If the state does not retry after a hung jury, that is usually a dismissal or nolle prosequi, not an acquittal.
Yes, the case can die procedurally. Plea posture can change. Time can reveal more evidence or weaken what already exists. And you are right, juror removal is rare.
But Anthony still has to show a sequence that sustains self-defense. That is not impossible, but the gravity is high. The facts still have to carry the claim.
@MrDennisByron A hung jury is not a win. Only an acquittal or nolle prosequi ends the case. One holdout can delay conviction, but delay is not exoneration. If the holdout is acting in bad faith, the court may also have options, including removal and replacement by an alternate.
No, a hung jury does not equal salvation. It means mistrial, retrial, more pressure, more money, and the same exposure all over again. Betting your life on one adverse juror is not a defense strategy.
Trying to intentionally sabotage a jury is misconduct at minimum, and depending on how it is done, it can become criminal. Jury service is not activism.
The post essentially celebrated the possibility of a single “adverse” juror as some kind of tactical victory. Legally and practically, it isn’t
@HenriettaSnacks Tribalism is weakness. Assuming you know all the facts because the racial frame feels right is foolish. A jury is supposed to weigh evidence, not validate group grievance.
The account shows street-level persistence suited for echo-chamber activism, but the pattern is not rigorous. The mockery, factual shortcuts, repetitive phrasing, and emotional reactivity point to someone prioritizing tribal signaling over precision, evidence, or rebuttal.
There is plenty of passion here, but not much discipline.
@CCFreedmen This is administrative harassment dressed up as civil-rights enforcement. You are not citing law, you are inventing a pressure campaign and pretending it has statutory authority. Tennessee does not even have its own hate-crime penalty enhancement statute.
@MrDennisByron Yes, stabbing is an intentional act. The state still has to prove the charged elements and defeat self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
The loss of life is always unfortunate, especially when it is a child.
But you cannot approach the problem through a racial grievance frame that ignores a real verdict.
A jury heard the case and acquitted him.
You can disagree with the outcome. You can think the facts were ugly. You can mourn the dead.
But “wrongfully murdered” is not something you get to declare after acquittal just because the racial narrative demands it.
@realAFLF But a donation link is not probable cause. A press release is not law. And “civil rights review” does not magically convert a disputed self-defense case into a hate crime.
@realAFLF It's a private, race-explicit trust intervening to push a hate crime review against the white shooter—after the Black man, Joshua Fox, initiated the physical violence.
@TheLaurenChen@TheYayaMethod A lot of people claim to fear for Black children only after birth, but ignore the scale of Black children lost before birth.
@lilmoemusic@TheBrancaShow Ultimately, a 14-year-old with a handgun is already a system failure.
That should have been addressed long before a store owner, a chase, or a trigger pull.