The Karmelo Anthony Case Was Never About Race

Artwork for “Anatomy of a Murder” (Amazon)

Some people can make anything about race.  There’s money in it, I suppose.  In the case of Karmelo Anthony, the verdict of murder was the obvious outcome if you look at the facts.

Anthony entered the tent of the opposing school during a track meet in Frisco and was asked to leave.  Had he done so, there would have been no pushing, no shoving and no confrontation.  As it happened, Anthony pulled a serrated knife from his backpack and plunged it into the heart of Austin Metcalf.

A fatal stab to the heart in response to a shove is murder. 

It would have been murder had the races been reversed.  But not to the crowd outside where race-baiters were plying their trade in front of any TV camera they could find.  The composition of the jury ought to be irrelevant.  We either base verdicts on race, or on evidence.

AUDIO:  Random Samplings of a Logical Mind (TO COME)

What about the composition of the jury?

We are told that it was not an all-white jury, but was diverse, based on the demographics of the region.  It contained no black jurors, possibly due to peremptory strikes by the prosecution.  Many lawyers will tell you that cases are often decided during jury selection.  That’s sad, but it’s not wrong, either.

I learned the term “jury nullification” during the O.J. Simpson trial.  That simply means that a jury knows full well that the defendant is guilty, however, they rebel against the judicial system, or consider the charges unfair based on some prior notion that certain people get off, and others don’t.  I think that how Simpson was acquitted in an obvious case of double murder.

The most disturbing question me in the case of Karmelo Anthony, is this:  What if there had been an all-black jury?  Based on what we saw outside the courthouse, it seems unlikely that a conviction could have been handed down.  Here’s another question:  Could a guilty verdict have been reached if there had been a single black juror?  The answer to that is yes, because there are large numbers of black people who would have considered the evidence and voted accordingly.

RELATED:  Derek Chauvin and O.J. Simpson at Opposite Ends of Injustice 

Prosecutors were likely wary because of the country’s recent flirtations with wokeness, and diversity.  When those abominations are in our schools, colleges, corporations, and hospitals, it’s hard to keep them out of the courtroom.

I might note here that all-white juries convict white defendants all the time.  As a white person, I would never, under any circumstances, consider the race of a defendant unless it had some special attachment to the case.  Show me the facts.  Take away the race-baiting.  I will vote accordingly in the jury room as to whether the prosecution proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.  That is the standard, and that is our system.

And yet, celebrities from Chris Cuomo to Jasmine Crockett have problems with the verdict.

Cuomo, on his show on NewsNation was hung up about the jury, saying that Anthony was guaranteed a jury of his peers.  He had attorney guests on both sides of the issue.

Video:  Chris Cuomo:  The jury was all-white.

Way over the top was Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett from Texas who unleashed a rant on her podcast that contained made-up facts.   Her podcast is called “Clock it With Crockett,” and that tells you a lot.  This excerpt is from the New York Post on June 10, 2026, in which she goes off the deep end:

The cavalcade of inaccuracies started with Crockett downplaying the size of the semi-serrated, 5-inch pocket knife Anthony was convicted of plunging into Metcalf’s chest during a dispute at a track meet at Memorial High School in Frisco, Texas, last April.

“Wait a minute, it was this?” she said, holding her thumb and forefinger about an inch apart to demonstrate the size of the murder weapon.

“Was it a switch? I don’t know what he had,” Crockett said, inadvertently telegraphing her flimsy grasp of the facts of the case that has roiled her home state for more than a year.

One of her guests claimed the knife was “a multi-tool” akin to a Swiss army knife.

“Yeah, like with the little scissors and everything and whatever. So it was small,” Crockett said, furrowing her brow and squinting her eyes in disbelief.

“Well, I would argue the size of it alone, you wouldn’t even think it’s a deadly weapon.”

It’s hard to imagine this kind of outrageous stupidity unless this is nothing more than a black woman defending a black defendant because both are black.  To me, that is unimaginable.  The guilty should be found guilty if the prosecution can prove it.  That’s what happened in this case.

Video:  Jasmine Crockett sparks OUTRAGE over Karmelo Anthony defense

Media accounts reveal that the judge, John Roach, Jr., is a meticulous jurist, who ran the trial by the book, assuring it was efficient, fair, and irreversible.  The chance of it being overturned on appeal are slim.  The 35 years in prison Karmelo received is a better deal for him than what Austin Metcalf got.

RELATED: Who Mourns for the Innocent? 

What about self-defense and “sudden passion?”

The self-defense idea was silly from the start.  Anthony went into the opposing tent carrying a backpack with a large serrated knife.  He was asked to leave and refused.  Pushing and shoving is what teen-aged boys do.  It’s not a big deal.  Going into that tent with a large knife is a big deal.

If you’ve never read the novel Anatomy of a Murder, find a copy as soon as you can.  At least see the movie that starred Jimmy Stewart and George C. Scott.  Both the book and the movie are fabulous entertainment and well-worth a read to see the justice system in action.   The book was written by Michigan Supreme Court Justice John D. Voelker under the pen name of Robert Traver and he knew what he was writing about.

RELATED:  Marxism Comes to Texas High Schools

The plot concerns a defendant who claims he murdered a man for raping his wife, but that he has no memory of committing the crime.  Like Karmelo Anthony, he freely admits he did the deed.  The story centers around Jimmy Stewart’s character and how he works to secure a not guilty verdict when the case is so obvious.  Stewart decides on a strategy of “irresistible impulse,” a form of temporary insanity that would mean he just couldn’t stop from killing the victim in the heat of passion.

Tom Stiglich (C) Creators (Fair use)

In the case of the book, the strategy worked, and you’ll need to read it to discover the twist ending.  In the case of Karmelo Anthony, the defense of “sudden passion,” essentially the same thing, was not accepted by the jury.

How could the jury believe such a defense when Karmelo showed up in that tent with a knife cable of piercing the chest, the sternum, and ripping apart a person’s heart?

You simply cannot make up your own set of facts as Jasmine Crockett tried to do.  You cannot set aside a verdict based on evidence because of jury composition as Chris Cuomo tried to do.  Yes, juries do matter, and sometimes you get a bad verdict based on something other than the facts – as in the the Simpson case.  That did not happen here.

I’d like to think an all-black jury, presented with the same facts, hearing the same testimony, and under the watchful eye of the same judge would have come up with the same verdict.

Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based author, broadcaster, and songwriter.  Follow his podcast at https://www.PlanetLogic.us.  Check out his author’s page at https://www.Amazon.com/author/lynnwoolley. 

Order books direct from Lynn at https://PlanetLogicPress.Square.Site.  Email Lynn at lwoolley9189@gmail.com.

The Trial of the Century — in another universe.  Read “Rules of Ascension” Book II in Stitches in Time.