Skip to main content

View Diary: Michael Dunn, the Murderous Bullying S.O.B. that the Jury Hardly Knew (199 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes, unless Dunn's team attempted to use (3+ / 0-)

    his good character as part of the defense - and they were smart enough not to do so - that door would be closed.

    This guy is probably telling the truth, but I don't know how he would fare on the stand. As a self confessed brawler, he may have been too easily discredited. His testimony wouldn't have much supported an argument for premeditation, which is fairly narrowly defined.

    If ever there were a case of depraved indifference, this was it. On to the retrial!

    Dunn is probably going away for the rest of his life and the world will be the better for that.

    It always seems impossible until its done. -Nelson Mandela

    by chuckvw on Sun Feb 16, 2014 at 01:25:58 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The only character evidence that would be admitted (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      is "Has he ever shot anyone before?"


      •  I don't think that's accurate (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chuckvw, NWTerriD

        If Dunn got up and testified that he wasn't a violent person, for example, any evidence of past violent conduct/character would be admissible.

        It's a moot point, of course, and he's going to rot in prison anyway.

        •  it's a interesting point of legal scholarship (0+ / 0-)

          if he said "I'm not a violent person" yes, then
          all that character stuff comes in.

          if he said "I'm ordinarily not a heavy drinker and
          the rum at the wedding hit me hard" well then
          drinking evidence would come in.

          but if he said "I have never shot someone before and
          i'm horrified, mortified and i'm ever so sorry", well
          that would be probably a narrow corridor.

          doesn't help a lot but makes him more empathetic.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site