Aug. 23, 2026
Karmelo Anthony DENIED A New Trial
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed This weekend, a Texas judge has denied 18-year-old Karmelo Anthony a new trial after explosive revelations came out about a “gentleman’s agreement” between the prosecution and the defense. Both sides agreed to keep out incendiary past behavior by both Anthony, and his murder victim, Austin Metacalf that led up to the altercation at a high school track meet that ended with Anthony stabbing Metcalf in the heart. Anthony’s lawyers have vowed to continue their fight, arguing Anthony wasn’t able to take the stand in his own defense because the prosecution reneged on part of their verbal, backroom deal.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey, that folks. It is Sunday, August twenty third. Carmelo Anthony has been denied his request for a new trial and a decision that came down late. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Rookes didn't expect it when we got it, had two days of hearings Carmelo Anthony. People know this story by now. This was a really really big deal. As of now his conviction stands.
00:00:29
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it was sur It was surprising to me the decision itself, and it was also surprising the timing of when it came out. It's very rare that you get a late Saturday ruling from a judge and one that had been closely watched, because Thursday and Friday of last week were just jaw dropping in terms of what we learned that we didn't know and what George didn't know going into the trial.
00:00:57
Speaker 1: M man and we thought it was nasty before whoooo u. Of course, this young man at the age of seventeen at a track meet with another seventeen year old and an opposing team and a different school. You know this by now. A lot of folks. There was a confrontation between the two Carmelo. Anthony is black, Austin Metcalf is white. Whatever confrontation that did happen, Carmelo pulls out a knife, stabs the young man in the chest. He dies, now robes. That gets us to what was really an awful several months of back and forth leading up to that trial because race became such a part of the dynamic.
00:01:34
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then it was even worse. I think once the verdict came down, then both sides polarized even more, if that was possible. But then we started hearing from Austin Metcalf's dad, who was obviously in pain and just started going on podcast and took things to another level.
00:01:53
Speaker 1: Was it watermelon? Mellow watermelon? He called them something along those lines, nothing short of absolutely atrocious racist language. There's some stuff you'd give somebody a pass on. Being angry and upset and yelling and screaming. This was something else. This was racist.
00:02:10
Speaker 2: He had every right to feel anger, as I would think anyone who has lost a child to violence. When you are talking about the person who took your son from you, who killed your son, we all understand, well, we can imagine I'll take the back. We don't understand, but we can imagine how gutting an awful and angry and frustrated you would be. But that doesn't excuse racist, vile terms than being hurled at someone, which, of course then in sight an entire community and raise the stakes and have everyone going to their corners and create just this ugliness on top of something that was already brutal and ugly. You've made things significantly worse.
00:02:56
Speaker 1: And things are unfortunately, at least the language JH has gotten significantly worse after what we saw at this mini hearing, I guess you will. It was a mini trial, I should say, but it was a hearing on a motion to get him a new trial. Robes, it was watermelon felon. By the way, oh god, is what he called carmelo anthony after the trial watermelon felon. So, Robes, do you hear that? And like, wow, where did that? Is not normal to speak like that. We might have an indication of where that came from or who it passed to, who it passed to? There it is, but at least getting into what happened here. The ruling from the judge he said this, and it was short and sweetened to the point upon reviewing the motion, the record and the evidence and argument that briefs, and the relevant case law, the court has determined that the motion should be denied, period point blank. He is not getting, at least at this point a new trial robes the centerpiece of this motion. For them trying to get a new trial had to do. I don't even know how this is legally allowed. A gentleman's agreement that was made in the first trial in his trial between the prosecutors and the defense rope to keep certain character evidence out of the trial.
00:04:11
Speaker 2: Yeah, this feels like, I don't know, old days, old times, something that happened before we had the legal system in place that we do today. It does seem icky and it shouldn't be legal. It feels like to me, this should be something a judge should have decided, And that's how we typically see these arrangements made. Obviously, in plenty of cases, a judge rules what's admissible and what's not, and whether or not past acts or past behavior should be allowed to be considered by jurors. But the point being a judge makes that decision, and both sides make their arguments to that judge outside of the jury to hear that that's not how this agreement came about. Is deeply concerning.
00:04:59
Speaker 1: Folks, to be clear here, in that first trial, and this is something we did not know about as the public, the prosecutor, and the defense essentially shook hands and say, hey, we're not going to say the bad stuff about Carmelo's past if you don't say the bad stuff about Austin Metcalf's past. That was the agreement to keep character stuff out to where all we're going to talk about in this trial is what happened on that day, Robes. Why would both sides agree to this? It seems like they thought it was beneficial in some way to both sides to do this.
