Karmelo Anthony, Rick Chow, and Why the Justice System Fails Black Youth

 In this episode, we unpack the gaps in the justice system by dissecting the polarizing outcomes of the Karmelo Anthony and Rick Chow trials. We discuss the parallels between these cases and similar cases in which non-black plaintiffs were acquitted or given a lighter sentence.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Hey guys, welcome back to a new episode of A Bit of a Tangent. I'm your host, Larian Weary. This podcast is called A Bit of a Tangent because I am a neurospicy individual and I tend to take a few detours trying to get to the point of my story. But guess what, y'all? I promise that I always land the plane. Okay, so this is my second episode. I am so excited to have you guys here with me. This episode is a little bit of a heavier topic that has been a really big deal within the black community, and I really wanted to touch on it, give you guys the facts of the case, the facts of the situation, and also give my opinion on everything. So we're going to be covering the child case, the Rick Child case that happened in South Carolina, and we're gonna also be covering the Carmelo Anthony versus Austin Metcalf case that happened in Texas. Before we get into this, I do want to say I do understand that this is a very heavy topic for a lot of people, and I understand that my people are drained. I do understand that it seems like it's something every day, every week, it feels like we're being attacked at all ends, and there's no one really sticking up for us, being there for us. And so, if this topic is a little bit too much, I totally understand. However, I do think it is important information to know, and also I think that's why it is important for us to get out there and vote, and it is important for us to protest and make our voices known and heard. So even if you have to step away, I do invite you to come back and listen. So let's get into it. The Rick Choi incident happened in 2023. He was arrested and charged with murder after fatally shooting 14-year-old Cyrus Karmic Belton. These are the events that led up to the fatal shooting of Cyrus, and then we're gonna get into the aftermath, which would be the case, and him ultimately being acquitted of all charges. Cyrus is a 14-year-old teenager child. He goes into Rick Choi's corner store. They have a policy where you have to sit your book bags or I guess big purses, book bags at the door. So, what does Cyrus do? He takes off his book sack, he sits it at the door. He goes to the cooler where there's drinks, water, whatever. He in the video, um, it's been a minute since I watched the video, only watched it once, and I didn't watch it again. But he goes and it looks like he pulls out the water, but he puts it back. What he does after that, he closes the door, comes around like um those are shelves that's in a corner store. He grabs his book sack and then he leaves. Rick Choi and his son Andy, they believe that Cyrus has stolen some water. And what do they do? They chased him down over 100 yards, and for reference, that's about the size of a football field. They chased this little black boy down over the size of a football field because they thought he stole some water. So, this is what happens they chase him down for that long ass distance, and Ray Choi pulls his gun out and shoots Cyrus in the back, he falls to the ground and he dies. There were people on the scene that saw the shooting occur. I'm not really gonna get into their testimonies. I do recommend that if you would like to hear their point of view, that you definitely do so. But I'm not gonna cover that in this podcast. But overwhelmingly, all of the eyewitness accounts say that Rick Choi shot Cyrus in his back. So, following the death of Cyrus, Mr. Choi is taken into custody and he remains in jail for three years. So from 2023 up until the point he was acquitted, he was in jail. Now, his whole argument, his whole defense was that it was self-defense. So he argued that Cyrus Carmack Belton was carrying a firearm and pointed it at his son, and it was a split-second decision. All he was trying to do was protect his son from this black boy that came into his store who supposedly stole, which it was proven that he didn't steal anything. But this is where in the mindset or supposedly the mindset of Mr. Choi right now. He thought that this black boy came into his store, stole. He chased after him in the pursuit of chasing him. He saw that Cyrus had a firearm on him. Cyrus pointed the gun at Choi's son Andy. In a split second, he was like, Oh no, he can kill my son. I have to protect my son. I am gonna shoot him, I am gonna kill him in self-defense of my son. Pulled out his gun, shot Cyrus in the back. Okay, so now let's get into the prosecutor's argument. So the prosecutor's argument was that because he was running away and got shot in his back, the deadly force was unnecessary. Meaning, because Cyrus was trying to get away from them, he was fleeing from them. The fact that Chow took out his gun, shot him in his back. It wasn't like he shot him in the front, right? Because to me, it would make sense. Oh, Cyrus had a gun on him, which he did. Cyrus had a gun on him, he turned around with the gun, pointed it at his son. That seems like an immediate threat. Don't that wouldn't that seem like an immediate threat? So it would make sense for Cyrus to have sustained a gunshot to his chest, to his abdomen. Did that happen? No, he got shot in his back. Now, I do want to say some of you may be wondering why the prosecutor is not mentioning the fact that Choi chased Cyrus the length