Woman gets 50+ years for murder at Wichita bikini bar
WICHITA, Kan. (KSNW) – A Wichita woman will be almost 90 years old before she gets out of prison. On Monday, a judge sentenced her to the Hard 50 for a murder outside Baby Dolls bikini bar in 2020.
Last August, a jury found Autumn Metcalf, 34, guilty of first-degree murder and solicitation to commit first-degree murder in the death of 33-year-old Joe Wheeler III.
Metcalf and Wheeler were working at Baby Dolls, 4900 N. Arkansas. On the night of Aug. 24, 2020, witnesses told police the two were arguing for up to two hours.
Later, Wheeler was found shot to death inside a Jaguar in the parking lot. Metcalf was arrested and charged two years later.
Some Kansas lawmakers want to end daylight saving time, how do some Kansans feel?
On Monday, District Judge Eric Williams sentenced Metcalf to the Hard 50 for the first-degree murder charge. It means she will be in prison with no parole eligibility until 50 years have passed.
The judge sentenced her to 61 months (5 years) for solicitation to commit first-degree murder. The sentences are to run consecutively, meaning that if she is granted parole after 50 years, she must then serve the 61-month sentence.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
These 13 Fake Stories Were Made by AI— and Folks Are Falling for Them Left and Right
It's no secret artificial intelligence is slowly becoming a part of our everyday lives, but that's all the more reason to know what's real and what's fake. In the era of misinformation and disinformation, it's time we take a look at some of the most shocking news headlines in recent times and really evaluate the truth behind it all. Now, The Root is diving deep into the world of AI deepfakes and ultimately, the consequences. These 13 stories serve as cautionary tales for all of us before AI becomes inescapable. Did any of these fake stories fool you??? (Be honest.) President Donald Trump faced backlash after giving 60 white South Africans— better known as Afrikaners— refugee status in the country. But after the murder of a South African woman broke headlines, many speculated her killer husband was one of Trump's refugees. This, according to is a blatant lie. In truth, Kim Towne, a South African born woman, was allegedly killed by her husband Alexander Towne. The two married in 2021 after meeting in Dubai. Alexander is a U.S. citizen, as confirmed by his own family. AI has even made its way into the classrooms. In January, former Pikesville High School principal Eric Eiswert sued Baltimore County Public Schools after he was fired last year. Originally, Eiswert was believed to be the voice in an audio recording spewing racist slurs and antisemitic hate, according to CBS News. He was accused of saying 'ungrateful Black kids' and more… but, it turns out, the recording was a fake, created by AI technology in the school. Now, Eiswert wants $75,000 in damages. As we previously reported, 17-year-old Austin Metcalf died in his brother's arms after being allegedly stabbed by another high school senior, Karmelo Anthony, in Texas. The case, which hasn't gone to trial yet, set off a massive wave of misinformation, including fake details about Metcalf's death certificate and autopsy. As CBS News reported, a fake X account posing as the Frisco Police Chief began sharing fake details about the investigation online. Then, a counterfeit autopsy report surfaced on Facebook, claiming drugs were involved in Metcalf's death. Adding on to the chaos surrounding the polarizing case, rumors began swirling that the Anthony family bought a new home and lavish vehicles with money they received on GoFundMe. Anthony's mother, Kayla Hayes, spoke during a press conference, denying everything. 'I don't know why we are being targeted and discriminated against before a fair trial,' she said. 'Our son deserved the same rights under the law that everyone is afforded to.' After almost two decades of being the target of racist, misogynistic and often homophobic attacks, former First Lady Michelle Obama made headlines this year when a clip from her podcast was taken out of context, fueling the baseless debate about whether Obama was born male. She was talking to comedian Marlon Wayans about his journey as a parent. She said to him, 'You are being a role model for dealing with a child that's transgender… And that warms my heart, particularly as a Black Man.' Of course, MAGA and Obama haters took this as an admission, but in fact, Obama was simply referring to Wayans— the only Black man in the room! Even in times of disaster, leave it to the racists of the world to find a way to be outraged. During the height of the California fires in January, video clips showed Black men carrying bags, TVs, and other valuables out of a house in the fire's path. Soon, rumors swirled that the Black people caught on camera were looting the home, taking advantage of the desperate situation. But the truth is the men were helping a woman move her things from her house. She reportedly had three children and a dog, according to Snopes. Out of all the deepfakes on this list, this one surely takes the cake. On X, a MAGA page falsely claimed Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. endorsed Trump's second term, and he urged Black people to vote for Trump, claiming he did 'more for the Black community than any other president.' It soon got over 10 million views. 