00:05:36
Speaker 2: Yes, but should it be their decision and not a judge's about what's relevant and what's not because clearly to say it's only about what happened in that small window of time that led to Carmelo Anthony's stabbing Austin Metcalf in the heart essentially, But wouldn't we need to know what led to that moment, what each person Austin Metcalf, Carmelo Anthony was thinking and feeling leading up to that horrific, tragic moment I would say yes because it would It would absolutely, I think help the defense because wouldn't we need to know state of mind and frame of reference and any reputation that Austin Metcalf might bring to the confrontation in addition to his size, Like, shouldn't I can't imagine. I know, obviously, what were we learned about Carmelo Anthony wasn't great and absolutely would have been used against him. So yeah, But at the same time, what we didn't know about Austin Metcalf could absolutely have influenced a jury to think, you know what, he had every right to think his life was being threatened.
00:06:53
Speaker 1: And then the other side would make the argument is that, look, Carmelo Anthony came and he owed up already as a violent person, as a person who had what on the verge was a text that he's saying, we're gonna get through that stuff here in a second. If you haven't heard it, it is remarkable Robes that the backgrounds of these two young men were not known by the jury. Now does that matter? Should it matter? That's not for me to say, it's for them. The jury didn't get a chance to decide this because a couple of attorneys shook hands in a back room.
00:07:27
Speaker 2: Yeah, I look at it from being a potential jurors perspective, and as a juror, just ask yourself, would you rather know as much information as possible to make the best decision possible? And look, I don't believe, I don't think I could be wrong, but I think a lot of folks think it would have still been a very tough hill for Carmelo Anthony's defense team to climb given what we know about what happened that day. But I would think that the sentencing would have been deeply impacted by some of this information, or there would be a better understanding about Carmelo's Carmelo Anthony's state of mind in those moments. And just as a juror, wouldn't we all prefer to have as much information as possible to make the best decision possible? Because maybe he would have gotten there were several murder charges available. Correct, it didn't have to be first degree, It could be second degree, There could have and all of those other factors could have absolutely played a role in what they found, which charges they found Carmelo Anthony guilty of.
00:08:28
Speaker 1: Uh, all of that makes sense. I am kind of blown away by this by two guys in a back. The judge had nothing to do with it. It seems like malpractices. It seems like it shouldn't be like And again, maybe this is some common thing that happens that we don't hear about it distance happened to be a high profile case. But whatever the case, the new judge, and again we should remind you this was a new judge as well, because the defense did want a new judge to hear this. Because the other guy was out there popping off at the mouth. It made it.
00:08:56
Speaker 2: Sound like the jury got it right.
00:08:58
Speaker 1: Yeah, so we kind of do its side he was on, but they did get a new judge. Now, Carmelo Anthony's attorneys will share the statement that they did put out in road. Just so far, it sounds like this is only the first step in this fight.
00:09:10
Speaker 2: Yes, they absolutely made it clear that they were not going to be just saying okay, well we're done, that this was just the first step, and they did realize that there would be more to come. This was their official statement. We are disappointed that the court denied our motion for a new trial. We respectfully disagree with the ruling. And remain firmly committed to protecting our client's rights. We believe the issues raised in our motion are substantial and deserve meaningful appellate review. The denial of our motion does not end this case. We will continue the appeal in the Fifth Court of Appeals and pursue every legal remedy available to our client. Our commitment to our client has not changed. We will continue to advocate vigorously on his behalf through every lawful avenue available.
00:09:58
Speaker 1: So then the next avenue is going to be Court of Appeals. What they've already said they are going to be going forward with. I thought this was just interesting. There's a group out there stand with Carmelo Coalition, and they do. They put up a website and they follow this case, and it's pretty substantial group growth. They are They have been following this and giving significant updates. They put out a pretty long statement, but some of the relevant parts here are kind of underlining That jumped out to me. Robes is the defense made consequential decisions throughout the trial and reliance upon an agreement with the state concerning the evidence that would and would not be introduced, only to have the state change his position at a critical point in the proceedings. They explained in a very succinct way, but Robes that is the point they're saying is that the state changed and therefore, when they did, the defense was not comfortable putting Carmelo Anthony on the stand in his own defense. That's a significant argument that he didn't get a chance to speak at his own trial because of this deal that was made. Now, obviously you could take the stand if you want to, you have the right, but how is the deal then valid because it wasn't officially on the record.
00:11:07
Speaker 2: It's so bizarre and it's such a legal gray area given how they did it. It seems so strange. If this had been done in front of a judge, this would be verifiable and you'd be able to look at the records. And so that's why this kind of thing shouldn't be legal, because now it's just murky and confusing. To be honest, I'm curious too, because, yes, the defense has said the reason why Anthony Carmelo Anthony didn't take the stand was because they didn't feel comfortable anymore with this deal. Did they get specific as to what the prosecution did or did not do that made them start to question that they were holding up their end of the bargain or that they would hold up their end of the barblet.
