Stand you Ground? No, get your butt to jail!

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That's not what happened. Dooley would have walked if that was what transpired.

Then what did happen? Because the article you chose to post pretty much says that's what happened.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Says the perp and nobody else. The jury saw through all the smoke and mirrors and concluded that Dooley killed Davis in front of Davis' 8 year old daughter over nothing at all. The Air Force veteran that was killed did not threaten Dooley's life. I think the jurors that handed down the verdict have gotten a much better view of what transpired than what a couple of newspaper articles will offer.

That's not what happened. Dooley would have walked if that was what transpired.

Okay, let's ask the questions. How did the fight start? Was Dooley walking away or not? Who took the first sign of physical aggression? If Dooley took out his gun and shot this guy in cold blood like you said then I am with you he should be in jail. But if this man was trying to avoid a fight, and James started choking him out then it was self defense.

[decocker 7,198]

That's not what happened. Dooley would have walked if that was what transpired.

i don't get it. that's what the article and the video said happened. so, why post this article and video if it's false?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You aren't answering the question though... how did this incident make Dooley "trigger happy"? It seems like he was defending himself in an already physical altercation with someone much younger and much bigger than he was. An altercation he did not initiate.

Dooley's life was not in any danger at any time. If you knew the community and neighborhood you'd know that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to carry around and brandish firearms. It is that particular and unnecessary act that per the witness statements caused the physical altercation. Either way, the jury found the man guilty and he will likely bein the custody of the state until he kicks the bucket. And that's a good thing.

[aaydrian 479]

I think what happened in this case is somehow James found out gramps was packing and thought he needed to relieve the owner of the weapon.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Dooley's life was not in any danger at any time. If you knew the community and neighborhood you'd know that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to carry around and brandish firearms. It is that particular and unnecessary act that per the witness statements caused the physical altercation. Either way, the jury found the man guilty and he will likely bein the custody of the state until he kicks the bucket. And that's a good thing.

So witness statements say that Dooley did NOT turn around to go home and that James followed him?

[Teddy B 17,251]

I think what happened in this case is somehow James found out gramps was packing and thought he needed to relieve the owner of the weapon.

But wait, don't armed citizens help prevent crime? I agree that if Dooley wasn't packing heat, this probably would not have gone as far as it did. But that doesn't excuse James for following him, no one was in immediate danger, he should have called police.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i don't get it. that's what the article and the video said happened. so, why post this article and video if it's false?

It's incomplete. Do you think the jury would have found the man guilty if he indeed reasonably feared for his life and defended himself? That's not what happens in Florida. Here's a snippet from an earlier report on this crime:

Detectives have interviewed multiple witnesses and have heard various versions of the confrontation. Officials continue to investigate.

William Myers, a neighborhood skater, said he was at the park when the shooting occurred. He said there were two boys skateboarding on the basketball court.

The man accused of shooting James came out from his home and argued with the skateboarders, Myers said. James stuck up for the boys, saying that they weren't bothering anyone and that the park is for everyone, Myers said.

Both men turned around to walk away and then the alleged shooter turned back and said something to James. He then pointed a handgun. James tried disarming him. They fell to the ground and the gun went off, Myers said.

"Over something as little as this, I don't think that this should have happened at all," said Myers, a friend of James and his family. "That guy just went way over the edge with it."

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That's a totally different story than the one you chose to post, which is what caused confusion.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So witness statements say that Dooley did NOT turn around to go home and that James followed him?

That's only part of the story. Dooley started walking home, then turned back, brandished his gun and made a remark of some sort to Davis. That is what prompted Davis to try and disarm Dooley. If Dooley had walked home, none of this would have happened. Again, the jury found Dooley guilty for a reason.

[aaydrian 479]

But wait, don't armed citizens help prevent crime? I agree that if Dooley wasn't packing heat, this probably would not have gone as far as it did. But that doesn't excuse James for following him, no one was in immediate danger, he should have called police.

What I heard a few months ago said nothing of a fight but what I got from the whole thing is James thought the only way to 'save' everybody was to tackle the man he knew had a gun. Even if Dooley was attacked James still did the wrong thing. His involvement and actions caused his own death.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That's only part of the story. Dooley started walking home, then turned back, brandished his gun and made a remark of some sort to Davis. That is what prompted Davis to try and disarm Dooley. If Dooley had walked home, none of this would have happened. Again, the jury found Dooley guilty for a reason.

I don't know why you chose to post an article that only gave "part of the story" then. I know they found him guilty for a reason, however, your article didn't exactly spell out what that reason was.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That's a totally different story than the one you chose to post, which is what caused confusion.

Well, I posted the story that discusses Dooley's deserved conviction. I don't control the content of that article - it is what it is. But again, a jury doesn't convict a man who was merely acting in self defense.

[decocker 7,198]

Do you think the jury would have found the man guilty if he indeed reasonably feared for his life and defended himself?

do i think i jury can come to the wrong conclusion? of course. casey anthony ring a bell?

if what the skateboarder kid said is true, then the article you posted is a gross misrepresentation of the facts behind the case. shoddy journalism.

Edited January 9, 2013 by val erie

[aaydrian 479]

I don't know why you chose to post an article that only gave "part of the story" then. I know they found him guilty for a reason, however, your article didn't exactly spell out what that reason was.

I think he posted the 'gun nuts' version accidentally.