A hearing over whether Karmelo Anthony should receive a new trial has brought previously undisclosed information about both Anthony and 17-year-old Austin Metcalf into public view, adding a complicated new chapter to a case that has drawn national attention since Metcalf was fatally stabbed at a Texas high school track meet in April 2025.
Anthony, now 19, was convicted of murder in June 2026 and sentenced to 35 years in prison. His defense maintained that he acted in self-defense during the confrontation with Metcalf. Anthony’s new legal team is now seeking to overturn that conviction, arguing that decisions made before and during the trial prevented jurors from hearing evidence that could have affected how they evaluated the encounter.
At the center of the new hearing is an unusual off-the-record agreement between prosecutors and Anthony’s original defense attorneys. According to testimony and reporting from CBS News Texas, both sides agreed to keep damaging background information involving Anthony and Metcalf away from the jury and largely out of public proceedings. The apparent goal was to keep the murder trial focused on what happened during the confrontation beneath a team tent at the Frisco track meet rather than turning the case into a broader examination of either teenager’s past.
That information is now coming out.
Records Detail Metcalf’s History of Discipline, Racial Slurs and Alleged Violence
Court records presented during the new-trial proceedings describe a history involving Metcalf that was substantially different from what jurors heard during Anthony’s murder trial.
According to CBS News Texas’ review of the records, Metcalf and his twin brother, Hunter, had previously been caught spray-painting racist and Nazi-related graffiti, including references to the Ku Klux Klan and racial slurs. The brothers received 12 months of juvenile probation in connection with the vandalism. Records also documented multiple instances in which Austin Metcalf allegedly used racial slurs at school, including an allegation that he bullied a Black student in 2023.
The records contain other allegations of aggressive behavior.
In 2018, while still in elementary school, Metcalf and his brother were accused of bullying and assaulting a girl, an incident CBS reported led to Austin’s arrest. In another reported incident in 2024, Metcalf allegedly knocked a female student to the ground and punched her in the stomach during an argument.
School disciplinary records also described repeated problems involving profanity and anger. Metcalf reportedly received in-school suspensions, was banned from attending basketball games for a season after yelling profanity at a player and met with a counselor on multiple occasions in 2024 concerning anger and rage during a football game.
Another school incident reportedly resulted in a suspension after Metcalf and another student discussed bringing a gun to school.
The newly disclosed information does not determine what happened during the fatal confrontation, nor does a person’s disciplinary history legally justify killing them. But for Anthony’s attorneys, the records raise a different question: whether jurors deciding a self-defense claim should have been allowed to know more about Metcalf’s history and alleged behavior.
Prosecutors Reveal Anthony’s Own Troubling History
Prosecutors responded with an extensive collection of records concerning Anthony, demonstrating why the original agreement may have been attractive to both sides.
According to CBS News Texas, prosecutors submitted a 75-page filing containing text messages, school records, police reports and information extracted from Anthony’s cellphone.
Among the most significant revelations are allegations involving Anthony’s relationship with his girlfriend. On the morning of Metcalf’s killing, prosecutors said Anthony’s girlfriend reported to school personnel that Anthony had been engaging in stalking behavior, including driving past her home and refusing to accept the end of their relationship.
Prosecutors also presented messages in which Anthony allegedly threatened his girlfriend with violence, including threats involving firearms and a knife. Other messages reportedly showed Anthony discussing fights and admitting that he had punched girls in the face.
Anthony’s school history also contained repeated fighting incidents. While attending school in Louisiana, records reportedly showed numerous suspensions for fighting. In messages disclosed by prosecutors, Anthony described liking to punch people and claimed that when he became angry he could lose control.
Other messages introduced by prosecutors included discussions about guns, robbery, vandalism and violence. In one 2023 exchange, Anthony reportedly wrote about shooting up a school before subsequently saying he would never actually do it. Prosecutors also cited messages suggesting Anthony carried firearms and attempted to bring a weapon into the State Fair of Texas.
Authorities additionally said Anthony’s phone contained photographs and videos showing him holding firearms, along with messages containing racial and anti-gay slurs.
As with the allegations involving Metcalf, the existence of troubling statements or previous misconduct does not by itself establish what occurred during the fatal confrontation. Much of the material involves allegations, disciplinary records or private messages rather than criminal convictions.
Why Didn’t the Jury Hear Any of This?
That question has become one of the central issues in Anthony’s effort to obtain a new trial.
Anthony’s defense argues that the agreement restricting the use of background evidence went too far and ultimately interfered with his ability to fully present his self-defense case.
On Friday, Anthony’s former attorney Toby Shook testified about the agreement. Shook said he believed Anthony should have testified during his original trial. According to Shook, however, prosecutors were concerned Anthony taking the stand could violate the agreement restricting background evidence.
Shook testified that preventing Anthony from testifying hurt the defense’s ability to establish self-defense. Prosecutor Bill Wirskye disputed that characterization during cross-examination, arguing there had never been a discussion about Anthony testifying.
The controversy is particularly significant because a defendant claiming self-defense can face a difficult strategic decision about whether to testify. Taking the witness stand can give jurors a firsthand account of what the defendant says he saw, feared and believed at the moment force was used. But it can also expose the defendant to cross-examination and potentially allow prosecutors to introduce otherwise excluded evidence.
The newly revealed histories illustrate that dilemma dramatically. Had the door been opened widely to character and background evidence, jurors might have heard damaging information about Metcalf — but they also could have been confronted with extensive evidence concerning Anthony.
A Case Already Surrounded by Threats and National Attention
The original proceedings unfolded under extraordinary pressure.
The case became a national flashpoint almost immediately after the April 2, 2025 stabbing, generating intense debate over race, self-defense and the criminal justice system. Both families reported receiving threats, while court officials faced significant security concerns.
During Friday’s hearing, Wirskye testified that the level of threats influenced how the original case was handled. According to CBS News Texas, he said security concerns contributed to decisions to limit pretrial hearings and conduct more of the proceedings through written filings as authorities attempted to protect witnesses and the families involved.
Anthony’s attorneys, however, argue that some of the extraordinary measures taken to control the proceedings crossed the line from protecting the trial to restricting it.
That distinction could prove critical.
The current hearing is not a second murder trial and does not require the judge to decide whether Anthony was guilty or innocent. Instead, the court must consider whether Anthony’s original trial was conducted fairly and whether alleged errors were serious enough to justify giving him another one.
For months, much of the public debate surrounding the case centered on a relatively brief confrontation at a track meet and two sharply competing narratives: prosecutors portraying Anthony’s actions as murder and the defense arguing that a confrontation escalated until Anthony believed he needed to defend himself.
The newly released records do not resolve that dispute.
What they do reveal is how much information the original jury never heard — and why both prosecutors and defense attorneys once had reasons for keeping it that way.
Now, with Anthony serving a 35-year sentence and fighting for another chance before a jury, those hidden records have moved from the sidelines to the center of the case.
Source: CBS News Texas report