00:11:48
Speaker 1: There was one and I guess we were more familiar with this on legal shows and whatnot. But he well, no, we watch a lot of actual courtrooms. But that moment when one thing is said in the opposing side will say, well, they opened the door. There was something that was testified to in court that they felt the state at least they opened the door to it. Now we can go we don't have to honor this deal. That was the feeling. Of course the defense didn't agree. But Roes, how can you go to court and argue that the state violated an agreement? What agreement?
00:12:22
Speaker 2: Exactly?
00:12:23
Speaker 1: Where is it? What a judge could admonish the state if he had told them to do a certain thing and then they didn't do it. That's not the case. This is like a contract. Robes, How is somebody gonna come sue us because we said one time in a subway that we were going to hire them for something and then we didn't.
00:12:39
Speaker 2: They looked us in the eyes, they shook our hands. It doesn't hold up in courts.
00:12:43
Speaker 1: It's not how this works. The district attorney also put out a statement saying they respect the decision, but they also say they expected it. Robes, this is what we expected to happen, and they stand by ready and waiting for whatever next thing that might happen. But stay here, if you have not heard, the centerpiece of this whole motion for them to try to get a new trial has a lot to do with the character information that we have now just learned about Austin Metcalf and Carmelo Anthony. It is ugly and a lot of it is some racist and violent stuff. Stay here, all right, we continue here on this Sunday, August twenty third, is getting worded late yesterday that Carmelo Anthony will not be getting a new trial, but they will continue with their appeals and options that they do have ropes. They kept the character information about these two young men out of the first trial because of this deal we're talking about. Holy hell, it looks I don't know what these things have canceled each other out because so much of this stuff is jaw dropping. When you're talking about seventeen year olds in rows, when you're talking about a violent confrontation that ended in violence. Excuse me, that ended in the death. The two characters here robes are the exact last two people who should have been in a confrontation.
00:14:08
Speaker 2: It's so true and it's so tragic when you start to see what they both brought to that moment that we were all unaware of. And yes, I don't know if it would have canceled each other. I don't know, But isn't that the point? Shouldn't a jury have been able to make that determination. That's what seems frustrating about it all. But yes, we learned. We can start with Austin metcap the victim in this. But yeah, the defense was able to provide documents that showed both Austin and his twin brother Hunter got twelve months of probation for a racist graffiti incident where yeah, the racist language they were spray painting or graffiti ing included KKK, kill all blacks, the N word, hyl hitler. I mean, so they and obviously people knew about this and what these two had done. And so yes, that would have gone absolutely in Carmelo Anthony's defense, and that he's now being confronted by this larger Austin Metcalf with his twin brother right there, who are known to have proudly spray painted horrific racist, threatening language on a wall recently.
00:15:23
Speaker 1: Okay, that's fine. Somebody could hear that and go, okay, stupid kid whatever. That doesn't mean he was violent, or he was angry, or even that he hates black people. Robes, and then it goes on and on and on. The defense kept presenting incidents robes over the past several years of these young men, both of whom are seventeen, both men. If you don't realize Austin Metcalf has a twin brother, Hunter, these two ropes, some of these incidents go back twenty twenty three, twenty four and whatnotes, weren't they fourteen fifteen year old kids at the time.
00:16:02
Speaker 2: Yeah, And there were documented cases of Austin bullying a black student. A teacher even sent an email reporting Austin for using racist language and bullying this black student, and then his twin brother, Hunter threatened to strike cheerleaders. Parents even reported that the girls were scared of both Austin and Hunter. That Hunter, I believe told the cheerleaders that his hands are bisexual, meaning he'll hit either gender. Another female student says the twins assaulted her in twenty twenty four. Austin, by the way, this was significant, has been suspended seven times for disciplinary issues, including cursing at teachers. He was suspended once after he discussed bringing a gun to school. Hunter has six document documented instances of telling a teacher to shut up. There's video from Austin's phone showing him laughing at a black sat student. The student tells him to stop, and he hits him in the face. Another video on his phone showing a black student eating a banana, and he's obviously making all of the imaginable racist comparisons that you can think of, and then cheering on a friend who's chasing a black kid and yelling racial slurs at him. This sounds like the most racially motivated menace and maybe even gender motivated menace that you could imagine, starting at a very young age. At your point, so to your point, so I would want to know all of these things. And it doesn't mean he deserved to die, and it doesn't mean that he deserved to be.
00:17:40
Speaker 1: A murder victor.
00:17:41
Speaker 2: But when you bring all of that energy and all of that history and all of that known violent racist behavior to a situation that I don't know. I guess the big smoking gun would be if Carmelo Anthony and his friends and the community were all very aware of this in that moment or at least some of those instances.
00:18:07
Speaker 1: According to the defense, Carmelo Anthony did at least on one occasion was aware of these boys from some other incident. I think it was out a basketball game. So they tried to make an argue. It wasn't that solid of one. He didn't know them or know them well, but they tried to suggest at least he's seen these young men in action, which again goes to some level of fear. It also goes to robes would that speak to a juror They go, okay, little, this smaller black kid is in there with these two guys who it's reasonable now to understand how they might react to him being in their tent exactly.
