I hope that dude gets life in prison and someone beats his skull in during the first week. He's a POS murdering criminal.
GoFundMe for Karmelo Anthony
250,749 Views |
1842 Replies |
Last: 1 min ago by jrdaustin
YokelRidesAgain said:Ex Ex Officio Director said:
And how is he gonna argue Stand Your Ground when he was in another team's tent???
The tent was in the stands of a facility that is open to the public; it's not private property. Legally speaking, he had a right to be where he was.
The question is whether the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not reasonably in fear of physical harm to an extent that would justify lethal force. I suspect that they can, but "he was in their tent" is not a meaningful issue here.
Nope
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
HtownAg92 said:Quote:
His final question surrounded juror's thoughts on "current immigration policy", with half of the jurors declining to respond, citing their confusion as to how the question was relevant to the case.
Jurors smarter than the attorney and see through the BS. The "relevance" to the question is to find radical liberal, anti-establishment, anti-government / DA loonies and get them on the jury.
The best response would have been "I want the nasty immigrants here to go to war with the dumbasses who defend Karmelo simply because he's black"
5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:Ex Ex Officio Director said:
And how is he gonna argue Stand Your Ground when he was in another team's tent???
The tent was in the stands of a facility that is open to the public; it's not private property. Legally speaking, he had a right to be where he was.
The question is whether the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not reasonably in fear of physical harm to an extent that would justify lethal force. I suspect that they can, but "he was in their tent" is not a meaningful issue here.
So basically what you're saying is for example at a high school baseball tournament, a player goes into another teams dugout, with them in there in the middle of a game, the first guy that tells him to get out, he stabs. It's public property, so he's allowed to be in there is what you're saying. Are you also saying that gives him the right to stab the first person to try and get him out, in the middle of a baseball game? The hoops people jump through.
Thug murderer created the entire situation, knowing he would be told to leave. This is nonsense.
Quote:
raising serious concerns about fairness and equal justice.
"Fairness and equal justice" are the last thing the race-baiting NGAN charlatans are interested in. "Justice" would have this cold blooded murderer sitting on death row by now waiting for his appeals to run out.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
There is only one constant, one universal, it is the only real truth: causality. Action. Reaction. Cause and effect.
if you're at your track meet and a kid from another school (who is not even competing at said track meet) is in your school's tent rooting through your teammates' backpacks, you can't confront ? You have to let them steal because your team tent and your backpacks are "not private property"YokelRidesAgain said:5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
You give people permission to root around in other people's things then it's ok to stab them in the heart if questioned or confronted. We are toast if that's justice in this country.
YokelRidesAgain said:5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
Its very relevant
YokelRidesAgain said:5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
It's irrelevant whether it was private or public when you respond with murder when being asked to leave. How do you not know this?
Yokel's "expertise" on this is pretty obvious
Darthag11 said:YokelRidesAgain said:5Amp said:
each team has their own tent to protect their goods and for the athletes to catch some rest between events and talk strategies. No different than a dugout in a baseball park.
Irrelevant. Anthony sitting in their area may have been against meet rules or something, but that has no bearing on the case. The tent was not private property that the victim and his brother had a legal right to defend with force; it's not their house or their car, for example.
The case is about whether one of the brothers pushing Anthony (or whatever the defense alleges that they did), they somehow created a fear of gross bodily harm such that Anthony could reasonably feel that the only thing for it was to pull out a knife and stab one of them in the heart.
That seems highly implausible but that is the only defense they can offer.
It's irrelevant whether it was private or public when you respond with murder when being asked to leave. How do you not know this?
He has Austin, Tx logic, youth team is trying to play at a city field but a homeless guy has his tent on said field. Well its public property, he is within his rights to stab anyone that tries to get him to get off the field. It's insane how people think.
It's how the most brain dead in this country justify.
Muy said:
It's how the most brain dead in this country justify.
And the family made bank while the victims family gets swatted. This is right there with the Ukrainian girl savagely murdered. Hell Democrats tried to hide that one as long as they could. Just cold blooded killers running around knowing Democrats will defend them no matter what.
ShaggySLC said:Muy said:
It's how the most brain dead in this country justify.
And the family made bank while the victims family gets swatted. This is right there with the Ukrainian girl savagely murdered. Hell Democrats tried to hide that one as long as they could. Just cold blooded killers running around knowing Democrats will defend them no matter what.
It's beyond fatigue now.
I wont post how I really feel in fear of being banned.
There is only one constant, one universal, it is the only real truth: causality. Action. Reaction. Cause and effect.
ShaggySLC said:
So basically what you're saying is for example at a high school baseball tournament, a player goes into another teams dugout, with them in there in the middle of a game, the first guy that tells him to get out, he stabs.
Thug murderer created the entire situation, knowing he would be told to leave. This is nonsense.
No, I am saying that the stands at a track meet are not your house or your car and you do not have a legal right to defend them with force. Do you think that the victim would have had a legal right to punch Anthony for sitting in "their" tent? Or stab him?
