Oh, will the bullshyt never end?

So your answer is - It's an involving and difficult decision making process?

Would the finely tuned minds here at A2K please to explain to me: How in the hell someone can be guilty of ATTEMPTED murder, but not of murder - if they were successful in their attempt to kill the person?

Would the finely tuned minds here at A2K please to explain to me: How in the hell someone can be guilty of ATTEMPTED murder, but not of murder - if they were successful in their attempt to kill the person

(Reuters) - A Florida jury convicted a white, middle-aged man on Saturday of three counts of attempted murder for opening fire on a car of black teenagers during an argument over loud rap music, but could not reach a verdict on a murder charge for the killing of a 17-year-old in the car.

Michael Dunn, a 47-year-old software engineer, fired 10 rounds at a vehicle carrying four teens in a Jacksonville gas station parking lot in November 2012, killing black teen Jordan Davis.

The jury deadlocked on the most serious charge of first-degree murder against Dunn, forcing Judge Russell Healey to declare a mistrial on that count.

The failure to reach a verdict on the first-degree murder charge is a blow for the prosecution and the Davis family. But Dunn still faces at least 60 years in jail for the attempted murder convictions against the three other teens, legal analysts said.

Prosecutors told a press conference after the verdicts were read that they plan to retry Dunn, who has been in jail since his arrest in 2012, on the first-degree murder charge.

The jury also found Dunn guilty on a fifth count of firing into an occupied vehicle.

Quote:

(Reuters) - A Florida jury convicted a white, middle-aged man on Saturday of three counts of attempted murder for opening fire on a car of black teenagers during an argument over loud rap music, but could not reach a verdict on a murder charge for the killing of a 17-year-old in the car.

Michael Dunn, a 47-year-old software engineer, fired 10 rounds at a vehicle carrying four teens in a Jacksonville gas station parking lot in November 2012, killing black teen Jordan Davis.

The jury deadlocked on the most serious charge of first-degree murder against Dunn, forcing Judge Russell Healey to declare a mistrial on that count.

The failure to reach a verdict on the first-degree murder charge is a blow for the prosecution and the Davis family. But Dunn still faces at least 60 years in jail for the attempted murder convictions against the three other teens, legal analysts said.

Prosecutors told a press conference after the verdicts were read that they plan to retry Dunn, who has been in jail since his arrest in 2012, on the first-degree murder charge.

The jury also found Dunn guilty on a fifth count of firing into an occupied vehicle.

More: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-dunn-idUSBREA1E0MR20140216

I can't believe that Dunn and his family were shocked at the guilty verdict.

The fact that someone can say "I thought I saw a gun." as a defense is beyond incredible.

The trial has drawn international attention because of racial overtones and Dunn's claims of self-defense.

Generally reading about this makes me sad...but participating on a jury where you see where the 'rubber meets the road' reaches deep down to a whole different level of sadness.

I have a thought on modifying the jury selection process. I know why this wouldn't happen but here's my fantasy. The judge helps pick the juror candidates. He wouldn't have the final say...but he/she could eliminate obvious 'lemons'. Perhaps it could help eliminate the 'too stupid and/or ignorant candidates from the pool. As I said, it's a fantasy.

I should have thought this was obvious.

Would the finely tuned minds here at A2K please to explain to me: How in the hell someone can be guilty of ATTEMPTED murder, but not of murder - if they were successful in their attempt to kill the person?

When it comes to the degrees of murder, things can get a little tricky.

There's first and second degree murder, and even sometimes a third. Then there's voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.

And don't forget "adequate justification," which can downgrade a murder to a lower level.

To help make sense of the degrees of murder, we're going to start with the two most serious crimes in the murder spectrum, and pinpoint just what differs between a first and second degree killing.

First degree murder falls into one of the following two categories:

Premeditated, intentional killings
Felony murder
While second degree murder is either:

An unplanned, intentional killing; or
A death caused by a reckless disregard for human life
Putting aside felony murder, the real difference between first and second degree murder is the degree of intent under which the defendant acted when carrying out the killing.

First degree murder requires that a defendant plan and intentionally carry out the killing, whereas second degree murder requires that the killing either be intentional or reckless, and occur in the spur of the moment.

Taking the time to plan another's death is arguably a more serious crime.

An outlier, felony murder is a form of first degree murder that occurs when a person dies--even accidentally--during the commission of a violent felony.

For instance, if a robber unintentionally kills a patron in a liquor store, he's still committed first degree murder.

While it's easy to pinpoint the differences between degrees of murder in a theoretical manner, this is not always the case in a real life situation. When faced with evidence, there is often a very fine line between a first and second degree killing.