GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #7

[RANCH]

I do not disagree. I feel like the way the current laws are being interpreted anyone can claim they were fearful and do whatever they want. It feels as if the burden is on the state to PROVE the person was NOT fearful and that just seems so bizarre to me.

How the heck are juries supposed to know how to interpret the finer points of these laws when they seem to indicate simply saying you were fearful is all it takes to excuse any sort of violent reaction/response you have to any given situation?

I hope that juries don't believe that a defendant was in fear of death or great bodily harm just because they said so. Just because it's possible doesn't make it reasonable.

Evidence should support the claim that the defendant had a legitimate reason to be in fear of being killed or injured. If the evidence to support that claim is absent, as I feel is the case here, then they should disregard the defendants claims and vote guilty as charged.

 

[JaimeInLA]

Whoa!! Don Lemon is pissed!!!! He is swearing and just told parents to get their kids out of the room because he's about to go OFF!

 

[Chelly]

Scarlett... We are in total agreement...( for once )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ditto! And it is refreshing!:blushing:

 

[Chelly]

Go Don Lemon..

I agree..

Don Lemon just said he is pizzed!

 

[Spellbound]

I am quite surprised at how this jury asks questions that get such detailed explanations. i have never seen that before. Can it because it is about jury instructions and not trial evidence, statements, etc, that they get these questions answered in such detail? Seems I remember other juries being told "we can't tell you that, you need to read your instructions and make your own conclusions"

 

[Linda7NJ]

I respectfully disagree. If they're hung on murder, and vote on a lesser charge, he could very well be released on time served. I still doubt there were no guns in the teen car, and the gun was never found in subsequent searches I would have to find reasonable doubt on that alone.



moo

mel

It's not reasonable for you to assume there was ever a weapon in that car. Your job, as a juror, isn't to manufacture evidence. The evidence to be considered was presented in court. The only person claiming there was a gun. was the defendant. He is not credible. Matter of fact. He was proven to be a liar.
There is zero evidence to corroborate his LIE. He couldn't even keep his OWN LIE straight.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boytwnmom]

No one reported and there was no evidence of anything than that one party discharged a weapon. By the time police arrived it was obvious what happened. The caller didn't know which vehicle contained a shooter but only one vehicle did. There was no exchange of gunfire so why would the police think there was any other weapon? Eveyone knew the shooter drove away.

Excellent point imo

 

[popsicle]

Larry Hannan ‏@LarryHannan 1m
On a separate matter, I believe the jurors dinners are about to arrive. #DunnTrial

 

[Linda7NJ]

I am not a Florida lawyer, but I have a problem with a judge telling jurors so specifically how to deliberate. No one is supposed to tell a jury that. This judge seems a bit odd to me.

The jurors had a question about the law. It's the judges job to answer those questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steft50]

Good point. I don't know about the rest of you but I feel I have PTSD from Florida juries. :banghead:

I really don't want to offend those posters here who live in or are from Florida but I am seriously begining to feel that a certain type of shooter will never be held accountable for shooting a certain type of victim in this state.....I'm really sorry but that is how I am starting to feel. And if I am wrong I will post and admit it.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Scarlett... We are in total agreement...( for once )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

YAY! I knew we would get there eventually!!!

Here is what I see.

I think that it is guilty on the AM and the shooting in the car.

I also believe that they are not arguing not guilty on the First count. I think they are stuck on what level of murder it is.
I don't think this is not guilty.

I just don't. They can not be that stupid.

The bullets where Jordan was are STRAIGHT IN THE CAR AT JORDAN. IF his door was open it would not be. It would be angled.

 

[evelyn24]

I agree with Alan Dershowitz on little else, but he and I agree with you about Corey.

She has a track record of overcharging and, according to Dershowitz, "submitting [a] perjurious affidavit".

She also has a reputation of retaliating against Florida bar members who dare to cross her (source: FL counsel who shall remain nameless). Suffice it to say that the descriptors "politics" and "grandstanding" have been used.

We do know that non-attorney staffers have felt her wrath merely for testifying to the truth.

"Ben Kruidbos" is all I'll say about that.

Amen!

She's a problem imo.

 

[Nore]

Larry Hannan ‏@LarryHannan 1m
If jurors take this seriously, it may still be awhile before we get verdict. #DunnTrial

Larry Hannan ‏@LarryHannan 1m
Each juror now get to explain the weakness of their own argument. Other jurors told not to interrupt each other. #dunntrial

----------
I agree but I'd say IF we get a verdict.:banghead:

 

[JLSChook]

O'Mara just said on CNN (paraphrasing) has to be not guilty on other counts because if it was guilty lessers would not pertain

Still behind, but could you explain what this means? It doesn't make sense and O'Mara isn't someone I like to listen to or agree with. TIA

 

[RANCH]

the problem seems to lie with the jury's interpretation of what is reasonable vs unreasonable. Lately a lot of juries IMO have seemed to feel fears I would consider ridiculous and NOT reasonable - reasonable. Therein lie the rub IMO.

If this jury comes back with not guilty or is unable to find Dunn guilty of murder it suggests to me that people in general feel it is reasonable to fear young black men with loud music and who curse at you when you confront them are to be feared and therefore, its okay to shoot at them. This scares the hell out of me.

That's why I've said that maybe we should rethink how we seat juries. If a random sample of average citizens can't figure out the difference between what's reasonable and unreasonable, then something needs to change.

Professional juries? That's something I've thought about.

 

[Steft50]

I am not a Florida lawyer, but I have a problem with a judge telling jurors so specifically how to deliberate. No one is supposed to tell a jury that. This judge seems a bit odd to me.

I could be wrong (probably am) but I believe that is how the Allen Charge reads.

 

[popsicle]

YAY! I knew we would get there eventually!!!

Here is what I see.

I think that it is guilty on the AM and the shooting in the car.

I also believe that they are not arguing not guilty on the First count. I think they are stuck on what level of murder it is.
I don't think this is not guilty.

I just don't. They can not be that stupid.

The bullets where Jordan was are STRAIGHT IN THE CAR AT JORDAN. IF his door was open it would not be. It would be angled.

I agree. I also think they are deadlocked on the level of murder.

 

[Softail]

:dunno: If it were me, I'd hang the crap out of that jury if the others thought NG on Count 1.

 

[pkz]

Still behind, but could you explain what this means? It doesn't make sense and O'Mara isn't someone I like to listen to or agree with. TIA

O'Mara later retracted this statement just for THAT reason....it didn't make sense

 

[yankeefan]

Don Lemon's head is about to explode on CNN as he discusses the Michael Dunn trial.