If Anthony had been in someone's house uninvited they would be legally justified in ejecting him with force. In this case, what he did was not illegal until he started stabbing.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:
So basically what you're saying is for example at a high school baseball tournament, a player goes into another teams dugout, with them in there in the middle of a game, the first guy that tells him to get out, he stabs.
Thug murderer created the entire situation, knowing he would be told to leave. This is nonsense.
No, I am saying that the stands at a track meet are not your house or your car and you do not have a legal right to defend them with force. Do you think that the victim would have had a legal right to punch Anthony for sitting in "their" tent? Or stab him?
If Anthony had been in someone's house uninvited they would be legally justified in ejecting him with force. In this case, what he did was not illegal until he started stabbing.
So if you and your wife are sitting down for dinner, I can just come over and go through your wife's purse.
Cool... Let me know the next time you are out for dinner.
There is only one constant, one universal, it is the only real truth: causality. Action. Reaction. Cause and effect.
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:
So basically what you're saying is for example at a high school baseball tournament, a player goes into another teams dugout, with them in there in the middle of a game, the first guy that tells him to get out, he stabs.
Thug murderer created the entire situation, knowing he would be told to leave. This is nonsense.
No, I am saying that the stands at a track meet are not your house or your car and you do not have a legal right to defend them with force. Do you think that the victim would have had a legal right to punch Anthony for sitting in "their" tent? Or stab him?
If Anthony had been in someone's house uninvited they would be legally justified in ejecting him with force. In this case, what he did was not illegal until he started stabbing.
Doubling down, just stop Yokel. Yes, they have a right to defend their stuff and have the right to assume some random dude not involved with their team, school or meet being there is a problem. Anthony created the situation and killed someone over it. Stop reasoning with thug murderers doc. Where do you practice?
edit: And funny the victim didn't do that from the info out there, but here you are, a doctor trying to give reason to a cold blooded murder, created by the murderer. Where do you practice!?
ShaggySLC said:
He has Austin, Tx logic, youth team is trying to play at a city field but a homeless guy has his tent on said field. Well its public property, he is within his rights to stab anyone that tries to get him to get off the field. It's insane how people think.
I said nothing of the sort. In your example, the youth team doesn't get to beat the hell out of the homeless guy for being on the field. However, if one of them shoves the homeless guy he doesn't have a legal right to kill them.
The case Anthony's defense is offering is that the victim and his brother "attacked" Anthony and caused him to fear for his life, so he used lethal force to defend himself. The reason that he will presumably be gong to jail for murder is that his claim of fearing death or gross bodily harm is totally implausible; you can't stab or shoot someone for pushing you.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:
He has Austin, Tx logic, youth team is trying to play at a city field but a homeless guy has his tent on said field. Well its public property, he is within his rights to stab anyone that tries to get him to get off the field. It's insane how people think.
I said nothing of the sort. In your example, the youth team doesn't get to beat the hell out of the homeless guy for being on the field. However, if one of them shoves the homeless guy he doesn't have a legal right to kill them.
The case Anthony's defense is offering is that the victim and his brother "attacked" Anthony and caused him to fear for his life, so he used lethal force to defend himself. The reason that he will presumably be gong to jail for murder is that his claim of fearing death or gross bodily harm is totally implausible; you can't stab or shoot someone for pushing you.
You just said it again. Did Austin beat the hell out of him, I saw no marks in his mugshot.
ShaggySLC said:YokelRidesAgain said:
.
Doubling down, just stop Yokel. Yes, they have a right to defend their stuff and have the right to assume some random dude not involved with their team, school or meet being there is a problem.
I'm not aware of any claim that he was rifling through their stuff; where is you seeing that?
The sequence of events as I understand it is:
1) Anthony sits down in the their team's spot in the stands (not illegal).
2) Victim and/or brother tell him to leave. (not illegal)
3) Anthony says "touch me and see what happens" (arguably a threat)
4) Brother or victim shoves Anthony
5) Anthony stabs victim
The action in 5) is not going to meet the legal standard for self defense. That's what the case is about, not that the victim was "standing his ground".
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ShaggySLC said:
You just said it again. Did Austin beat the hell out of him, I saw no marks in his mugshot.
No, I don't think he did. That would be the case the defense would have to make to justify self-defense and I don't think they will succeed.
What you seem to be saying is that Austin had the legal right to use force against Anthony simply for sitting in "their" tent. You are wrong about that.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
that was just witness accounts right after the murder. But you're right. Dude probably just sat in another team's area politely and said "what's up guys?" before shanking a kid to death.YokelRidesAgain said:
I'm not aware of any claim that he was rifling through their stuff; where is you seeing that?
The sequence of events as I understand it is:
1) Anthony sits down in the their team's spot in the stands (not illegal).
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:YokelRidesAgain said:
.
Doubling down, just stop Yokel. Yes, they have a right to defend their stuff and have the right to assume some random dude not involved with their team, school or meet being there is a problem.
I'm not aware of any claim that he was rifling through their stuff; where is you seeing that?
The sequence of events as I understand it is:
1) Anthony sits down in the their team's spot in the stands (not illegal).
