McKINNEY, TEXAS — New and deeply troubling evidence has emerged in the legal battle surrounding Karmelo Anthony, months after a Texas jury convicted him of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a high school track meet.

The evidence was never presented to the jury during Anthony’s original murder trial.

Prosecutors recently revealed details about Anthony’s alleged behavior and messages that they say could have significantly changed the picture presented to jurors. The revelations came during a hearing in which Anthony’s attorneys sought a new trial.

But in the latest development, a judge has now rejected that request, leaving Anthony’s 35-year prison sentence intact for the time being.

Prosecutors Reveal Evidence the Jury Never Heard
During the August 2026 hearing, Assistant District Attorney Bill Wirskye described evidence that prosecutors had agreed not to introduce during the original trial.

Among the evidence were messages allegedly sent by Anthony before the April 2025 confrontation with Metcalf.

Prosecutors said some of the messages reflected violent thoughts and fantasies involving stabbing.

One particularly disturbing allegation involved Anthony discussing stabbing someone and even referring to the possibility of “licking the blood off the blade,” according to testimony and evidence discussed during the hearing.

Prosecutors also presented evidence concerning Anthony’s alleged behavior toward a former girlfriend.

They said he had stalked or repeatedly contacted her and had sent alarming messages in the months before the fatal encounter.

Another message from 2023, which reportedly contained a threat involving shooting at his school, was also among evidence that did not reach the original jury.

The prosecution’s position was that these details could have provided important context about Anthony’s state of mind and behavior.

Why Wasn’t the Evidence Presented at Trial?
The unusual evidentiary situation developed before Anthony’s original murder trial.

According to the defense, attorneys on both sides had reached an informal understanding that potentially inflammatory character evidence would not be introduced.

The agreement was intended to keep the trial focused primarily on the events surrounding the fatal confrontation.

Prosecutors also agreed not to introduce certain damaging information about Anthony.

In exchange, the defense agreed that evidence concerning Metcalf’s own juvenile history and alleged racist behavior would not be presented to the jury.

The arrangement was partly motivated by concerns that introducing inflammatory evidence about either teenager could further inflame racial tensions surrounding a case that had already attracted enormous national attention.

Anthony’s lawyers later argued that the situation affected their client’s decision not to testify.

They contend that Anthony had initially planned to take the witness stand and explain his version of the confrontation.

But when the defense believed prosecutors might introduce damaging evidence that had previously been excluded, Anthony ultimately did not testify.

His lawyers argued that this deprived him of a meaningful opportunity to present his self-defense claim.

The Defense Says Anthony Was Denied a Fair Trial
Anthony’s legal team has challenged several aspects of the original proceedings.

Their arguments included the alleged informal agreement concerning evidence, restrictions on courtroom access and the conduct of the original trial judge, John Roach.

The defense also argued that jury instructions and other courtroom decisions created constitutional problems.

One of the most important arguments centered on Anthony’s decision not to testify.

His attorneys maintained that the last-minute dispute over what evidence prosecutors could potentially use against him changed the defense strategy and influenced his decision to remain silent.

The prosecution strongly disputed that a new trial was justified.

Judge Michael Chitty Takes Over the Case
The retrial proceedings were also complicated by the removal of the judge who presided over Anthony’s original trial.

Judge John Roach was recused from the post-conviction proceedings after the defense argued that his public comments about the original verdict raised questions about his impartiality.

Roach had previously defended the jury’s decision and said the jurors had reached the correct result.

Retired Judge Michael Chitty was subsequently assigned to handle the retrial request.

That meant a different judge would determine whether Anthony’s conviction should stand or whether the case should be sent back for a new trial.

Jury Previously Rejected Self-Defense Claim
Anthony was convicted in June 2026 after a trial that centered heavily on his claim that he acted in self-defense.

The fatal confrontation occurred on April 2, 2025, at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas.

According to trial testimony, Anthony entered or remained near a tent being used by members of Metcalf’s track team.

Metcalf reportedly confronted Anthony and told him to leave.

A confrontation followed.

Anthony ultimately stabbed Metcalf, who suffered a fatal wound and died.

Anthony acknowledged that he stabbed Metcalf but maintained that he acted in self-defense.

Jurors rejected that argument and found him guilty of murder.

He was subsequently sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Race Became a Major Issue Outside the Courtroom
The case generated intense national attention partly because Anthony is Black and Metcalf was white.

The racial dynamics surrounding the case triggered heated debate online, including racist commentary and harassment directed toward people connected to both families.

However, attorneys on both sides have repeatedly said race was not the reason for the confrontation.

The prosecution has maintained that the case was about the conduct of the two teenagers during the track meet rather than their racial backgrounds.

The decision to keep potentially inflammatory character evidence away from the original jury was therefore particularly significant.

Prosecutors said they were concerned that introducing allegations involving either teenager could turn the proceedings into a trial about their backgrounds rather than what happened on April 2, 2025.

The Retrial Request Has Now Been Denied
After reviewing the evidence and arguments presented during the August hearing, Judge Michael Chitty ruled against Anthony.

On August 22, 2026, Chitty denied the motion for a new trial.

The ruling means Anthony’s murder conviction remains in place and his 35-year sentence continues to stand.

Anthony’s attorneys have indicated that they intend to continue challenging the conviction through the appeals process.

The New Evidence Still Raises Questions
Although the newly disclosed evidence did not result in a new trial, its emergence has added another complicated layer to a case that was already highly controversial.

The prosecution argues that the undisclosed evidence demonstrates why it was reasonable for prosecutors to be concerned about Anthony’s background and potential testimony.

The defense, meanwhile, maintains that the legal process surrounding the original trial was flawed and that Anthony’s constitutional rights were affected.

The central question is no longer simply what happened beneath the track-meet tent.

It is now also whether the original trial gave jurors everything they legally needed to fairly evaluate Anthony’s claim of self-defense.

Judge Chitty has answered that question for the current retrial motion: he found no sufficient basis to order a new trial.

What Happens Next?
Anthony remains convicted of murder and is serving a 35-year sentence.

His legal team can continue pursuing appellate remedies after the denial of the new-trial motion.

The case therefore may not be over.

But for now, the latest ruling leaves the original jury’s verdict intact.

The evidence revealed during the August hearing — including allegations of violent messages, stalking behavior and disturbing statements — was never considered by the jury that convicted Anthony.

At the same time, the jury also never heard the potentially damaging information about Metcalf that prosecutors had agreed to keep out of the trial.

Those competing pieces of evidence remain at the center of the debate over whether the original trial was fair.

For Austin Metcalf’s family, the latest ruling preserves the murder conviction.

For Karmelo Anthony’s defense team, the fight is expected to continue in the appellate courts.

As of August 23, 2026, Karmelo Anthony’s request for a new trial has been denied, his murder conviction remains valid, and he remains sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Latest Case Status
Karmelo Anthony: 19 years old.
Victim: Austin Metcalf, 17.
Incident: Fatal stabbing at a Frisco, Texas, high school track meet in April 2025.
Verdict: Guilty of murder in June 2026.
Sentence: 35 years in prison.
New evidence: Prosecutors recently disclosed previously excluded messages and other alleged behavioral evidence.
Retrial request: Denied August 22, 2026.
Next step: Anthony’s attorneys are expected to continue the appeal process.
Sources
New York Post: Reporting on the evidence disclosed during the retrial hearing.