of a football field. Well, in South Carolina, it is not illegal for a shop owner to chase after someone they perceive to have shoplifted. It is within their right to chase them down and lawfully detain them, which to me is a problem within itself. It's not safe, it's never that serious. You have insurance. Also, another big part and another big discussion of the case is the fact that there was only one choice for the jury to make, it was only murder. There wasn't a lesser sentence. Um, and I would like to think that if manslaughter was offered, that possibly Cyrus would have gotten some form of justice, but with the way these court cases have been, we don't know. So now let's get into how murder convictions are conducted in South Carolina. So in South Carolina, they don't have how a lot of states have first degree, second degree, I think some states even have third degree, if I'm not mistaken. In South Carolina, it's either murder or it's manslaughter. Because of Child's acquittal, people are calling for there to be a change in legislature. Because the argument is that if the jury had been given more choices to charge him a first degree, second degree, third degree, or even if manslaughter was put on the table, that maybe he wouldn't have gotten acquitted. The way that a murder conviction works in South Carolina, it really depends on how much time you get. That's really the only difference. The way that a murder conviction works in South Carolina is based on different circumstances, so it's just a regular murder case. Okay, if they are convicted, they have to serve a minimum of 30 years in prison up to life. Now, there are aggravating circumstances, and this is determined by the jury, where and these aggravating circumstances could be a prior conviction. Maybe they killed instead of killing one person, they killed multiple people, or they killed a law enforcement. This is what the jury would kind of take into account and be like, Oh, there are some extra aggravating circumstances. So instead of the mandatory 30 years, the jury may then just decide to give the person life, okay? And then there's capital murder. Now, capital murder is decided by the state, and it's because the state have has identified aggravating circumstances, which is what we mentioned earlier, prayer convictions, yada yada yada, and the state seeks for the death penalty, and so that's really a big problem when it comes to people that are doing such heinous acts, like chasing children down, mistaking that they stole something when they didn't, and then shooting them in the back. And the only option is murder or manslaughter, and manslaughter wasn't on the table. Now that I have submitted to you guys all the facts of the case, or maybe not all of the facts, but kind of like a summary. Let's kind of get into what everyone's feelings are around the case, my own feelings, even though I kind of gave y'all a little bit of my feelings as I was describing all of this to you. I did not sound very impartial. That really wasn't my um wasn't my goal anyway, so I didn't fail. Of course, the family was very upset with the ruling. The family is looking to file a civil suit against Rick Choi, and I hope that through the civil suit they are able to get some sort of justice, but honestly, nothing is gonna bring their baby back, nothing, and so prayers go out to the family, and this is one of the things where I want to say prayers without work is dead because there is some changes that needs to be made in the state of South Carolina. I just don't think that we are in a time where I don't think there ever really was a time where the way they do murder convictions is acceptable. I don't think that it is fair for the families who have lost a loved one. I don't think it is fair to the jury who have to make these very tough decisions. I just don't think that that should have been the case. Unfortunately, it was. And sometimes we have situations like this that bring about change. So although Cyrus's family was not able to get justice via a conviction, I hope that his story does and his in the circumstances of the case brings about change via legislature. And I hope that they outlaw shop owners being able to chase down people who they think shoplifted. Because not only is it not safe if the person was wrongfully chased, it's also not safe for the shop owner. So, one last time, just prayers to Cyrus's family. A big thing that has been on the internet is the comparison to the 1991 killing of Latasha Harling. She was fatally shot, I think she was fatally shot in the head actually in Los Angeles, and she was shot by an Asian shop owner who thought that she was shoplifting. And just like Chow, the lady who shot Latasha was acquitted. And given these circumstances, there has been a call for black people to boycott Asian hair salons, convenience stores, nail shops, all of the above. And there was this video of this Asian man who was just like, Black people are saying they're not gonna shop in Asian stores anymore. Well, good, we don't need you, we're doing just fine, X, Y, and Z. And to me, it also makes me think about how Asian people were the ones who led the dismantling of DI when it comes well, DI and overall, but it was their argument that they were not getting as many opportunities because black people were getting into these Ivy League schools and taking away opportunities from Asian people, and we see that as the numbers have come out, that black people are still getting into these Ivy League schools around the same percentages as they were before. However, now there has been a decline in acceptances for Asian