2) Victim and/or brother tell him to leave. (not illegal)
3) Anthony says "touch me and see what happens" (arguably a threat)
4) Brother or victim shoves Anthony
5) Anthony stabs victim
The action in 5) is not going to meet the legal standard for self defense. That's what the case is about, not that the victim was "standing his ground".
Myself and anybody that I played with would have said something about a random person not from our school in our tent, bench, dugout, whatever. He put himself in the position to cause a question, whether he was stealing or not, likely was but you seem to trust murderers more than I do, so maybe not. No one in those stands was thinking at a track meet, a life and death situation was about to take place. Austin didn't go looking for it, Anthony did. It's relevant and he deserves way more than what he'll up getting with people running around with your logic.
Muy said:
Yokel's "expertise" on this is pretty obvious
How's that old saying go? Oh yeah, "don't argue with an idiot…they ll drag you down and beat you with experience "…..
oh no said:
that was just witness accounts right after the murder.
What witness stated that Anthony was going through other people's stuff?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:
You just said it again. Did Austin beat the hell out of him, I saw no marks in his mugshot.
No, I don't think he did. That would be the case the defense would have to make to justify self-defense and I don't think they will succeed.
What you seem to be saying is that Austin had the legal right to use force against Anthony simply for sitting in "their" tent. You are wrong about that.
Even getting beat up isn't reasonable grounds for escalating to deadly force. If ge'd punched him in the face instead of shoving him, he still wouldn't be justified stabbing him.
I look at it different. To me "touch me and see what happens" makes it premeditated and Anthony knew what he wanted to do.
I don't see a fear for his life aspect when he's making that threat.
I don't see a fear for his life aspect when he's making that threat.
YokelRidesAgain said:oh no said:
that was just witness accounts right after the murder.
What witness stated that Anthony was going through other people's stuff?
Looks like we'll find out tomorrow.
I remember reading he was seen going thru some back packs.
He was also an athletic, had a football scholarship to a Div2 is what I read. He understood the rules of behavior at sporting events.
He had no business in that tent, he had no rights to be in that tent.
He was also an athletic, had a football scholarship to a Div2 is what I read. He understood the rules of behavior at sporting events.
He had no business in that tent, he had no rights to be in that tent.
ShaggySLC said:
Myself and anybody that I played with would have said something about a random person not from our school in our tent, bench, dugout, whatever. He put himself in the position to cause a question, whether he was stealing or not, likely was but you seem to trust murderers more than I do, so maybe not. No one in those stands was thinking at a track meet, a life and death situation was about to take place. Austin didn't go looking for it, Anthony did.
Another sad example demonstrating that there are people who simply don't place the same value on things like "human life" and/or "not going to jail" as do civilized people. Anthony was looking to provoke a confrontation. If someone says something like "touch me and see what happens", it is not a good idea to do that. I don't see anything that Austin did that remotely justifies him getting stabbed, but despite that, he is still dead.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
duck79 said:
I look at it different. To me "touch me and see what happens" makes it premeditated and Anthony knew what he wanted to do.
I don't see a fear for his life aspect when he's making that threat.
Agree completely.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
YokelRidesAgain said:ShaggySLC said:
Myself and anybody that I played with would have said something about a random person not from our school in our tent, bench, dugout, whatever. He put himself in the position to cause a question, whether he was stealing or not, likely was but you seem to trust murderers more than I do, so maybe not. No one in those stands was thinking at a track meet, a life and death situation was about to take place. Austin didn't go looking for it, Anthony did.
Another sad example demonstrating that there are people who simply don't place the same value on things like "human life" and/or "not going to jail" as do civilized people. Anthony was looking to provoke a confrontation. If someone says something like "touch me and see what happens", it is not a good idea to do that. I don't see anything that Austin did that remotely justifies him getting stabbed, but despite that, he is still dead.
I get you're trying to play devils advocate but wtf are you saying guy!? You agree now?
5Amp said:
He had no business in that tent, he had no rights to be in that tent.
The first statement is true; as a matter of law, the second is not. A tent at a track meet is not your house or your car and you do not have a legal right to defend it with force.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ShaggySLC said:
I get you're trying to play devils advocate but wtf are you saying guy!? You agree now?
I agree that the self-defense claim is bogus. I don't agree that Anthony was legally an aggressor merely on the basis of sitting in the tent. Austin did not have a legal right to shove him for that reason alone.
Nonetheless, you can't stab an unarmed person in the heart for shoving you.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Featured Stories
See All
Recruiting surge evokes euphoric and neurotic emotions
by Olin Buchanan
5:12
7h ago
2.5k
10:06
1d ago
4.3k
62:09
13m ago
237
B-Team: Freshcorn up for postseason accolades and more
by Ryan Brauninger
Infection_Ag11
Elko is set to land around 20% of the nation's top 50 composite players
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
124
Infection_Ag11
Elko is set to land around 20% of the nation's top 50 composite players
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
79
SVR44
Who is the person in our social media department who decided this was a good idea?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
70