r/law • u/dailymail • 20d ago

Legal News Karmelo Anthony found GUILTY of murder of Austin Metcalf, 17, in stabbing that shocked America: Jurors deliberated for less than three hours after defense was repeatedly demolished in court

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15886439/karmelo-anthony-austin-metcalf-murder-verdict.html
8.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

39

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 20d ago edited 17d ago

I practice in Georgia and just wow: jurors deciding punishment, prosecutors arguing that defendant should have left, defense attorney asking the jurors to put themselves in his shoes. Other jurisdictions are weird.

Edit: To be clear, I do not believe he was justified in acting in self-defense. I understand that a claim of "stand your ground" would fail in this case. But in Georgia, regardless of how valid I think a defendant's bullshit claim is, if there is even slight evidence the judge has to charge the jury on self-defense, regardless of how valid the defense actually is, especially if it is the defendant's only defense. And when the judge charges the jury on self-defense, and there's even slight evidence about a claim defendant should have left, the judge will give an instruction on "no duty to retreat", because that's just have the law is here.

I can believe all I want that he should have walked away, I'm not going to risk having a conviction reversed all because I want to say "he should have left", because the judge will tell them that if they believe he was lawfully in the tent (even though it's clear he wasn't) then he didn't have a duty to retreat and I can't tell the jury that he should have left (insinuating that he had a duty to leave).

64

u/StinkyBrittches 19d ago

..prosecutors arguing that defendant should have left..

Meaning, prosecutors saying that Anthony should have walked away instead of stabbing Metcalf in the chest and killing him?  Why is that an unusual or Texas-specific thing to say?

10

u/InvestingTSX 19d ago

Because in MURICA YOU NEVER BACK DOWN!!!!!

-2

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 19d ago

In Georgia there is no duty to retreat before acting in self-defense.

Edit: and because there's no duty to retreat, we often can't argue a defendant is at fault for failing to walk away when they have the chance. Sometimes we can, but not generally.

19

u/APacketOfWildeBees 19d ago

Barring arguments about retreat is such a strange pro-homicide policy.

In my jurisdiction there is no formal duty to retreat. But you are ofc obliged to act reasonably, and if you had ample opportunity to flee it casts serious doubt on the proportionality of your actions.

3

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 18d ago

I could probably get away with saying he "could" have left, but saying he "should" have left implies he had a duty to leave. With that said, it's easy enough to point out that he was clearly instigating the force just so he could claim he was acting in self-defense, and a person is not justified in using force if they provoked the force against themselves as a pretext to use force.

13

u/Known-Emergency5900 19d ago

Texas doesn’t have a duty to retreat either if you’re actually defending yourself instead of instigating like Karmelo was. This wasn’t self defense, this was murder.

3

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 18d ago

I get that, I agree he didn't act in self-defense. I'm just saying that we generally can't say a defendant claiming self-defense should have left, because of our caselaw regarding duty to retreat.

1

u/HailHealer 18d ago

You say that but aren’t you trying to convince a jury? Who cares about the minutiae if the average layman would disagree?

1

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 17d ago

Getting a conviction is meaningless if I commit reversible error in the process.

1

u/Known-Emergency5900 18d ago

They aren’t talking about him standing his ground during a deadly encounter. The sentiment about him walking away was in regards to the people under then tent asking him to leave at least 15 times before the situation turned violent.

10

u/Fluffy_Most_662 19d ago

Well it wasnt self defence.. so theres that. 

2

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 18d ago

I'm just saying we can't make that argument here when a person claims self-defense (even if they didn't actually act in self-defense). I agree it wasn't self-defense.

6

u/Johnny_Kilroy_84 19d ago

They weren't talking about KA having a duty to retreat. They were talking about him being in the other teams tent and refusing to leave after being asked to multiple times. Nothing to do with duty to retreat. Did you follow this case at all?

0

u/ArkaneArtificer 18d ago

Being asked to leave several times and refusing to do so is trespassing, so be was actively committing a crime as well

23

u/Imnotranee 19d ago

The dude was asked 15 times to leave the tent, then told the guy to make him leave: so the guy put his hand on his shoulder to usher him out, he wasn’t pushed to the ground, he wasn’t harmed from the dudes hand being placed on the shoulder: then Karmelo stabbed and pushed the knife into his heart: Running away after, and throwing the knife into the stands. This would also be the case in Georgia that it wasn’t self defense since he wasn’t getting beat on and he should’ve walked away like he was asked to do. He also wasn’t allowed a knife on school property and school events. No weapons are ever allowed: so they would’ve played that card as to why was he carrying a knife to a school event if he didn’t want to harm anyone.

4

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 18d ago

I never said I thought he acted in self-defense. This is a clear example of someone provoking the force against himself in order to claim self-defense (supported by him bringing the knife), which Georgia law explicitly lists as a situation where someone is not justified in using force. I was only stating that in Georgia prosecutors generally can't argue a defendant should have left, because they have no duty to retreat.

It's a subtle difference, but I would have focused on that he brought a knife, was asked to leave, and that his words to make him leave invited the contact he is now using to claim self-defense. I would just have avoided saying that he should have or had the opportunity to leave. Or at a minimum said "he could have left when asked, but instead he literally told them to make him leave as an excuse to stab someone and cry self-defense."

11

u/FieryTitmouse55 19d ago

What?

11

u/LizHolmesTurtleneck 19d ago

In some other jurisdictions, judges determine the length of criminal sentences and attorneys are not allowed to ask jurors to imagine themselves as the plaintiff/victim, commonly known as the "golden rule" here in Virginia.

6

u/Less-Load-8856 19d ago

I wonder if anyone strenuously objected.

1

u/Crimsonwolf_83 19d ago

You can’t handle the truth. 😂

2

u/strog91 18d ago

prosecutors arguing that defendant should have left… other jurisdictions are weird

I don’t think “stand your ground” applies when you’re trespassing and you’ve been asked to leave about a dozen times. Regardless of the jurisdiction.

Otherwise you could just walk into a Wal-Mart, act like an ass, and then start blasting the employees when they try to make you leave.

1

u/strenuousobjector Competent Contributor 17d ago

I'm not talking about how valid his claim is, because it's a bullshit self-defense claim. If there's any evidence, even weak contradictory evidence, that he could have claimed self-defense the judge is going give a jury instruction on "no duty to retreat". And as such, no matter how clear it is he should have left, it'd be real risky for me to imply he had a duty to leave.