...at least he'll be put away for quite a while.

Michael Dunn convicted of attempted murder; jury can't decide on murder

Have you seen the Republican response?



It's Borowitz. But I wouldn't be surprised!

The state prosecutor is going for a retrial on the primary charge.

Well partial justice, and as usual the GOP doesn't not see reality !!!
Guns don't kill people.... Loud music does!

I was thinking that we didn't know a lot of what happen there, because from what was written in the news it looked like a slam dunk. The jurors must have seen something in the security videos or the somewhat poor protection of the scene by the police in not scouring the bushes for the "said shotgun"

Dave

You thought wrong, Dave. There was no gun. The PD did not under-investigate anything. This is — as was the case in the Zimmerman trial — the prosecution's incompetence. Talk about making the same mistakes twice! Over-charging to placate the left and the gun control sector and under-prosecuting to pander to the right and the gun lobby.

First degree murder was never a slam dunk. Second degree would have been.

I'm sure I did. I haven't read up on aal they evidence or followed the trial as you have but was just commenting based on that I had heard that the police hadn't looked for the gun that he said he saw as well as the could have.

I hadn't read until just recently that the teens had also driven off from the scene. But in all trials unless we watch the trial we don't hear all the details.

But it does look as if was found guilty enough to put him away for a few years

Dave

[rant] Yes, he may spend the next 75 years in prison just based on the lesser charges (and at his age of 47, that may as well be a life sentence). But the principal of murder, 1st or 2nd degree or even attempted — and therefore true justice — was totally missed by the prosecution because there were issues they failed exploit: Intensely racist letters Dunn wrote from jail; his failure to call 911 immediately after the incident; his fiancee's contradictory testimony regarding the mention of a gun; the story told by the ballistic rods in the victims' car; if, as character witnesses allege, he was such a gentle sole, why does a software engineer need to carry loaded semi-auto handgun in his glove compartment?

What I know a/b criminal law would be lost on the head of a pin. But I do know something a/b trying a case, because when I pitch new creative to a client, that's exactly what I'm doing. If I knowingly try to sell a concept that a client will never buy, I deserve to lose the pitch. I look at the client's history, the market and consumers/end users in question, the competitive analysis, and my own success rate relative to the nature of the ideas I put forth. If it's obvious that a client will not embrace ideas of a "1st degree" intensity, I will attempt to execute what they're likely to favor in a way that meets my own standards of creative integrity.

The prosecution did not — again — take that approach. They knowingly tried to sell the unsellable under these circumstances. [/rant]

I think the haunting thing was the Testimony from his fiancé. You could tell she was visibly shaken between telling the truth and trying to defend her fiancé. Her fiancé is a cold-blooded murderer; she had a conscience. That's the "truth"!

Hope he's NOT eligible for parole for 25 years! That'd put him at 72! If he lives that long.

Evidently, the state wants to retry the 1st degree murder charge. Are they that stupid? It failed twice, once with Zimmerman and now with Dunn? Try him on 2nd degree murder — and DO NOT let the same inept idiots inside the courtroom, or let Dunn do the 75 w/o parole.