Fox News98%
Victim hit with SHOCKING insults after Karmelo Anthony sentencing 49%
6/10/2026, 4:30:02 AM
BS Summary: This video contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Burden of Proof, and Overconfidence Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 22.8% saturation with 194 hits. Analysis detected 1,966 faulty-reasoning hits from 851 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49.4% and a BS Rank of 49% (11,334 of 21,887 videos). This video is better (less manipulative) than 51.80% of the video peer group.
19-year-old Carmelo Anthony sentenced to 35 years in prison for fatally stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metaf at a track meet.
Metaf's father delivering an emotional victim impact statement saying, quote, "We were robbed.
This was never about race.
It is about right and wrong.
My son's death destroyed the person I used to be.
He does not exist anymore.
You're going to prison.
I forgave you the day it happened.
I don't forgive what you did.
You can't look me in the eyes, but you can stab my bleeping son.
The Colin County DA adding this.
Today, justice was served.
Despite the trauma of witnessing the senseless murder at a school track meet, they cooperated fully and testified truthfully.
Their courage was essential to securing justice in this case.
This verdict sends a clear message.
Violence like this won't be tolerated in our Colin County community.
And we remain committed to protecting our schools and standing with victims and their families.
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainy Affairs, Cully Stimson joins me now.
Cully, yesterday was about analyzing the verdict and the sentence.
Today is about what comes next.
On what grounds do you expect the defense to appeal this verdict?
Well, they're going to look for any errors they believe the trial judge made or the prosecutor made.
Uh, and I think the first one they're going to do is they're going to file what's called a Batson claim.
Batson versus Kentucky, uh, was the Supreme Court case that says you cannot use race as the primary factor to exercise your preemptive challenge to get rid of potential jurors.
And the prosecution did three, excuse three jurors who were black. uh and uh so they will appeal that and say that was done in an unconstitutional way.
Now you can excuse minority members of the jury for non-racial reasons and the prosecutor did give a facially non racial reason for that. So that will be one area of appeal, but they'll look at every they'll get the trial transcripts and they'll look at every aspect of the trial and what the judge did and then they'll appeal on those grounds.
And the non-racial reason prosecutors gave was those three black uh individuals on the jury, potentially on the jury, were teachers and there were concerns that they would be too differential to students.
Um let's go a little bit more to the defense strategy in this.
Could you discern what their strategy was?
Cuz because quite frankly, Kelly, I can't.
Well, I can't. And the only reason I can't is because I've been a defense attorney and I had uh a bad hand.
Sometimes the facts were totally against my client.
And so I think they took the spaghetti against against the wall defense.
And that is either shoot for a total quiddle, which was not going to happen based on the facts in this case
and certainly not after their own defense witness got got turned sideways by the prosecutor and admitted that Carmelo was in the wrong.
or go for the heartstrings and try to get them to uh convict on the manslaughter.
And I think it was a pirick victory for them to get the judge to include the manslaughter lesser included offense charge to the jury.
So I think a victory for them would have been a manslaughter conviction and I think that was the defense.
Interesting. Okay, let's play a snapshot of some of the protest outside court and
I'm going to ask you some questions about him.
Listen,
it was our race.
This this case was built off of race.
As a former prosecutor, this was a legal lynching that happened in the slaughter house.
This is a slaughter house.
This is not a courthouse.
Those twins are domestic racist terrorists.
To be clear, it's a little bit tough to hear the last line.
Those twins are domestic racist terrorists.
If that incendiary accusation was true, wouldn't the defense have brought that out to attack the victim's character, albeit a risky strategy, I understand, but you even said, "We're throwing stuff against the wall here to ste see what sticks."
Or do you think the defense was too scared to open up a character attack line of questioning for what it would have meant for their client?
Well, number one, it was irrelevant.
race was irrelevant in this case except in the minds of these protesters.
Uh and I think the defense knew that they tried to go down that road, the judge would have shut them down because race was not a factor in this case.
I'd like to know where these protesters are uh every day
in Chicago when you have thousands over the years of black men killing other black men.
Where is where are they calling for justice in those cases?
They're not.
And so they're trying to monetize uh the tragedy of one boy killing another boy.
If this was two white dudes getting in a fight and one
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.