Karmelo Anthony's trial starts, A Texas track meet murderer

13,390 Views | 290 Replies | Last: 25 min ago by Oldbear83
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All the memes are spot on - especially those that point out the oxygen provided to disinformation and double standards by the left-wing media.

I am surprised there is even a discussion around this case. Transparently, I am not talking about the legal case but the "for lack of a better word" moral case.

For all intents and purposes, Karmelo was trespassing. Let's not be cute with the florid "sacred space" comment but you guys are not so daft and to realize that during competitions one team does not got site in the middle of an opponents spot unless invited.

Anyone who has basic civility simple would leave when asked to by the other team. Refusing too is inherently provocation. Again, don't act like during a football game TCU is just going to come over to Baylor's sideline and refuse to leave and that would be "excused" as normal and fine.

100% he was asked to leave politely and started mouthing off and yapping. Again inherently provocative.

I did not read the trial transcripts - so someone that did will have to share whether anyone actually testified that Anthony or Austin touched the other first or at all before the murder. Again, you're being daft if anyone acts like this is reasonable and normal behavior for 17-year-old kids. If every time a teenage boy was shoved in the heat of the moment excused murder we would have lots of dead kids. People act like Karmelo was out seeing a movie with his wife and Austin approach him and started shoving and threatening him. Again, turn on your brains.

Zero-percent Karmelo felt threatened, but if we get high and believe he did he simply could have walked away. Again, he was the pursuer by entering the Memorial team space. To have been threatened or bullied would require Austin to have entered the Centennial space and provoke. It was the other way around

Not only did he not leave he stopped to get a knife and not simply use as defensive protection but stabbed Austin so hard it pierced his sternum. That is not a defensive action.

All that to say, one has to really suspend disbelieve an engage in some serious mental gymnastics to contemplate this is not an extremely simple, clear cut case likely intentionally created by Karmelo. If you recall. he like to take pictures with guns pretending to be a gangster - he was just trying to live the fantasy he hears from gangsta rap and likely underscored by his obviously sociopathic parents.

The fact this case was discussed beyond anything but a cold-blooded murder just demonstrates how stupid so many are.
Johnny Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

Jasmine definitely code switching back to her ghetto side..



One way you know this is all disingenuously performative is because this woman actually passed the bar in Texas. You can't possibly be this dumb and accomplish that feat.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

All the memes are spot on - especially those that point out the oxygen provided to disinformation and double standards by the left-wing media.

I am surprised there is even a discussion around this case. Transparently, I am not talking about the legal case but the "for lack of a better word" moral case.

For all intents and purposes, Karmelo was trespassing. Let's not be cute with the florid "sacred space" comment but you guys are not so daft and to realize that during competitions one team does not got site in the middle of an opponents spot unless invited.

Anyone who has basic civility simple would leave when asked to by the other team. Refusing too is inherently provocation. Again, don't act like during a football game TCU is just going to come over to Baylor's sideline and refuse to leave and that would be "excused" as normal and fine.

100% he was asked to leave politely and started mouthing off and yapping. Again inherently provocative.

I did not read the trial transcripts - so someone that did will have to share whether anyone actually testified that Anthony or Austin touched the other first or at all before the murder. Again, you're being daft if anyone acts like this is reasonable and normal behavior for 17-year-old kids. If every time a teenage boy was shoved in the heat of the moment excused murder we would have lots of dead kids. People act like Karmelo was out seeing a movie with his wife and Austin approach him and started shoving and threatening him. Again, turn on your brains.

Zero-percent Karmelo felt threatened, but if we get high and believe he did he simply could have walked away. Again, he was the pursuer by entering the Memorial team space. To have been threatened or bullied would require Austin to have entered the Centennial space and provoke. It was the other way around

Not only did he not leave he stopped to get a knife and not simply use as defensive protection but stabbed Austin so hard it pierced his sternum. That is not a defensive action.

All that to say, one has to really suspend disbelieve an engage in some serious mental gymnastics to contemplate this is not an extremely simple, clear cut case likely intentionally created by Karmelo. If you recall. he like to take pictures with guns pretending to be a gangster - he was just trying to live the fantasy he hears from gangsta rap and likely underscored by his obviously sociopathic parents.