'It's vile, fake, irresponsible, and not at all reflective of what my father would say,' Bernice King said in response. 'And you gave no thought to our family.' During election season last year, several AI pictures and videos of the president with groups of Black people began making its way around the internet. Of course, they were all fake. The co-founder of Black Voters Matter said the counterfeit images were pushing a 'strategic narrative' designed to show Trump as popular in the Black community, according to BBC. Following a touchy game against the Chicago Sky in May, several folks on social media ran with the rumor that Indiana Fever star Caitlin Clark filed a defamation lawsuit against an ESPN analyst named Monica McNutt. The fake suit came after fans claimed Clark 'had enough' of being misrepresented in the media, according to MSN News. Short answer? No, Eddie Murphy did not testify in Sean 'Diddy' Combs' federal trial, but last month, rumors flooded Facebook suggesting otherwise. Catchy headlines like 'I Left Hollywood Because of Diddy!' surely fooled some folks online. But the truth is Murphy has no connection to the ongoing case against Diddy. In the words of Trump, this claim is also 'fake news.' Last week, Simone Biles got into a heated debate over the issue of transgender rights in sports. Her opponent, as we previously reported, former competitive swimmer Riley Gaines, began the debate following Trump's ban on transgender athletes. Soon, rumors began that Biles' role in the back and forth on X resulted in her being suspended, which is not true. We all remember where we were when we heard the tragic news that NBA legend Kobe Bryant, his daughter Gianna 'Gigi' Bryant, and eight others died in a helicopter crash. Chaos soon took over, and misinformation flooded headlines around the globe. The most shocking report said Bryant's former teammate and actor Rick Fox also perished in the crash, which was obviously not true. Fox responded to the fake news saying, 'We're blessed to have had the time we had with Kobe. A city is mourning, a family's mourning. We're all mourning… but it's hard to deal with because it shook a lot of people in my life.' Back in 2017, folks were scrambling after several reports that President Trump had plans to rename Black History Month, according to Snopes. The February holiday is federally observed, but after Trump's anti-immigration antics and detailed history of racist, divisive remarks, many feared he'd set his sights on the Black celebration… Well, as we know eight years later, that didn't happen.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Woke police chiefs whinge about underfunding when the real problem is their warped priorities
Readers of this newspaper will, throughout its long history, have been among the most ardent supporters of the police. We are traditionally pro law and order and take a dim view of rotters. It feels like that time is well and truly over. Monday's main Telegraph story, in advance of Wednesday's spending review by Rachel Reeves, which reported the concerns of senior officers that the police service is 'broken' and that underpaid and overworked personnel are leaving in droves because of funding cuts, attracted well over two thousand comments. They ranged from 'Diddums' to 'It's all your own stupid fault' with a good deal of colourful hostility in between. Honestly, you would struggle to find more derogatory remarks among the police's long-running foes at The Guardian. I noticed a similarly unsympathetic reaction a week ago when Met chief Sir Mark Rowley protested that police would have to choose which crimes to investigate if they didn't get more cash. As if the public, until now, had enjoyed a superb and rapid response to its burglaries, muggings, car, bike and phone thefts and our town centres positively thrummed with the purposeful presence of bobbies on the beat. 