people, and it's so disheartening because of all the things that the black community has done for the Asian community with the civil rights movement. The fact that Asian people are in this country today, the rights that they have today, is because of the sacrifices, the blood and tears of my ancestors while they look down on us and they see us less than, and your family has been able to progress and overcome because of black people, and there is no acknowledgement of that, there is no gratitude, there is only hatred, and it's just I don't understand it. It's this desire, it's this desire for people of color to aspire to or to get as close as they can to whiteness, and the way to do that is by talking down on black people who have quite literally built this country through their sweat, tears, blood, and there is no acknowledgement, it's just get over it. It was years ago, and honestly, it's it's a parallel, and this is why I love history so much because it often informs not often, it always informs the future, and it always informs the present. If you want to know why shit is the way it is now, look to the past, it will inform everything. The way they use them Asian students to get rid of DEI is the same way. The reason why so many um Asian stores are in black communities is because they did not allow Asian people to be in white communities, and then the work of upholding white supremacy was to also convince Asian people that they were somehow better than people in the black community, where they decide I don't want to fight with black people, I want to fight for my proximity to whiteness, and it's very disheartening, but we don't get the recognition. We end up in situations like this, where a young black boy could be running away from two people that are fucking chasing him the length of a football field trying to get away, and an Asian man takes out his gun and shoots him in the back when he was running away, and he gets acquitted of all charges. Now, yes, the argument can be made. The jury should have been offered first degree, second degree, third degree, manslaughter should have been on the table. It was not, and that could be the fault of the prosecutor. We can make that argument, but what can we say about 1991? What can we say about the issue with Carmelo Anthony and Metcalf? I'm gonna take a breather and we're gonna pick up on the Metcalf case. So let's get into that one. Okay, so I am gonna do things a little bit differently for the Carmelo Anthony versus Austin Metcalf case. What I'm gonna do is I'm gonna read the testimonies of the eyewitnesses differently from how I did with Chow's case, and there's a reason why I'm doing it this way because I want to break down what happened based on the eyewitness accounts. Okay, let's go. So the incident that led to the death of Austin Metcalf, this occurred on April 2nd, 2025. This was at a high school track meet and from start to finish, meaning from Anthony sitting under memorial's tent to first responders coming to the scene. All of this occurred in the period of around 11 minutes. These testimonies that I'm reading to you is based on eyewitness accounts. It started raining. Anthony attended um Centennial High School, they didn't have a tent. So what did Anthony do? He saw someone that he was familiar with, he saw them under a tent. It's raining. What does he do? He goes under the tent. The tent was a designated tent for memorial high school. Anthony was then asked to leave several times, but he refused. I want to make it clear that he was not just asked to leave by Metcalf, he was also asked to leave by other students. And based on the eyewitness accounts, they said that he called them a bunch of pussies. He was like, You're not gonna do nothing about it. It's raining, I'm staying under this tank. I'm here, like you're not gonna move me. And he was very much so stubborn about it. He was like, No, I'm not leaving. It's raining, I'm not leaving. And he said that you're gonna have to move me. You want me to leave under this tent? You're gonna have to move me. At this point, Metcalf approaches Anthony, goes from all of these students kinda going at Anthony to Metcalf being like, Yo, you need to move. And he's kind of getting into Anthony's personal space. So Anthony reaches into his backpack, letting them know I got something. But according to the people that were testifying during the court case, they said that everyone thought that he was bluffing, especially Metcalf. Metcalf was like, You don't have anything in your book pack. What Metcalf does is he shoves Anthony by his shoulders. So, in reaction to Anthony getting shoved by the shoulders, he stands up and he stabs Metcalf in the chest with the object that he told the students about. Now, this object was like a little switchblade, it was 3.5 inches long. And so one of the witnesses, his name is Jalen Matthews. His testimony was that it didn't look like Metcalf was trying to make a fight with Anthony. He said that it appeared that Anthony was the one looking for a fight. Now, this is where I'ma step in. I do not see how you can say the person that was sitting down, hand in the book said, I'm not moving. You touch me, see what happens. And then the person gets in their personal space, shoves them, and you don't see how that is confrontational. Someone getting in your personal space and shoving you, you don't see how you can say that maybe Anthony was being pompous, maybe he had an ego about him, maybe he was like, and y'all not gonna move me. You can say that that irritated you, that that made you feel some type of way, that he shouldn't have been under the