Fl murderer convicted in loud music

Page 2 of 3  
On Saturday, February 15, 2014 11:31:48 PM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I would agree that they should at least wait to see the actual sentence handed down. But he's most likely not going to get 60 years. The minimum is 20 years on each count and the judge could probably have them served concurrently. So, he might just be facing 20 years. Then you typically have time off for good behavior, parole, etc. He might be out in 15 if he's lucky.
I didn't follow this much, but from what I see, the defendant appeared quick to open fire and to continue to fire, when there appeared to have been other options. That's why it was easy for the jury to convict him on the attempted murder charge for continuing to fire as they drove away. One part in his story that makes no sense to me is that he claims that while they were all still in their cars, as the confrontation escalated, he thought he saw a guy in the back point a shotgun out the car. So, he says he reached over to the glove compartment, got his gun and when the passenger started to get out he started firing. But he started shooting at the guy in the passenger seat, and that's the guy he killed. THAT makes no sense, does it? If you think the guy in the back seat has a shotgun, why in the world would you open fire on the guy in the passenger seat? If his buddy has a shotgun, he's in a perfect spot to blow you away.
Also his behavior afterward, ie fleeing rather than sticking around suggests it wasn't a case of justified self defense. But in cases like this, unless you hear all the testimony that the jury did, see all the evidence, it's hard to sort the whole thing out. It is another sad case of how bad behavior on both sides can turn into something really bad happening. There appears to be no dispute that the black kids in the car were playing obnoxiously loud music and they started the verbal assault when he politely asked them to turn it down. That's one of the risks you run when you want to behave like that, you may run into someone equally willing to escalate and then really bad things can happen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 23:31:48 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

The news always adds up the maximum sentences and presents it in this way, even though almost no one ever gets the sum of all the sentences.
They do this for everyone, but I'm afraid that those who haven't noticed this feel wronged when the criminal who hurt them or killed somone they cared about gets so much less than what the news suggested they would get. They feel wronged by the criminal and betrayed by the courts.
Another example where the news should be ashamed of itself, and this time, I'm not sure but I I may need to include radio and newspapers. I don't recall if they participate in this or not.

No. Especially if someone is a first offender, or even the first time it's a felony, the judge will have some, maybe all sentences served concurrently, and won't give him the maximum for the most serious conviction.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

This is Florida. The prosecutor can push a 10-20 life on this guy and since he shot someone it is automatic 25 to life. Remember the woman doing 20 for a warning shot. Same prosecutor. This guy will have his sentence commuted when he is so old and sick the state doesn't want to pay to watch him die.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 7:04:50 PM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

But he wasn't *convicted* of shooting anyone, he was convicted of *trying* to shoot 3 people. I think that's why you're at the 25 years and all the news stories I've seen, the max sentence for any of the crimes is 20 years on each count.

It's the judge that determines the sentence. And the case of the black woman you're citing was overturned on appeal. She's getting a new trial. That was one of the worst court decisions I've seen handed down, ever.

If he got 25 and the sentences run concurrently, and we apply the no parole before 85% of the sentence rule, that's 21 served. He's 46, so assuming he has a normal life expectancy, that wouldn't be a life sentence, he could be out at 67. And I don't know about anyone else, but that seems adequate to me, given the crime. There are all kinds of people committing similar crimes and doing that or less.
I think a lot of this will come down to what the sentencing laws require to be considered, allowed to be considered, exclude from being considered, etc. If it's viewed from the standpoint that he was not convicted of the death that occured, and that isn't part of the sentencing consideration, perhaps because it's not allowed, then you're left with attempted murder convictions for shooting into a car and not wounding anyone.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 05:13:30 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

He shot a gun in commission of a felony and someone was hit. That is the test.

