My god, this is pissing me off. Are you hearing this argument? I heard it in multiple places now
"Well, the Jury said that they were unsure if Dunn shooting in self defense at the Davis because he saw a shotgun. The other counts are because he kept shooting at the others"
HOW THE fukk DOES THIS MAKE ANY fukkING SENSE? WHAT SHOTGUN? THERE WAS NO GUN.
YOU COULD JUST MAKE UP ANY shyt TO KILL SOMEONE?
Lawyers are saying this shyt.
It literally makes zero sense. Like what the fukk are they talking about?