Did the murderers see themselves as victims?

Reparations by other means. 

Why did prosecutors grant young Miriam Carre immunity in the slayings of her adoptive parents, Robin Carre and Dr. Beth Potter?

Miriam Carre

The Dane County District Attorney compiled an impressive tranche of forensic evidence: text messages, cell phone eco-location, street camera videos, etc. Miriam Carre posted selfie photos of her boyfriend Khari Sanford pointing the likely murder weapon, a powerful Glock 357. Topped by the testimony his accomplice, who also awaits sentencing. Did they really need Miriam’s testimony, which feigned total ignorance of the crime?

Classmates at West high school overheard the two lovebirds scheming to lay hands on her parents’ “bands” of money. Other witnesses heard Sanford talk about life insurance policies. Who told him?

So, good on the murdered couple’s adult sons for squeezing Miriam out of any inheritance, ably detailed in today’s Wisconsin State Journal. Teenagers do get crossways with their parents. But not many arrange to yank their girlfriend’s parents out of bed, drive them to a densely wooded place, force them to their knees, and pop a cap behind their ears, then feverishly work their ATM cards for quick cash.

‘Although Miriam may have not been physically present during the murders of her parents, that does not absolve Miriam from accountability.’

Petition to exclude the daughter from her parents’ will (reported here).

The murderous Khari Sanford, Mayor Rhodes-Conway, and activist Katy Farren

Not exactly ‘Bleak House’

The parents lavished separate living quarters and a vehicle on their under-age daughter and boyfriend. Sanford, in addition to shacking with his honey at her parents’ expense, had been given the benefit of an internship at city hall. Sanford was captain of his West high school football team. The two lovebirds hatched their plot during ceramics class. Ceramics class!

Now the money quote from Miriam — adopted out of Guatemala — in a text message to Sanford, a young black man:

“I feel like (my parents) got this white (savior) act going on and, like, feel like they can’t do any wrong.”

“We gon’ change this world, cause it’s time to let our diversity and youth shine over all oppressive systems and rebuild our democracy✊??.”

— Khari Sanford on Facebook a few months before the murders. (Source here.)

In the same edition of our favorite Madison daily newspaper, reporter Mitchell Schmidt inserts this unattributed boilerplate into an unrelated story:

Critical race theory [is] a decades old academic framework used in graduate courses to understand how laws and institutions perpetuate racism. It is not taught in elementary schools, though conservatives have often conflated it with lessons focused on diversity, equity and inclusion.

Tell us, then, from what drain pipe did Miriam Carre and Khari Sanford imbibe their racial hatred — if not from the CRT lesson plan on how “laws and institutions perpetuate racism.” Whether from their school or the culture at large, CRT is not confined to esoteric doctoral dissertations, Mr. Reporter.

If Madison schools are not teaching CRT, they practice it.

If it’s not critical race theory, it’s critical race theory-lite,” says Columbia University professor John McWhorter, author of Woke Racism; “How a new religion has betrayed black America.” McWhorter defines CRT as:

See[ing] white people as potential oppressors and black people as perpetual victims of an inherently oppressive system. This “critical approach has trickled down,” McWhorter writes, “into … education-school pedagogy and administration … and from there migrated … into the way they wind up running schools.

Blaska’s Bottom LineMadisons’ obsession with diversity, equity, and inclusion creates division, grievance, and resentment. CRT taught Miriam Carre, Khari Sanford, and accomplice Ali’jah Larrue that THEY were the victims and white people their oppressor — even if one of them was rescued out of an orphanage in Guatemala and both got to play house rent- and judgment-free. The final irony, Dr. Beth Potter — good liberal that she was — donated money to Freedom Inc. to remove police from schools.

Are we too harsh?

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Critical Race Theory / Identity politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Did the murderers see themselves as victims?

  1. One eye says:

    Miriam Carre was a typical spoiled, entitled teenager. Was it the Madison ethos or poor parenting? Maybe some of both.

    Recall Sanford’s mother’s failed gofundme, imploring that it’s what the murder victims would have wanted. Some piece of work.

    Khari Sanford is the poster child for abortion.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gary L. Kriewald says:

      He’s also the poster child for the outcome of white upper-middle-class white Madison liberals’ notion of “restorative” justice and every other costly harebrained scheme to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. His rant on Facebook shows just how thoroughly he absorbed every hateful doctrine of the left–and then put them into action. Meanwhile, Madison does everything it can to sweep this atrocity under the rug, just as they do whenever the consequences of their wokeness collide with reality. That photo of him in the embrace of the socialist cow in the mayor’s office says it all. If you can look at that without loosing your lunch, your stomach’s stronger than mine.

      Liked by 3 people

  2. WashCoRepub says:

    Highly recommend watching the scene of the conversation between Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) and Teddy in the club in Antoine Fuqua’s film ‘The Equalizer.’


    • One eye says:

      Another recommendation: “Street Smart” with Morgan Freeman as a charismatic pimp with a dark side that can appear in a flash.