tent. You can make that argument, but to say that Anthony was the one looking for a fight and Metcalf wasn't, when Metcalf was the one who pushed him first. You see how that's not clicking to you. I'm trying to follow, but I'm not following there. So after this happens, when Anthony stabs Metcalf in the chest, he runs off within a few minutes. First responders come, the pyramid check his vitals and everything, and he is unresponsive and he lacked a pause. So also during this time, Anthony has ran away. When the police come, he goes up to the cops and he basically is like, I did it, I stabbed him. And from the beginning, his whole reasoning was he pushed me, he got in my personal space, and so I defended myself. Now, he did not know the state of Metcalf, he did not know that it was he was in bad shape, but the Is something that of course he later found out, and according to eyewitness accounts, he started to break down. So now I want to get into the defenses argument. Metcalf was significantly larger than Anthony. If I remember correctly, I think Anthony is 5'8. The Metcalf twins, because it was twins, he was 6'1, I believe. And he had at least 50 to 60 pound advantage over Anthony. The defense also highlighted that Anthony was seated with a backpack in his lap, surrounded by nearly 20 students that was fussing at him, telling him that he needed to leave, basically establishing that he felt threatened. It was just him 5'8, with this tall white guy standing over him, telling him that he needed to leave, being the ringleader of everybody, and shoved him. Okay, so now let's get into the prosecution's argument. So the prosecution's argument was that Anthony was the aggressor and that he taunted the students, including Metcalf. The statement that they were really focusing on was the fact that he said, Touch me and see what happens. The other argument that they made is that his action of killing Metcalf was not justified. They said the fact that Metcalf simply shoved him that did not justify him to apply lethal force. They said that he could have simply walked away, notified a coach, but instead he chose to escalate the verbal altercation and made it a lethal altercation. I do want to say it was not just a verbal altercation, it was a verbal altercation that became a physical altercation because Metcalf decided to get into his personal space and shove him. So let's not negate the fact that Metcalf physically assaulted Anthony. Okay, let's continue. Another argument that they made was that Anthony killing Metcalf was premeditated, and the way they established this is by highlighting that Anthony brought a knife to a school event in which all weapons were prohibited, and he put his hand inside of his bag before Metcalf even made physical contact. That was the defenses argument. What I'm gonna say is I don't see how that could be seen as pre-meditated. It honestly seems like a reach to me. Because honestly, if that's the case, Texas is an open carry state. The argument can simply be made for people who come to school events and they have their gun on them. If something pops off and they were to take their gun out and shoot it, would Texas then say that it was premeditated? Will they then convict that person? Especially if it's a white person. What's the difference between a knife? Mind you, the knife is not an illegal weapon. Illegal on school grounds, yes, but not an illegal weapon. And if a gun is registered, it's the same thing, it's legal, just not legal on school, or and it's not even a question of is it legal on school grounds? Because technically it's still legal, it's just not prohibited on school grounds. So I gave you the testimonies of the eyewitnesses, I gave you the argument for the defense and the argument for prosecution. Anthony was facing a sentence between five and ninety nurses. I do want to say that the that the defense did also argue that Anthony acted out of sudden passion. If the jury was to accept this, his maximum possible sentence would have been capped at 20 years, and the jury ultimately rejected this claim. We're gonna get into the jury. It was 12 jurors, none of which were black. It was reported that at least three of them were POC, Asian and Indian. Although Indian is Asian, but I think what they mean is maybe uh Chinese, Vietnamese, along the lines of that. And so there were black people that were in jury selection. However, the prosecution dismissed all eligible black jurors, and the reason for doing so is they claimed that the potential jurors were struck because they were educators, and they felt that it was a conflict of interest, and so the defense did object to this. However, Judge John um however Judge John Rogers Jr. overruled in the strike for the three black jurors was allowed to stand. There's this argument of a jury of your peers, and there is this argument because there were no black jurors. Was Carmelo Anthony tried by a jury of his peers? I think the answer to that is no. They ended up finding him guilty, and they found him guilty after three hours of deliberating. They found him guilty of first-degree murder the next day. Turned around and sentenced him to 35 years in prison. Now, in Texas, he is required to serve at least half of the 35 years, so he will have to be in jail for at least 17 and a half years before he can become eligible for parole. Now I'm gonna keep going. Now that I've given you the facts and what happened with the Anthony and Metcalf case, I want to take you guys' attention to another case that happened in 2022. This is the Case and Allison case versus Jose Ramirez. So this happened in the high school bathroom