Hodad Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 3 hours ago, Nationalist said: He stabbed a young guy at a track event! I swear...you are just a twit. Yep. That's what happened. I do not expect you to be able to address any of the nuance. Just enjoy your beer. 1 Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 5 hours ago, Hodad said: Yep. That's what happened. I do not expect you to be able to address any of the nuance. Just enjoy your beer. Nuance? Lol...take you nuance and go suck rocks. The evidence is overwhelming. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Hodad Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: Nuance? Lol...take you nuance and go suck rocks. The evidence is overwhelming. See, this is what I mean. You simply cannot come up with any point to make. The evidence of what? That there was a stabbing? A killing? Sure. That was never in question at all. But I defy you to tell me why he didn't have a right to "stand his ground" and self defense? 1 1 Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 17 minutes ago, Hodad said: See, this is what I mean. You simply cannot come up with any point to make. The evidence of what? That there was a stabbing? A killing? Sure. That was never in question at all. But I defy you to tell me why he didn't have a right to "stand his ground" and self defense? Read it and weep. https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15876951/karmelo-anthony-trial-stabbing-austin-metcalf-case-footage-live-updates.html Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Hodad Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 5 hours ago, Nationalist said: Read it and weep. https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15876951/karmelo-anthony-trial-stabbing-austin-metcalf-case-footage-live-updates.html That's a non-answer. Again, I defy you to tell me why he didn't have a right to "stand his ground" and self defense? Can you articulate anything resembling an arguent? 1 Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 49 minutes ago, Hodad said: That's a non-answer. Again, I defy you to tell me why he didn't have a right to "stand his ground" and self defense? Can you articulate anything resembling an arguent? Yes. Anthony has been found guilty of murder. Have a nice day. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Fluffypants Posted June 9 Author Report Posted June 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hodad said: That's a non-answer. Again, I defy you to tell me why he didn't have a right to "stand his ground" and self defense? Can you articulate anything resembling an arguent? He was where he wasnt supposed to be. He was the aggressor and was provoking an attack. A push isnt deadly force. Stand your ground was never an issue in this case. You cannot claim self defense if you are the person provoking the situation. Edited June 9 by Fluffypants 1 Quote
Reg Volk Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 Quote As Democrat and Liberal governments fall, Republicans and Conservatives come to the rescue.
Hodad Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Fluffypants said: He was where he wasnt supposed to be. He was the aggressor and was provoking an attack. A push isnt deadly force. Stand your ground was never an issue in this case. You cannot claim self defense if you are the person provoking the situation. He had a legal right to be there. He was not physically aggressive. And to be protected by a stand your ground defense you don't have to be responding to deadly force. You simply have to reasonably be afraid for your safety--and that's a pretty easy bar to meet outmatched, outnumbered and having been physically assaulted. Lawful Presence: You must be in a place where you have a legal right to be (e.g., public space, walking down the street) and not be trespassing. No Criminal Activity: You cannot be engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used No Provocation: You cannot have provoked the person or started the altercation. Provocation is a difficult case to make when he was specifically warning the much bigger guys not to touch him... or else. Metcalf FAFO, unfortunately for all. A Texas trial convicting a Black kid without a single Black juror? Should be an interesting appeal. I predict it won't stick. 1 Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 5 minutes ago, Hodad said: He had a legal right to be there. He was not physically aggressive. And to be protected by a stand your ground defense you don't have to be responding to deadly force. You simply have to reasonably be afraid for your safety--and that's a pretty easy bar to meet outmatched, outnumbered and having been physically assaulted. Lawful Presence: You must be in a place where you have a legal right to be (e.g., public space, walking down the street) and not be trespassing. No Criminal Activity: You cannot be engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used No Provocation: You cannot have provoked the person or started the altercation. Provocation is a difficult case to make when he was specifically warning the much bigger guys not to touch him... or else. Metcalf FAFO, unfortunately for all. A Texas trial convicting a Black kid without a single Black juror? Should be an interesting appeal. I predict it won't stick. A New York trial convicting a former POTUS after the judge makes conviction a multiple choice. Go fck yourself. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 19 hours ago, Nationalist said: He stabbed a young guy at a track event! I swear...you are just a twit. I swear you have ZERO COMPREHENSION of US law. Quote
WestCanMan Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 On 6/7/2026 at 3:22 PM, Fluffypants said: Yeah it does, it is a high profile murder trial that speaks to our current political climate. And it's going to cause political/racial rioting. "Karmelo was a Gentle Giant in a small body". Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 8 hours ago, Nationalist said: Read it and weep. https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15876951/karmelo-anthony-trial-stabbing-austin-metcalf-case-footage-live-updates.html I told you Texans would find a way to convict him, no matter what the evidence says. Quote
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 18 minutes ago, Nationalist said: A New York trial convicting a former POTUS after the judge makes conviction a multiple choice. Go fck yourself. You have totally confused a business fraud case with a stand your ground case. Not the same. Duh 4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: And it's going to cause political/racial rioting. "Karmelo was a Gentle Giant in a small body". ^DRIVEL Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 7 minutes ago, robosmith said: I swear you have ZERO COMPREHENSION of US law. You may be right. But I got you pegged pretty good, Sweetie. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 1 minute ago, Nationalist said: You may be right. But I got you pegged pretty good, Sweetie. Far from it. You don't even understand what our 1st Amendment means. And you repeatedly advocate breaking US LAW. If CBP knew what you advocate here, you'd never gain admission again. Quote
Nationalist Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 Just now, robosmith said: Far from it. You don't even understand what our 1st Amendment means. And you repeatedly advocate breaking US LAW. If CBP knew what you advocate here, you'd never gain admission again. Lol...go kick a Caucasian baby. You'll feel better. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
