Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 hours ago, Helobious said:

I’ve never been to Frisco or even spent much time in DFW. But looking at the TAPR profile (statewide accountability system for schools) for each school, the school that Metcalf went to actually has a lot more economically disadvantaged students and was a lot more racially diverse than Anthony’s school. Centennial (Anthony) is actually 51% Asian and only has about 9% “poor” students enrolled. Memorial (Metcalf) has 21% poor students, and whites making up the largest chunk of the student body, but only at 37%. 
 

and TIL that not all affluent Dallas suburbs are Southlake carroll copies

Yes.  The twins and their mom worked at a pizza place. Probably not rich

Posted
54 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Fuck, using tapa talk and quoting should be a legal defense for stabbing someone in the heart.

Edit - And it does under the Terroristic Threat aspect of capital murder A 3:

TERRORISTIC THREAT. (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to:

 

(1) cause a reaction of any type to his threat by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies;

 

(2) place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;

 

(3) prevent or interrupt the occupation or use of a building, room, place of assembly, place to which the public has access, place of employment or occupation, aircraft, automobile, or other form of conveyance, or other public place;

This is nuance I might be missing reading and I'm happy to be corrected about the definition of Capital Murder.

However, none of that alters:

If you stab someone with a knife, and they die, its murder

Unless there are other circumstances that occurred.

The words premeditation or premeditated do not appear in that statute.  In fact they don't appear in the Texas Penal Code at all.  That statute is talking about intent, which is an element of any crime in the Texas Penal Code.  In states that have premeditation or malice aforethought as a part of their homicide laws, it is generally defined as forming the intent to kill in advance over a period of time that would allow reflection on the situation, but that varies from state to state.

Here is a quick, general summary of Texas Homicide laws:

Murder:  A first degree felony punishable by 5 years to Life.   Defined as intentionally or knowingly causing the death of a person.  Alternate definition is intending to cause serious bodily injury to someone and causing their death by committing an act clearly dangerous to human life.  This is basically so you can't shoot and kill someone and claim you were just trying to wing them and not kill them.  Other alternate definition of murder is known as "felony murder" which is when someone is intending to commit some other felony and in doing so does an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of a person.  

Sudden Passion:  This is a punishment issue.  After someone is convicted of murder, in the punishment phase, if the Defendant proves by a preponderance of evidence that he was under the immediate influence of sudden passion  resulting from an adequate cause, it lowers the range of punishment to 2 to 20 years.  The common example given to illustrate this is a guy finding his wife in bed with another man and shooting the dude.  

Capital Murder:  a capital felony punished by Death or Life without parole, or Life with parole eligibility after 40 years for 17 year olds.  This is basically intentional Murder plus an aggravating factor such as killing a cop, or killing more than one person, or killing a kid, or killing someone while committing a robbery, etc.  There are several other circumstances in Penal Code Section 19.03.  But that isn't really relevant to this case as far as I know.

Manslaughter: second degree felony, 2 to 20 years.  Recklessly causing a death.  Recklessness is when you are aware you are doing something that creates a substantial and unjustified risk and you do it anyway.

Criminally Negligent Homicide:  Causing a death by criminal negligence, which is when you should have known what you were doing created a substantial and unjustified risk.

Self-Defense:  This is a defense that the defendant has to raise at trial and the state has to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt to get a conviction.  To simplify it as much as possible, it is when you intentionally or knowingly cause someone's death but you were justified in doing so because you REASONABLY felt it was immediately necessary to defend yourself from the other person's use or attempted use of deadly force against you.  To boil it down further, the jury takes in all the facts and they decide whether what the person did was reasonable given the circumstances.  You can only use deadly force (ie a gun or knife or deadly weapon) if you are faced with someone using deadly force against you.  However, that doesn't mean you are automatically guilty if the other person wasn't armed.  Usually the defendant will say the other person was capable of killing or seriously injuring them without a weapon, ie with fists. Or they will say they were under the impression the other person was armed for some reason (apparent danger.)  It is ultimately up to the jury to decide whether it is REASONABLE.  Personally, I wouldn't think it is reasonable to stab someone in the heart if they pushed you or you are in a fistfight with them, but it is ultimately up to the jury.