The fact this case was discussed beyond anything but a cold-blooded murder just demonstrates how stupid so many are.
Exactly. Pretending like his refusal to leave after being asked not once, twice, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen but FIFTEEN TIMES ,and his taunts were not antagonistic is just fantasy. Karmelo had no right to do anything he did. None. Not even if his primitive brain felt disrespected.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
midgett said:

cowboycwr said:

Has there been any official or verified news source that breaks down the racial make up of the jury?

I know they has been about no blacks being on it and trying to claim it was all white and it was shown to have Hispanics, whites and Asians on it but I have seen a report it also had a middle eastern woman on it described as a "woman of color"


7 whites, 3 Asian women, 1 Hispanic, 1 Middle Eastern.


That is what I have seen on Facebook and now here but no actual link to a news article or reputable site saying that. Do you have one?
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Oso said:

cowboycwr said:

El Oso said:

I get it. I was lucky. A little blood on the floor is the worst it ever got. Broken noses heal fast all things considered. But I think the lack of a present adult contributed here.


And that blood on the floor was because of lack of adult? Or because the two kids wanted to fight? Or because the kid fought the adult?

I worked in schools and have seen first hand the kids that didn't stop no matter the adults present and had to be restrained and cuffed by officers after attacking an adult.

All three. A lot of fights start because an adult isn't around. A lot of fights start because the two kids were just going to fight regardless. I've also seen a student stand up, walk across the room, and hit the teacher. I took a few punches breaking up some fights over the years. I only think one of those students actually hit me on purpose. The rest were already fighting and when you physically intervene to break up the fight, you need to know you might take at least one punch. They cover it all in the class you take. We both worked in public schools. We know how it can be.

In thirteen years, I took one pocket knife off a student in my classroom (without incident), one pocket knife from a student in the cafeteria (without incident), and was involved in the team that took a gun off a student in the hallway (without incident, but it did involve a handcuffing).

I get it. Kids do stupid things, but I still think if an adult had been in that tent, this probably would not have happened.


I disagree. He wanted to stab someone. It would have been an adult instead of Anthony.

Just like the teens that attack teachers all the time. They don't care that an adult is present.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Oso said:

Mothra said:

El Oso said:

I've not made any excuses. I think the jury got it right in verdictand sentence. There are three things that must occur in self defense. I could see an argument that two did. I could not see how force was met with proportional force.

You cannot claim self-defense if you started or provoked the conflict. That clearly happened here, IMO.

Regardless, an adult should not have to babysit a 17 year old to prevent him from stabbing someone in the heart at a track meet. Perhaps that would have prevented this hoodlum from doing what he did, or perhaps it would have gotten the teacher killed. It's not a fair ask of any teacher or coach. It's also not relevant to any issue in this case, which is why it's weird you keep talking about it.


I somewhat disagree that Melo provoked it. According to the videos and the witnesses, Austin got up, climbed up four rows, and pushed Melo. Melo's unwanted existence is not provocation. His words, maybe.

It's extremely relevant to all facts in the case. If an adult is there, no kid feels the need to remove Melo. That's the adult's job, and in 13 years of teaching and coaching, I only had to call for help once. I moved the kids away and waited for help to arrive. You ask the kid to move. If he doesn't, you send a kid for one of the police officers and another for another coach.

Experience and wisdom, things teenagers do not have, prevent tragedies.

Melo's still 100% responsible for what he did. I'm just saying I'm extremely confident this would not have happened with an adult present.


No he provoked it by being in another teams area. A track team tent is like the locker room. You don't go in there.

An adult being present would have changed nothing except the person who was stabbed.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

muddybrazos said:

Porteroso said:

Johnny Bear said:

Porteroso said:

Danielsjackson114 said:

Most of it because they put themselves in those situations lol

That's what he said... the killers of young black males, are almost always young black males.

True that the black community needs to have an internal conversation about it.

They need to do a lot more than just have a conversation about it. And the left - especially including the MSM - needs to stop excusing it, condoning it, and even encouraging it (won't happen of course).

