When he shot three times at the fleeing vehicle, it was what got him three convictions for attempted murder.
When he shot three times at the fleeing vehicle, it was what got him three convictions for attempted murder.
NO SHI+! If he had limited himself to the Seven Shots he fired into the stationary vehicle he would have been home free, But for what you describe as a "pernicious prosecuting attorney."
Why was there even a trial is my question. What's the big deal?
I mean,Jesus, it's not like YOU never had a bad day.
Once again, firing after any claimed possible threat has ended appears to get easy convictions, as has happened in OK. FL and OK law are similar on this issue.
He can be retried on the murder charge.
What gets me is that they did not convict him on a murder charge. It was never proven that a shotgun was in the SUV. Dunn did admit to ordering a pizza afterward.
Well, technically, the burden is not to PROVE there was a shotgun in the SUV, but to establish REASONABLE DOUBT. Apparently the jurors simply could not agree enough to reach a verdict. Hard to say what will happen in a jury room.
My point was simply what I say in SDA classes, that continuing to shoot after any alleged threat has obviously ended often leads to arrest and conviction in OK and states with similar laws, even if there is no conviction on the initial shot, for whatever reason. Even if the first shot were fully justified (in some other instance) shots after there is no threat just have no justification in OK and similar states.
Similar threads
