GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #1

[songline]

BBM.

Aren't you doing the exact same thing?

I embellished nothing. The only report I offered was the cops said "NO shotgun, none"

JUST asking how someone is 150% in the know that a 45 year old shooter who did not call 911 but he did flee the scene is to be protected?

While he is calling the teens who with all due respect are just teens, but they are annoying noisy punks, and shoots at them, killing one.

 

[songline]

I agree and I believe I know as well. it makes me feel ashamed and feeling shame by association makes me feel angry and it is why I choose to unsubscribe from this thread for a good long while.

I love seafood but cannot stomache bait.

BBM: I love the way you worded it I like your posts please stay. :beats:
Me too love sea food don't like bait, I hardly reply to the bait, I do reply to the real posters.
If a baiter gets attention they do not stop....does not get attention they do stop (I HOPE).

This shooter needs to be dealt with and sadly so does his GF who also did not call 911, she may have been buying wine at the time of the shooting, but she did hear the shots, and she did go back to the hotel with him, where he learned that it is on the news, and he checked out of the Hotel, did not meet up with his son that evening, but went home.
IMHO she needs to be dealt with too.

 

[songline]

I completely understand, as I've had to break off some cases for periods of time (Caylee's forum after "the verdict") in order to collect my sanity. Your valued posts will be missed, but I do understand. XOXOXOXO

MOO

OFF TOPIC.

BBM: I walked out on the Caylee case a year and half before the verdict.
Never because of baiters... I just take brakes from that LOL....

CAYLEE CASE: Once Daddy cleaned up I knew that only the 911 call was made after 30 days but George knew at least 2 weeks sooner, but needed time to clean it up. Once he cleaned it up they told MOM who did make that call.... And I knew that LE dad knew how to look for evidence and won’t let them find any.....I knew if you can’t prove it she will walk, and she did. I posted this long, long ago as I made my exit.

 

[songline]

To date there is no credible evidence that Jordan threatened Dunn or displayed a means of doing Dunn harm. He was still inside the car when he was shot, so he could not have physically confronted Dunn unless Dunn was in the car with him! Apparently, words were exchanged and Dunn is the person who initiated that exchange by complaining about the music. The only person, IMO, who could be charged as an accessory is Dunn's girlfriend since she left the crime scene and then hid out with him. No one in the car that Dunn shot up could be charged as an accessory as they are the victims—and they did not shoot anyone dead, nor did they flee the crime scene.

:clap: :clap: GREAT POST :clap: :clap:

 

[Steely Dan]

Snipped I would not be surprised to find out that Mr. Dunn's girlfriend was facing charges in the days after the shooting. Speculation of course, but I would not be surprised if she has accepted immunity from prosecution for her cooperation/testimony.

MOO

It's interesting we haven't heard about her. I'm guessing she has a lawyer and they are telling her to keep her mouth shut and lay low. Her lawyer isn't going public with anything because he's trying to work a deal for her. That's just my guess.

Threatening someone with death then representing the means to carry out that threat as the shooter claims is a felony! Like I said, they have every reason to lie as does the shooter. I sure wish there was audio and video recrding of the events that evening! I bet the police do also.

You think they have as much reason to lie as the shooter? Why? There is no gun, and nobody heard anything from the kids just him and his "asking them to turn the music down."

If he fled the scene and never contacted police he's got to have a whopper of a story to explain that. The kids didn't have a gun, end of story. Unless you can offer a fact that they did it's just wild speculation on your part.

A guy who empties his gun on a car full of kids, goes to his hotel and doesn't call police, abruptly cancels plans with his son the next day and goes home without contacting police has a much, much bigger reason to lie. If his story is true then he should have stayed at the scene, or called from his hotel room.

IMO, thinking someone who's not charged with anything vs. someone charged with murder is more likely to lie, doesn't make sense.

 

[mobeydick]

So do you think they had gone to the store planning to commit the crime of threatening someone that night?

I am not a lawyer but I just don't see this law in any way applicable here.



BBM.
To make this law applicable and charge the surviving teens for the hypothetical death threats that the deceased teen might have made you would have to show that the others had agreed to commit this crime. It would be kind of hard imo seeing as how they didn't even know that Mr. Dunn would be there. You'd have to be a willing participant in a felony to be charged under this one and I doubt courts would define sitting in a car with someone who makes death threats as being a participant if you didn't say anything. Being friends with somebody who commits a crime is not a felony.

It wouldn't matter if they planned it, They may have been participating in the act. You did read the one guy just heard about a plan and he is serving life! He did nothing to stop it!

 

[mobeydick]

To date there is no credible evidence that Jordan threatened Dunn or displayed a means of doing Dunn harm. He was still inside the car when he was shot, so he could not have physically confronted Dunn unless Dunn was in the car with him! Apparently, words were exchanged and Dunn is the person who initiated that exchange by complaining about the music. The only person, IMO, who could be charged as an accessory is Dunn's girlfriend since she left the crime scene and then hid out with him. No one in the car that Dunn shot up could be charged as an accessory as they are the victims—and they did not shoot anyone dead, nor did they flee the crime scene.