00:18:42
Speaker 2: And so we kind of got this feeling that they were just trying to do due diligence and following their coaches orders and keeping the tent clear, and they were just trying. Now that we know this background, what were they saying And I'm not again I am not saying he deserved to be murdered.
00:18:56
Speaker 1: He didn't.
00:18:56
Speaker 2: But escalating the situation, what was he saying? What was he doing? None of that at all seemed like it was inappropriate what Austin was doing, And so it was kind of strange seeming and very unreasonable to think that Carmelo Anthony escalated it in the way he did. None of it really made sense. But hearing all of this now, perhaps you're getting a different view. And look, you asked if a juror, if what this would mean to a juror. There were no black jurors in that jury.
00:19:28
Speaker 1: So might not mean eithing exactly, might not mean the thing. So with this stuff, though, on the other side, would this have been relevant to a jury to hear that Carmelo Anthony actually sent a text message that day at one am to someone saying I'm low key on the verge. That was supposed to be some suggestion that maybe he was already wired for the day. That same day, his girlfriend allegedly reported to an assistant principle of his stalking behavior. Also another text message they pointed out, in which it seems he was texting someone and it seemed to confirm that he had hit a girl in the face at some point. There are more here in which they pointed out, I will shoot up the school tomorrow than he followed up saying I'm kidding, I would never actually do that. Another text thing I like punching people. Another one saying when I get mad, I can't control myself. Text to his girlfriends saying I'm gonna get you. Quote how many bullets you want? Quote when I stab somebody, I'm gonna lick the blade off the table, off the blade.
00:20:23
Speaker 2: Ropes.
00:20:23
Speaker 1: All that stuff is not something I understand that a's fifteen, sixteen, seventeen year old kids should be saying. Why they're saying it. That's pretty damning as well, Robes. And that would have possibly had an impact on a juror jury that does not include any black people, and a jury that might think that what they think of black people and black men and young black men. All of that reads like, oh yeah, that might have hurt him even worse. And there's some suggestion Robe, you sure you want a new trial because what if he gets sixty years next time? Well, because what do you go, Ropes, This is awful Star, I'm with you, babe. It's just that the juror should have had the option exactly. But then the other part of that robes is there is context in these two things that you need maybe a black person to be in the room to understory.
00:21:16
Speaker 2: So I think, to me, just hearing all of this, and yes, when I stab somebody, I'm gonna lick their blood off the blade, that that's a really hard thing given what happened on the bleachers in that Texas track meet. So yes, that that to me was the most damning of them all. But I do think that one of the biggest issues, and this was this brought up. I don't remember this being a thing about there being no black jurors.
00:21:41
Speaker 1: In this back and forth. You don't have a right to it necessarily, right.
00:21:46
Speaker 2: Your peers, because I do think that is that is to me, that was the biggest travesty. I have said this a lot of folks listening here who are white, just imagine you are a white person, you killed a black person, and they're kind of being hailed a wonderful human being who was looking forward to college. So you're white, you've killed a black person, and now you're on a jury and there's not one white person on that jury. Immediately your chest titans. You feel like you can't win. Like whether or not you deserve to be punished and whether or not you deserve to be found guilty, it still feels like you're not going to get a reasonable understanding of what possibly was going through your mind or why, the why, the how all of that. The idea of that would be unthinkable to most white people. And yet that's exactly what happened to Carmelo Anthony.
00:22:45
Speaker 1: Just so you could take this holes and just reverse it all. This is a predominantly white area, yes, first of all, and so you have these two black kid white kid like reverse at all. Let's say this is a predominantly black area, a white kid, like you said, kills a black kid. You go in there, Robes and imagine a white defendant looking at all black jurors.
00:23:08
Speaker 2: A black judge.
00:23:09
Speaker 1: Wow, y'all, really they are really gonna get me.
00:23:12
Speaker 2: That's exactly what you would think.
00:23:14
Speaker 1: I killed one of theirs. I don't have a shot here.
00:23:17
Speaker 2: They don't care why, they don't care what happened leading up to it.
00:23:22
Speaker 1: Absolutely, and what would you say in that scenario, Robes, is they if black folks came to you and said, I don't see the problem here. What are you saying black people can't be a fair and impartial jury. That's that's the arguments that we're used. This is so different. I can understand why Carmelo Anthony was scared out of his mind if this is what he was confronted with. If and we don't know because the only witness there that's not a friend of Austin Metcalfs is Carmelo Anthony and he didn't get a chance to tell his story on the stand. Why and if it's legally relevant to get him a new DRIW I don't no, but Robes, this just doesn't seem fair.
00:24:03
Speaker 2: Agreed to your side.
