At a hearing this week in Collin County, Texas, prosecutors publicly detailed a substantial body of information that was never presented to the jury during Karmelo Anthony’s murder trial. The disclosures came as Anthony’s new legal team seeks a new trial, arguing that an informal pretrial agreement and other aspects of the original proceedings violated his rights.

Anthony, now 19, was convicted in June 2026 of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison. The killing occurred on April 2, 2025, during a high school track meet in Frisco. According to witnesses, Anthony sat under a tent designated for another school. Metcalf and others repeatedly asked him to leave. The confrontation escalated. Prosecutors said Anthony reached into a bag and warned, “Touch me and see what happens.” After Metcalf pushed him, Anthony pulled out a knife and stabbed Metcalf in the chest. Metcalf later died from the wound.

During the recent appeal hearing, ᴀssistant District Attorney Bill Wirskye explained that before the original trial, prosecutors and Anthony’s then-defense team reached what both sides described as a “gentleman’s agreement.” Under the arrangement, neither side would introduce certain background or character evidence about the two teenagers. Wirskye said he proposed the deal so the trial would remain focused on the specific events under the tent rather than broader personal histories. He also cited the intense national attention the case had already attracted and the threats, harᴀssment, and security concerns directed at both families.

Among the material the jury never heard about Anthony was a report from his high school ex-girlfriend. On the morning of the stabbing, she told a school official that Anthony had been stalking her after their breakup and that he appeared fixated on fights, guns, and knives. Prosecutors said Anthony sent her a pH๏τograph of a knife along with a message stating he was “low key on the verge.” Wirskye described Anthony’s state that day as “spiraling.”

Additional phone records and notes that remained outside the trial included messages reflecting an interest in violence, references to weapons, and other concerning statements. School disciplinary records from Anthony’s earlier years were also withheld under the agreement. In court this week, prosecutors read excerpts from some of those messages, including references to fighting and weapons. Wirskye told the judge that introducing this material at trial could have led to a significantly harsher sentence.

In exchange, the defense agreed not to present evidence related to Austin Metcalf’s juvenile record. That record reportedly included graffiti containing racist language and other disciplinary matters. Both sides had previously told the jury that race was not a factor in the confrontation itself, even as social media amplified racial interpretations of the case nationwide.

Anthony’s appellate attorneys argue that the informal agreement, combined with courtroom restrictions and certain jury instructions, compromised the fairness of the original trial. They successfully sought the removal of the judge who had presided over the conviction. A retired judge has been ᴀssigned to decide whether Anthony should receive a new trial. Defense lawyers have also claimed that Anthony’s decision not to testify was influenced by disputes over the scope of the evidence agreement.

Prosecutors maintain that the original trial was conducted ethically and that the jury’s verdict was supported by the evidence presented about the stabbing itself. Wirskye emphasized that multiple witnesses described Anthony as the aggressor and that the focus remained on the events of that afternoon. He said the agreement protected both sides from the risks of introducing inflammatory character evidence in an already highly charged atmosphere.

The hearing has now placed into the public record material that both the prosecution and the original defense had previously kept from the jury. The newly ᴀssigned judge is expected to rule on the motion for a new trial after reviewing the arguments and testimony presented this week.

The case continues to draw significant attention because of the circumstances of the killing, the ages of those involved, and the broader tensions that surrounded the original trial.

Sources: https://nypost.com/2026/08/20/us-news/karmelo-anthony-prosecutor-reveals-trove-of-disturbing-evidence-jury-never-saw/