Jump to content
We Keep Receipts

Florida 'loud music' trial juror: 'I believed he was guilty'

 Share

208 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I just want to say, please keep it civil. If we're going to have a discussion, let's do it the right way.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/19/justice/florida-loud-music-case/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

(CNN) -- One of the jurors who convicted Michael Dunn of attempted murder after he fired into an SUV during a fatal argument over loud music believes he should have been convicted of first-degree murder.

"I believed he was guilty," Valerie said in an interview with ABC's "Nightline" early Wednesday. Also known as juror No. 4, she asked that her full name not be given in order to protect her identity.

“Hate is too great a burden to bear. It injures the hater more than it injures the hated.” – Coretta Scott King

"Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge." -Toni Morrison

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

President-Obama-jpg.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well of course some believed he was guilty. That's why there was a hung jury. Some agreed, some didn't.

What I'd like to know is what they couldn't agree on. Could they not agree on 1st, 2nd degree, manslaughter? Or could they not agree on whether or not it was justified?

Edited by Penny Lane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say, please keep it civil. If we're going to have a discussion, let's do it the right way.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/19/justice/florida-loud-music-case/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

(CNN) -- One of the jurors who convicted Michael Dunn of attempted murder after he fired into an SUV during a fatal argument over loud music believes he should have been convicted of first-degree murder.

"I believed he was guilty," Valerie said in an interview with ABC's "Nightline" early Wednesday. Also known as juror No. 4, she asked that her full name not be given in order to protect her identity.

Please note she is white, and thought he was guilty.. Racism ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well of course some believed he was guilty. That's why there was a hung jury. Some agreed, some didn't.

What I'd like to know is what they couldn't agree on. Could they not agree on 1st, 2nd degree, manslaughter? Or could they not agree on whether or not it was justified?

My guess would be whether it was justified or not. If they all agreed that it was in fact murder, but disagreed on the 1st or 2nd degree charge, I would think, or hope, they could at least compromise on 2nd degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please note she is white, and thought he was guilty.. Racism ?

She clearly did not get the "be racist" memo everyone else did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well of course some believed he was guilty. That's why there was a hung jury. Some agreed, some didn't.

What I'd like to know is what they couldn't agree on. Could they not agree on 1st, 2nd degree, manslaughter? Or could they not agree on whether or not it was justified?

It was 10-2 for 1st degree, then went to 9-3. That means the 3 against thought it was self defense.

Yesterday, I said someone thought it was justified. Not racism.

On the murder charge, Valerie said the jury split over the issue of self-defense.

Please note she is white, and thought he was guilty.. Racism ?

Can't believe I'm saying this, but can we keep race out of this for now?

“Hate is too great a burden to bear. It injures the hater more than it injures the hated.” – Coretta Scott King

"Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge." -Toni Morrison

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

President-Obama-jpg.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was 10-2 for 1st degree, then went to 9-3. That means the 3 against thought it was self defense.

Yesterday, I said someone thought it was justified. Not racism.

On the murder charge, Valerie said the jury split over the issue of self-defense.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but can we keep race out of this for now?

But you have made it about race for three days, but I welcome that request.

I don't think they thought it was self defense but maybe not murder 1 or 2.

I personally would never have rang him up for murder 1.

Maybe murder 2 , but voluntary manslaughter as the appropriate charge here. The prosecutor over reached

As a side note I don't think charging a person with the highest possible charge, then saying OBTW if e don't get that can you maybe do b.c. or d is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe I'm saying this, but can we keep race out of this for now?

I'm proud of you man, keep up the good work.

I just don't see how it could be self defense or anything but murder. How did he fear for his life enough to pull a gun?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is murder two a "nicer" crime than murder one? Why is voluntary manslaughter "better" than murder two? If it's not self defense, then someone was killed that shouldn't have been killed. I fire into a car load of people but I accidentally kill someone?

R.I.P Spooky 2004-2015

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rolleyes.gif

LOL Good one

Why is murder two a "nicer" crime than murder one? Why is voluntary manslaughter "better" than murder two? If it's not self defense, then someone was killed that shouldn't have been killed. I fire into a car load of people but I accidentally kill someone?

Because that is the way the law works. They look at murder committed during a passionate argument way different than you plan to rob a store and kill the owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...