Posted
22 minutes ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

Yes.  The twins and their mom worked at a pizza place. Probably not rich

Frisco is a lot like Plano. A money side and a not so much money side. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, HiggyBaby said:

Frisco is a lot like Plano. A money side and a not so much money side. 

Yep.  "old" Frisco is just as blue-collar as anywhere.  Lots of new apartments as well all over to allow people to take advantage of the school districts without having to buy a house.  

Posted
8 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Yep.  "old" Frisco is just as blue-collar as anywhere.  Lots of new apartments as well all over to allow people to take advantage of the school districts without having to buy a house.  

Out here in California a lot of those nice apartments have pretty large carve outs for low income folks.   
 

From what I’ve seen and read, Austin wasn’t a rich privileged white boy

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

Out here in California a lot of those nice apartments have pretty large carve outs for low income folks.   
 

From what I’ve seen and read, Austin wasn’t a rich privileged white boy

Not at all.  Family went to our old church, so we still new a lot of the people at the service.  Lots of kids know each other.  Friends of friends.  Lots of older (relatively), ranch style houses in that part of town.  Few McMansions.  Many more apartment complexes.  Just "normal" as it gets I guess?  

Posted
8 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

If you intentionally stab someone, and they die it is murder.

Period.

How do you know Anthony intended to stab anyone? All of a sudden wielding a knife for any purpose means you intend to stab? What if they can only prove he intended to intimidate, or to graze the victim's skin?

Someone should study the reasons why social media commenters can't seem to resist the urge to jump to conclusions before the trial actually happens. There's no reward for guessing. All it does is contribute to an echo chamber where these guesses marinade among room temperature IQ losers until they become firmly held community prejudices.

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

How do you know Anthony intended to stab anyone? All of a sudden wielding a knife for any purpose means you intend to stab? What if they can only prove he intended to intimidate, or to graze the victim's skin?

Someone should study the reasons why social media commenters can't seem to resist the urge to jump to conclusions before the trial actually happens. There's no reward for guessing. All it does is contribute to an echo chamber where these guesses marinade among room temperature IQ losers until they become firmly held community prejudices.

Your illogical attempts at semantics are amusing. 

Yes, room temperature IQ folks will conclude that if person a pulls a knife out on person B and person B ends up dead from a knife wound that c- person A was trying to stab person B. What an odd, illogical leap of faith with no ties to reality. You keep on reaching out there I'm sure spaghetti monsters, lochness and aliens are next on the possible reasons this occurred.

I've noted in every.single.post.on.this.thread. that more evidence or facts may surface that alters my (and other people's) perception of the case, but given the information we currently have it definitely looks like murder. The statements of the suspect is a fairly decent reason to come to that conclusion. And before you go there, yes, I've already noted its not impossible it was coerced.

So, am I not to believe the words of the person who, ya know, did the fucking stabbing? 

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Your illogical attempts at semantics are amusing. 

Yes, room temperature IQ folks will conclude that if person a pulls a knife out on person B and person B ends up dead from a knife wound that 😄 person A was trying to stab person B. What an odd, illogical leap of faith with no ties to reality. You keep on reaching out there spaghetti monsters, lochness and aliens are next on the possible reasons this occurred.

I've noted in every.single.post.on.this.thread. that more evidence or facts may surface that alters my (and other people's) perception of the case, but given the information we currently have it definitely looks like murder. The statements of the suspect is a fairly decent reason to come to that conclusion. And before you go there, yes, I've already noted its not impossible it was coerced.

So, am I not to believe the words of the person who, ya know, did the fucking stabbing? 

What words? He said what he thought had happened, not what he intended. The text you quoted makes a big distinction between what's "intended" and what's "committed" by him. Nobody denies that the victim was stabbed, which is why he "committed" a homicide, but without video or other concrete proof you'd have to make a pretty big assumption about Anthony's "intentions." He's adamant that his knife was for self defense, after all.

Edited by chainsaw
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

What words? He said he what happened, not what he intended. The text you quoted makes a big distinction between what's "intended" and what's "committed" by him. Nobody denies that the victim was stabbed, which is why he "committed" a homicide, but without video or other concrete proof you'd have to make a pretty big assumption about Anthony's "intentions." He's adamant that his knife was for self defense, after all.

