Karmelo Anthony’s Lawyer Asks for Retrial
Sandego.net – Karmelo Anthony’s lawyer asks for a new trial after a Dallas-area judge heard arguments over suppressed evidence from a six-week criminal proceeding. The 19-year-old defendant, sentenced to 35 years for fatally stabbing a 17-year-old classmate at a suburban high school track meet, sat at the defense table Thursday as his attorneys detailed what they called a cascade of judicial errors. No timeline for a ruling on the retrial motion has been set.
The hearing, which ran into Friday, centered on an unusual pretrial arrangement: both prosecution and defense agreed to keep certain character evidence out of the courtroom. The defense contends that agreement, combined with other procedural choices, stripped the trial of fairness and demands a complete do-over.
What Happened at the Track Meet
The killing occurred on a rainy spring afternoon last year in the bleachers of a multi-school track competition. Several teams had pitched tents beneath the stands. Anthony, a Black teenager, was seated under a tent owned by the team of Austin Metcalf, a White student. Witnesses testified that Metcalf and others repeatedly told Anthony to vacate the space. The exchange escalated until, per a police report, Anthony reached into a bag and told Metcalf, “Touch me and see what happens.” Metcalf shoved him; witnesses said Anthony then drew a knife and drove it into Metcalf’s chest.
At the original June trial, prosecutors framed Anthony as the aggressor who provoked the confrontation. The jury returned a guilty verdict, and the sentencing judge imposed a 35-year term. National attention surged after the verdict, with social media casting the killing in explicitly racial terms even though both sides’ counsel had told jurors the tragedy was unrelated to race.
The Suppressed Evidence and the Retrial Argument
Prosecutor Bill Wirskye confirmed Thursday that both legal teams reached an off-the-record understanding to withhold character information. On the defense side, that included a text message in which Anthony fantasized about stabbing someone. On the prosecution side, Wirskye acknowledged evidence showing Metcalf had a history of physical fights and had used racist language. He said he chose to keep that material out so the jury’s focus would remain on the seconds immediately before the stabbing.
“Witness after witness came in” and said Anthony did it and it was not self-defense, Wirskye said.
The prosecutor also conceded he agreed not to introduce evidence suggesting Anthony harbored an obsession with guns and knives and was visibly angry that morning.
“He went there that day spoiling for a fight,” Wirskye said about the day of the track meet.
Anthony’s trial attorney, Mike Howard, countered that the defense possessed information indicating Metcalf had used racial slurs and bullied Black classmates. Howard described the suppression agreement as one of several errors the trial court permitted that, taken together, undermined the integrity of the proceeding.
Judicial Removal and Procedural Maneuvering
Defense attorney Russell Wilson, who was not Anthony’s counsel at the criminal trial, told the court Thursday that a new trial should be ordered because of errors that restricted public access to the case. He pointed to what he called a “shadow docket” maintained by the original judge, which kept character information about both parties out of the public record.
“Everything was done off the record, at an astonishing clip,” Wilson said.
Wirskye pushed back, arguing the defendant received a fair trial and that his original attorneys consented to every procedural choice made during the six-week proceeding.
The defense scored a procedural win the day before the hearing when state District Judge John Roach, who had presided over the trial, was removed from the case. The motion to recuse Roach cited, among other concerns, a television interview in which he told viewers the jurors “got it right” when they delivered the guilty verdict. Judge Michael Chitty was subsequently assigned to weigh the retrial motion.
National Spotlight and Intimidation
The case quickly outgrew its local origins. Both families reported sustained harassment once national media coverage intensified. Wirskye described threats directed at the trial judge, fabricated autopsy reports circulating online, and attempts to intimidate witnesses. At one point, jurors received anonymous communications questioning their verdict, according to court filings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where is the retrial hearing being held? The hearing took place in a Dallas-area state court. Judge Michael Chitty, who replaced the removed trial judge, will decide whether to grant a new trial.
What sentence did the defendant receive? The jury-convicted defendant was sentenced to 35 years in prison for the fatal stabbing.
What evidence was suppressed under the pretrial agreement? Both sides agreed to withhold character information: a text message from the defendant about fantasizing a stabbing, and prosecution evidence of the victim’s prior fights and use of racist language.
When will a ruling come down? No timeline for a decision on the retrial motion has been announced as of the conclusion of the Thursday-Friday hearing.
