Nice hit and run post. You Can't defend your bs

biglebowski said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Killer culture that never holds itself accountable on anything.

---

Black men sure commit a lot of our crimes.

---

6% of the population and commit 50% of all violent crime. The black community's got a big problem. Their biggest problem was hitching their star to the dem party.

But if his client goes down hard then he looks like a moron.

backintexas2013 said:

---

I can't remember the exact stat but I think about 90% of all criminal cases end in a plea bargain.

I'm not saying this is how I feel but with a person that's 17 the DA may not have the appetite to go full on max sentence. If they offer something like 20 years eligible in 10 maybe the guy takes it. The dad seems like he isn't out for blood and this may give the perp a chance to plead down.

---

It is closer to 97% for felonies in my county. And a plea deal is the most likely outcome. I have pled out 2 teenagers (17-18 year olds) in the past 6 months on murder. Both took 15 years. They will be eligible for parole in 7.5 years, but will likely serve 10.

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

Tom Fox said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

I can't remember the exact stat but I think about 90% of all criminal cases end in a plea bargain.

I'm not saying this is how I feel but with a person that's 17 the DA may not have the appetite to go full on max sentence. If they offer something like 20 years eligible in 10 maybe the guy takes it. The dad seems like he isn't out for blood and this may give the perp a chance to plead down.

---

It is closer to 97% for felonies in my county. And a plea deal is the most likely outcome. I have pled out 2 teenagers (17-18 year olds) in the past 6 months on murder. Both took 15 years. They will be eligible for parole in 7.5 years, but will likely serve 10.

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

And if I was Austin's father or twin brother, I would be planning to meet him once he is out.

TheRatt87 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

I can't remember the exact stat but I think about 90% of all criminal cases end in a plea bargain.

I'm not saying this is how I feel but with a person that's 17 the DA may not have the appetite to go full on max sentence. If they offer something like 20 years eligible in 10 maybe the guy takes it. The dad seems like he isn't out for blood and this may give the perp a chance to plead down.

---

It is closer to 97% for felonies in my county. And a plea deal is the most likely outcome. I have pled out 2 teenagers (17-18 year olds) in the past 6 months on murder. Both took 15 years. They will be eligible for parole in 7.5 years, but will likely serve 10.

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

And if I was Austin's father or twin brother, I would be planning to meet him once he is out.

---

hopefully they sue civilly for wrongful death, only issue is I doubt his family has any real assets.

I think they got around $300k right now. I'd go ahead and file suit before they spend any of it.

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

---

It is all going to come down to his statement to police. It is obvious that he made a statement because we know he spoke with the patrol officers.

If he makes a good statement about being in fear for his life and look remorseful, it will not fix the fact that his response was not proportional and therefore not justified under chapter 9 but It will weigh into the prosecutor's decision on what to offer.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

evestor1 said:

---

pretty sure one can assume it is for the 'hoping to kill someone'

no reason to goaltend for it on texags...just realize the dude was a wrong turn away from being like Thomas Johnson in this scenario and give your T&Ps

---

I'm definitely not willing to assume this was premeditated murder. That doesn't mean that I am ruling it out nor that II wouldn't avoid him given the opportunity. It is not goal tending to point out that no one here actually knows what occurred.

---

You can't assume it was premeditated?? Of course you can. This guy packed a knife, went and picked a fight by doing something highly inflammatory, and then quickly escalated to stabbing somebody in the heart when it was completely unjustified.

One can't even dream up a fictitious series of events that makes this accidental or spontaneous.

---

Sure I can, but I'm unwilling to before the facts come out. Too much misinformation out there for me to be willing to make an assumption.

---

You can read the offense reports linked on this very thread. The facts will not deviate much from that. If you change your story now, those statements will be on police body cameras and a good lawyer will impeach the shlt out of you if you change very much.

---

Maybe not but there is literally no benefit to not assuming.