No, I dont have to make assumptions. I'm going off only the known facts at this point. As for intent, you and I covered this already about 3 pages back.

But here we go again Texas Law:

Spoiler

(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual

If you pull a knife out and thrust it in the direction of someone that qualifies for the intent to cause serious bodily injury. If that intent leads to their death it is murder by Texas law. Unless there is clear evidence of self defense which to this point I've seen zero (you've provided none) and him being in the tent and not attempting to leave further leans in the not self defense direction so does bringing a knife to a track meet. Also, his confession supports this as well.

So your going against known facts, the actual law as it is written, a confession and all reasonable logic to ask your intent question. 

This is the second time we've covered this, you and I directly. You keep clutching at straws and provide zero links or support for any of your positions. It is pretty typical behavior for you.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

How do you know Anthony intended to stab anyone? All of a sudden wielding a knife for any purpose means you intend to stab? What if they can only prove he intended to intimidate, or to graze the victim's skin?

Someone should study the reasons why social media commenters can't seem to resist the urge to jump to conclusions before the trial actually happens. There's no reward for guessing. All it does is contribute to an echo chamber where these guesses marinade among room temperature IQ losers until they become firmly held community prejudices.

Exactly. If I wanted to kill you I would’ve shot you in your heart not your shoulder.  The fact that you cracked your skull on the pavement is not my fault.  

  • Haha 2
Posted
6 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

The premeditated aspect only comes into play on a murder charge as it relates to Capital Murder, which has a different legal standard than Murder. Again, unless he was attacked and defending himself, or some other yet unknown facts present themselves, if you stab someone with a knife, and they die, by Texas legal code, that's murder. 

Yeah, "premeditated" comes from some notion of common-law murder.  Almost all crimes are now a creature of statute and the statutes vary widely from state to state.  Some still require proof of premeditation for the more severe homicide crimes.  Texas does not.

For regular ol' murder, it's either an intent to kill or to inflict serious bodily harm by a dangerous act.

Texas kind of hits "premeditation" in reverse, providing an affirmative defense to 1st degree murder reducing it to 2nd degree, when the act is the result of sudden passion provoked by adequate cause (by inference negating any premeditation, but not intent to kill or do serious bodily harm).

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
8 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

Saw this on trusty internet. Premeditation and self defense soups both be in play:

 

This is the story according to the coach:
The week before last, Austin & Karmelo had a fight at a party. Karmelo lost-took the L and walked away. Austin & his twin brother had friends at Karmelo’s school who started to harass him so he stayed home for a couple of days. On the day of the “tragedy”, Karmelo went to the other school for a track meet. He was sitting in the bleachers and it started to rain. The coach told him to go and sit under the tent. He was under the tent with his friends when the Metcalfe twins came over to the tent. They told him to go and when he didn’t move, Austin grabbed his phone and threw it so it broke. The twins then proceeded to jump him with Austin on top of Karmelo. Karmelo pulled out the knife and stabbed Austin. When Austin got up, that’s when his twin realized he had been hurt. Texas is a stand your ground state and self defense is different in stand your ground states than it is in Illinois. Karmelo had the right to defend himself and his property.

This is what I heard happened. This also tracks with what the dad on youtube said. If you read the police report one of the kids said that Melo was friends with one of the guys on the Memorial track team so could be how he was at the same party. It also explains why the situation turned violent so quickly. There is def more to this story than "dude nobody knew was under a tent and decided to stab some random guy".

 

Posted
22 hours ago, Helobious said:

I’ve never been to Frisco or even spent much time in DFW. But looking at the TAPR profile (statewide accountability system for schools) for each school, the school that Metcalf went to actually has a lot more economically disadvantaged students and was a lot more racially diverse than Anthony’s school. Centennial (Anthony) is actually 51% Asian and only has about 9% “poor” students enrolled. Memorial (Metcalf) has 21% poor students, and whites making up the largest chunk of the student body, but only at 37%. 
 

and TIL that not all affluent Dallas suburbs are Southlake carroll copies

Most of DFW is like this.  DFW is one of the most racially mixed, if you will, metros that I've ever lived or worked in.

Carroll ISD is 60% white, btw.

Posted
14 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

serious bodily injury.