To date the is no credible evidence the shooter shot the teenagers over loud music yet almost everyone who has posted on this thread has stated that is why they were shot at, in almost the same post they all claim they would never shoot someone over loud music! Stop and think about that!



Florida law is pretty clear, if you are participating in a crime and some gets killed you can be charged with murder. The teens have a very good reason to lie, so does the shooter. Like I stated many times in this thread I wish there was Audio and Video of the event! We might would know the truth then!

 

[fran]

Both the shooter and the victims state the confrontation was over loud music. It was Mr. Dunn who escalated the incident by shooting into a car full of teenagers.

There is no proof the teenagers had a weapon, but there's proof the shooter had and used a gun.

Now it's up to a jury to decide who they believe.

JMHO
fran

 

[QueenD]

I was pumping gas today when up drives a car with loud music....... I said lord please let me get out of here before someone comes and starts with this driver.
Driver did turn music off while pumping gas.

Seems like I am hearing more loud music than before or did I not notice it before?

I was wondering if it had anything with all the turn up your music events going on around town in honor of the victim.

 

[mobeydick]

Both the shooter and the victims state the confrontation was over loud music. It was Mr. Dunn who escalated the incident by shooting into a car full of teenagers.

There is no proof the teenagers had a weapon, but there's proof the shooter had and used a gun.

Now it's up to a jury to decide who they believe.

JMHO
fran

There is no proof the shooter escalated the situation, NONE. There is evidence he responded to threats.

 

[Steely Dan]

There is no proof the shooter escalated the situation, NONE. There is evidence he responded to threats.

Perceived threats, hallucinations, most likely made up stories of threats. JMO

 

[mobeydick]

I would like everyone to state what it would take (what provocation) for them to feel the need shoot someone in a public area. Obviously it would not be loud music so what would it be.

 

[flourish]

It wouldn't matter if they planned it, They may have been participating in the act. You did read the one guy just heard about a plan and he is serving life! He did nothing to stop it!

Are you referring to the guy who loaned his car to some people, knowing they were planning to go rob someone? He didn't just "hear about the plan," he provided means to get to and from the robbery. That's much more complicit than just "hearing about it."

Twist, twist, insist.

 

[flourish]

I would like everyone to state what it would take (what provocation) for them to feel the need shoot someone in a public area. Obviously it would not be loud music so what would it be.

Why?

..

 

[flourish]

There is no proof the shooter escalated the situation, NONE. There is evidence he responded to threats.

EVIDENCE????

And that would be what exactly?

The shooter's testimony is not EVIDENCE that he was threatened.

 

[Nova]

EVIDENCE????

And that would be what exactly?

The shooter's testimony is not EVIDENCE that he was threatened.

Actually, the shooter's testimony IS evidence. It just may be tainted in the minds of others because the testimony is self-serving.

But a defendant has a right to testify just like everyone else.

 

[rossva]

Please show me where the bolded part of your quote is a KNOWN FACT:

and he was not threatened with death. NO WAY NO HOW.
You are embellishing the facts and it does not make it so.

You have embellished.

I embellished nothing. The only report I offered was the cops said "NO shotgun, none"

JUST asking how someone is 150% in the know that a 45 year old shooter who did not call 911 but he did flee the scene is to be protected?

While he is calling the teens who with all due respect are just teens, but they are annoying noisy punks, and shoots at them, killing one.

 

[Steely Dan]

I would like everyone to state what it would take (what provocation) for them to feel the need shoot someone in a public area. Obviously it would not be loud music so what would it be.

I'm guessing one of the kids mouthed off at him. What set you off to beat up a much younger man?

 

[gxm]

Actually, the shooter's testimony IS evidence. It just may be tainted in the minds of others because the testimony is self-serving.

But a defendant has a right to testify just like everyone else.

I doubt a (good) lawyer would ever let Dunn take the stand. IMO, that would be a disaster and would not help him in any way. Dunn left the crime scene and would need a very good explanation for running and hiding. The prosecutor would eat him alive. JMHO and all.

 

[gxm]

There is no proof the shooter escalated the situation, NONE. There is evidence he responded to threats.

I completely disagree. So far, the evidence shows that the shooter is the one who initiated the confrontation and then escalated the situation by bringing a gun into the mix. The shooter was outside of his car, Jordan was not. The shooter was the aggressor at every point from start to finish. After shooting Jordan, Dunn then escalated the situation by fleeing the scene and hiding out.

Loud music is not a "threat." Mouthy teens are not a "threat." An annoyance to some, but not a threat. Dunn met an annoyance with deadly force which, IMO, is antisocial and inexcusable violence.