---

Just because you refuse to draw any conclusions based on... I'm not sure what exactly; maybe some desire to appear non biased? - doesn't mean that the rest of us can't apply basic logic. and I'm not trying to be rude when I say that, but this really is basic logic. If a guy packs a murder weapon, goes and picks a pointless fight through needlessly inflammatory behavior, says touch me and see what happens, and then immediately pulls out the murder weapon and stabs somebody in the heart after initial contact, then the guy clearly intended to kill. Every action he took along the way demonstrates his goal of killing somebody.

Again, short of "will maybe somebody put LSD in his water bottle," you can't even dream up a scenerio that explains this way and makes it not pre meditated.

Tom Fox said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

---

It is all going to come down to his statement to police. It is obvious that he made a statement because we know he spoke with the patrol officers.

If he makes a good statement about being in fear for his life and look remorseful, it will not fix the fact that his response was not proportional and therefore not justified under chapter 9 but It will weigh into the prosecutor's decision on what to offer.

---

I have a question about that. In the police report, they said Karmelo was saying "I'm not alleged, I did it." And "i acted in self-defense" but this was prior to him being formally questions and potentially before he was Mirandized. If that's the case, is what he said admissible in court?

The requirement to Mirandize is that he's being put under arrest. If he blabbed before being arrested, he's dumber than he looks. If he blabbed after being arrested, he's even dumber.

Quote:

---

is what he said admissible in court?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

The requirement to Mirandize is that he's being put under arrest

---

Or taken into police custody.

I'm sorry - how's that different than being put under arrest?

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

evestor1 said:

---

pretty sure one can assume it is for the 'hoping to kill someone'

no reason to goaltend for it on texags...just realize the dude was a wrong turn away from being like Thomas Johnson in this scenario and give your T&Ps

---

I'm definitely not willing to assume this was premeditated murder. That doesn't mean that I am ruling it out nor that II wouldn't avoid him given the opportunity. It is not goal tending to point out that no one here actually knows what occurred.

---

You can't assume it was premeditated?? Of course you can. This guy packed a knife, went and picked a fight by doing something highly inflammatory, and then quickly escalated to stabbing somebody in the heart when it was completely unjustified.

One can't even dream up a fictitious series of events that makes this accidental or spontaneous.

---

Sure I can, but I'm unwilling to before the facts come out. Too much misinformation out there for me to be willing to make an assumption.

---

You can read the offense reports linked on this very thread. The facts will not deviate much from that. If you change your story now, those statements will be on police body cameras and a good lawyer will impeach the shlt out of you if you change very much.

---

Maybe not but there is literally no benefit to not assuming.

---

Just because you refuse to draw any conclusions based on... I'm not sure what exactly; maybe some desire to appear non biased? - doesn't mean that the rest of us can't apply basic logic. and I'm not trying to be rude when I say that, but this really is basic logic. If a guy packs a murder weapon, goes and picks a pointless fight through needlessly inflammatory behavior, says touch me and see what happens, and then immediately pulls out the murder weapon and stabs somebody in the heart after initial contact, then the guy clearly intended to kill. Every action he took along the way demonstrates his goal of killing somebody.

Again, short of "will maybe somebody put LSD in his water bottle," you can't even dream up a scenerio that explains this way and makes it not pre meditated.

---

You are assuming that you know the details. And perhaps you do. But until a video surfaces, I refuse to assume anything, even if I think I have a really good guess at what happened. Both sides have been wrong too often too recently for me to assume I can pick through all of the sensationalism in the media and online. If I had to thrown my bet down, I know which way I would go, but I don't have to.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

---

It is all going to come down to his statement to police. It is obvious that he made a statement because we know he spoke with the patrol officers.

If he makes a good statement about being in fear for his life and look remorseful, it will not fix the fact that his response was not proportional and therefore not justified under chapter 9 but It will weigh into the prosecutor's decision on what to offer.

