#NNPA BlackPress

Guilt or Innocence… A Jury Has Decided: After Two Mistrials, a Third Jury Has Found A.J. Armstrong Jr. Guilty of Capital Murder

ABOVE: Dawn and Antonio Armstrong Sr. and A.J. Armstrong Jr. (bottom right) Over the past seven plus years, there has been a lot of discussion regarding the cold-blooded and brutal murders of Antonio Armstrong Sr., and his wife Dawn Armstrong, as they were shot in the head with a .22-caliber pistol while they both slept […]
The post Guilt or Innocence… A Jury Has Decided: After Two Mistrials, a Third Jury Has Found A.J. Armstrong Jr. Guilty of Capital Murder first appeared on BlackPressUSA.

Published

3 years ago

August 27, 2023

Forward Times Staff

ABOVE: Dawn and Antonio Armstrong Sr. and A.J. Armstrong Jr. (bottom right)

Over the past seven plus years, there has been a lot of discussion regarding the cold-blooded and brutal murders of Antonio Armstrong Sr., and his wife Dawn Armstrong, as they were shot in the head with a .22-caliber pistol while they both slept in their Bellaire-area home on July 29, 2016.

There has been even more conversation about whether their—then 16-year-old son, Antonio “AJ” Armstrong Jr.—used the gun that was owned by his father to commit those heinous murders and if he is responsible for killing both of his parents back in 2016.

As the court of public opinion has consistently weighed in on AJ Armstrong’s alleged guilt or innocence over the last seven years, three Houston juries heard the evidence surrounding the case during three separate trials, with the first two trials resulting in mistrials.

On August 15^th, however, attorneys for the prosecution and the defense presented their cases to a third jury. After seeing all the evidence, hearing from 31 witnesses over 11 days, and listening to the closing arguments of both sides, the third jury deliberated the fate of AJ Armstrong for over nine hours over a two-day period, and came back with a unanimous verdict the next day.

On August 16^th, “Guilty” was the unanimous verdict handed down by the 12 jurors, finding AJ Armstrong guilty of the capital murder of both his parents—Antonio Armstrong Sr. and Dawn Armstrong. The, now 23-year-old, was immediately sentenced to life in prison, with the possibility of parole after 40 years.

Immediately after the verdict, Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg held a press conference, along with her prosecutors, to discuss the guilty verdict and to thank everyone involved.

Kim Ogg and Prosecutors

“I want to say this on behalf of the victims,” Ogg stated at the press conference. “Antonio Sr. and Dawn Armstrong died because they were trying to be good parents. Because they wanted their children to do right. Not to lie. To work. To be law-abiding, contributing adults. And for that, they paid with their lives.”

Ogg went on to express additional thanks to the prosecutors and law enforcement for their dedication to the case, while expressing a heartfelt appreciation to the jury and pointing out that approximately one out of nine people actually respond to jury summons.

“For the jurors who answered their jury summons, I want to thank them, because we don’t make these decisions about guilt or innocence unilaterally,” said Ogg. “Our jurisprudence, and our American democracy, and our government system doesn’t contemplate it that way. We participate in our democracy, and the community, those jurors—12 trial jurors and 3 alternates—the community spoke, and the community found Antonio Armstrong Jr. guilty, and the community found justice for our victims.”

There have been lots of discussions across the Greater Houston area regarding the multiple times that AJ Armstrong was tried for the murders, where the new blood evidence came from, and whether this was a “witch-hunt” to deliver a conviction against him by any means necessary.

As stated before, two of the previous trials ended with a hung jury and the judge had no other choice but to declare a mistrial because the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. In layman’s terms, a mistrial simply means that the trial ended because there was an inability by the jury to render a unanimous decision on the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

According to former Harris County criminal court judge Ronnisha Bowman, to hand down any sentence in Texas—whether it is a conviction or acquittal—the jury’s decision must be unanimous. In other words, if even one juror disagrees, it would be considered a hung jury and could lead to the judge declaring a mistrial. However, the defendant could be tried again.