and it ended with Jose Ramirez losing his life from being stabbed. Evidence from the trial showed that there were multiple conversations of them planning to meet up to fight. It was conversation on Snapchat. They had come to the conclusion that they were gonna fight on at least, I want to say, two to three different occasions. So on the day that Jose lost his life, Case and Allison he was cornered by multiple individuals. However, he punched first and then a fight ensued, and it ended with him stabbing Jose Ramirez and taking his life. So when charges were originally brought up, he was originally charged with first-degree murder. However, after reviewing the evidence, the jury decided to find him not guilty of murder, nor did they find him guilty of manslaughter. Instead, they convicted him of criminally negligent homicide. Under Texas law, the maximum sentence for criminally negligent homicide is 10 years. I just want to kind of go over the facts with you again, and we're gonna compare this with what happened with Carmelo Anthony. And I do want to say, because I did not say this, Kaysen Allison is, you guessed it, white. So not only was he also a high school student, not only did he also stab someone and was charged with first degree murder, but in Kasen's case, the jury did not find him guilty of murder, did not find him guilty of manslaughter, they found him guilty of something lesser than both of those. They charged him with a criminally negligent homicide, and he was only sentenced 10 years in prison for fatally stabbing his 18-year-old classmate. And this was something that was planned. They talked about this. He knew that a fight was coming, and what did he do? Had a knife with him. Wouldn't that make you think that it was premeditated? But the jury did not. A jury of his peers found that it was only negligent homicide. Ain't that about a bitch? And so now we're gonna move on from the case and Allison trial. We're gonna we're gonna leave that behind and we're gonna go back in time. To February 26, 2012, when 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was unarmed and he was killed by George Zimmerman. You know what Trayvon was doing? Minding his business, eating some Skittles, and George Zimmerman thought that he looked suspicious. And what happened to George Zimmerman people? He was acquitted of all charges, and one of the biggest things was because Florida is a stand your ground state. You know where else is stand your ground? You guessed it. Texas is a stand your ground. So now that we have all of this information, now that we got it, fold it up, put it in your pocket, like it's a pill, consume it, drink a little water to kind of like really get it down in there inside of you. Do we not see the disparity? Because my thing is, why is it that when it comes to white people, when it comes to people of color, now speaking to the case with Choi, why does it seem that they get to claim self-defense, especially when it's against a black body and get acquitted of all charges? But when a black boy who is sitting under a tent, and yeah, he's a teenager, of course you can't tell him nothing. Of course, he's feeling like he missed a you can't tell me, you can't move me. That is not out of the ordinary behavior for a teenage boy. That constituted someone getting into his space, pushing him, assaulting him. That behavior was okay, and he cannot claim self-defense. So his lawyer is going to ask for an appeal, and a lot of people think that it's gonna be on the basis of the jury selection, which I think he should go for that. But also, I want to say this it is gonna be very, very, very hard to get an appeal on that. You wanna know why? Because the Supreme Court said that it was okay to redraw the congressional maps in Texas, well, in Louisiana, but I think they also got approval for it in Texas, and they said, as long as the reason for redrawing those maps isn't because of race. How can you prove that it is? Because all they have to say is, oh, it wasn't. How can you fight that? How can you legally prove that? Even though we all know that's the case, even though we all are aware that that is the case, how can we prove it? I think that they should file an appeal. I think that should be a part of it, even though I feel like it's very weak. I think they should also now see. I don't really know how appeals work, but let's say let's let's just say that I do. I think that if you can introduce case law, I would 100,000 percent, especially because it is in Texas, oh, we bringing up that case and Allison trial, we bringing it up, and not only that, I think we need to discuss stand your ground. I think we should talk about it, and I think we need to also, if anything, to talk about how do we explain self-defense? How do we explain self-defense when George Zimmerman got off? How do we explain self-defense when Caseon Allison when when the jury knocked down his charge all the way to neck negligent homicide? How do we do that? And this is where we are calling for new legislature, especially when it comes to picking a jury, because that was unfair. So we are coming to an end of this podcast, and I want to say this because I want to make this clear. Yes, they are young adults, but they are not adults, they are teenagers because this could have been prevented had the adults been doing their jobs. I do not think that it would have been fair for Carmelo Anthony to be acquitted of his charges. I think that a more suitable charge would have been to charge Carmelo with manslaughter, which the jury was offered. They decided not to go with that. I think that he should have been