'Yes, Sir Mark, times must really be hard if you can only send six officers to arrest a retired police volunteer over a single tweet,' sneered one disgruntled taxpayer, perfectly capturing the mood of seething resentment. This collapse in trust is as precipitous as it is shocking. A widespread feeling has clearly taken hold that police are no longer doing the job we expect them to do, while interfering in things that are none of their damn business. The story of the London couple who were obliged last week to 'steal back' their own car after being told by police they did not know when they would be able to investigate thieves who took the Jaguar away on a flat-bed truck (but do call 101 if you find it, they were told) presents a snapshot of a frustrated public having to take the law into their own hands like a group of extremely polite, Emma Bridgewater-owning vigilantes. While many physical crimes go largely ignored, activist constabularies are doing a roaring trade in online offences. The preposterous yet sinister non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs), an Orwellian development of the College of Policing back in 2014, are frequently cited by police critics, as is the clampdown on free speech which is increasingly used to suppress popular discontent about things like the annual £4.7 billion bill to keep migrants in hotels and look after them. Those of us who, for some strange reason, think it's outrageous to spend the equivalent of every single penny in tax paid by the population of Manchester on accommodating tens of thousands of young males who broke into our country, used to be called 'racists'. But I see we have got a promotion, ladies and gentlemen. According to Prevent [a counter-terrorism programme], we are no longer racists, we are 'terrorists'! If we dare to express doubts about uncontrolled immigration and lack of integration, that is. That's the same Prevent which failed to prevent Axel Rudakubana slaughtering a dance class of little girls. And which, according to a 2023 report by Sir William Shawcross, concentrates too much on the largely mythical 'far Right' and not enough on Islamist terror. The College of Policing, I am reliably informed, encourages the same delusional appeasement of the group which poses by far the biggest threat to our national security. The criminalising of the white indigenous population, running in parallel to the woke appeasement of actual criminals, goes some way to explaining this new cordial loathing of the police, I think. Unbelievably, over 60 of our fellow citizens are slapped with an NCHI every single day for 'hateful' thoughts or conduct, many of them Monty Pythonesque in their absurdity. While senior police moan about Home Secretary Yvette Cooper not winning them a big enough payout in the spending review, there seem to be adequate funds to arrest and stigmatise law-abiding people. Only this week, I got a very worried email from a reader, Carolyn, who had complained to the police about a man who has been camping for several weeks in the park where her children play. The surrounding area stinks of urine and faeces and there are scattered remnants of drug use. When Carolyn and other mums walk past they have seen the man put his hand down his trousers to play with himself. The camper's appearance suggested to her that he was an African migrant. 'Using the term 'migrant' therefore did not strike me as anything other than a fair assumption,' says Carolyn. Uh-oh. Obviously, in the bonkers world of PC policing it will now be the anxious lady who complained about a threat to her community who is warned about causing trouble. 'It would seem that any offence caused to me is secondary to the offence of Hate Crime,' Carolyn says. Correct. An officer emailed Carolyn to say that police did not have the powers to remove the tent from the park. 'With regard to the hand down the trousers,' he said, 'Many people from all different backgrounds do this as a cultural/social trend and have done for a while, we often see members of the public doing this all around the city. We will speak with him about this though and advise him of the perception this could cause. I also suggest you reframe (sic) from referring to him as a 'migrant' and making comments about 'Are we paying him to take the proverbial out of us all?'… These can be seen as derogative (sic) terms and possibly a hate crime, especially when you probably know nothing about him.' If you seek a perfect illustration of why the police service is 'broken' and officers are deserting in droves, look no further than this jaw-dropping inversion of good and bad guys. Intimidating man from alien culture seemingly exposing himself in public and peeing, crapping and doing drugs where your kids play? Completely fine, culturally appropriate, nothing to be done about it. Englishwoman suggests the man is a 'migrant' who is taking advantage of our absurdly generous system? Oh dear, oh dear – your hurty words will be taken down, Madam, and used in evidence against you. Now, it's a fair bet that many of the public-spirited young people who aspire to become police officers still think it is Carolyn's side they should be on. A rookie error, I'm afraid. 