All jurors MUST agree on a final conviction or acquittal. That didn’t happen in AJ Armstrong’s first two trials, which is what led to the third and most recent trial.

“In Texas, a unanimous decision is required for final conviction, or an acquittal for that matter,” said Bowman. “If a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision, in a criminal case, the state can retry the case as many times as they choose.”

It is also important to note that in Texas, anyone who is charged with capital murder and is convicted could possibly receive a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty. In this case, because AJ Armstrong was only 16, and a minor under the age of 18 at the time he was charged with committing the two murders, the death penalty was not applicable, and he was eligible for a sentence of life with parole.

Assistant District Attorneys John Jordan and Ryan Trask prosecuted AJ Armstrong during this third criminal re-trial case, as well as during the second trial that resulted in a mistrial.

During closing arguments, the prosecution argued that the evidence presented before the jury was enough to find AJ Armstrong guilty. They went on to say that AJ Armstrong’s own mother, who was the person prosecutors said knew him best, was forthright about her son.

Prosecutors opened their closing arguments with Dawn Armstrong’s words about AJ Armstrong that were sent to him via text before the murders, stating: “All you do is piss on everything we do for you. What did we ever do to deserve all the lies and the schemes?”

Prosecutors would continue to argue that AJ Armstrong’s cell phone and the alarm system activity were connected, and focused on the timeline of events that took place between the 9-1-1 call that AJ Armstrong made and when the police arrived.

The prosecution also attempted to debunk the argument that the defense was making that AJ Armstrong’s older brother, Joshua Armstrong, could have committed the murders instead of him.

“I am asking you to find somebody innocent in this case, but not the defendant,” the prosecution pleaded with the jury during closing arguments. “Josh Armstrong was wrongfully accused in this courtroom for a crime he didn’t commit, but not by us, by them [the defense attorneys]. Their case is that Josh Armstrong did this. Are they so desperate that they would sacrifice one brother for the other?”

As the prosecution wrapped up their closing arguments, it was the defense’s turn to refute the prosecution’s claims by reminding jurors that the prosecution had the burden of proof to find AJ Armstrong guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The defense for Armstrong stated that: “When the state does not have sufficient evidence to meet that burden, what happens? They turn to desperation. They start doing things and concocting stories, they start speculating.”

The defense continued to dissect the evidence, question the sworn testimony of the prosecution’s witnesses, highlight the mental health, drug, and alcohol challenges of Joshua Armstrong, and continue the speculation that Joshua Armstrong could have committed the murders of his parents.

“This young man right here [AJ Armstrong] deserves far more than to have his future determined based on faulty, unreliable, error-ridden records from an alarm company that can stand up to their own records, their own accuracy, for the July month alone in 2016,” the defense argued. “This, in and of itself, creates reasonable doubt across the board.”

Undoubtedly, this case has so many layers and details, but regardless of the court of public opinion, we know that AJ Armstrong Sr. and Dawn Armstrong were both murdered on July 29, 2016, with their own gun, which was left on the kitchen counter after the shootings, along with a note written on the family’s notepad with a pen from a kitchen drawer.

Here are other things we know about the case, after learning more and more about what occurred from the day of the murders to the recent conviction.

That same day, AJ Armstrong called 9-1-1 to report hearing gunshots in the house coming from his parents’ room. AJ Armstrong and his, then 12-year-old sister, were in the house.

AJ Armstrong was taken into police custody and subsequently charged with the murders.

Investigators say that all the doors and windows at the house were still locked prior to the police arriving at the home.

The Armstrong family had some challenging internal relationship issues.

The judge set AJ Armstrong’s bond at $200,000 and he was ordered to wear an ankle monitor. He was released on bond.

In March 2019, AJ Armstrong’s first capital murder trial began.

In April 2019, the judge declared a mistrial because the first jury could not reach a unanimous verdict after two days of deliberations.

