Karmelo Anthony and Self-Defense: Was His Response Just?

It was a rainy Wednesday morning on April 2 when 17-year-old Centennial High School student Karmelo Anthony arrived at the Kuykendall Stadium in Frisco, Texas.  He was there to watch the UIL District 11-5A Championship track meet.

While at the event, Karmelo seated himself under the Memorial High School tent to avoid the rain. The seating error was quickly noticed by twins and Memorial students Austin and Hunter Metcalf. Noticing the mix-up, the brothers informed Karmelo that the tent was only for Memorial students and that he needed to leave.

“You need to move,” Austin reportedly said.
“Make me move…touch me and see what happens,” Karmelo allegedly warned.

Austin reportedly stood up and pushed Karmelo, attempting to remove him from the tent. During the brief scuffle, Karmelo reportedly reached into his backpack, pulled out a knife, and stabbed 17-year-old Austin Metcalf in the chest.

Hunter allegedly held his brother in his arms, but Austin bled heavily and was pronounced dead at a local hospital less than an hour after the stabbing.

Once police arrived at the scene, Karmelo immediately admitted to the stabbing, and claimed he acted in self-defense.

Self-defense is a popular subject in the United States due to strong gun rights, personal liberty values, high crime concerns, and legal debates over when force, especially deadly force, is justified.

However, self-defense does not function the same in every state, so it is important when analyzing the Karmelo case to consider the location this incident happened in — Texas.

Texas and self-defense laws have a strong relationship. This is due to the state’s cultural emphasis on gun rights, personal protection, widespread support for individual freedom, and responsibility laws like Stand Your Ground and the Castle Doctrine.

The Texas Castle Doctrine allows one to use force, even deadly force, to defend oneself, their home, vehicle, or workplace without any duty to retreat. And Stand Your Ground extends that right beyond those places, stating that you don’t have to back down if you’re in a location where you are lawfully present.

For Karmelo, he was in a location where he had a legal right to be. That said, it is imaginable that the courts will not be focused on this detail. Instead, the case centers on whether the use of deadly force was justified in the high school stabbing.

Before examining self-defense and deadly force, it is important to note that the two are separate laws in Texas. A person may qualify for self-defense but may not for deadly force. And before determining the legal use of deadly force, Karmelo’s claim of self-defense must be found first.

According to the Texas 9.31 penal code titled self-defense, it states, “a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.”

This means Karmelo had to believe Austin’s push posed enough of a threat to reasonably use physical force to defend himself, which wouldn’t have been a difficult case to prove.

However, the major issue is that Karmelo did not use physical force/self-defense, he instead used deadly force — which remember is a separate, stricter law.

According to section 9.32 of Texas law, deadly force is defined as “force that is intended or known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.”

The penal code further explains that a person may only use deadly force if they are first justified in acting in self-defense, have not provoked the other person, and reasonably believe it’s necessary to prevent deadly force from being used against them.

In context, the courts must first decide whether Karmelo’s actions qualify as self-defense. But as mentioned, since he technically did not use physical force to defend himself, the courts may not find any acts of self-defense from Karmelo.

Contrary to popular belief, Karmelo’s statement — “touch me and see what happens,” — may not qualify as self-defense.  In similar cases, Texas law only recognizes use of physical or deadly force, not verbal warnings. And since Austin’s pushes are the only actions that preceded Karmelo’s fatal response, it may suggest Karmelo escalated the altercation and/or failed to legally defend himself.

With what’s left, the courts now have to assess Austin’s actions to decide if Karmelo’s use of deadly force — specifically, stabbing Austin — was justified.

For that to be the case, Austin would have had to be using or attempting to use deadly force on Karmelo. However, witness statements on the arrest report do not appear to indicate any actions that would support this claim, leaving the courts to make that determination.

Several pieces of misinformation circulated online following the Texas stabbing, including claims that Austin broke Karmelo’s phone, false autopsies involving drugs, Karmelo being attacked by both brothers, and racially charged motives from both sides.

An allegation of bullying also emerged, but both Karmelo’s and the Metcalfs’ parents later denied this, clarifying that the boys had never met before the incident.

Still, the courts will consider official reports over statements and commentary made online, so it’s important to address the circumstances following legitimate records of the case.

Ultimately, self-defense can only be claimed if the use of physical force is found reasonable by law, and deadly force in Texas must be a proportional response to a real, immediate threat of deadly force or serious bodily harm.

If the courts do not view Austin’s physical force onto Karmelo as an attempt to cause fatal or serious harm, then prosecutors could argue that Karmelo’s response was excessive or unjustifiable, even if Karmelo was initially the target of the altercation.

This case has gained nationwide attention, with many opinions surfacing about the legality of self-defense. The case also fueled racial tensions, as Karmelo, a Black student, and Austin, a White student, are at the center of the dispute, intensifying an already complex situation.

The racial divide has led to threats and accusations from both sides, with multiple swatting calls made to the Metcalf home and Karmelo and his family having to relocate to an undisclosed location due to continuous death threats.

At a press conference with the Next Generation Action Network, Karmelo Anthony’s mother, Kala Hayes, expressed her family’s grief and frustration over false accusations circulating online. She emphasized her son’s right to a fair trial and extended condolences to the Metcalf family amidst the ongoing investigation.

Jeff Metcalf, Austin’s father, also publicly expressed his grief and frustration following his son’s death. He emphasized that the incident was not racially motivated and urged the public to stop politicizing and spreading misinformation about the incident. He has since criticized the claim of self-defense made by Karmelo.

Regardless, the tragedy leaves behind unanswered questions, grieving families, and communities struggling to make sense of what happened. Both sides are left seeking justice, while the public copes with the emotional and societal impact of the case.

As of now, Karmelo has been released from Collin County jail on bail, which was reduced from $1 million to $250,000. He and his legal team maintain their self-defense claim, and Karmelo remains on house arrest awaiting trial.