How do you prove his intent was to do that, specifically? The kid was holding a knife, sure. So what? He says he wanted to defend himself, not cause a serious injury. As was covered earlier in the thread, the bar for "serious" is pretty high, so how are they going to prove that at the time of the incident he wanted to use the knife to hospitalize the victim? Remember the law separates what was "committed" from what was "intended" so it seems kind of lazy to infer from the events of Act III the characters' intentions in Act II. Just let things play out.

Posted
1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

I'd assume all cell phones were taken/scrubbed as evidence?  

Probably. I would expect some video to leak from law enforcement, especially if it shows this Anthony kid in a real bad light as expected.

Posted
20 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

How do you prove his intent was to do that, specifically? The kid was holding a knife, sure. So what? He says he wanted to defend himself, not cause a serious injury. As was covered earlier in the thread, the bar for "serious" is pretty high, so how are they going to prove that at the time of the incident he wanted to use the knife to hospitalize the victim? Remember the law separates what was "committed" from what was "intended" so it seems kind of lazy to infer from the events of Act III the characters' intentions in Act II. Just let things play out.

No reasonable, logical person believes that trying to stab someone with a knife is not intent to cause serious bodily injury. I grant you're neither reasonable nor logical, but again you're reaching for any straw you can find in a storm. I love that you ignored all the other points and went back to hanging your hat on "Can one really conclude that a person intended serious bodily injury when stabbing them with a knife."

It's truly comical. The answer, because you clearly need it is yes, it's completely logical and with the legal definition of Texas law for someone to draw that conclusion and pretty much any jury, judge, prosecutor or sane rational person would as well.

At this point you're either trolling or seriously the lack intellectual mental capacity for actual logical and worthwhile engagement. Good luck in your future endeavors.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 3
Posted
10 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

No reasonable, logical person believes that trying to stab someone with a knife is not intent to cause serious bodily injury.

This.  JFC this site never ceases to amaze.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted

Under certain circumstances, I suppose you could pull a knife in a defensive way and then get tackled or grabbed by the victim, or an intervenor, and thereby actually get lucky/unlucky and hit an artery causing exsanguination.

And that might successfully convince a jury that you lacked the intent, and/or that it was self-defense.

But, if you get in any way offensive with that knife, that is legally sufficient to prove the intent necessary.  

Due to the nature of appeal of jury verdicts, it basically boils down to whatever you can convince the jury of.  You're not going to get a court to instruct them much beyond what the statute says (that is that any particular conduct with a knife that results in death either proves or negates the intent).  Nor will you get an appellate court to reverse on intent under either (offensive knife vs. defensive knife) set of facts.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Under certain circumstances, I suppose you could pull a knife in a defensive way and then get tackled or grabbed by the victim, or an intervenor, and thereby actually get lucky/unlucky and hit an artery causing exsanguination.

And that might successfully convince a jury that you lacked the intent, and/or that it was self-defense.

But, if you get in any way offensive with that knife, that is legally sufficient to prove the intent necessary.  

Due to the nature of appeal of jury verdicts, it basically boils down to whatever you can convince the jury of.  You're not going to get a court to instruct them much beyond what the statute says (that is that any particular conduct with a knife that results in death either proves or negates the intent).  Nor will you get an appellate court to reverse on intent under either (offensive knife vs. defensive knife) set of facts.

Other scenario that could justify Anthony is he pulled the knife after both twins sized him up and were going to attack.  Doesn’t sound like that happened here though 

Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Under certain circumstances, I suppose you could pull a knife in a defensive way and then get tackled or grabbed by the victim, or an intervenor, and thereby actually get lucky/unlucky and hit an artery causing exsanguination.

And that might successfully convince a jury that you lacked the intent, and/or that it was self-defense.

But, if you get in any way offensive with that knife, that is legally sufficient to prove the intent necessary.  

Due to the nature of appeal of jury verdicts, it basically boils down to whatever you can convince the jury of.  You're not going to get a court to instruct them much beyond what the statute says (that is that any particular conduct with a knife that results in death either proves or negates the intent).  Nor will you get an appellate court to reverse on intent under either (offensive knife vs. defensive knife) set of facts.

This is the point I'm making. Right now we don't have proof of intent to seriously injure. Wait for evidence.