---

I have a question about that. In the police report, they said Karmelo was saying "I'm not alleged, I did it." And "i acted in self-defense" but this was prior to him being formally questions and potentially before he was Mirandized. If that's the case, is what he said admissible in court?

---

If all you had to do was blab it out before you got officially mirandized, that would be one hell of a loophole.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

---

It is all going to come down to his statement to police. It is obvious that he made a statement because we know he spoke with the patrol officers.

If he makes a good statement about being in fear for his life and look remorseful, it will not fix the fact that his response was not proportional and therefore not justified under chapter 9 but It will weigh into the prosecutor's decision on what to offer.

---

I have a question about that. In the police report, they said Karmelo was saying "I'm not alleged, I did it." And "i acted in self-defense" but this was prior to him being formally questions and potentially before he was Mirandized. If that's the case, is what he said admissible in court?

---

Miranda is required when there is custody plus interrogation.

That statement was made spontaneous by him and not in response to police questions. So it is admissible.

The interrogation came later and would be post Miranda.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

If I was this kids attorney, 10 to do would be the goal and hard to turn down.

---

Given the publicity and politics here, I don't see anyway he gets that offer! (He'd be insane to turn it down)



Note: I do not know anything about the Collin County DA or that office, just speaking generally here!

---

It is all going to come down to his statement to police. It is obvious that he made a statement because we know he spoke with the patrol officers.

If he makes a good statement about being in fear for his life and look remorseful, it will not fix the fact that his response was not proportional and therefore not justified under chapter 9 but It will weigh into the prosecutor's decision on what to offer.

---

I have a question about that. In the police report, they said Karmelo was saying "I'm not alleged, I did it." And "i acted in self-defense" but this was prior to him being formally questions and potentially before he was Mirandized. If that's the case, is what he said admissible in court?

---

If an officer shows up to a scene and someone just blabs something out that's considered a res gestae statement and is an admissible statement. If he was being detained or in custody, he'd need to be mirandized before being questioned.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

evestor1 said:

---

pretty sure one can assume it is for the 'hoping to kill someone'

no reason to goaltend for it on texags...just realize the dude was a wrong turn away from being like Thomas Johnson in this scenario and give your T&Ps

---

I'm definitely not willing to assume this was premeditated murder. That doesn't mean that I am ruling it out nor that II wouldn't avoid him given the opportunity. It is not goal tending to point out that no one here actually knows what occurred.

---

You can't assume it was premeditated?? Of course you can. This guy packed a knife, went and picked a fight by doing something highly inflammatory, and then quickly escalated to stabbing somebody in the heart when it was completely unjustified.

One can't even dream up a fictitious series of events that makes this accidental or spontaneous.

---

Sure I can, but I'm unwilling to before the facts come out. Too much misinformation out there for me to be willing to make an assumption.

---

You can read the offense reports linked on this very thread. The facts will not deviate much from that. If you change your story now, those statements will be on police body cameras and a good lawyer will impeach the shlt out of you if you change very much.

---

Maybe not but there is literally no benefit to not assuming.

---

Just because you refuse to draw any conclusions based on... I'm not sure what exactly; maybe some desire to appear non biased? - doesn't mean that the rest of us can't apply basic logic. and I'm not trying to be rude when I say that, but this really is basic logic. If a guy packs a murder weapon, goes and picks a pointless fight through needlessly inflammatory behavior, says touch me and see what happens, and then immediately pulls out the murder weapon and stabs somebody in the heart after initial contact, then the guy clearly intended to kill. Every action he took along the way demonstrates his goal of killing somebody.

Again, short of "will maybe somebody put LSD in his water bottle," you can't even dream up a scenerio that explains this way and makes it not pre meditated.

---

You are assuming that you know the details. And perhaps you do. But until a video surfaces, I refuse to assume anything, even if I think I have a really good guess at what happened. Both sides have been wrong too often too recently for me to assume I can pick through all of the sensationalism in the media and online. If I had to thrown my bet down, I know which way I would go, but I don't have to.