You gotta start by talking about it, acknowledging the issue. These young males need guidance from older, wiser men and women. And right or wrong, they will listen to people who look like them more than anyone else.

The problem is that wont happen. As you can see with this Karmelo stuff almost every black person older or younger is excusing what he did. There's just no accountabilty and people want to place blame everrywhere but on the actual people who are causing the problem.

Get a grip. You have heard or read the opinions of very few black people. You would hear a lot of whites doing the same were the skin colors reversed.

Don't look at a very small sample size of vocal zealots and ascribe their thoughts to aentire demographic. Insane.

I'm wondering if you STILL believe that it's racist to think that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative, in light of the fact that the narrative undoubtedly contributed significantly to Karmelo Anthony's mindset and actions.
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.

That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.


You might as well ask blek woman to not be embarrassingly stupid.

One thing that should not be lost is how big racist scumbags his sociopathic parents are. No wonder he turned out to be a murdering p-ssie.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BLM is and was a racist extortion racket by race hustlers. The same is true of the idiotic "reparations" scam some are trying to push.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.


You're an idiot. You make me wish I'd have gone to Northwestern.
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Who says that was the reason? And if it was, I suspect that it was felt that being an educator made them too emotionally involved with students and thus at risk for bias and/or leniency. For example, if someone with depression commits a crime, I bet they wouldn't include jurors who have family members with depression.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.




That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Who says that was the reason? And if it was, I suspect that it was felt that being an educator made them too emotionally involved with students and thus at risk for bias and/or leniency. For example, if someone with depression commits a crime, I bet they wouldn't include jurors who have family members with depression.


I watch enough Bull to know the jury matters. The "emotional" argument makes no sense.

We will learn more about the jury in the coming days and through the appeals process.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

Oldbear83 said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.




That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.

There was certainly enough money to get a good lawyer. Too late now to argue about the lawyer.

That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Who says that was the reason? And if it was, I suspect that it was felt that being an educator made them too emotionally involved with students and thus at risk for bias and/or leniency. For example, if someone with depression commits a crime, I bet they wouldn't include jurors who have family members with depression.


I watch enough Bull to know the jury matters. The "emotional" argument makes no sense.

We will learn more about the jury in the coming days and through the appeals process.

Of course the emotional argument makes sense. Educators are likely to view students like their own children in a way.

And you really don't need to watch tv shows to know that juries do matter. It's not a deep concept.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

Oldbear83 said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.




That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.


They feigned fake T'RACISM to grift $1M from idiots like you - what did they do with the money? I bet it
Involved caddies bling and ice.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.


You're an idiot. You make me wish I'd have gone to Northwestern.


Says the bloke that never has a real answer.

One of your geniuses like Sheila Lee : https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-dem-lashes-out-gop-efforts-probe-foreign-donations-stunning-claim-motive
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.


Let's be blunt, because it's far to late in history to talk around the truth using 20th century niceties. Having negro jurors in a trial in which a negro has committed a crime against a non-negro is problematic. As was demonstrated in the OJ trial, they will disregard the facts of the case and decide "not-guilty" based on racial tribalism. Pretty much every other racial group appears to be able to reach beyond tribal identity and consider their shared humanity when deciding these things.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Who says that was the reason? And if it was, I suspect that it was felt that being an educator made them too emotionally involved with students and thus at risk for bias and/or leniency. For example, if someone with depression commits a crime, I bet they wouldn't include jurors who have family members with depression.


I watch enough Bull to know the jury matters. The "emotional" argument makes no sense.

We will learn more about the jury in the coming days and through the appeals process.

Of course the emotional argument makes sense. Educators are likely to view students like their own children in a way.

And you really don't need to watch tv shows to know that juries do matter. It's not a deep concept.


It doesn't. Why? There was an educator on the jury.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.


Let's be blunt, because it's far to late in history to talk around the truth using 20th century niceties. Having negro jurors in a trial in which a negro has committed a crime against a non-negro is problematic. As was demonstrated in the OJ trial, they will disregard the facts of the case and decide "not-guilty" based on racial tribalism. Pretty much every other racial group appears to be able to reach beyond tribal identity and consider their shared humanity when deciding these things.


