FRISCO, TEXAS — A trove of previously undisclosed evidence has emerged in the legal battle involving Karmelo Anthony, offering a new look at allegations prosecutors say could have influenced the jury that convicted him of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf.

The evidence was discussed during a hearing on Anthony’s request for a new trial. Prosecutors revealed alleged messages and other information involving Anthony that had been kept away from the original jury under an agreement between the two sides.

Anthony, now 19, was convicted of murder in June 2026 and sentenced to 35 years in prison for the April 2, 2025 stabbing of Metcalf during a high school track meet in Frisco.

⚠️ Prosecutors Reveal Disturbing Messages
During the hearing, Assistant District Attorney Bill Wirskye described messages prosecutors said Anthony had previously sent.

According to the evidence presented in court, some of the messages allegedly involved violent thoughts and references to stabbing.

Prosecutors highlighted one alleged conversation in which Anthony reportedly discussed stabbing someone and made a disturbing remark about licking blood from a blade.

Another message reportedly involved a threat concerning a shooting at school.

The prosecution argued that this material could have provided jurors with additional information about Anthony’s behavior and state of mind.

Importantly, the messages were not presented to the jury during the original murder trial.

💬 Alleged Messages About an Ex-Girlfriend
Prosecutors also discussed communications involving a former girlfriend.

The evidence reportedly included allegations that Anthony repeatedly contacted the woman after their relationship ended and engaged in behavior prosecutors characterized as stalking.

The defense has challenged the relevance and handling of these allegations.

Because the evidence had been excluded from the original trial, jurors never had the opportunity to consider it when deciding whether Anthony acted in self-defense.

⚖️ Why Was the Evidence Kept From Jurors?
The unusual evidentiary arrangement began before the original trial.

Prosecutors and Anthony’s defense team agreed not to introduce certain inflammatory information concerning either Anthony or Metcalf.

The agreement was intended to keep the trial focused on the confrontation at the track meet rather than turning the proceedings into a battle over the teenagers’ personal histories.

The two sides also agreed to prevent potentially damaging allegations about Metcalf from being presented to jurors.

That decision was particularly significant because the case had already attracted intense national attention and racial controversy.

🗣️ Defense Says the Agreement Affected Anthony’s Decision
Anthony’s attorneys now argue that the handling of the agreement had consequences for his constitutional rights.

A key part of their argument is that Anthony had considered testifying during the original trial.

According to the defense, uncertainty over whether prosecutors would introduce the excluded evidence caused Anthony to decide against taking the stand.

His lawyers contend that this prevented him from personally explaining what happened during the confrontation and supporting his self-defense claim.

The prosecution disputes that the issue justified a new trial.

🔎 What Happened at the Track Meet?
The case began on April 2, 2025, during a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas.

Anthony was near a tent being used by members of the Memorial High School track team when Metcalf approached him.

Witnesses said Metcalf told Anthony to leave the area.

A confrontation followed.

Anthony acknowledged that he stabbed Metcalf but maintained that he acted in self-defense after the confrontation became physical.

Metcalf suffered a fatal stab wound and died.

The jury rejected Anthony’s self-defense argument and convicted him of murder.

🧑‍⚖️ Judge Who Oversaw Trial Was Later Removed
The post-trial proceedings have also been complicated by a change in judges.

Judge John Roach Jr., who presided over Anthony’s original trial, was removed from the case after the defense challenged his impartiality.

The defense pointed to public comments Roach made after the verdict in which he defended decisions made during the trial.

A different judge, Michael Chitty, was assigned to consider Anthony’s request for a new trial.

That hearing ultimately brought the previously excluded evidence into public view.

🧩 Evidence About Metcalf Was Also Kept Out
The agreement did not only benefit Anthony.

Prosecutors also agreed not to introduce certain allegations about Metcalf.

Those records reportedly included accusations involving racist graffiti and other disciplinary matters.

Defense attorneys could have used such information to portray Metcalf negatively, but the agreement prevented the jury from hearing it.

The arrangement therefore kept potentially damaging information about both teenagers outside the original trial.

🚨 The New Evidence Does Not Mean the Conviction Is Overturned
The revelations during the hearing do not automatically invalidate Anthony’s conviction.

The purpose of the proceedings was to determine whether the circumstances surrounding the original trial were serious enough to justify granting a new trial.

Judge Chitty ultimately considered the arguments and evidence before ruling on the defense request.

The emergence of previously excluded evidence therefore represents an important development, but it is not itself a new verdict.

The Judge Rejects a New Trial
On August 22, 2026, Judge Michael Chitty denied Anthony’s request for a new trial.

The ruling left the original murder conviction intact.

Anthony’s 35-year prison sentence also remains in effect.

His attorneys are expected to continue challenging the conviction through the appeals process.

📌 Why the Hearing Still Matters
Even though the request was denied, the hearing revealed information that had never been placed before Anthony’s original jury.

That has reignited debate about what evidence should have been admissible and whether the agreement between the prosecution and defense ultimately affected the fairness of the trial.

The defense continues to argue that Anthony should have had greater freedom to explain his side of the confrontation.

Prosecutors maintain that the original proceedings produced a lawful verdict.

A Case That Continues to Divide Public Opinion
Anthony’s case has remained deeply controversial.

The stabbing occurred during a school sporting event, but the proceedings quickly became a national story.

Anthony is Black, while Metcalf was white, and the racial dynamics surrounding the case generated intense debate online.

The legal question, however, remains whether Anthony unlawfully killed Metcalf or acted in lawful self-defense.

The recently disclosed evidence has added another layer to that debate without changing the jury’s original conclusion.

What Comes Next for Anthony?
For now, Anthony remains convicted of murder.

His attempt to obtain a new trial has failed, but his attorneys can continue pursuing an appeal in the Texas courts.

The appellate process could revisit many of the same constitutional and evidentiary issues raised during the recent hearing.

The case therefore remains active even though the latest ruling went against the defense.

The jury never heard the disturbing messages and other allegations revealed during the retrial hearing. Now that evidence is public — but Anthony’s murder conviction and 35-year sentence remain in place.

Sources
New York Post: New York Post — Prosecutor reveals disturbing evidence jury never saw