00:24:05
Speaker 1: By the way, I'm not not some fullhearted defense. Some of the stuff he said is just it's wild. Next step don't know when it's going to be happening, but they are taking it to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. I wanted to give you this update and it came late yesterday as Carmelo Anthony, not as of now getting a new trial. And with that, we appreciate you being here. I'm TJ. That's Robes. We'll talk soon.
Speaker 1: Hey, that folks. It is Sunday, August twenty third. Carmelo Anthony has been denied his request for a new trial and a decision that came down late. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Rookes didn't expect it when we got it, had two days of hearings Carmelo Anthony. People know this story by now. This was a really really big deal. As of now his conviction stands.
00:00:29
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it was sur It was surprising to me the decision itself, and it was also surprising the timing of when it came out. It's very rare that you get a late Saturday ruling from a judge and one that had been closely watched, because Thursday and Friday of last week were just jaw dropping in terms of what we learned that we didn't know and what George didn't know going into the trial.
00:00:57
Speaker 1: M man and we thought it was nasty before whoooo u. Of course, this young man at the age of seventeen at a track meet with another seventeen year old and an opposing team and a different school. You know this by now. A lot of folks. There was a confrontation between the two Carmelo. Anthony is black, Austin Metcalf is white. Whatever confrontation that did happen, Carmelo pulls out a knife, stabs the young man in the chest. He dies, now robes. That gets us to what was really an awful several months of back and forth leading up to that trial because race became such a part of the dynamic.
00:01:34
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then it was even worse. I think once the verdict came down, then both sides polarized even more, if that was possible. But then we started hearing from Austin Metcalf's dad, who was obviously in pain and just started going on podcast and took things to another level.
00:01:53
Speaker 1: Was it watermelon? Mellow watermelon? He called them something along those lines, nothing short of absolutely atrocious racist language. There's some stuff you'd give somebody a pass on. Being angry and upset and yelling and screaming. This was something else. This was racist.
00:02:10
Speaker 2: He had every right to feel anger, as I would think anyone who has lost a child to violence. When you are talking about the person who took your son from you, who killed your son, we all understand, well, we can imagine I'll take the back. We don't understand, but we can imagine how gutting an awful and angry and frustrated you would be. But that doesn't excuse racist, vile terms than being hurled at someone, which, of course then in sight an entire community and raise the stakes and have everyone going to their corners and create just this ugliness on top of something that was already brutal and ugly. You've made things significantly worse.
00:02:56
Speaker 1: And things are unfortunately, at least the language JH has gotten significantly worse after what we saw at this mini hearing, I guess you will. It was a mini trial, I should say, but it was a hearing on a motion to get him a new trial. Robes, it was watermelon felon. By the way, oh god, is what he called carmelo anthony after the trial watermelon felon. So, Robes, do you hear that? And like, wow, where did that? Is not normal to speak like that. We might have an indication of where that came from or who it passed to, who it passed to? There it is, but at least getting into what happened here. The ruling from the judge he said this, and it was short and sweetened to the point upon reviewing the motion, the record and the evidence and argument that briefs, and the relevant case law, the court has determined that the motion should be denied, period point blank. He is not getting, at least at this point a new trial robes the centerpiece of this motion. For them trying to get a new trial had to do. I don't even know how this is legally allowed. A gentleman's agreement that was made in the first trial in his trial between the prosecutors and the defense rope to keep certain character evidence out of the trial.
00:04:11
Speaker 2: Yeah, this feels like, I don't know, old days, old times, something that happened before we had the legal system in place that we do today. It does seem icky and it shouldn't be legal. It feels like to me, this should be something a judge should have decided, And that's how we typically see these arrangements made. Obviously, in plenty of cases, a judge rules what's admissible and what's not, and whether or not past acts or past behavior should be allowed to be considered by jurors. But the point being a judge makes that decision, and both sides make their arguments to that judge outside of the jury to hear that that's not how this agreement came about. Is deeply concerning.
00:04:59
Speaker 1: Folks, to be clear here, in that first trial, and this is something we did not know about as the public, the prosecutor, and the defense essentially shook hands and say, hey, we're not going to say the bad stuff about Carmelo's past if you don't say the bad stuff about Austin Metcalf's past. That was the agreement to keep character stuff out to where all we're going to talk about in this trial is what happened on that day, Robes. Why would both sides agree to this? It seems like they thought it was beneficial in some way to both sides to do this.
00:05:36
Speaker 2: Yes, but should it be their decision and not a judge's about what's relevant and what's not because clearly to say it's only about what happened in that small window of time that led to Carmelo Anthony's stabbing Austin Metcalf in the heart essentially, But wouldn't we need to know what led to that moment, what each person Austin Metcalf, Carmelo Anthony was thinking and feeling leading up to that horrific, tragic moment I would say yes because it would It would absolutely, I think help the defense because wouldn't we need to know state of mind and frame of reference and any reputation that Austin Metcalf might bring to the confrontation in addition to his size, Like, shouldn't I can't imagine. I know, obviously, what were we learned about Carmelo Anthony wasn't great and absolutely would have been used against him. So yeah, But at the same time, what we didn't know about Austin Metcalf could absolutely have influenced a jury to think, you know what, he had every right to think his life was being threatened.