Black people convict black people all the time. OJ wasn't a hung jury where all the blacks said no and the whites said yes.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So you would have found Karmelo innocent right? You're arguing awfully hard for blacks on the jury when most polled literally said "I'd have a hard time convicting a brother"
muddybrazos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

I was watching a youtube about this case and they had some quotes of jurors that were cut and they were to the effect of "I could not put a black boy in prison for life" and "he looks like a baby and he shouldnt be going to prison". If you say anything like that to during voir dire you are cut. If you are talkative and opinionated then you are cut. In my trips to Lew Sterret justice center in Dallas I always made it a point to speak up and have opinions so that I would be cut from the jury. I still had to sit there all day, though.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

So you would have found Karmelo innocent right? You're arguing awfully hard for blacks on the jury when most polled literally said "I'd have a hard time convicting a brother"


I don't know if I'd have found him innocent or guilty. I didn't see the trial.

Someone stated "maybe there were no qualified black jurist" I'm calling bull**** on that. If a person says they can't convict based on race, they shouldn't be on the jury.

I read that there were 4 black jurist who were educators who were dismissed. I'm calling BS because there was an educator in the jury.

My biggest issue (outsider looking in) is the defense team. When I looked at the website, I saw a single practitioner law office. With the most high profile case in the nation, I think you must go with the most high profile TEAM. (Lawyers, jury consultants, forensic evidence, pathologist) all that ***** That's my point.

You should know, people pay me for advice. That's all I have. I can't even type. (Not worth a damn)

FTR, I think you a cool dude. Do some ****, I'll put the needle in your black ass, myself.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anthony COULD have had a damm good set of lawyers if his parents didn't blow all the go fund me $$ on cars and houses. The fact that there was a go fund me in the 1st place furthers how broken things are. A go fund me for a cold blooded murderer. Brilliant ****ing idea.
But nonetheless you get the defense you pay for. And the reality is Karmelos parents found it more important to purchase a nice house & vehicles.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

Anthony COULD have had a damm good set of lawyers if his parents didn't blow all the go fund me $$ on cars and houses. The fact that there was a go fund me in the 1st place furthers how broken things are. A go fund me for a cold blooded murderer. Brilliant ****ing idea.
But nonetheless you get the defense you pay for. And the reality is Karmelos parents found it more important to purchase a nice house & vehicles.


I have an odder fact. Per the site, they never touched the money. I'm screaming at my coffee. I need something harder.

https://www.tmz.com/2025/04/16/karmelo-anthony-not-withdraw-fundraiser-money/
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

Porteroso said:

muddybrazos said:

Porteroso said:

Johnny Bear said:

Porteroso said:

Danielsjackson114 said:

Most of it because they put themselves in those situations lol

That's what he said... the killers of young black males, are almost always young black males.

True that the black community needs to have an internal conversation about it.

They need to do a lot more than just have a conversation about it. And the left - especially including the MSM - needs to stop excusing it, condoning it, and even encouraging it (won't happen of course).

You gotta start by talking about it, acknowledging the issue. These young males need guidance from older, wiser men and women. And right or wrong, they will listen to people who look like them more than anyone else.

The problem is that wont happen. As you can see with this Karmelo stuff almost every black person older or younger is excusing what he did. There's just no accountabilty and people want to place blame everrywhere but on the actual people who are causing the problem.

Get a grip. You have heard or read the opinions of very few black people. You would hear a lot of whites doing the same were the skin colors reversed.

Don't look at a very small sample size of vocal zealots and ascribe their thoughts to aentire demographic. Insane.

I'm wondering if you STILL believe that it's racist to think that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative, in light of the fact that the narrative undoubtedly contributed significantly to Karmelo Anthony's mindset and actions.

Denying that black lives matter will always be racist. You can stop asking when it will cease to be true.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

Mitch Blood Green said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

historian said:

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.


Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.


I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.


All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.

I expect it from you, but besides Daniel, who else is up voting this crap?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.