sentenced to 10 years, similar to that of Casey Allison, because I think that although I can believe that yeah, he was acting all you know, move me, make me move. I don't care what y'all are saying, this, this, that, and the third. I can believe that he did that. I can bel because he's a teenager, but you know what? Teenagers are scared, teenagers are depressed, teenagers are going through a lot. I think that he was scared, I think that he was intimidated by Metcalf. And I think that in the moment, it's just like this guy is over me. He's a white guy, and he is trying to tell me what to do, and he's trying to intimidate me. You ain't gonna intimidate me. I'ma stand up for myself. You put your hands on me, I have this knife in my bag, and I'm gonna use it so everybody can see that I ain't no punk. I feel like that was what was going through his head, and I am sorry that that is something that he had to go through, and that's something that he had to experience. And I'm sorry that society makes it seem like men, little boys cannot feel fear that they have to show that they are strong all the time, because that is an issue with the patriarchy, and in that moment, I think that he was like, I have to defend myself and show that I ain't no punk and ain't no white boy finna finna show me up, and I do not think that he meant to kill him, but he did. So, do I think that he should get jail time? Yes, all that being said, I think that he deserves jail time, but I do not think he deserved to be charged with first degree murder. I do not think he believed to get 35 years. I believe his sentence should have been I feel like 10 years would be appropriate. And y'all, that's all I got. That's all I got. I also would like to say I was speaking with my mom about this, and he's actually not too far removed from people that I know. It was this older lady. I used to think that she was white growing up, she was a black woman from Bogalusa, Louisiana, going to Antioch. Everybody called her grandma. She made the best, when I tell you, the best cookies, she made the best Dissy cups, and she's related to Carmelo Anthony. Carmelo Anthony's father was her grandson, either her grandson or her great-grandson, and she died many years ago, probably back in probably back in 07. Very wonderful, beautiful lady. She played the piano. He comes from a good family, she was such a sweet lady, and I don't have that many memories of her, but I remember you remember how people treated you, and you remember how people made you feel. And so, prayers to the Metcalf family, and prayers to the Carmelo Anthony family. Because no, Metcalf did not deserve to die, he didn't, and Anthony deserved a fair trial and to be tried by his peers, and he was not, and so now where do we go from here? Is there a light at the end of the tunnel? And y'all, I believe that there is, but I think that right now we are so deep in the tunnel, we are so deep in it, and it is so all-consuming, it's just exhausting. It's exhausting because that attorney in the child case, he was good. The way he was questioning Andy, and he was stuttering on that trial, on that stand, I was like, they got to. They got to find that man guilty. But you know what came into my mind? The case from 1991, the fact that Latasha was shot in the head, and that Asian lady was acquitted. That came to my head when it seems like, oh for sure, oh for sure they gonna find him guilty. But then you gotta think about Latasha. You gotta think about the situation with George Zimmerman, you gotta think about how black Americans are treated in this country, and there it is. That's all I got for y'all. I did want to end it with something light. I did have a joke, but it kind of it seems a little um, it seems a little inappropriate for this. I was like, let me lighten the mood with this joke. We're not gonna do the joke. I just want to say thank you guys so much for watching. I do appreciate it. I am still learning, I am still trying to perfect the sound, I am still trying to do what I can. I do want to have a vulnerable moment with you guys and just say that I'm still I want to be a good podcaster, but I'm trying. There is a lot of stuff that I have to edit, it was a lot of ums, it was a lot of dead space. But I thank you guys for listening all the way through, anyways. Stick with me. Each episode will be better and better and better and better. So, yeah, you can find this podcast wherever you listen to podcasts. You can go Apple Podcasts, Spotify. I think I am on Amazon Music as well. Wherever you listen to podcasts, that's where a bit of a tangent is. Okay. If you want to connect with me on socials, you can follow me at Larian L-A-R-I-O-N dot weird. I'm sorry, dot W at Instagram. You can also follow my Instagram, it's Larian I-T-S. That Instagram is dedicated to my website, it's Larian.com. There I post weekly blogs. They're posted every Tuesday, and this podcast is posted on there every Friday as well as all apps, or wherever you find your podcast, this is I'm there. Okay, you'll find it on Friday. And lastly, you can follow me on TikTok at Larian W, any social media site. Type in Larian W or Larian Weary. I'ma pop up. You're gonna see my big beautiful face. Follow your girl, show me some love. And like I said in the beginning, I'll go on a few tangents, but I'll always land that plane. So I hope I land the plane for you guys today. Please go ahead and rate this podcast. Give me five stars. You can always email me by going to my website, letting me know what you thought of this week's episode or any past episodes or any future episodes. Thank you. Y'all have a good one.