re: Defense Rests in Karmelo Anthony Trial GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY

I heard that the defense's star witness admitted that he had lied. He was shown on video with his back was to Austin and Carmello when the stabbing happened. The group of people he saw surrounding Carmello were people tending to Austin after he was stabbed. Carmello is going to be found guilty. The question is how many decades is going to get?

quote:

---

I could stab Powerman on live TV during the Super Bowl

---

you're not planning to do that, are you?






not judging, just curious

quote:

---

Scary blank

---

Supposedly, Carmelo looked away when the medical examiner showed the piece of Austin's heart that he severed with his 5inch knife. So, he must have some type of emotion. Idk, if it's true but they said one of the jury members became physically ill from seeing pictures of Austin's autopsy. Had to be some pretty gruesome images.

quote:

---

Had to be some pretty gruesome images.

---

I can't even imagine... glad I'm not on that jury- I don't think I could do it.

Mines

quote:

---

You have to bear witness to the consequences of bad people to fully understand how to protect yourself and your family.

---

True.

quote:

---

I could stab Powerman on live TV during the Super Bowl and Jake and Boozie would’ve put on a better case than these two.

---

Together, they’d antagonize the judge so badly, you’d end up looking up at the working edge of a guillotine.

If you bring a knife, you a school event, on school property...and that knife takes someone's life in an altercation that was initiated by your actions....you are guilty, period. Should be a hard law.
Kinda like drunk driving....if you are drunk and in an accident, even not your fault, you suffer the consequences of being drunk.

Cut out the Grey areas. If these kids end up throwing punches...they all go home to their families. But a kid makes a premeditated action to bring a weapon, and then threaten to use before he actually uses it,,,shows all the premeditated actions needed to convict.

Here's what will sink him. He chose to be in that area. He refused to leave. Things got heated, and he claims he had to defend himself. Problem is, all he had to do was leave. He didn't. He was in an area , open tent, and had full unfiltered access to flee (if he feared bodily harm).
He didn't. Simply that means he didn't fear for his safety. If he didn't, it can be self defense

quote:

---

Here's what will sink him. He chose to be in that area. He refused to leave. Things got heated, and he claims he had to defend himself. Problem is, all he had to do was leave

---

Texas provocation law is what sunk him.

Texas Penal Code § 9.31(b)(4) (Provocation).Under Texas law, you completely forfeit your right to claim self-defense if you intentionally provoke someone into using force against you just to give yourself a pretext to attack them.

He refused at least 15 requests to leave the area. Instead he armed himself using the concealment of his backpack (unfolded a bladed weapon and gripped it, ready for use) and began making provocative statements of touch me and find out.. When you arm yourself and attempt to bait someone into attacking you, you lose all claims to self defense in the state of Texas.. if you want to really split hairs, Texas state law does not allow for the use of deadly force in a verbal altercation. The moment he armed himself, he legally became the aggressor. Concealed or not, he introduced a weapon into a verbal disagreement. His own actions void any claim to self defense.