Prosecutors revealed on Thursday that crucial evidence concerning Karmelo Anthony’s supposed history with knives and violence was deliberately withheld from the jury that ultimately convicted him of murder. This disclosure comes as Anthony seeks to secure a retrial.
During Anthony’s hearing for a new trial, lead prosecutor Bill Wirske brought to light allegations about Anthony’s behavior. According to Wirske, on the morning of the stabbing incident, Anthony’s ex-girlfriend approached his school authorities, expressing fear of him.
Wirske further mentioned that the prosecution had in its possession text messages and other documents they believed demonstrated Anthony’s fascination with violence and knife use. Interestingly, none of these materials made it to the courtroom during the original murder trial.
The prosecutor explained that Anthony’s initial defense team had formed a verbal agreement with the state to exclude any character evidence related to Anthony and others, specifically Austin Metcalf and his brother, Hunter, from being introduced in court.
In a related image, Karmelo Anthony is seen following his transfer to the custody of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, as he is escorted to his assignment at the Pack Unit near Navasota. (Texas Department of Criminal Justice)
Anthony’s new legal team disputes that account, arguing prosecutors did not honor the agreement and that the dispute affected Anthony’s decision whether to testify.
Anthony’s attorneys argued that jurors never heard material they say could have supported his self-defense claim. They pointed to school records, social-media posts and videos alleging prior aggressive behavior by Austin Metcalf and his twin brother.
The defense cited alleged racist language, prior fights and disciplinary incidents, arguing Anthony knew the brothers could be aggressive.
The material was not presented to the original jury, and the court has not made findings on the allegations.
Retired District Judge Michael Chitty is hearing Anthony’s motion for a new trial Thursday, after Judge Sid Harle removed Judge John Roach from Anthony’s remaining trial-court proceedings Wednesday.
Harle found that a reasonable outside observer could question whether Roach appeared impartial after Roach said in a post-trial television interview that the jury “got it right” and defended several of his trial decisions.
File photo of Austin Metcalf, a junior at Memorial High School in Frisco, who was stabbed in the chest allegedly by 17-year-old Karmelo Anthony, a student-athlete from Frisco Centennial High School. (Courtesy Jeff Metcalf)
Roach’s removal is a significant win for Anthony’s new legal team, but it does not erase his conviction or sentence. The far more consequential question is whether Chitty will grant Anthony a new trial.
Metcalf’s father, Jeff Metcalf, said Roach’s removal did not change his view of the case because it did not alter the evidence that led to Anthony’s conviction.
“It’s just one step in a long journey,” Metcalf said Wednesday on “The Will Cain Show.” “It doesn’t really change the facts.”
Anthony, 19, was convicted in June of murdering 17-year-old Metcalf, who he fatally stabbed during an altercation at a Frisco track meet. A Collin County jury sentenced Anthony to 35 years in prison.
Before Thursday’s hearing, an estimated 75 to 100 people gathered outside the courtroom, with some raising their fists as lead defense attorney Russell Wilson arrived. One man wore a Black Panther uniform.
Members of the Anthony and Metcalf families sat on opposite sides of the courtroom. Metcalf’s father greeted Wirske before the hearing, and Anthony entered in a navy suit and tie with his wrists shackled.
Criminal appellate lawyer Brett Ordiway said motions to remove a judge are difficult and uncommon, but a motion for a new trial is a much steeper legal climb.
“Granting that motion wipes out the conviction and the sentence altogether and gives Karmelo Anthony a new trial,” Ordiway told News Media. “It is very, very difficult to win these motions in any case, and I would be surprised if they were successful here.”
Anthony’s attorneys argued Roach could not fairly consider the new-trial request because his public comments addressed the same issues they raise in their motion, including courtroom access.
File photo of Jeff Metcalf with his son, Austin Metcalf, a junior at Memorial High School in Frisco, who was stabbed in the chest allegedly by 17-year-old Karmelo Anthony, a student-athlete from Frisco Centennial High School. (Courtesy Jeff Metcalf)
The motion argues Anthony’s trial was not open enough to the public. Cameras were barred from the courtroom and only 27 seats were available for members of the public.
The new-trial motion also challenges the jury instructions, arguing they limited jurors’ ability to fully consider Anthony’s claim of self-defense.
During Thursday’s hearing, Wilson said the defense would present more than 40 exhibits and at least 12 witnesses. He argued that the access restrictions amounted to an unconstitutional courtroom closure and that Roach made critical decisions outside the formal court record.
Wirske countered that Anthony’s trial lawyers consented to the security and courtroom-access decisions now challenged by the new defense team. He said the parties relied on paper filings and off-the-record discussions because of threats, doxxing and efforts to disrupt the high-profile case.
Accused killer Karmelo Anthony walks out of jail after posting bond. (KDFW)
Mike Howard, Anthony’s former lead attorney, testified that the lawyers and Judge John Roach held more than a dozen off-the-record meetings before trial. Howard said Anthony was not present for those discussions and that no pretrial motions were formally filed because the parties used what he described as an “old-school” system of filing materials directly with Roach.
Howard said the defense discussed waiving some public-trial access because of security concerns, but that no Sixth Amendment waiver was made on the record. He testified that the decision not to use an overflow room was tied to technology concerns, not a specific security threat.
Howard testified that the defense understood its oral agreement with the state to allow Anthony to testify, provided the testimony stayed focused on the confrontation under the tent.
But Howard said that changed on the final day of trial, when prosecutors told the defense that the agreement did not cover a testifying Anthony and argued that the defense had already opened the door to character evidence. Howard testified that the dispute led to a heated break in the proceedings and forced the defense to reconsider whether Anthony should take the stand.
Howard said Roach told the lawyers he did not see a legal way to enforce their agreement. The former defense attorney testified that the uncertainty over what prosecutors could raise on cross-examination affected Anthony’s decision not to testify.
Chitty’s timeline is unusually short. Anthony was sentenced June 9, and Texas rules require a judge to rule on a motion for a new trial within 75 days of sentencing. That deadline falls Monday.
“If the judge does not grant the motion by Monday, then by operation of law, the motion will be denied,” Ordiway said.
If Chitty grants the motion, Anthony’s existing conviction and sentence would be set aside. Ordiway said the case would effectively return to the point before Anthony was convicted and sentenced, allowing Anthony to pursue another jury trial or negotiate a plea agreement.
If the motion is denied, Anthony’s legal fight will continue on direct appeal, a process that differs sharply from the fast-moving new-trial request.
A direct appeal is decided by a three-judge panel of the Texas Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas and can take a year or longer, Ordiway said. Appeals generally focus on legal errors raised and decided in the trial court, while a motion for a new trial gives the trial court an opportunity to correct alleged errors soon after a conviction.
Anthony filed both the recusal motion and his request for a new trial on July 7. Roach referred the recusal request for assignment to another judge under Texas procedure.
News Media has reached out to Anthony’s defense team for comment.