---

Both sides have been wrong recently?

If you had to plot a bar chart to show how many times they have been dead ass wrong, which would be higher?

BadMoonRisin said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

evestor1 said:

---

pretty sure one can assume it is for the 'hoping to kill someone'

no reason to goaltend for it on texags...just realize the dude was a wrong turn away from being like Thomas Johnson in this scenario and give your T&Ps

---

I'm definitely not willing to assume this was premeditated murder. That doesn't mean that I am ruling it out nor that II wouldn't avoid him given the opportunity. It is not goal tending to point out that no one here actually knows what occurred.

---

You can't assume it was premeditated?? Of course you can. This guy packed a knife, went and picked a fight by doing something highly inflammatory, and then quickly escalated to stabbing somebody in the heart when it was completely unjustified.

One can't even dream up a fictitious series of events that makes this accidental or spontaneous.

---

Sure I can, but I'm unwilling to before the facts come out. Too much misinformation out there for me to be willing to make an assumption.

---

You can read the offense reports linked on this very thread. The facts will not deviate much from that. If you change your story now, those statements will be on police body cameras and a good lawyer will impeach the shlt out of you if you change very much.

---

Maybe not but there is literally no benefit to not assuming.

---

Just because you refuse to draw any conclusions based on... I'm not sure what exactly; maybe some desire to appear non biased? - doesn't mean that the rest of us can't apply basic logic. and I'm not trying to be rude when I say that, but this really is basic logic. If a guy packs a murder weapon, goes and picks a pointless fight through needlessly inflammatory behavior, says touch me and see what happens, and then immediately pulls out the murder weapon and stabs somebody in the heart after initial contact, then the guy clearly intended to kill. Every action he took along the way demonstrates his goal of killing somebody.

Again, short of "will maybe somebody put LSD in his water bottle," you can't even dream up a scenerio that explains this way and makes it not pre meditated.

---

You are assuming that you know the details. And perhaps you do. But until a video surfaces, I refuse to assume anything, even if I think I have a really good guess at what happened. Both sides have been wrong too often too recently for me to assume I can pick through all of the sensationalism in the media and online. If I had to thrown my bet down, I know which way I would go, but I don't have to.

---

Both sides have been wrong recently?

If you had to plot a bar chart to show how many times they have been dead ass wrong, which would be higher?

---

I don't disagree, but neither would be empty.

Would you agree that when you look at Karmelo's mug shot, there is nothing about it that looks like he was in any kind of fight (no bruising or cuts, not disheveled) which does make his use of deadly force suspicious and possibly an overreaction?

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

Would you agree that when you look at Karmelo's mug shot, there is nothing about it that looks like he was in any kind of fight (no bruising or cuts, not disheveled) which does make his use of deadly force suspicious and possibly an overreaction?

---

I would

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

Would you agree that when you look at Karmelo's mug shot, there is nothing about it that looks like he was in any kind of fight (no bruising or cuts, not disheveled)

---

Agree.

Quote:

---

which does make his use of deadly force suspicious and possibly an overreaction?

---

I don't think one has anything to do with the other. None of the witnesses nor Anthony said they were rolling around fighting or being hit in the face, etc.

A person can be legitimately in fear for their life and not have any type of bruising, cuts etc.

(But not in this case, as there has been ZERO information provided to suggest Anthony had any fear that would make deadly force a reasonable response.)

My argument was mostly due to others (mostly on social media) that Karmelo's use of deadly force on Austin was due to him getting beat up and stomped on. It does not appear that was the case and witness statements say Austin pushed him (at most - others say he just touched Karmelo's backpack) and Karmelo pulled out his knife and stabbed Austin through the heart. I have no idea how the attorney is going to try to get a self defense argument to hold water when there doesn't seem there was any real threat to Karmelo's safety.

