Prosecutors say Karmelo Anthony texted that he would “lick their blood off the blade,” and a judge is now weighing whether a jury should hear that in a potential new trial.
Story Snapshot
- Prosecutor read violent texts in court, including a line about licking blood from a knife.
- State says the messages show fixation with fights, guns, and knives tied to the stabbing case.
- Defense points to self-defense claims and a reported push before the stabbing.
- A reported “handshake deal” kept phone evidence from the first jury, fueling a retrial fight.
What The Prosecutor Put On The Record
Collin County Assistant District Attorney Bill Wirskye told the court that Anthony sent a text saying, “When I stab somebody I’m gonna lick their blood off the blade.” He also pointed to a message that read, “I’m low key on the verge.” The state argued these texts show violent intent tied to the fatal stabbing of Austin Metcalf at a school track meet. These claims came in an August 20, 2026 hearing on whether to grant a new trial.
Prosecutors said the messages fit a broader pattern. They told the judge that Anthony was “obsessed with fights, guns, and knives.” They also linked the texts to a report that Anthony’s ex-girlfriend accused him of stalking and threatening her with a knife the same morning as the stabbing. Those points, the state argued, show the messages were not random or harmless talk, but part of a mindset that matters to the case.
Why The Phone Evidence Was Not Heard Before
Reporters say the first trial never featured the cellphone texts because of a private “gentleman’s agreement” between legal teams. An NBC Dallas–Fort Worth report described a handshake deal that narrowed what jurors saw. That dispute now sits at the center of the retrial request. The defense argues the process was skewed, while the state says the withheld texts should now be considered by the court.
Live coverage from the original trial noted that jurors did see the knife alleged to have been used in the stabbing. That detail ties the violent knife messages, if admitted, more closely to the charged act. Still, the timeline and full context of each text remain unclear in public reporting, which could affect how much weight a judge gives them going forward.
How The Defense Frames The Confrontation
Anthony and his lawyers say he acted in self-defense. A school resource officer’s body camera captured Anthony saying, “He put his hands on me.” A teammate reportedly testified that Metcalf pushed Anthony before the stabbing. The defense says the scene was a fast, physical clash at a crowded track meet, not a planned attack. Those facts, if credited, speak to who started the fight, which is key to self-defense law.
During Karmelo Anthony’s appeal hearing for a new trial, shocking evidence emerged about his behavior in the hours leading up to the stabbing. His ex-girlfriend had gone to an assistant principal that morning, reporting that she had broken up with him and that he was stalking…
— Jeff B (@jeffb198712) August 20, 2026
Defense lawyers also challenge the fairness of the first trial. They say the off-the-record limits kept jurors from seeing a fuller picture, which they argue hurt their case. A judge tied to post-verdict comments was removed from the appeals process earlier, adding to concerns about process. The retrial judge now must weigh the phone evidence’s relevance and whether its shock value would unfairly sway a future jury.
What This Fight Says About Justice And Evidence
Courts often face hard calls with digital messages. Judges must decide if a text is real, when it was sent, and what it proves. Legal guides say such messages need clear links to the issue on trial and must pass checks for authenticity. A single shocking line can be powerful, but without strong timing and context, it may show attitude more than action. That is the balance the court must strike now.
Why People Across The Spectrum Care
Families want truth and fair rules. Voters see a system that sometimes hides key facts behind deals and closed doors. When evidence surfaces late, people suspect games, not justice. If the texts are solid and tied to the event, a jury should hear them. If they are loose talk, a judge should limit them. This case tests whether the courts can apply common-sense standards and avoid theatrics while protecting due process.
Sources:
twitchy.com, x.com, youtube.com, facebook.com, dallasnews.com