  • Haha 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

So there I was, showing my cool knife off. And the guy just jumped on it, heart first. 

That’s what I’m thinkin’ - kind of a Steve Irwin type situation.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Bevo said:

That’s what I’m thinkin’ - kind of a Steve Irwin type situation.

"Just luke at eem. EEees a real bute. Love um. Jess genna go in and say ello. Wootch is knife, kill ya it con. Ear we go, move in calmly dont wanna scare the amAzin critter." 

Posted
16 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

So there I was, showing my cool knife off. And the guy just jumped on it, heart first. 

That's more or less what it would take, yes.  

From what I have read about knife fighting, trying to stab someone through the heart through the rib cage is a very low-percentage deal.  The ridbs and sternum are highly likely to deflect the blade or cause it to get hung up.

For that reason, the military teaches going under the rib cage for the lungs, liver, spleen and maybe heart, or even trying for other arteries like the carotid, femoral or brachial.  That's partly due to body armor and other military gear can make it even more difficult to "stab the heart," but it's difficult either way.

So, unless Melo was a trained knife fighter, he was pretty extraordinarily unlucky to deliver a fatal stab.  That factoid is probably not going to help him any, though.

Posted
7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's more or less what it would take, yes.  

From what I have read about knife fighting, trying to stab someone through the heart through the rib cage is a very low-percentage deal.  The ridbs and sternum are highly likely to deflect the blade or cause it to get hung up.

For that reason, the military teaches going under the rib cage for the lungs, liver, spleen and maybe heart, or even trying for other arteries like the carotid, femoral or brachial.  That's partly due to body armor and other military gear can make it even more difficult to "stab the heart," but it's difficult either way.

So, unless Melo was a trained knife fighter, he was pretty extraordinarily unlucky to deliver a fatal stab.  That factoid is probably not going to help him any, though.

Maybe he has been training to be a surgeon. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's more or less what it would take, yes.  

From what I have read about knife fighting, trying to stab someone through the heart through the rib cage is a very low-percentage deal.  The ridbs and sternum are highly likely to deflect the blade or cause it to get hung up.

For that reason, the military teaches going under the rib cage for the lungs, liver, spleen and maybe heart, or even trying for other arteries like the carotid, femoral or brachial.  That's partly due to body armor and other military gear can make it even more difficult to "stab the heart," but it's difficult either way.

So, unless Melo was a trained knife fighter, he was pretty extraordinarily unlucky to deliver a fatal stab.  That factoid is probably not going to help him any, though.

What usually happens if a guy suckerpuches someone else at a bar or a party and the victim takes an unlucky bounce and ends up dead. That's not intent to cause serious bodily injury is it? Intent to bruise someone or even fracture a bone, but to cause a serious injury? I wouldn't think so.

Bringing a knife into the mix changes things, I agree. I just don't think agree that every time someone wields a knife they're intent on causing a "serious" injury that can't be treated with a tourniquet and basic first aid equipment that is probably available at a UIL event.

Posted
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's more or less what it would take, yes.  

From what I have read about knife fighting, trying to stab someone through the heart through the rib cage is a very low-percentage deal.  The ridbs and sternum are highly likely to deflect the blade or cause it to get hung up.

For that reason, the military teaches going under the rib cage for the lungs, liver, spleen and maybe heart, or even trying for other arteries like the carotid, femoral or brachial.  That's partly due to body armor and other military gear can make it even more difficult to "stab the heart," but it's difficult either way.

So, unless Melo was a trained knife fighter, he was pretty extraordinarily unlucky to deliver a fatal stab.  That factoid is probably not going to help him any, though.

This is all pretty accurate. I'll refresh what I said before. Slashing major arteries not protected by bone and lots of muscle is a far better edged weapons strategy. That why any anyone well trained in edged weapons uses a karambit and goes for throat, wrists, inner thigh. Couple of specific areas covered only by a small amount of skin that can end someone's life in minutes or seconds depending on depth of slash. 

It's also why many serial killers use knives, death from stabbing is usually not fast and typically requires multiple stabs. It's well noted this suffering and repeated abuse is part of the reason serial killers use it. 

Posted
42 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

This is the point I'm making. Right now we don't have proof of intent to seriously injure. Wait for evidence.