CdnFox Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 Wow, I haven't seen this much of an effort from Robo Smith to defend and shut down talk about a murderer in ages He must really think the guy is guilty Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 3 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Lol...go kick a Caucasian baby. You'll feel better. ^LIES is all you got. Must be really frustrating for ya. 1 Quote
WestCanMan Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 (edited) On 6/8/2026 at 9:48 AM, robosmith said: They will find a way to nail the black guy. From the stupid cultist: "So what if she has zero evidence, zero witnesses, can't name what year it allegedly happened, and the judge blocked the jury from finding out that she was caught lying during her deposition? He's guilty because jurors in a 94% Dem area thought he was 51% likely to be guilty." Also from the same stupid cultist: "So what if there were a bunch of witnesses who saw it, it was his knife, it had his fingerprints on it, and he said that he did it? He's innocent, and it will take a crooked judge and jury to convict him!" Congrats on beating all the odds, and finding a new low to sink to. Even Kamala "I blow old dudes to get political appointments" Harris looks up to you now. Facts: He brought a lethal weapon with him to a place that he knew he wasn't supposed to go to he had a plan to use it on someone instigated a situation where he could use it he used - what he knew to be lethal force - in response to a shove FYI if you make a plan to kill someone, and then go through with your plan kill that person, that's "pre-meditated murder". It's even pre-meditated murder if you plan a crime, bring a gun but only mean to use it to coerce people to do something, and then kill someone with the gun during the commission of your crime. If you plan any crime, and then kill someone during your crime, that's 1st degree murder, murder one, pre-meditated murder, what have you. In the US you have carte blanche to defend yourself, but you aren't allowed to plan a crime and kill someone during its execution. Edited June 9 by WestCanMan 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Fluffypants Posted June 9 Author Report Posted June 9 49 minutes ago, Hodad said: He had a legal right to be there. He was not physically aggressive. And to be protected by a stand your ground defense you don't have to be responding to deadly force. You simply have to reasonably be afraid for your safety--and that's a pretty easy bar to meet outmatched, outnumbered and having been physically assaulted. Lawful Presence: You must be in a place where you have a legal right to be (e.g., public space, walking down the street) and not be trespassing. No Criminal Activity: You cannot be engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used No Provocation: You cannot have provoked the person or started the altercation. Provocation is a difficult case to make when he was specifically warning the much bigger guys not to touch him... or else. Metcalf FAFO, unfortunately for all. A Texas trial convicting a Black kid without a single Black juror? Should be an interesting appeal. I predict it won't stick. They did not use stand your ground as a defense it was self defense. He didn't have the right to be there. It was the opposing teams tent which is like a locker room. He started the altercation by not leaving a place he didn't belong and instead starting running his mouth and calling everyone b1tches. He had a knife which was prohibited by the school. He can't claim fear when he literally was daring them to hit him. If you are scared you leave. He had his hand on the knife ready to go if Austin touched him. Austin didnt punch him he gave him a light shove. In Texas you cannot provoke the attack. 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 57 minutes ago, robosmith said: I swear you have ZERO COMPREHENSION of US law. When you pass the bar, then you can tell is if we are wrong. Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
WestCanMan Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: When you pass the bar, then you can tell is if we are wrong. When If he passes grade 3, we will know the bar is too low. 2 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
gatomontes99 Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Hodad said: He had a legal right to be there. He was not physically aggressive. And to be protected by a stand your ground defense you don't have to be responding to deadly force. You simply have to reasonably be afraid for your safety--and that's a pretty easy bar to meet outmatched, outnumbered and having been physically assaulted. Lawful Presence: You must be in a place where you have a legal right to be (e.g., public space, walking down the street) and not be trespassing. No Criminal Activity: You cannot be engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used No Provocation: You cannot have provoked the person or started the altercation. Provocation is a difficult case to make when he was specifically warning the much bigger guys not to touch him... or else. Metcalf FAFO, unfortunately for all. A Texas trial convicting a Black kid without a single Black juror? Should be an interesting appeal. I predict it won't stick. Lmao...you used my info but conveniently left off the proportional response part. Soooo convenient for you. Killing someone because you got pushed is not proportional. Plus, all of the witness, from KA's one team and others, said that KA provoked the situation. Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
robosmith Posted June 9 Report Posted June 9 43 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: From the stupid cultist: "So what if she has zero evidence, zero witnesses, can't name what year it allegedly happened, and the judge blocked the jury from finding out that she was caught lying during her deposition? He's guilty because jurors in a 94% Dem area thought he was 51% likely to be guilty." Also from the same stupid cultist: "So what if there were a bunch of witnesses who saw it, it was his knife, it had his fingerprints on it, and he said that he did it? He's innocent, and it will take a crooked judge and jury to convict him!" Congrats on beating all the odds, and finding a new low to sink to. Even Kamala "I blow old dudes to get political appointments" Harris looks up to you now. Facts: He brought a lethal weapon with him to a place that he knew he wasn't supposed to go to he had a plan to use it on someone instigated a situation where he could use it he used - what he knew to be lethal force - in response to a shove FYI if you make a plan to kill someone, and then go through with your plan kill that person, that's "pre-meditated murder". It's even pre-meditated murder if you plan a crime, bring a gun but only mean to use it to coerce people to do something, and then kill someone with the gun during the commission of your crime. If you plan any crime, and then kill someone during your crime, that's 1st degree murder, murder one, pre-meditated murder, what have you. In the US you have carte blanche to defend yourself, but you aren't allowed to plan a crime and kill someone during its execution. ^This DRIVEL has nothing to do with my post. Congrats on that. LMAO Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.