Michael Dunn Verdict: I don't get it. - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

davidmash · #31 02-20-2014, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suginami

Having served on two murder trials, I can tell you that how the law defines the crime, i.e. murder or attempted murder, is different than the average persons understanding of it.

To convict of the specific crime, it has to fit the definition as defined precisely by the law, and fit all of the conditions.

I had a first degree murder trial, and there are several conditions that must be met to convict. First degree is a tough one.

I do understand that. My question comes from the fact that according to juror #4 the final vote was 9-3 to convict. I'm curious what the reasoning was for the hold outs.

suginami · #32 02-20-2014, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidmash

I do understand that. My question comes from the fact that according to juror #4 the final vote was 9-3 to convict. I'm curious what the reasoning was for the hold outs.

I can answer that one based on my experience. There are at least three idiots on every jury.

davidmash · #33 02-20-2014, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suginami

I can answer that one based on my experience. There are at least three idiots on every jury.

Lol. I've been on two juries. None were violent crime cases. I agree with the idiot part but we discussed the issues, presented our case and came to an agreement. The fact that these three held out makes me wonder why. Surely it goes beyond them being an idiot right .... I know I'm stretching but .....

suginami · #34 02-20-2014, 02:12 PM

On my murder trial, we ultimately convicted the two defendants of murder in the first degree, but there were two women who were hold-outs for days.

They thought the two defendants, who planned the crime, brought a knife and a gun to the guy's house, and ended up knifing the guy and then shooting him to death, might not have planned to kill. Instead they were arguing they were just trying to hurt him or send a message.

davidmash · #35 02-20-2014, 03:40 PM

That's what I don't get about this case. Dunn went and got the gun before he thought he saw their gun. Why did he get a gun for some kids mouthing off and playing loud music.

If saying I'm going to kill you in the context of a conversation (heated or not) is grounds for self defense there are going to be a lot of dead people.

MTI · #36 02-20-2014, 04:46 PM

If You Fire a Gun, You Better *** Hit Somebody

suginami · #37 02-20-2014, 04:57 PM

I'm not sure the killing of the boy fits the definition of 1st degree murder:

"In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim."

Did he plan the murder in advance of the argument over music? Did he willfully try to kill? Was he lying in wait? Did he stop at the gas station as a plan he put together prior to the event?

That's the rub with meeting the legal standard with murder in the first degree. It's different how people tend to define the crime and how the law is written. It's just different.

Honus · #38 02-20-2014, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suginami

I'm not sure the killing of the boy fits the definition of 1st degree murder:

"In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim."

Did he plan the murder in advance of the argument over music? Did he willfully try to kill? Was he lying in wait? Did he stop at the gas station as a plan he put together prior to the event?

That's the rub with meeting the legal standard with murder in the first degree. It's different how people tend to define the crime and how the law is written. It's just different.

I don't think Mr. Dunn's case turned on the issue of premeditation. The prosecution's problem was not a lack of premeditation. Their problem was that the jury was not unanimously convinced that the prosecution had negated Dunn's claim that he feared for his life when he shot the boy.

Even a premeditated killing will be considered legally justified if done in self defense. Apparently a couple of jurors thought that's what happened in this case. That defense flew out the window, though, once Dunn continued shooting while the SUV was driving away from him.

MTI · #39 02-20-2014, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suginami

I'm not sure the killing of the boy fits the definition of 1st degree murder:

"In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim."

Did he plan the murder in advance of the argument over music? Did he willfully try to kill? Was he lying in wait? Did he stop at the gas station as a plan he put together prior to the event?

That's the rub with meeting the legal standard with murder in the first degree. It's different how people tend to define the crime and how the law is written. It's just different.

There is no "common law" 1st degree muder/homicide. Each state defines it "their way." In Florida, basic 1st degree murder/homicide is:

When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

Their statute also makes it 1st degree murder/homicide when the death involves some other felonies.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statuTes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html

davidmash · #40 10-17-2014, 10:39 PM

Looks like they got it figured out on the second try. Dunn was convicted of 1st degree murder and will spend the rest of his life in jail.

Fla. man gets life in prison in loud music killing

t walgamuth · #41 10-18-2014, 04:00 AM

Why did they get a second chance to convict? ...hung jury?

davidmash · #42 10-18-2014, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Why did they get a second chance to convict? ...hung jury?

Yep. He was convicted on 2 out of 3 charges the first time. Hung jury on the 1st degree. Retried and convicted. He will never see the light of day again. I think justice worked this time.