In October 2022, the second trial for AJ Armstrong began.

That same month, the judge declared a mistrial because the second jury could not reach a unanimous verdict after more than two days of deliberations.

In July 2023, AJ Armstrong’s third trial began.

On August 16, 2023, AJ Armstrong was found guilty of capital murder and was immediately sentenced to life in prison, with the possibility of parole after 40 years.

AJ Armstrong was transferred to state custody and will be sent to the Byrd Unit in Huntsville, Texas, which is where male inmates who are given the death penalty or sentenced to life in prison for 50 or more years serve out their sentences.

Prior to his conviction, AJ Armstrong had been free on bond for seven years.

The Armstrong family and his attorneys have filed a federal civil lawsuit against the City of Houston, claiming in the suit that the Houston Police Department (HPD) planted blood evidence to sway the third jury and help manage to get a false conviction against AJ Armstrong.

The Forward Times will continue to follow the case and keep our readers informed with any new details that may arise. May Antonio Armstrong Sr. and Dawn Armstrong rest in peace.

The post Guilt or Innocence… A Jury Has Decided: After Two Mistrials, a Third Jury Has Found A.J. Armstrong Jr. Guilty of Capital Murder appeared first on Forward Times.

The post Guilt or Innocence… A Jury Has Decided: After Two Mistrials, a Third Jury Has Found A.J. Armstrong Jr. Guilty of Capital Murder first appeared on BlackPressUSA.

Forward Times Staff

Posts by Forward Times Staff

Up Next

Honoring the People on Whose Backs America was Built

Don't Miss

Historic March on Washington Anniversary Commemorated with Calls for Continued Civil Rights Struggle

Forward Times Staff

Click to comment

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Jim Crow 2.0 at the Pentagon

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

Published

1 week ago

August 3, 2026

bpusa-syndication

Pete Hegseth insists that he is restoring “merit” to the United States military. But after months of dismissals, blocked promotions, and ideological purges, the evidence tells a different story. His campaign against so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has become something far more dangerous: an assault on equal opportunity that falls with particular force on African Americans, while also targeting women, Latinos, gay Americans, and transgender service members.

The latest example is both troubling and infuriating.

Once again, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly blocked the promotion of an exceptionally qualified woman—Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt. Bauernschmidt is no ordinary officer. She became the Navy’s first woman to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the most demanding leadership assignments in the world. Her career reflects decades of exemplary performance, operational excellence, and leadership under extraordinary pressure.

Yet once again, a distinguished military career appears to have been subordinated to an ideological agenda masquerading as “merit.”

I call BS!

The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

The pattern has become impossible to ignore.

General Charles Q. Brown Jr., only the second African American to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed despite a career that placed him among the most accomplished military leaders of his generation.

Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman ever to serve as Chief of Naval Operations, was removed despite decades of distinguished command experience.

Reports have documented interventions that blocked or delayed the promotions of Black officers and women selected through the military’s rigorous promotion system.

Now Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt joins the growing list of highly accomplished officers whose careers have been derailed for reasons that have never been persuasively explained.

Where is Congress?

Its silence has become deafening.

Congress has an independent constitutional responsibility to oversee the armed forces. Instead, too many lawmakers have watched silently while one of the nation’s most respected institutions is subjected to ideological litmus tests and political interference.

This is not military reform. It is testosterone-fueled performative masculinity disguised as a philosophy of military excellence.

The irony is impossible to miss. Hegseth repeatedly invokes “merit,” yet his rhetoric begins with the assumption that Black officers, women, and other historically excluded Americans must somehow justify their achievements in ways that white male officers are rarely required to do.

That is not meritocracy. It is prejudice wrapped in patriotic language.

No one is asking that anyone be promoted because of race or gender. Americans simply expect that promotions be based on demonstrated competence, leadership, integrity, and service. The officers being targeted have already proven themselves repeatedly under one of the world’s most demanding evaluation systems.