  3. arthurwordsmith says:

    Thank you for this news coverage. It is a scandal that Madisonians have forgotten Carre and Potter yet go out of their way to idolize everything associated with the “woke” and BLM activists. If this tragedy did not shock Madison into the reality of the situation, then nothing will.

    “Everything that rises must converge.” Teilhard de Chardin


    Liked by 2 people

  4. Mark+Lemberger says:

    How does DA Ozanne justify immunity to a co conspirator?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bob says:

      The same way DA Ozanne doesn’t prosecute anyone on “felon in possession of a firearm” but wants more gun laws.

      Liked by 3 people

    • brynstane says:

      After bringing no charges against Althea Bernstein, Izzy’s hit his stride. Of course, he perennially runs for re-election with no opposition, so it’s apparently hunky-dory with our fellow Dane County taxpayers.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Cornelius_Gotchberg says:

        “it’s apparently hunky-dory with our fellow Dane County taxpayers.”

        Decidedly, not this one!

        The Gotch

        Liked by 1 person

  5. A Voice in the Wilderness says:

    Too bad Miriam Carre can’t be deported back to Guatemala. She’ll continue living in the wealthiest nation on earth, sopping up the rights and privileges provided.


    • Cornelius_Gotchberg says:

      “She’ll continue living in the wealthiest nation on earth, sopping up the rights and privileges provided.”

      One way to look at it AVitW; another?

      Not only will she get none of the bands of money (whatever the eff that means) she anticipated, but she’ll have to make her own way in life, and that way will forever be illuminated by the big, bright, screaming neon sign of her past.

      IOW, she’s phuqued!

      The Gotch

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Wm. Tyroler says:

    “Why did prosecutors grant young Miriam Carre immunity in the slayings of her adoptive parents, Robin Carre and Dr. Beth Potter?” David asks a great question, and if we had something that approximated an inquisitive media, rather than one that runs interference for the Democratic Party, Ozanne might be pressed hard to supply the answer. But we don’t, and he won’t. Maybe Miriam bore no culpability and maybe the prosecution dearly needed her testimony. Maybe; I surely don’t know. But you’d think the matter sufficiently in question to compel some sort of public airing. Which doesn’t seem to be in the offing.

    Might be worth mentioning though that Miriam may not be out of the woods. I don’t know the terms of the immunity agreement (the linked WSJ story is behind a paywall, so if it’s there, I’m unable to access it). But I’ll take as a given that under the agreement Miriam was required to testify truthfully, and that she in fact bore no culpability for the homicides. In other words, if it’s shown that she lied, or that she was involved in the killings, the prosecutor would be, I assume, able to abrogate the agreement, and charge her. The risk to her, then, of the pending probate challenge is that it may result in exposure to homicide charges. But even then, Ozanne wouldn’t have to issue the charges, especially if he isn’t being pressurized by a complaisant media.

    Well, one other mystery. David alludes to Miriam having “posted selfie photos of her boyfriend Khari Sanford pointing the likely murder weapon,” and it ought be remembered that at the time Sanford was under a deferred prosecution agreement for another crime: so why wasn’t *that* agreement abrogated, and that charge then allowed to proceed? When the photo surfaced a couple of years ago, Ozanne claimed, dubiously I think, that the DPA didn’t bar gun possession so there was nothing he could do. (Background, here: https://www.facebook.com/bill.tyroler/posts/pfbid0dpLdfm8Bs5o9HqLKwmrXWSdtHV8QYfQPQ7VAokEkzHtcdZpzTVdT9rAJSuPQcqYSl.) Again, even a minimally inquisitive media would seek out confirmation; the DPA would be in the court file, and it either did or didn’t contain a gun-ban. If it did, Ozanne should have been pressured to tear up the DPA. If it didn’t, then it might be asked just why, given the current zeitgeist about gun control, there wasn’t such a provision and maybe one should be added to DPAs going forward. Bottom-line: media cheerleading for their party leads to little if any accountability of public officials in one-party rule Dane County.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Cornelius_Gotchberg says:

      Superb analysis, WT!

      The Gotch


    • patrickmoloughlin says:

      On the matter of Miriam having to tell the truth in order to receive immunity, I would think that Sanford’s texted response to her would have sunk her boat. When she complained about her parents being “white saviors” who think they are so superior, Khari Sanford replied, “It’s cool because they gon’ die.”

      So plainly, when she testified that she had no idea he was going to kill them, she was lying.


  7. Mordecai The Red says:

    I read the WSJ article before Blaska posted it and it made my blood boil. Two well-meaning, well-to-do, generous to a fault people get betrayed by two youths that they went out of their way to help and end up dead for it.

    The white savior is a critical race theory construct and perjorative. Khari Sanford and Miriam Potter Carre bought into it and the rest of this destructive mindset to the point that they committed violence against their conjured up oppressors. Beth Potter and Robin Carre are victims of critical race theory.

    There are plenty of white people out there like Potter and Carre who want to help the less fortunate, but this incident sends a clear message that they’ll be viewed as oppressors no matter what they do. It tells them they just can’t win.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Gary L.. Kriewald says:

    Knowing Madison, look for a wing of the proposed Center for Black Excellence [sic] to be named after Khari Sanford.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.