okay. we have reviewed the weaknesses of our position and have more to talk about. if we are up able to agree and reach a verdict, is the entire case mistried or is the single count mistried? i think that they didn t mean it exactly the way they said it, because it says if we are unable to agree and reach a verdict, which doesn t really make sense, but i think that i know what they mean, if they are unable to agree, is the entire case mistried or just that count, and i think that the instruction, well, the instruction doesn t really say that count, and i think that i said it, but i would repeat it again, and so my answer to them would be if you
but see what is inconsistent with that and why i am saying it is inkon sconsistent to us is tf they accept the self-defense, it would be an acquittal outright on everything, because he would have been justified in shooting, get it. so if they have got verdicts on one or four and not on the other, then that doesn t make sense. if they are hung on one, and convict and have decided on the others, they suggest that they are rejecting the self-defense, and you see where i am going with that? if they accept ed it, it would e across the board acquittal. very quickly, paul. yes, and the point is that i agree with nancy here, but if they believe that he had the right to use force and that is why they are not convicting of murder, how bizarre would it be if they convict him of attempted murder of the other kids that he was not shooting at. it would be a strange verdict indeed. maybe it is self-defense against jordan davis, but not
on all charges, and that suggests along that rational line of thinking that they are coming back with a nancy, we are listening to the judge as they are coming back. i have a question for the record, and the question is that we have reviewed the weaknesses of our position, and we have more to talk about. if we are unable to agree, and i think that this means to reach a verdict instead of and is the entire case mistried or is the single count mistried? only the single count is mistried and not the entire case. if you have reached a verdict as to the other counts, they stand. and perhaps, if you look at the i see the pens already going, so i see where you guys are really very, very good. i read it, and i said the word count, and you noticed that, didn t you? you guys are something. you are correct that here in the
the other counts which are attempted murder on each of the other three boys in the car, and the fifth count is firing on the vehicle. what is stumping me though is that if they accept eed dunn s self-defense, and most court watchers agree that jordan davis did not have a gun, and he was a kid going out to the mall that night, and if they accept michael dunn s self-defense theory, this is acquittal outright, because if you are defending yourself, you have a right to fire back, and while the jury verdict may seem inconsistent to us, it is not to th them. it sounds like a conviction on the other four counts and a not guilty or the mistrial on the first. well. nancy, when we assume that they say reach a verdict, and paul cal lam brought this up that we are assuming guilty, but maybe it is not guilty on those counts, nancy? yes, i agree.
these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. crestor! yes! [ female announcer ] ask your doctor about crestor. if you can t afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. we are back now on cnn with the breaking news coverage happening in florida. i m don lemon and we are covering the michael dunn murder trial or the jordan davis murder trial. obvio obviously, michael dunn is on trial for murdering jordan davis. this is what is going on. and probably getting my times mixed up here, but it is close to 5:00 or 4:45 the jury had a question for the judge. 4:45 eastern and had a question for the judge. the judge brought them in, and they said they had not reached a verdict on the decision of nu number one, the first degree murder charge, so the judge