Their records speak for themselves.

The attack on African American military leadership has been especially pernicious.

For generations, Black Americans fought in segregated units, earned decorations while denied equal treatment, and repeatedly demonstrated loyalty to a nation that often failed to extend them full citizenship. They broke barriers not because standards were lowered but because excellence finally overcame institutional discrimination.

Today’s campaign against “diversity” threatens to revive old assumptions under new slogans.

The implication that Black generals and admirals somehow owe their success to affirmative action rather than extraordinary performance echoes some of the ugliest stereotypes of the Jim Crow era. Yesterday’s segregationists claimed Black Americans were inherently less qualified. Today’s culture warriors simply employ more politically acceptable language while inviting the same suspicion about Black achievement.

That is why Hegseth’s campaign increasingly resembles Jim Crow 2.0.

The targets may now wear stars on their shoulders instead of military patches on segregated uniforms, but the underlying message is hauntingly familiar: Black excellence is presumed suspect, while white excellence is presumed earned.

America’s military became the finest fighting force in history because it opened its doors to talent wherever it could be found. It grew stronger after President Truman desegregated the armed forces. It became stronger when women assumed greater command responsibilities. It became stronger when every qualified American was given the opportunity to serve to the fullest extent of their abilities.

Diversity is not a concession. It is a strategic advantage.

The nation’s adversaries do not fear an American military because it is racially homogeneous. They fear it because it draws upon the talents of more than 340 million Americans whose diverse experiences, perspectives, and abilities make our armed forces unmatched anywhere in the world.

Every politically motivated dismissal of a distinguished officer sends a chilling message throughout the ranks: excellence alone may no longer be enough if you belong to the wrong demographic group.

That weakens morale. It weakens recruitment. It weakens retention.

And ultimately, it weakens national security.

Pete Hegseth has every right to pursue military readiness. He has no right to redefine merit in ways that repeatedly cast suspicion upon the accomplishments of Black officers, women, and others who have devoted their lives to defending this nation.

America deserves better. The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better. The Constitution deserves better.

And unless Congress finds the courage to exercise meaningful oversight, history may well remember this period not as a restoration of military excellence, but as the moment political ideology attempted to resurrect, in modern form, the old poison of exclusion.

Jim Crow did not strengthen America. Jim Crow 2.0 will not strengthen America’s military. It will only diminish it

Wade Henderson
Strategic Advisor
Civil and Human Rights
wade@wadejhenderson.com

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

#NNPA BlackPress

New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial

By Emilie St. John (Contributor) Karmelo Anthony will return to court next month in his first step to overturn his murder conviction. Anthony was found guilty last month in the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison. His new legal team has filed motions seeking the recusal of State District […]
The post New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Published

2 weeks ago

July 31, 2026

Oakland Post

By Emilie St. John
(Contributor)

Karmelo Anthony will return to court next month in his first step to overturn his murder conviction.

Anthony was found guilty last month in the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison. His new legal team has filed motions seeking the recusal of State District Judge John Roach Jr. from overseeing the appeals process.

Two hearings have been scheduled on the motion for Aug. 9 and 10 in the Collin County Courthouse in McKinney, Texas, according to Fox4 News.

On July 14, Senior Judge Sid L. Harle of the 226th District Court was assigned to preside over the defense’s motion to recuse Collin County Judge John Roach. The assignment took effect immediately and authorized Harle to handle all matters related to the recusal request, the filing read.

The Collin County District Attorney’s Office continues to defend its handling of the case by issuing a statement to NBC 5 DFW.

“The defendant’s new lawyers have filed a motion containing several inaccurate characterizations of the trial proceedings. The entire prosecution team and I conducted this trial ethically and in full compliance with the Court’s rulings and any agreements with defense counsel. We look forward to addressing these claims thoroughly in a Court of law in the coming weeks. The jury heard extensive evidence over the course of the trial and returned a unanimous verdict. We remain confident in that verdict and the fairness of the proceedings.”

