Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 06/17/2026 8:38:58 AM PDT by Eleutheria5
I have not yet read the full trial transcript. But so far, I do know this. Karmelo Anthony was entitled to a jury of his peers. He did not get that. On that ground alone, he is entitled to a new trial. Minorities are not interchangeable. The prosecutor’s reported proffered reasons for striking all black jurors —that they were teachers—appears to be pretext. Anthony needs a new lawyer on appeal and in a new trial. His trial lawyer allowed in opinion evidence that should have been struck. He also seemed unable to appreciate and counter the impact of racial overtones in that case. Those overtones are clear even on Twitter commentary as folks seek to paint Metcalf as having no culpability in what happened and Karmelo as a complete monster. ....
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Here's the author's twitter bio.
Prof. Emerita; Historian/Evidence Pro/SCOTUS Bar; JD Harvard; Independent; Slave Descendant; WD Carter’s daughter.
She has a JD from Harvard. No wonder she's an idiot. But at least she raises real legal issues, not just mouth foam, though she does that, too. Jury selection irregularities is the avenue for any trial contest, imho, and she raises that first.
They couldn’t find 12 little wanna be thug murdering feral animals?
She’s a racist.
One of those morons who look at things and categorize by skin color.
The “peers” that they were selecting for the jury stated flat out they would not convict a black boy.
Blacks didn’t want to be on the jury because they would have been in danger from the black “community” if they found him guilty of anything.
“ They couldn’t find 12 little wanna be thug murdering feral animal?”
No, they couldn’t find 12 little wanna be thug murdering feral animals willing to convict a fellow wanna be thug murdering feral animal based on evidence and eye witness accounts.
According to her statement, black jurors were purposefully excluded (allegedly), which would be a legitimate ground for a new trial, but she is a Harvard law professor, and a “descendant of slaves” (like who isn’t?). So I’ll believe it when I see it.
No white defendant should ever face a jury which contains any blacks. Right?
Does that mean Tyler James Robinson jury must include trans adjacent juror?
“Minorities are not interchangeable.”
Yeah, no doubt because Hispanics, East Asians, Native Americans and other people’s of color won’t just ignore all evidence and stubbornly refuse to convict guilty blacks due to their “stick it to whitey” racist prejudice.
Karmelo is 100% objectively guilty of murder. He needs to do the full 35 years. Anyone who insists otherwise is either ignorant of the facts, blindly racist, or both.
Let justice be done, race-baiting grifters be damned.
Well his peers are convicted murderers. not sure if they are allowed to serve on juries.
“”No white defendant should ever face a jury which contains any blacks. Right?””
***
Oh no, of course... that’s completely different. Cause...
‘whitey got it comin’.
Karmelo was entitled to a jury of his “peers”, not a jury of his “peeps”.
Statistically, you’re much more likely to get an actual fair trial on the merits if it’s not a black jury. There’s been some studies of the issue.
They want the OJ jurors. That’ll be quite a trick
I don’t know if that’s what she’s saying. Maybe she doesn’t know what she’s saying. There is case law that using peremptory channels to exclude blacks as potential jurors is unconstitutional, and might be grounds for a new trial, or if in progress, a mistrial. I’m skeptical that this is the case here. A challenge for cause is another matter, which seems to be what was done here, but she says that the exclusions appeared to be pretext.
Haven’t read the transcript of the voir dire. Don’t intend to read the transcript. The case is interesting, but not all that interesting to me. If anyone has taken the trouble to read the voire dire transcript, or intends to, keep us posted here on Freep.
Nowhere in The Constitution is their mention of a jury of one’s peers...................
They don’t want a trial on the merits. They want an acquital, regardless of the merits. F@#$ that.
Black supremacists are coming up to white people and “accusing” them of having been on the jury or in jury selection, and threatening them with violence or even hitting them. There must be some sort of a criminal statute against that, either federal, state, or both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.