'Recruits who join the force don't realise the police are so captured,' a senior source tells me. Police retention has been a problem for a long time. It's got much worse since the higher echelons subscribed to the anti-white Critical Race Theory and adopted a witless, Leftist ideology that would have been abhorrent to their predecessors. The number of resignations in the police started to exceed the number of retirements nationally around 2023. What this means in practice, as I was told after Essex Police came to my own door on Remembrance Sunday, is that many officers now lack the experience and maturity to make common-sense decisions and bin spurious allegations of racial hatred that flatter the identity-politics obsessions of their superiors. 'It's not uncommon for uniform shifts to be about 50 per cent probationers, and they might be running with an acting sergeant barely out of his probationary period (two years) in some cases,' warns my source. The Conservatives' decision, in 2020, to lower the application age to 17 (to join at 18) as part of their training means that a lot of young people without much life experience, who don't know what they're letting themselves in for, find policing a nasty shock to the system. Once they're in, probationers have to cope with complicated, badly-designed computer systems that add hours to already heavy workloads. They have very little time to conduct inquiries and pick up more and more stressful cases, meanwhile having to deal with the aggressive, ever-more-volubly-entitled, human-rights-aware dregs of our society. After all that, if you can still muster the courage to be a first-class constable who fiercely defends the public against wrong 'uns but swears a bit and leaves violent offenders feeling they weren't treated with enough dignity then expect your Pontius Pilate of a chief constable to throw you under the Hurty Feelings bus. That is exactly what happened to Lorne Castle, a Dorset officer who has twice won a national bravery award, including one for rescuing an elderly woman from a swollen river in 2023. The 46-year-old father of three was dismissed without notice for gross misconduct after bodycam footage captured him trying to arrest a teenager who was believed to have assaulted an elderly man (the boy, who later turned out to be carrying a knife). If you watch the footage, you can experience the frightening, febrile atmosphere in which Lorne Castle was trying to carry out his thankless task. He shouted and swore, telling the lad: 'Stop resisting or I'm going to smash you.' A veteran officer tells me that 'it looked like a good arrest'. But a panel found PC Castle did not treat the teenager with 'courtesy' or 'respect', and Dorset Police said 'his shouting, swearing, finger pointing, taking hold of the boy's face and throat and suggested use of leg restraints was not necessary, reasonable or proportionate'. The force said no further action was taken against the teenager – of course it wasn't! – but he was issued with an out of court disposal for possessing the knife. I ask you, why would anybody risk phone seizures, suspensions and months of stress over complaints that usually turn out to be baseless but which see them treated like criminals? While clueless top brass in their woke ivory towers put saving their career before protecting their officers. In my book, a man of the calibre of Lorne Castle is worth more to the people of this country than every chief constable put together. So let us hear no more whingeing about underfunding leading to reduced services and driving officers away. Blame a warped sense of priorities promoted by activist police chiefs, a shameful betrayal of the British bobby and the demonisation of ordinary people for expressing legitimate fears. If the police have lost the support of Telegraph readers, then they are lost indeed. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
‘My jag got stolen and the police did nothing – here's how I got it back'
On television, a crime scene is usually theatrical: chalk outlines, flashing sirens and anxious bystanders whispering behind yellow tape. In reality, (well, my reality anyway) a crime scene is like any other Tuesday morning in leafy west London – just with another car sitting in the space where our Jaguar E-Pace was supposed to be. For a moment, I doubted myself. Had I parked it around the corner? I called my husband Mark who was working (he is a litigator while I am a former lawyer-turned-mediator and coach) to see if he had moved it overnight. When he confirmed he hadn't, we were utterly baffled. This wasn't the first car that had vanished from that spot: about seven years ago our Fiat Abarth had been stolen and, concerned about that, Mark had installed a second immobiliser in the Jaguar on top of the one it came with. This required the driver to press a series of buttons to turn it on – I often had trouble with it so couldn't imagine how a criminal would be able to bypass it. Then we remembered the AirTag. If it