Updated....Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Lucylastic -> Updated....Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 12:57:28 AM)

Juror in 'Loud Music' Trial Wanted Murder Conviction
A juror in the controversial Florida "loud music" trial says there was no chance from the start of a murder conviction in the shooting of an unarmed teen at a gas station because several jurors were convinced Michael Dunn acted in self-defense.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/juror-loud-music-trial-wanted-murder-conviction/story?id=22571068



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 4:04:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

now you are saying it doesnt... [8|]



You really should stop fabricating things like that.


No fabrication from me sunshine. You clearly said the original photo was the one with the door shut and that the second one was "photo adjustment"

When you first posted you claimed the photo proved the door was open.

Any fabrication clearly comes from your two posts.



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 4:06:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I'm not sure what the point is with the angles but I can tell you the door in your example is not open... that is a terrible attempt with Photoshop to make the door look opened.. otherwise crap.



Butch


It's not supposed to be a realistic photoshop job, just a demonstration of angles.




Bullshit....... you clearly claimed it showed the door was open.

"Except that the angle of bullet entry into Davis' door showed it was open." << your words



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 5:20:28 AM)

Yep, and it does show that the door was open, as I said.

What your fabrication was, is when you said "now you are saying it doesnt..."

I never said that.



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 5:31:27 AM)

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.





DomKen -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 6:06:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.

Bullshit.
Do you really think the vehicle would have been moving fast enough top change the angle that drastically?
Would you care to present your math on that?.



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 10:33:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

Yep, and it does show that the door was open, as I said.

What your fabrication was, is when you said "now you are saying it doesnt..."

I never said that.


Blatant untruths.



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 10:34:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.





Its simply bullshit for the reason Ken stated.



BamaD -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 10:51:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.

Bullshit.
Do you really think the vehicle would have been moving fast enough top change the angle that drastically?
Would you care to present your math on that?.

Not to defend Dunn but that depends on how close you are, at 5 feet a low speed will have a greater effect
that a high speed will have at 50 feet.



DomKen -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 1:25:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.

Bullshit.
Do you really think the vehicle would have been moving fast enough top change the angle that drastically?
Would you care to present your math on that?.

Not to defend Dunn but that depends on how close you are, at 5 feet a low speed will have a greater effect
that a high speed will have at 50 feet.

Dunn is actually indicted by the fact that the car was moving.



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 2:29:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

Yep, and it does show that the door was open, as I said.

What your fabrication was, is when you said "now you are saying it doesnt..."

I never said that.


Blatant untruths.



Okay, feel free to point out where I said that the photo doesn't show the car door was open, as you claimed.

(Don't worry, you can't. You made that up.)





Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 2:32:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.

Bullshit.
Do you really think the vehicle would have been moving fast enough top change the angle that drastically?
Would you care to present your math on that?.

Not to defend Dunn but that depends on how close you are, at 5 feet a low speed will have a greater effect
that a high speed will have at 50 feet.


Yep. It really is quite obvious.

It'd seem quite a coincidence that three shots in one door panel was at one angle, and three shots in the rear door is at another angle...very easily explained by the rear door being open.



DomKen -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:07:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

And in case the photo evidence goes over your head; the angles on each separate door panel is very consistent; too consistent for those shots to have been made while the vehicle was in motion (there would have been more variation in shot angle if it were).

The photo adjustment shows the angle the door would be at for the bullets to pierce at the same angle coming from the same origin as the other three shots, therefore demonstrating the door was open at the time of those shots. It's simply an aid for those unable to grasp the obvious from the actual photo.

Bullshit.
Do you really think the vehicle would have been moving fast enough top change the angle that drastically?
Would you care to present your math on that?.

Not to defend Dunn but that depends on how close you are, at 5 feet a low speed will have a greater effect
that a high speed will have at 50 feet.


Yep. It really is quite obvious.

It'd seem quite a coincidence that three shots in one door panel was at one angle, and three shots in the rear door is at another angle...very easily explained by the rear door being open.


Or by, as everyone acknowledges, the car being in motion after the first 3 shots are fired.



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:30:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

Yep, and it does show that the door was open, as I said.

What your fabrication was, is when you said "now you are saying it doesnt..."

I never said that.


Blatant untruths.



Okay, feel free to point out where I said that the photo doesn't show the car door was open, as you claimed.

(Don't worry, you can't. You made that up.)





FFS I didnt make it up, you clearly said, and I quote "It was a photo adjustment" Are you suggesting it was adjusted from "open" to "Still fucking open" because if not, it must have been adjusted from shut to open. That should be easy enough for you to spot.



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:32:32 PM)

You do realize when I said that, I was referring to a photoshop of the photo that I said showed the door was open at the time of the shooting right?

I never said the photo doesn't show the door was open. That is absolutely your fabrication.



Politesub53 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:37:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

You do realize when I said that, I was referring to a photoshop of the photo that I said showed the door was open at the time of the shooting right?

I never said the photo doesn't show the door was open. That is absolutely your fabrication.


Now youre making shit up to get out of a hole you insist on digging...

You said what you said, its clear enough for anyone to see.



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:38:44 PM)

And yet you still can't point out where I said what you claim I did because you made it up.

I can't figure out if you're just trolling, or if what I said really did go above your head so you just make stuff up instead.



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:40:43 PM)

These are your words:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

It was still bullshit....... you claimed it proved the door was open, now you are saying it doesnt... [8|]


I never, ever said that the photo does not prove the door was open. My stance is the photo does prove it, and haven't said anything otherwise.

So stop making shit up.



jlf1961 -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:45:52 PM)

He kept firing at the damn car as it left the scene for fucks sake!

Okay, all things considered he probably did the world a favor, therefore instead of prison lets reward him with a all expense paid vacation to Tehran Iran, with lots of I love America and Down with the Ayatollah t shirts.

What could possibly happen?



Raiikun -> RE: Jury couldn't agree on 1st-degree (2/20/2014 3:47:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

He kept firing at the damn car as it left the scene for fucks sake!


If movement is what accounted for the change of angles, you wouldn't have 3 shots at one exact angle, and 3 shots at another exact angle.



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875