I mean, the fact that the kid died of a stab wound is evidence. The possibility of other evidence that could support a self defense claim doesn't mean we don't already have evidence available to us of an intent to seriously injure.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, wildcat09 said:

I mean, the fact that the kid died of a stab wound is evidence. The possibility of other evidence that could support a self defense claim doesn't mean we don't already have evidence available to us of an intent to seriously injure.

 

It's evidence but not proof.

Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

I mean, the fact that the kid died of a stab wound is evidence. The possibility of other evidence that could support a self defense claim doesn't mean we don't already have evidence available to us of an intent to seriously injure.

 

Unless it was actually Metcalfe’s knife?

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I mean, the fact that the kid died of a stab wound is evidence. The possibility of other evidence that could support a self defense claim doesn't mean we don't already have evidence available to us of an intent to seriously injure.

 

"Well, he didn't die because he was stabbed, he died because his heart stopped pumping blood. We do not know for a fact that the dead person didn’t have heart issues prior to that point. So is that really evidence that he was trying cause serious bodily injury?"

-chainsaw probably 

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Haha 7
Posted
53 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

What usually happens if a guy suckerpuches someone else at a bar or a party and the victim takes an unlucky bounce and ends up dead. That's not intent to cause serious bodily injury is it? Intent to bruise someone or even fracture a bone, but to cause a serious injury? I wouldn't think so.

Bringing a knife into the mix changes things, I agree. I just don't think agree that every time someone wields a knife they're intent on causing a "serious" injury that can't be treated with a tourniquet and basic first aid equipment that is probably available at a UIL event.

Someone's head hitting a barstool during a bar fight is a common example used for 2nd degree murder.  So, yes.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

What usually happens if a guy suckerpuches someone else at a bar or a party and the victim takes an unlucky bounce and ends up dead. That's not intent to cause serious bodily injury is it? Intent to bruise someone or even fracture a bone, but to cause a serious injury? I wouldn't think so.

Bringing a knife into the mix changes things, I agree. I just don't think agree that every time someone wields a knife they're intent on causing a "serious" injury that can't be treated with a tourniquet and basic first aid equipment that is probably available at a UIL event.

Yes In this case Austin accidentally landed on Karmelos knife 

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

My main takeaway from this thread?

Law school must suck even more than I ever could have imagined.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I came to a different conclusion.

I should start a YouTube podcast to discuss current legal events in crime and source my guess 100% from Surly. It would be entertaining as hell, and I could profit.

Posted
1 hour ago, JBJ said:

Someone's head hitting a barstool during a bar fight is a common example used for 2nd degree murder.  So, yes.

I'm sure there's also precedent saying that a stabbing isn't always serious bodily injury

Posted

It got delayed, apparently because the Metcalf father showed up before it started.  I looked up the Next Generation Action Network and offer their description of the work they do without editing.

Quote

NGAN Legal Advocacy Fund has provided ongoing legal support to protesters in Dallas since 2014,  NGAN Legal Advocacy Fund works in connection with the ACLU, Civil Rights Corps, and other Dallas-based organizations.

NGAN Legal Advocacy Fund's first case was after Crystal Mason was sentence to 5 years in prison for so-called voter fraud we provide her first 2 attorney's and the ACLU and Texas Civil Rights Project join our fight to keep Crystal free from prison.

The legal process can take a tremendous amount of time. Most cases take 6 months to a year to be resolved and some cases can take up to two years. For this reason,  disbursements and reporting will be ongoing possibly up to two years from now depending on people’s charges and cases. We will be continually updating information regarding these expenditures as money is used to bail people out and support peoples’ legal cases. 

These reports will be available through GoFundMe updates and publicly published online. Because we have access to limited funds, our first focus is freeing vulnerable protestors (including those at high risk of contracting COVID-19 while incarcerated, members of marginalized communities, and those without stable housing.  As the number of reported arrests rises and the severity of the charges has increased.

The funds will be used to pay for bail, legal fees, and fines, lawyers, discovery, investigations, personal material support, and any other financial needs that arise during the legal process.

In addition to financial support, we’ll be asking for community members to attend hearings and participate in the defense of our comrades. Subscribe on Twitter or Facebook to receive updates as the legal process proceeds.

For accounting information please email 501c3@thengan.com

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...