Exactly right. If they had a shotgun, why didn't they use it to return fire but sped away instead? Even though they had been fired upon and allegedly had a shotgun, they chose not to stand their ground. I believe *strongly* that had they been armed, they WOULD have returned fire so the lack of return fire is almost certain proof they were unarmed. In addition, Dunn's GF testified he never mentioned the shotgun until much later.
Is she still his girlfriend? Ironically, her testimony apparently didn't hurt him.
Maybe so in theory. I think the jury would have gone for voluntary manslaughter. When you get into FDM, every technicality gives the defense a way to derail the verdict. Got to convince 12 people.
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.Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required