The effort to relitigate an open-and-shut case in Texas provides an excellent reminder of an ancient wisdom: Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.
A jury found that Karmelo Anthony murdered Austin Metcalf, and the defendant got a 35-year sentence. A number of witnesses testified to Anthony’s murder. His defense mainly consisted of attempting to pass it off as self-defense, a claim that turned out to be nonsense. Anthony did not take the stand in his trial, a wise move in itself given the stipulation between prosecution and Anthony’s attorneys to keep character issues out of the trial.
Now Anthony has a new set of lawyers, and they want a new trial based on that “gentlemen’s agreement” and the fact that Anthony did not take the stand. The new defense team has successfully moved to recuse the original trial judge, and both sides argued on the motion for a new trial yesterday. And it became quickly apparent that Anthony’s case may have looked a lot worse without that agreement:
“Witness after witness came in” and said Anthony did it and it was not self-defense, Wirskye said.
The prosecutor said he agreed not to use evidence that showed Anthony had an obsession with guns and knives and that he was angry on the morning of the stabbing.
“He went there that day spoiling for a fight,” Wirskye said about the day of the track meet.
The defense team had information showing that Metcalf used racial slurs in the past and bullied Black classmates, according to Howard and documents shown during Thursday’s hearing.
NBC News undersells the “angry” in this case. His girlfriend had broken up with him shortly before the murder, and Anthony did not take it well. His girlfriend reported him to the school administration after Anthony threatened her and stalked her, warning that Anthony had an obsession with guns and knives:
Karmelo Anthony’s ex-girlfriend reported that he was stalking her hours before he stabbed Austin Metcalf — and he had threatening and violent texts on his phone, the prosecutor revealed at Anthony’s appeal hearing Thursday. …
[Wirskye] told the court Anthony’s high school girlfriend confided to an assistant principal on April 2, 2025 that Anthony was stalking her after a breakup, and that he was obsessed with fights, guns, and knives, according to local outlets at the hearing.
Anthony also sent a picture of the knife and told his ex-girlfriend, “I’m low key on the verge,” Wirskye said.
That was just a few hours ahead of the murder, according to prosecutors. And that changes the entire tenor of the case. The family painted the attack as a panicked response from a black teenager feeling threatened; this makes it look a lot more like an angry young man who went out looking for some sort of revenge after being rejected by his girlfriend and picked a fight he then made fatal.
Why didn’t this come out at trial? Both sides wanted to dial down the racial animus that the Anthony family pushed in an attempt to build support for his defense. The prosecution didn’t want to drag the victim’s name through the mud and put the Metcalf family through any more pain than necessary. The deal allowed room for a lighter sentence if the judge and the jury found mitigating circumstances, which would certainly not have been considered if the full context had been known. While Anthony’s new team complains about the stipulation to leave those factors out, this new information shows that it was a rational and reasonable choice.
Anthony’s decision not to testify is also clearly explicable in that light. It would not have taken much for Anthony to make a claim in direct testimony that would have forced prosecutors to repudiate the agreement and pull out the whole truth on cross-examination. In Texas courts, moreover, judges routinely test defendants on their decision not to testify to create a trial record that kills these types of appeals. It seems highly likely that Anthony personally waived his right to testify on his own behalf in the official trial record after having his rights explained explicitly by the trial judge.
Jonathan Turley agrees, and wonders whether Anthony would be better off dropping a demand for a new trial:
The grounds for the new trial are extremely dubious, as Anthony now suggests that he wants to testify. Such later regrets are common after a conviction, and courts, including this one, anticipate such objections by creating a clear record that the defendant made the decision knowingly and freely.
Ironically, a new trial could bring forth even more damaging evidence. New messages have surfaced showing that Anthony was threatening his former girlfriend and expressing violent ideations just hours before killing Metcalf. …
I do not believe that a new trial is likely based on the failure to testify. There were ample reasons for the “gentleman’s agreement” and the decision to remain silent. Anthony would have faced a withering cross-examination, and much of this evidence of his prior alleged threats and stalking would likely have been brought out for impeachment and rebuttal purposes.
A new trial might result in a longer sentence, too. Anthony’s sentence was based on what appeared to be an unfortunate personality clash. A new trial without the “gentlemen’s agreement” will paint a far more malevolent picture of Anthony as a stalker looking for an excuse to kill someone. Instead of 35 years, Anthony might end up with a life sentence when the next jury looks at this case. Be careful what you wish for.
Addendum: Turley doesn’t think too highly of James Talarico’s ignorant pandering on Charlamagne Tha God’s podcast on jury selection, either:
James Talarico says Karmelo Anthony was convicted because “there were no black members of the jury” and the “system is not working for black Texans.”
Karmelo Anthony stabbed 17-year-old Austin Metcalf to death for absolutely no reason.
And @jamestalarico sides with the killer. pic.twitter.com/kFIPWiMxp2
— Brandon Gill (@realBrandonGill) August 20, 2026
In the Anthony case, challenges to black prospective jurors drew criticism before the trial. However, the prosecutors objected to a number of individuals because they were educators and the crime occurred on school grounds. The ultimate jury was not “all-White” as commonly claimed. It included Asian, Indian, and Hispanic members.
The big question is why Talarico’s talking at all about a supposed “injustice” in a case he admits to knowing nothing about in almost the same breath?
Update: The hearing is still underway, but Nate the Lawyer breaks down the new evidence on both Metcalf and Anthony. The victim is no saint, Nate concludes, but Anthony’s first defense team made the right call. “Karmelo Anthony was a walking felony” before the murder, Nate says, and was a straight-out “thug.” Watch it all:
Editor’s Note: The American people overwhelmingly support President Trump’s law and order agenda.
Help us fight back against the Democrats and Soros-backed DAs that refuse to enforce our laws to hold criminals accountable. Join HotAir VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