The basis of the appeal was not 10-20-life

At a certain point our prisons become the world's most expensive geriatric hospitals with all the costs of incarceration tacked on to the costs of nursing home care and the medical issues of senior citizens. The old idea of throwing someone in a hole and letting them die has given way to questions of whether an inmate can get a heart transplant.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, February 17, 2014 11:25:24 AM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

But he was *not* convicted of hitting anyone. He was convicted of 3 counts of attempted murder for the other 3 occupants of the car. The jusry deadlocked on the more serious charge. So, if it requires someone to be hit, no one was hit in the crimes he was convicted of. And if it's 25 years, why aren't we seing that number anywhere else. The most I see is 20 X 3, with the possbility that since he is a first time offender, they could be served concurrently.

It may not have been the technical basis of it, but you can't deny that the screwy sentence she received generated a lot of support for her case to be appealed on whatever basis they could find.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:43:20 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

We have not had the sentencing hearing yet and we do not know what Corey will bring up there so everyone is just guessing.
This is the text of the law and the paragraph that applies ******************************************* 3. Any person who is convicted of a felony or an attempt to commit a felony listed in sub-subparagraphs (a)1.a.-q., regardless of whether the use of a weapon is an element of the felony, and during the course of the commission of the felony such person discharged a “firearm” or “destructive device” as defined in s. 790.001 and, as the result of the discharge, death or great bodily harm was inflicted upon any person, the convicted person shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of not less than 25 years and not more than a term of imprisonment of life in prison.
**************************************
It is clear that they were convicted of attempted murder (a forcible felony on the list) and a person was killed as the result of discharging the gun " regardless of whether the use of a weapon is an element of the felony" he can get 25 to life if the prosecutor asks for it in the sentencing hearing.

I believe the whole issue was the charge to the jury. It had nothing to do with the facts in the case or the 10-20-life law. There is a big push to revisit this law, simply because it is to broadly applied and Angie Corey is one on the biggest abusers of that law. .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, February 17, 2014 12:57:31 PM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

From my reading of the law, which I think is reasonable, no one died or was injured from what Dunn was convicted of. For example, if you want to convict someone of felony murder,' ie a murder convicted in the course of a felony, then you charge the with felony murder and try them that way. The jury apprently could not agree on or convict on whether he was justified in firing on the passenger or not. They only agreed that he was guilty of attempted murder, apparently because he continued to fire on the car as it left the scene and there was no longer a threat. Until proven otherwise, Dunn is innocent of any criminal conviction for killing anyone, period.
And if the 25 year law applies, why is no one in the media reporting it? All I've seen is the max is 20 x 3, which seems unlikely to me, given that he has no priors and whatever happened was a spur of the moment thing. Dunn didn't go out looking to shoot anyone.

Or course it did. If she had been sentenced to 2 years, instead of 20 per the screwy law, there would not have been the huge outcry from the public, all the media attention and how quickly attornies jumped to her defense to appeal it. For anyone sentenced to anything, for her to get such a quick reversal and new trial is unusual.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:04:50 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I tried to post again last night but my internet was down. Verzion, even thought my verizon land line phone was working.
ABC News the worst of the 3, said roughly that "because of Florida law, he will have to serve 60 years."
OTOH, NBC news, often much better than ABC, said "up to 60 years".
Normally I'd just believe NBC, but ABC was so specific, as if they'd actually asked someone, I was going to post here to retract what I'd said.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, February 17, 2014 10:27:14 AM UTC-5, micky wrote:

If you google, I don't see any news sources saying he has to serve 60 years or anything near that. That is the max he would coud face if they made him serve consecutive sentences. For a first time offender, that seems unlikely and unwarranted. It's kind of like saying Ray Nagin could go to jail for 100 years, but we all know that isn't going to happen.
A lot is going to depend on the sentencing guidelines and what the judge has to consider, may consider and is prohibited from considering. For example, he was not convicted of murder or even shooting the guy who died. If that can't be considered as part of the sentencing, then what you have is a guy who fired into an SUV, and didn't injure anyone. From what I see you have 3 counts of attempted murder. In similar situations, a guy like that with no priors, etc would get 20 years, served concurrently. And likely a lot less in many places.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:04:50 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I forgot to reply to you.
Ugh. I'm not too concerned about this guy, but that woman with the warning shot, terrible. My brother lives in Florida and I visit. I'd better be careful. So should he and his family.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/15/2014 10:18 PM, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite Sock Of Killer Loon wrote:

Killer Loon, how did the court case affect you personally? Are you an obnoxious DAN who plays loud salaciousness music in public and fear you may be shot by someone who asks you to turn it down? I know you're a useful idiot for the elite P.L.L.C.F. who wish to disarm the American people and you have no clue as to what will happen if those you support seize power and turn the United States into a dictatorship. I do feel sorry for you and those of your ilk who have no comprehension of what will become of America if your puppet handlers get their way. It would be funny to see you sitting in your sparsely furnished government owned apartment that's identical to what all citizens are housed in because everyone is equal and there are no more evil rich people with big lavish homes. That is, except for the elite you so vociferously support and you will be an old man sitting there in your drab government issue apartment munching on government issue Soylent that is supplied to all of the "Equal" citizens and the one thing going through your addled little brain over and over again will be "WTF!" Be careful what you wish for Killer Loon, your wish may come true. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:

What is the story about the guy he shot having a shotgun in the car? TV said that the shooter maintains that was the case, but I did not hear if that was ever introduced as evidence. Not making excuses for the guy, just looking for the facts.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 6:17:56 AM UTC-6, Ken wrote:

No weapon was ever found. It was a typical red neck gun hugger lie they use to shoot first, drive away, and ask later.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 9:13:12 AM UTC-5, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite TeaBillie on welfare wrote:

And if the shooter had been black and gotten into a similar confrontation over music, someone wearing the wrong color jacket, looking at someone the wrong way, etc, that happens about 1000 times more frequently, and that resulted in a shooting death, what would it be then?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ken wrote:

Unclear.
What is clear however is that the police botched the investigation by not searching the area immediately, leaving it entirely a "reasonable doubt" as to weather such a shotgun did exist and those in the car disposed of it in the time they were away from the gas station.
I have plenty of issues with the shooter's actions - not simply fleeing in his vehicle, firing multiple shots with time between shots and no apparent continued threat, etc. But there should be different charges for such actions.
I think everyone's view of the case, including those of the racist baiters would be different had the police located a shotgun in the car, and given the police failure that will remain an unknown barring an admission from one of the surviving parties that were in the car.
As for the initial request to turn down the music, far too much has been made about what music it was when that is simply not relevant. It is not racist to ask someone to turn down loud music when they are parked at a gas station or anywhere stationary where others may be trying to have a conversation such as a fast food drive through.
Turning music down in such cases is common courtesy, something that all teens should have learned from their parents. Indeed where I live is a short distance in from a 65 mph road, and the local kids here are courteous and turn down their music when they turn of that main road and I appreciate that courtesy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The only thing I disagree with is he really could not have driven off and left his girlfriend in what he saw as a threatening situation.
The first shot may have been plausible as self defense but shooting at a fleeing vehicle is aggravated assault with a firearm at a minimum. The sentence is the same, 25 to life.
You only have the right to defend yourself until the threat is abated. Then you have to stop shooting.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As to the shotgun -- testimony from his girlfriend revealed that he <Dunn> never mentioned another weapon being involved.
He drove off to his motel, ordered a pizza, and slept off the numerous drinks he had earlier that evening at a wedding reception.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
83LowRider wrote:

How talkative are you when you've just had a traumatic experience and are also still a bit drunk?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

Had I just fired numerous shots into a car and got back into mine... 1) there is no way my wife wouldn't be asking me a million questions. 2) if there was only ONE question asked, it would be 'why did you shoot at them?'. 3) the adrenaline after such an occurence would have one so pumped up that remaining silent wouldn't even be an option. 4) he wasn't so drunk that he didn't leave a good shot pattern on the other car... and certainly not so drunk that he didn't make it back to the hotel and remain awake/alert enough to order and eat a pizza. <sidenote - having just now looked back at her testimony, she says he had 3 or 4 drinks over the course of the evening>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.