00:06:53
Speaker 1: And then the other side would make the argument is that, look, Carmelo Anthony came and he owed up already as a violent person, as a person who had what on the verge was a text that he's saying, we're gonna get through that stuff here in a second. If you haven't heard it, it is remarkable Robes that the backgrounds of these two young men were not known by the jury. Now does that matter? Should it matter? That's not for me to say, it's for them. The jury didn't get a chance to decide this because a couple of attorneys shook hands in a back room.
00:07:27
Speaker 2: Yeah, I look at it from being a potential jurors perspective, and as a juror, just ask yourself, would you rather know as much information as possible to make the best decision possible? And look, I don't believe, I don't think I could be wrong, but I think a lot of folks think it would have still been a very tough hill for Carmelo Anthony's defense team to climb given what we know about what happened that day. But I would think that the sentencing would have been deeply impacted by some of this information, or there would be a better understanding about Carmelo's Carmelo Anthony's state of mind in those moments. And just as a juror, wouldn't we all prefer to have as much information as possible to make the best decision possible? Because maybe he would have gotten there were several murder charges available. Correct, it didn't have to be first degree, It could be second degree, There could have and all of those other factors could have absolutely played a role in what they found, which charges they found Carmelo Anthony guilty of.
00:08:28
Speaker 1: Uh, all of that makes sense. I am kind of blown away by this by two guys in a back. The judge had nothing to do with it. It seems like malpractices. It seems like it shouldn't be like And again, maybe this is some common thing that happens that we don't hear about it distance happened to be a high profile case. But whatever the case, the new judge, and again we should remind you this was a new judge as well, because the defense did want a new judge to hear this. Because the other guy was out there popping off at the mouth. It made it.
00:08:56
Speaker 2: Sound like the jury got it right.
00:08:58
Speaker 1: Yeah, so we kind of do its side he was on, but they did get a new judge. Now, Carmelo Anthony's attorneys will share the statement that they did put out in road. Just so far, it sounds like this is only the first step in this fight.
00:09:10
Speaker 2: Yes, they absolutely made it clear that they were not going to be just saying okay, well we're done, that this was just the first step, and they did realize that there would be more to come. This was their official statement. We are disappointed that the court denied our motion for a new trial. We respectfully disagree with the ruling. And remain firmly committed to protecting our client's rights. We believe the issues raised in our motion are substantial and deserve meaningful appellate review. The denial of our motion does not end this case. We will continue the appeal in the Fifth Court of Appeals and pursue every legal remedy available to our client. Our commitment to our client has not changed. We will continue to advocate vigorously on his behalf through every lawful avenue available.
00:09:58
Speaker 1: So then the next avenue is going to be Court of Appeals. What they've already said they are going to be going forward with. I thought this was just interesting. There's a group out there stand with Carmelo Coalition, and they do. They put up a website and they follow this case, and it's pretty substantial group growth. They are They have been following this and giving significant updates. They put out a pretty long statement, but some of the relevant parts here are kind of underlining That jumped out to me. Robes is the defense made consequential decisions throughout the trial and reliance upon an agreement with the state concerning the evidence that would and would not be introduced, only to have the state change his position at a critical point in the proceedings. They explained in a very succinct way, but Robes that is the point they're saying is that the state changed and therefore, when they did, the defense was not comfortable putting Carmelo Anthony on the stand in his own defense. That's a significant argument that he didn't get a chance to speak at his own trial because of this deal that was made. Now, obviously you could take the stand if you want to, you have the right, but how is the deal then valid because it wasn't officially on the record.
00:11:07
Speaker 2: It's so bizarre and it's such a legal gray area given how they did it. It seems so strange. If this had been done in front of a judge, this would be verifiable and you'd be able to look at the records. And so that's why this kind of thing shouldn't be legal, because now it's just murky and confusing. To be honest, I'm curious too, because, yes, the defense has said the reason why Anthony Carmelo Anthony didn't take the stand was because they didn't feel comfortable anymore with this deal. Did they get specific as to what the prosecution did or did not do that made them start to question that they were holding up their end of the bargain or that they would hold up their end of the barblet.
00:11:48
Speaker 1: There was one and I guess we were more familiar with this on legal shows and whatnot. But he well, no, we watch a lot of actual courtrooms. But that moment when one thing is said in the opposing side will say, well, they opened the door. There was something that was testified to in court that they felt the state at least they opened the door to it. Now we can go we don't have to honor this deal. That was the feeling. Of course the defense didn't agree. But Roes, how can you go to court and argue that the state violated an agreement? What agreement?