I suppose they might argue that he felt unsafe because Austin was so much bigger, but I doubt that works or you set the precedence that shorter people can kill bigger people after words are exchanged. They might argue he felt unsafe because he was outnumbered, but then they have to answer why he was in the tent of another team and how that wasn't antagonizing behavior. If prosecution is able to show Karmelo was the antagonizer, self defense goes out the window.

Ahhh. Gotcha!

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

My argument was mostly due to others (mostly on social media) that Karmelo's use of deadly force on Austin was due to him getting beat up and stomped on. It does not appear that was the case and witness statements say Austin pushed him (at most - others say he just touched Karmelo's backpack) and Karmelo pulled out his knife and stabbed Austin through the heart. I have no idea how the attorney is going to try to get a self defense argument to hold water when there doesn't seem there was any real threat to Karmelo's safety.

I suppose they might argue that he felt unsafe because Austin was so much bigger, but I doubt that works or you set the precedence that shorter people can kill bigger people after words are exchanged. They might argue he felt unsafe because he was outnumbered, but then they have to answer why he was in the tent of another team and how that wasn't antagonizing behavior. If prosecution is able to show Karmelo was the antagonizer, self defense goes out the window.

---

Yep

I've seen many people use whataboutism and comparing this to Zimmerman. If the twins or Austin was on top of KA bashing his head into the ground like in that case it's 100% self defense. That doesn't seem to be the case. If it was there are multiple videos out there that would show this. There's a reason he's charged with murder 1, the videos show KA wasn't being attacked.

My guess is Austin simply grabbed him and KA stabbed him. No way self defense applies there.

tylercsbn9 said:

---

My guess is Austin simply grabbed him and KA stabbed him. No way self defense applies there.

---

...and according to statements form multiple officers in the police report who recounted statements from witnesses, that's exactly what happened.

it's not like George Zimmerman, or Kyle Rittenhouse, or Daniel Penny, or even the Apple River stabbing or any other bad comparison whataboutism out there on the internet right now...

oh no said:

---

tylercsbn9 said:

---

My guess is Austin simply grabbed him and KA stabbed him. No way self defense applies there.

---

...and according to statements form multiple officers in the police report who recounted statements from witnesses, that's exactly what happened.

it's not like George Zimmerman, or Kyle Rittenhouse, or Daniel Penny, or even the Apple River stabbing or any other bad comparison whataboutism out there on the internet right now...

---

Also, the self defense laws vary by state.

tylercsbn9 said:

---

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

My argument was mostly due to others (mostly on social media) that Karmelo's use of deadly force on Austin was due to him getting beat up and stomped on. It does not appear that was the case and witness statements say Austin pushed him (at most - others say he just touched Karmelo's backpack) and Karmelo pulled out his knife and stabbed Austin through the heart. I have no idea how the attorney is going to try to get a self defense argument to hold water when there doesn't seem there was any real threat to Karmelo's safety.

I suppose they might argue that he felt unsafe because Austin was so much bigger, but I doubt that works or you set the precedence that shorter people can kill bigger people after words are exchanged. They might argue he felt unsafe because he was outnumbered, but then they have to answer why he was in the tent of another team and how that wasn't antagonizing behavior. If prosecution is able to show Karmelo was the antagonizer, self defense goes out the window.

---

Yep

I've seen many people use whataboutism and comparing this to Zimmerman. If the twins or Austin was on top of KA bashing his head into the ground like in that case it's 100% self defense. That doesn't seem to be the case. If it was there are multiple videos out there that would show this. There's a reason he's charged with murder 1, the videos show KA wasn't being attacked.

My guess is Austin simply grabbed him and KA stabbed him. No way self defense applies there.

---

But my question is why? That is not a normal response. Was he embarrassed he was sitting in the wrong section and trying to save face? Was he upset about something else that happened and in a heightened emotional state? Was he trying to impress a girl and went about it in a very stupid way? Part of some weird initiation where he was challenged with killing someone but claiming self defense?

