Anonymous #1 21w

Are you intentionally being dumb? Cyrus never aimed a gun at them. Also if he did he’s be well in his right to. They CHASED HIM for over 100 yards. Metcalf approached Anthony. Should he have stabbed Metcalf ? No. Did he mean to kill him? No. He should’ve gotten manslaughter. 1st degree would mean he intended to kill Metcalf which he didn’t.

6

Anonymous OP 21w

He didn’t mean to kill him? You’re goofy af, go look at the knife he brought to a high school event.

13

Anonymous OP 21w

Whats with this idea that being followed is justification for deadly force? It isn't, plain and simple.

3

Anonymous #1 21w

You don't get to shoot someone just because they're going the same direction as you with the intent of going after you. There's already plenty of lawful and just circumstances that would allow for this, such as pursuing what you believe to be a thief as a store owner.

4

Anonymous #2 21w

It was a multi-tool… And yes he didn’t mean to kill him. Anthony didnt leave the area ran to his couch and asked if Metcalf was alright. He even went to the cops HIMSELF and said he did it and it was due to self defense. In a similar situation where the white person was the perp, that white person ran and still got a lighter sentence

0

Anonymous #1 21w

He was being CHASED. Rick chow RAN after him with his son to the point that Carmack lost his shoes and his phone. Carmack was under the age of 16. Also being chased isn’t justification for deadly force but how is chasing someone and shooting them in the back self defense?

0

Anonymous OP 21w

Lmaooo it was not a multitool. You stab someone in chest and don’t expect to kill them? You’re far gone lol

1

Anonymous OP 21w

Mixed jury btw

9

Anonymous OP 21w

In plenty of situations similar to the Chow case, the kid turns around and talks to the store owner instead of pulling a gun on him. Not saying that the kid in the other case deserves such a light sentence, but the two were completely different circumstances, one was a non consensual closed fist fight in a bathroom where escape wasn't an option for the stabber, the other was a consensual shoving match where the stabber had every option to just leave.

2

Anonymous #2 21w

Brother are you illiterate?. It was an Ozark 6-in-1 multi-tool from Walmart. If you wanted to kill someone, if it were premeditated murder, why did he turn himself in? Why did he ask of Metcalf’s status? Stop being an idiot blinded by your own racism.

0

Anonymous OP 21w

You’re seriously gonna look at that knife and tell people it’s multitool when it’s primary “tool” is a 5in blade lmao. He turned himself in cause he was fucked either way, it’s not that hard of a concept. Don’t call racism when you try to reach for multitool lol. Again, who brings it to a high school event

6

Anonymous #2 21w

I think its kind of sanitizing the issue to say he shouldn't have had the knife. It was allowed by TX law, what he really shouldn't have done is used deadly force where not justified.

7

Anonymous #1 21w

Apparently it’s a multitool not a knife lol. But yea, it’s just wild the amount of people who defend it.

4

Anonymous #1 21w

Again, Carmack never pulled a gun on Rick Chow. Rick Chow had no reason to chase Carmack let alone shoot him. Rick chow chased A CHILD for over 100 YARDS and SHOT him in the BACK. Why are you trying to justify that? Carmack literally did nothing wrong.

5

Anonymous OP 21w

Carmack aimed a gun at Chow according to multiple victim testimonies, and this was corroborated by the fact that he had a gun on him at the time of the shooting.

4

Anonymous OP 21w

If the gun was never aimed or taken out, how would they have known he had it?

1

Anonymous #2 21w

Brother it has been stated to be a multi-tool in the case. You are willingly being dumb. He didn’t run because he didn’t mean to kill him. Meanwhile Allison ran away from the school completely. Allison quite literally threatened Ramirez saying he wanted him on life support.

3

Anonymous OP 21w

I'd argue Anthony didn't run because he didn't mean to leave the tent

4

It could have been going on for 20 miles and the outcome of the case would be the same, Chow had a just and lawful reason to follow.

4

Anonymous #1 21w

MULTIPLE witnesses stated that Carmack had NOTHING in his hand. The ONLY people that said he did was Chow and his family. Chow had NO reason to chase a 15 year old for over 100 yards to the point where Carmack lost his shoes and phones.

1

Anonymous #1 21w

The gun also fell out of his pocket while running again along with his phone and his shoes. It’s sickening that you are justifying this blatant murder. Even before the chase, the Chow’s were being racist with the wife quite literally following Carmack around in the store.

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Not a single black person. Also let’s not act as though the Allison case doesnt exist nor the Rick Chow case. It’s only justice if it’s a black person being out away.

-1

Anonymous OP 21w

Well you’re a good goy then believing anything you hear without looking at it lol

10

Anonymous #2 21w

Dude I legitimately think you are a lobotomized racist moron. Stop replying to me.

0

Anonymous OP 21w

I hate seeing this idea that it was an accidental stabbing or it should be manslaughter. You don’t accidentally stab through someone’s sternum and leave a 2 inch gaping hole in their heart. I don’t think you realize how strong the sternum is, especially on an athlete. Acting like the knife accidentally went perfectly through his sternum and into his heart is stupid, it clearly was deliberate

6

Anonymous OP 21w

Rick chow case was mixed, would the white or black jurors be more racist?

6

Anonymous #3 21w

I brought up those cases to show the double standard in the ruling. Rick Chow shot a kid in the back and was acquitted with his ruling being self-defense yet Anthony, who was approached first by multiple students over 6 foot and being pushed first couldnt even get man-slaughter. Allison threatened Ramerez and fled the scene still got a lighter sentence.

0

Anonymous OP 21w

So then who was more racist?

0

Anonymous #3 21w

Why does that matter?

1

Anonymous OP 21w

You’re saying that the verdict is racist, so explain how its racist

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Rick chow ran a child down and shot him in the back for no reason mind you and was deemed to be acting in self defense. Allison said he wanted Ramerez on life support killed him and fled but got 10 years. Metcalf approached Anthony with multiple people bigger than Anthony then pushed Anthony. Anthony then ran to his coach, asked if Metcalf was ok and turned himself in yet got more time than the other two combined. If you can’t see the double standard then idk what to do for you brother.

1

Anonymous OP 21w

Being that he was unanimously found not guilty by a mixed jury, where does the racism come in?

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Brother are you ok? Reread my reply.

1

Anonymous OP 21w

Are you able to articulate how the rick chow jury was racist

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Genuinely

1

Anonymous #3 21w

I never said the Rick Chow jury was racist. I said racism plays a part in the double standard of these cases. It’s a fact that black people receive harsher sentences than white people. READ MORE

1

Anonymous OP 21w

Oh okay so you agree its not racist

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Dude are your parents siblings cuz Jesus your comprehension skills are terrible.

1

Anonymous OP 21w

We agree no?

1

We are in agreement. I’m not sure what you are having a problem with now

1

Anonymous #3 21w

Yes we agree that there is racial bias among these three cases.

1

Anonymous OP 21w

The black members of the jury for the Rick Chow case had a racial bias?

1