00:12:22
Speaker 2: Exactly?
00:12:23
Speaker 1: Where is it? What a judge could admonish the state if he had told them to do a certain thing and then they didn't do it. That's not the case. This is like a contract. Robes, How is somebody gonna come sue us because we said one time in a subway that we were going to hire them for something and then we didn't.
00:12:39
Speaker 2: They looked us in the eyes, they shook our hands. It doesn't hold up in courts.
00:12:43
Speaker 1: It's not how this works. The district attorney also put out a statement saying they respect the decision, but they also say they expected it. Robes, this is what we expected to happen, and they stand by ready and waiting for whatever next thing that might happen. But stay here, if you have not heard, the centerpiece of this whole motion for them to try to get a new trial has a lot to do with the character information that we have now just learned about Austin Metcalf and Carmelo Anthony. It is ugly and a lot of it is some racist and violent stuff. Stay here, all right, we continue here on this Sunday, August twenty third, is getting worded late yesterday that Carmelo Anthony will not be getting a new trial, but they will continue with their appeals and options that they do have ropes. They kept the character information about these two young men out of the first trial because of this deal we're talking about. Holy hell, it looks I don't know what these things have canceled each other out because so much of this stuff is jaw dropping. When you're talking about seventeen year olds in rows, when you're talking about a violent confrontation that ended in violence. Excuse me, that ended in the death. The two characters here robes are the exact last two people who should have been in a confrontation.
00:14:08
Speaker 2: It's so true and it's so tragic when you start to see what they both brought to that moment that we were all unaware of. And yes, I don't know if it would have canceled each other. I don't know, But isn't that the point? Shouldn't a jury have been able to make that determination. That's what seems frustrating about it all. But yes, we learned. We can start with Austin metcap the victim in this. But yeah, the defense was able to provide documents that showed both Austin and his twin brother Hunter got twelve months of probation for a racist graffiti incident where yeah, the racist language they were spray painting or graffiti ing included KKK, kill all blacks, the N word, hyl hitler. I mean, so they and obviously people knew about this and what these two had done. And so yes, that would have gone absolutely in Carmelo Anthony's defense, and that he's now being confronted by this larger Austin Metcalf with his twin brother right there, who are known to have proudly spray painted horrific racist, threatening language on a wall recently.
00:15:23
Speaker 1: Okay, that's fine. Somebody could hear that and go, okay, stupid kid whatever. That doesn't mean he was violent, or he was angry, or even that he hates black people. Robes, and then it goes on and on and on. The defense kept presenting incidents robes over the past several years of these young men, both of whom are seventeen, both men. If you don't realize Austin Metcalf has a twin brother, Hunter, these two ropes, some of these incidents go back twenty twenty three, twenty four and whatnotes, weren't they fourteen fifteen year old kids at the time.
00:16:02
Speaker 2: Yeah, And there were documented cases of Austin bullying a black student. A teacher even sent an email reporting Austin for using racist language and bullying this black student, and then his twin brother, Hunter threatened to strike cheerleaders. Parents even reported that the girls were scared of both Austin and Hunter. That Hunter, I believe told the cheerleaders that his hands are bisexual, meaning he'll hit either gender. Another female student says the twins assaulted her in twenty twenty four. Austin, by the way, this was significant, has been suspended seven times for disciplinary issues, including cursing at teachers. He was suspended once after he discussed bringing a gun to school. Hunter has six document documented instances of telling a teacher to shut up. There's video from Austin's phone showing him laughing at a black sat student. The student tells him to stop, and he hits him in the face. Another video on his phone showing a black student eating a banana, and he's obviously making all of the imaginable racist comparisons that you can think of, and then cheering on a friend who's chasing a black kid and yelling racial slurs at him. This sounds like the most racially motivated menace and maybe even gender motivated menace that you could imagine, starting at a very young age. At your point, so to your point, so I would want to know all of these things. And it doesn't mean he deserved to die, and it doesn't mean that he deserved to be.
00:17:40
Speaker 1: A murder victor.
00:17:41
Speaker 2: But when you bring all of that energy and all of that history and all of that known violent racist behavior to a situation that I don't know. I guess the big smoking gun would be if Carmelo Anthony and his friends and the community were all very aware of this in that moment or at least some of those instances.
00:18:07
Speaker 1: According to the defense, Carmelo Anthony did at least on one occasion was aware of these boys from some other incident. I think it was out a basketball game. So they tried to make an argue. It wasn't that solid of one. He didn't know them or know them well, but they tried to suggest at least he's seen these young men in action, which again goes to some level of fear. It also goes to robes would that speak to a juror They go, okay, little, this smaller black kid is in there with these two guys who it's reasonable now to understand how they might react to him being in their tent exactly.
00:18:42
Speaker 2: And so we kind of got this feeling that they were just trying to do due diligence and following their coaches orders and keeping the tent clear, and they were just trying. Now that we know this background, what were they saying And I'm not again I am not saying he deserved to be murdered.