This was such an overreaction that you can almost understand why some people are tying to insist Austin was the aggressor. It makes no sense why a 17-year-old, who didn't appear to have had previous issues with the law or school (nothing official has come out and it likely would have by now) would grab a knife and stab someone just because he put his hands on him.

Because he felt disrespected.

And for a decent sized subset of Dey Culcha, that's an acceptable response.

Just look at the people supporting him.

Or… hear me out… That's just what he wanted to do, he wanted to stab someone. I didn't see that mentioned in your post…

Edit: this was in response to jello's last post

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

tylercsbn9 said:

---

A Net Full of Jello said:

---

My argument was mostly due to others (mostly on social media) that Karmelo's use of deadly force on Austin was due to him getting beat up and stomped on. It does not appear that was the case and witness statements say Austin pushed him (at most - others say he just touched Karmelo's backpack) and Karmelo pulled out his knife and stabbed Austin through the heart. I have no idea how the attorney is going to try to get a self defense argument to hold water when there doesn't seem there was any real threat to Karmelo's safety.

I suppose they might argue that he felt unsafe because Austin was so much bigger, but I doubt that works or you set the precedence that shorter people can kill bigger people after words are exchanged. They might argue he felt unsafe because he was outnumbered, but then they have to answer why he was in the tent of another team and how that wasn't antagonizing behavior. If prosecution is able to show Karmelo was the antagonizer, self defense goes out the window.

---

Yep

I've seen many people use whataboutism and comparing this to Zimmerman. If the twins or Austin was on top of KA bashing his head into the ground like in that case it's 100% self defense. That doesn't seem to be the case. If it was there are multiple videos out there that would show this. There's a reason he's charged with murder 1, the videos show KA wasn't being attacked.

My guess is Austin simply grabbed him and KA stabbed him. No way self defense applies there.

---

But my question is why? That is not a normal response. Was he embarrassed he was sitting in the wrong section and trying to save face? Was he upset about something else that happened and in a heightened emotional state? Was he trying to impress a girl and went about it in a very stupid way? Part of some weird initiation where he was challenged with killing someone but claiming self defense?

This was such an overreaction that you can almost understand why some people are tying to insist Austin was the aggressor. It makes no sense why a 17-year-old, who didn't appear to have had previous issues with the law or school (nothing official has come out and it likely would have by now) would grab a knife and stab someone just because he put his hands on him.

---

KA was already supposedly busted for having a knife at school. He also looks like some wannabe gang banger in some pictures he put out of social media despite living in a wealthy area. Maybe it's the Baton Rouge upbringing in him.

I mean kids do dumb **** all the time for no reason. My own kid drank a 10 pack of fireball shots in an hour at 16, then his dumbass friends dropped him off in an HEB parking lot only for him to fall and hit his head on the concrete. The cops called me while he was in the back of an ambulance. Luckily I was able to rush over there and the cop let him go home with me.

I'm not trying to excuse KA. He needs to spend a long ass time in jail but kids do dumb ***** His was just monumentally dumb. KA actually saved a kid from drowning years ago. I don't think he's some monster, however he got caught up being dumb and trying to act all hard and will pay a steep price.

Pool remains a loser tool bag:

Tim Pool has completely lost the plot. He’s passionately defending the unjust slaying of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf. Calls it “self defense,” and acts as if Karmelo Anthony was justified in taking his life. Unfollowed. pic.twitter.com/cgz2PanRsP

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) April 10, 2025

That still goes against normal human thought, though. There is something wrong with a person who makes the decision to kill with no specific target or reason. Those are your psychopaths. There was a rumor going around that his friend said Karmelo had said in the days or weeks before that he wanted to stab someone. I haven't seen a source that confirms that happened, but if that's the case, we are looking at a severe personality disorder at best. Clearly he suffers from impulse control. I just wonder if something had happened in the hours or days leading up to the murder that made Karmelo more on edge or whatever. Not that it excuses the behavior at all. I'm just interested in what makes people tick and something set this guy off that would not have set off the average person.