was still working, it might show us where it was. Mark opened the app. To his surprise, the car was less than three miles away from our house in Brook Green – on a quiet street in Chiswick called Gladstone Road. It dawned on us that it had indeed been stolen, but that it hadn't gone far. Unsure of what to do, Mark did a quick Google search and then called 999. The police were very busy but said they might send a patrol car at some point – if they did, they would let us know. It was a very uncertain response. Worried that we only had a short window to get the car back before it was gone forever, and desperate to avoid the nightmare of insurance claims, I persuaded Mark that we could investigate for ourselves. We set off in my little Volkswagen Polo, heading to Chiswick. On the nine-minute drive, our natural personalities came out. Mark was cautious and tense: he thinks everything through quite carefully, whereas I am more gung-ho. He grew up in Kent, while I'm a born-and-bred Londoner and have always found it to be an incredibly safe place. I simply couldn't believe that I would be hurt in broad daylight in this city I have always called home. Mark was also worried that people might be hanging around the car while I felt that anyone who steals cars wouldn't want to show their face and so would be unlikely to confront us. In retrospect, I wonder if – as a man – Mark thought he needed to protect me, whereas I didn't feel that responsibility. I just wanted to get the car back as quickly as possible. My biggest fear was that we would find the AirTag abandoned on the tarmac – so much of modern life is about being disappointed, that this seemed the most likely scenario. So when we turned onto the road and saw the Jaguar sitting there, I was delighted. And maybe a little triumphant that our adventure had concluded so well. We inspected the car. Outside, it was untouched, but inside it was a bit of a mess: ripped up carpets and air vents torn apart. Clearly, someone had tried to bypass the immobiliser but failed. Their efforts however, meant the car was now locked; even though we had the keys in our hands, there was no way of getting it home. We stood on the empty street, which had a small block of council flats on one side, for a few minutes before deciding to go back to our house and sort out the problem from there. A couple of hours later, after proving ownership, the Jaguar was delivered on a flatbed by a tow-truck company. Over time, we started piecing together what had happened. The AirTag showed that the car had been in Brook Green at 3.20am, and the neighbours said they had heard a commotion about an hour or two after that, which they had assumed was the binmen coming early, but which must have been the criminals loading the car onto a flatbed. The police had asked us to keep them informed, so we called 101 and told them what had happened. As for fixing the car up, that has been relatively easy – we had to sort out the immobiliser and then put the carpets and the air vent back as they were. The incident occurred last Tuesday and by the weekend, we were driving it to the countryside. I felt slightly icky as we set off, knowing that strangers had been inside, but mostly I was okay. They weren't too disrespectful, and I was grateful for that. What hadn't been made clear was that by fixing it up and then using it, we were destroying evidence. When forensics examined the car a week after the incident, they said there was no hope of finding any usable DNA as far too many people handled it in the interim. Yes, it would have been inconvenient not to use it, but we would have done so if it meant they could have gathered some evidence. Not telling us this was an oversight on the police's part and one I found very frustrating. Still, I am keen not to place too much blame on them. Blame feels good – but it is too simplistic. An officer once told me that it is normal to have 20 urgent calls on a peak night and only two to three people on duty. It is so easy to say that the increase in crime is all the police's fault – but the reality is more complex. The system is broken: there is too much focus on locking people up, but putting them in prison just teaches them how to become better criminals. If you rehabilitate them, then they become better members of society. Sadly, this is not popular with voters - but my hope is that public opinion can change. Mostly, I worry about deterrents. If there are none, crimes like these will only proliferate. The people who stole my car were sophisticated criminals: they knew how to hack an immobiliser and had access to a flatbed. We need to ask whether it is good for society that the police force lacks the funding to investigate them properly – and think seriously about what the consequences of not doing so might be. As told to Melissa Twigg Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