00:18:56
Speaker 1: He didn't.
00:18:56
Speaker 2: But escalating the situation, what was he saying? What was he doing? None of that at all seemed like it was inappropriate what Austin was doing, And so it was kind of strange seeming and very unreasonable to think that Carmelo Anthony escalated it in the way he did. None of it really made sense. But hearing all of this now, perhaps you're getting a different view. And look, you asked if a juror, if what this would mean to a juror. There were no black jurors in that jury.
00:19:28
Speaker 1: So might not mean eithing exactly, might not mean the thing. So with this stuff, though, on the other side, would this have been relevant to a jury to hear that Carmelo Anthony actually sent a text message that day at one am to someone saying I'm low key on the verge. That was supposed to be some suggestion that maybe he was already wired for the day. That same day, his girlfriend allegedly reported to an assistant principle of his stalking behavior. Also another text message they pointed out, in which it seems he was texting someone and it seemed to confirm that he had hit a girl in the face at some point. There are more here in which they pointed out, I will shoot up the school tomorrow than he followed up saying I'm kidding, I would never actually do that. Another text thing I like punching people. Another one saying when I get mad, I can't control myself. Text to his girlfriends saying I'm gonna get you. Quote how many bullets you want? Quote when I stab somebody, I'm gonna lick the blade off the table, off the blade.
00:20:23
Speaker 2: Ropes.
00:20:23
Speaker 1: All that stuff is not something I understand that a's fifteen, sixteen, seventeen year old kids should be saying. Why they're saying it. That's pretty damning as well, Robes. And that would have possibly had an impact on a juror jury that does not include any black people, and a jury that might think that what they think of black people and black men and young black men. All of that reads like, oh yeah, that might have hurt him even worse. And there's some suggestion Robe, you sure you want a new trial because what if he gets sixty years next time? Well, because what do you go, Ropes, This is awful Star, I'm with you, babe. It's just that the juror should have had the option exactly. But then the other part of that robes is there is context in these two things that you need maybe a black person to be in the room to understory.
00:21:16
Speaker 2: So I think, to me, just hearing all of this, and yes, when I stab somebody, I'm gonna lick their blood off the blade, that that's a really hard thing given what happened on the bleachers in that Texas track meet. So yes, that that to me was the most damning of them all. But I do think that one of the biggest issues, and this was this brought up. I don't remember this being a thing about there being no black jurors.
00:21:41
Speaker 1: In this back and forth. You don't have a right to it necessarily, right.
00:21:46
Speaker 2: Your peers, because I do think that is that is to me, that was the biggest travesty. I have said this a lot of folks listening here who are white, just imagine you are a white person, you killed a black person, and they're kind of being hailed a wonderful human being who was looking forward to college. So you're white, you've killed a black person, and now you're on a jury and there's not one white person on that jury. Immediately your chest titans. You feel like you can't win. Like whether or not you deserve to be punished and whether or not you deserve to be found guilty, it still feels like you're not going to get a reasonable understanding of what possibly was going through your mind or why, the why, the how all of that. The idea of that would be unthinkable to most white people. And yet that's exactly what happened to Carmelo Anthony.
00:22:45
Speaker 1: Just so you could take this holes and just reverse it all. This is a predominantly white area, yes, first of all, and so you have these two black kid white kid like reverse at all. Let's say this is a predominantly black area, a white kid, like you said, kills a black kid. You go in there, Robes and imagine a white defendant looking at all black jurors.
00:23:08
Speaker 2: A black judge.
00:23:09
Speaker 1: Wow, y'all, really they are really gonna get me.
00:23:12
Speaker 2: That's exactly what you would think.
00:23:14
Speaker 1: I killed one of theirs. I don't have a shot here.
00:23:17
Speaker 2: They don't care why, they don't care what happened leading up to it.
00:23:22
Speaker 1: Absolutely, and what would you say in that scenario, Robes, is they if black folks came to you and said, I don't see the problem here. What are you saying black people can't be a fair and impartial jury. That's that's the arguments that we're used. This is so different. I can understand why Carmelo Anthony was scared out of his mind if this is what he was confronted with. If and we don't know because the only witness there that's not a friend of Austin Metcalfs is Carmelo Anthony and he didn't get a chance to tell his story on the stand. Why and if it's legally relevant to get him a new DRIW I don't no, but Robes, this just doesn't seem fair.
00:24:03
Speaker 2: Agreed to your side.
00:24:05
Speaker 1: By the way, I'm not not some fullhearted defense. Some of the stuff he said is just it's wild. Next step don't know when it's going to be happening, but they are taking it to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. I wanted to give you this update and it came late yesterday as Carmelo Anthony, not as of now getting a new trial. And with that, we appreciate you being here. I'm TJ. That's Robes. We'll talk soon.