Karmelo Anthony’s Ex Said He Stalked Her, Sent Disturbing Text Before Murdering Austin Metcalf

Karmelo Anthony’s involvement in the fatal stabbing of Austin Metcalf is under renewed scrutiny following the emergence of alarming allegations involving his ex-girlfriend. These claims surfaced during a recent hearing where Anthony sought a new trial. The disturbing context of these allegations raises significant questions about the circumstances leading up to the incident.

On 2 April 2025, Anthony’s ex-girlfriend contacted a school administrator, informing them that she was experiencing stalking behaviour from Anthony. Reports indicate that she expressed her fear over his unwillingness to accept the end of their relationship. This communication has been noted by Bill Wirskye, an Assistant District Attorney for Collin County, during the court proceedings.

That same morning, Anthony allegedly sent her a text message stating he was “lowk on the verge” of something dramatic, accompanied by an image of a knife. Another chilling communication reportedly said, “Imma stab someone and lick the blood off the blade.” The context and timing of these messages, along with the reported distress of his ex-girlfriend, paint a troubling picture leading up to the confrontation that resulted in Metcalf’s death.

Less than two hours after the ex-girlfriend reported her concerns to school officials, the tragic incident occurred at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, where Anthony and Metcalf, both aged 17 at the time, were present. During an altercation beneath a tent, Anthony fatally stabbed Metcalf in the chest. Following the incident, Anthony asserted that he acted in self-defence after being confronted and shoved, a claim that was ultimately dismissed by the jury. In June, he was convicted of murder and subsequently sentenced to 35 years in prison.

During the recent court proceedings, it was revealed that evidence relating to Anthony’s alleged stalker behaviour was withheld from the jury. According to Wirskye, an informal agreement between the prosecution and Anthony’s defence team led to the exclusion of potentially inflammatory evidence regarding both individuals. The strategy was ostensibly designed to centre the trial on the specific events that transpired at the track meet rather than delving into each party’s respective backgrounds.

Included in the materials that were kept from the jury were indications of Anthony’s interests in weapons and violent behaviour, as well as information pertaining to Metcalf’s history of confrontations and involvement with graffiti that allegedly featured hate speech and threats. Mike Howard, Anthony’s trial attorney, shared details about the graffiti which included highly offensive slogans and imagery.

The aftermath of these revelations has prompted Anthony’s new legal team to argue that the informal agreement—alongside restrictions that impeded public access to trial proceedings—violated his constitutional rights. Furthermore, they maintain that the dispute surrounding this agreement influenced Anthony’s decision not to testify for fear of facing inquiries related to this excluded evidence.

In a notable turn of events, the judge who oversaw Anthony’s trial, John Roach Jr., has been removed from overseeing the post-trial processes after coming under scrutiny for comments made in a television interview, where he implied the jury’s decision was just. This statement prompted Anthony’s lawyers to call for his recusal.

Retired Kaufman County Judge Michael Chitty has since taken over the task of handling Anthony’s bid for a new trial. The urgency of this request is underscored by Texas law, which stipulates that any ruling to grant the appeal must be rendered by Monday, adhering to a 75-day deadline.

As the situation develops, the implications of the new evidence and the previous handling of the case are likely to become pivotal in determining Anthony’s future and the broader questions of justice in cases involving violence and alleged stalking. The unfolding legal proceedings will draw attention not only to the specifics of the tragic incident itself but also to how evidence and rights are navigated within the judicial system.