Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A homicide doesn't have to premeditated for a finding of malice. It is present in the number of rounds Dunn fired, some as his target was fleeing, and his callous behavior afterward.
Actually, none of those constitute first degree murder under Florida statute.
Quote:
782.04 Murder.—
(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;
2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:a. Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
b. Arson,
c. Sexual battery,
d. Robbery,
e. Burglary,
f. Kidnapping,
g. Escape,
h. Aggravated child abuse,
i. Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
j. Aircraft piracy,
k. Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
l. Carjacking,
m. Home-invasion robbery,
n. Aggravated stalking,
o. Murder of another human being,
p. Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person,
q. Aggravated fleeing or eluding with serious bodily injury or death,
r. Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism; or
3. Which resulted from the unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium, or methadone by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user,
is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082.
Dunn claims he "thought" he saw a gun. Then he had time to open his glove compartment, remove the gun from the holster, chamber a round in the gun and shoot. Seems as if he was "scared for his life" when he "thought" he saw the gun, he had plenty of time to move his car away from the car of teens. One fact in evidence--no shotgun was found anywhere in the vicinity of the store or surrounding areas. If the teens had thrown anything from the car, they only had three minutes to do so, and it is very difficult to believe nobody would notice someone in a car full of bullet holes throwing a shotgun out of the car or that if the weapon had been found, someone would not have turned it in to the cops.
If it was plain and simple it would have been resolved well before now...so it ain't.
It has to be a mess. A person who appears in control and rational claims to have fired after having seen a shotgun pointed out of the car.
The way it all went down it is very hard to disprove that. And this is "reasonable doubt" country.
They may find him guilty of something but it won't be first degree murder...and will likely be a compromise as they feel he did wrong but it is not past a reasonable doubt.
Dunn claims he "thought" he saw a gun. Then he had time to open his glove compartment, remove the gun from the holster, chamber a round in the gun and shoot. Seems as if he was "scared for his life" when he "thought" he saw the gun, he had plenty of time to move his car away from the car of teens. One fact in evidence--no shotgun was found anywhere in the vicinity of the store or surrounding areas. If the teens had thrown anything from the car, they only had three minutes to do so, and it is very difficult to believe nobody would notice someone in a car full of bullet holes throwing a shotgun out of the car or that if the weapon had been found, someone would not have turned it in to the cops.
A weapon does not have to have been found for Dunn's story to be believed by the jury.
Remember, they have to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
If they find that he could have only acted in such a manner if he did see something(whether it was a gun or not) then they might conclude that he acted in self defense, especially in light of the threats that were being shouted.
Also, Jacksonville is on an ocean with a river flowing through it.
We may never find a shotgun, if one was present in Davis's vehicle.
The way it all went down it is very hard to disprove that. And this is "reasonable doubt" country.
Reading you and other posters, all someone has to do is claim "they saw a gun" even is no gun is ever to be found, or seen, by anyone else. The doubt has to be reasonable to justify an acquittal. Hence the expression, reasonable doubt.
Given the attention and emotions tied to this case, a "comprehensive public safety plan" has been established ahead of a verdict, according to the Duval County joint information center handling the Dunn trial.
They have reached a verdict on the other charges which were attempted manslaughter and firing into a dwelling place. Which means in my opinion : if he is not guilty of manslaughter he is probably not guilty of attempted manslaughter.
Here is the Florida justice system for you. Reminds you anything ?
They have reached a verdict on the other charges which were attempted manslaughter and firing into a dwelling place. Which means in my opinion : if he is not guilty of manslaughter he is probably not guilty of attempted manslaughter.
Here is the Florida justice system for you. Reminds you anything ?
Were they sleeping in the vehicle?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.