Anthony’s new legal team, made up of appellate, civil rights, and criminal defense attorneys, was retained following Anthony’s conviction.

“Our responsibility is to determine whether a legal error occurred and to ensure that every issue supported by the record is fully and vigorously presented on appeal,” the team said in a statement.

“We recognize the profound loss suffered by one young man’s family and the uncertainty facing another, and we extend our respect to everyone whose lives have been forever changed by these events,” the release reads.

Anthony was charged with the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf during a track meet in Frisco, Texas, April 2, 2025. Anthony has long maintained it was an act of self-defense.

The attorneys are representing Anthony pro bono. The nearly 200-page notice of appeal seeks a new trial because his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was violated.

“The cumulative and practical effect of these provisions was to exclude members of the public from proceedings at every stage,” the filing reads.

The filing also focused on an alleged “handshake deal” that kept Anthony from taking the stand in his defense.

The defense filing said the agreement was that the jury would not hear that Metcalf and his twin brother had been accused of racism and bullying in the past. In exchange, they also would not see Anthony’s cellphone records or his school disciplinary record, according to court documents reported by the Dallas Morning News.

Anthony’s former defense attorney, Mike Howard, said the defense relied heavily on that deal. The team chose not to ask certain questions of witnesses or call on a separate expert witness based on that agreement. It also abandoned plans to introduce testimony and evidence about the allegations against Metcalf and his brother.

Appellate attorney Russell Wilson is now handling post-trial proceedings and Anthony’s appeal. He recently sat down for an interview, stating, “The court committed multiple errors during the June murder trial, preventing him from receiving a fair trial.”

“You know, we file motions that we expect to prevail on, but we understand that there’s two sides to every story. And at the end of the day, it’ll be a judge that has to make these decisions, but we feel confident in the positions that we’re taking,” Wilson said during an interview with WFAA. “There were substantial issues that we thought a reviewing court needed to look at. We thought these were constitutional irregularities, and we could have them addressed now. And so, we put them into a motion for a new trial.”

Bree West, a former Dallas County Assistant District Attorney, found it startling that so little time was given to Anthony’s team for such a serious “life or death” situation.

“I do think that it’s really challenging that potentially a court decided that you have 10 minutes to make that level of decision when it has the potential of being life-altering,” said West during an interview with Fox 4 News.

Judge Harle is no stranger to high-profile cases, having presided over the prosecution of a police officer charged in connection with the 2022 mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.

Anthony was convicted on June 9 of the murder of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison.

The post New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump!

WESTSIDE GAZETTE — The author criticizes Donald Trump’s rhetoric, noting his use of terms like “Dumbocrats” and “Communist” to describe Democrats and democracy. The column asserts that Trump’s current strategy involves creating doubt about midterm elections due to a lack of Republican agenda.
The post COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump! appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Published

2 weeks ago

July 31, 2026

Oakland Post

Frankly Speaking

Wow! Wow! Wow! The swamp drainers have truly stepped down to new levels of stupidity. You remember Weapons of Mass Destruction? We now have Weapons of Mass Distraction. Trump has introduced Dumbocrats and Communists into the conversation about Democrats and Democracy.

Trump lies so much, and his current strategy is to set up doubt about midterm elections because he and Republicans have no agenda!

He has no “Trump “ card, but Iran has a strait! He called it a skirmish; it’s now a War. He said five days; now it’s five months. He said few casualties; now it’s 18 deaths. He knew nothing about Project 2025 but hired its architects! Trump lies about the lies and often forgets these little inventions called cameras and phones

We see and hear and then see and hear the inconsistencies.

I didn’t like 45 and dislike 47 even more!

The post LSMFT! Lord Save Me From Trump! appeared first on The Westside Gazette.

Based on reporting by Westside Gazette.

The post COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump! appeared first on BlackPressUSA.