Jury reaches verdict in Karmelo Anthony murder trial

Jurors took just short of three hours Tuesday to return a guilty verdict in the murder trial of Karmelo Anthony.Jurors began deliberations at 10:54 a.m., KTVT-TV reported, and officials announced at 1:45 p.m. that a verdict had been reached.'You don't get to kill someone just because they are bigger than you.'The station reported that Anthony visibly broke down in the courtroom when the guilty verdict was read, and he is now in custody. KTVT added that Anthony's parents left the courtroom after the verdict was read.Prior to the start of deliberations, jurors were instructed that they could consider a lesser charge of manslaughter, the station said.Anthony was 17 when authorities charged him with murdering high school star athlete and fellow 17-year-old Austin Metcalf in a stabbing at a Frisco, Texas, track meet in April 2025.The murder charge is a first-degree felony, the station said. Anthony faces a sentence of five to 99 years or life in prison. KTVT said the same jury is determining what sentence Anthony will face.According to Texas law, murder means a defendant "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," KTVT said — but manslaughter means the defendant "recklessly causes the death of an individual."A conviction for manslaughter — a second-degree felony — would have meant a sentence of two to 20 years in prison, the station said.Criminologist Alex del Carmen told KTVT in a separate story that he believed Anthony's case meets the threshold of manslaughter: "He didn't get up with the intent to kill someone, but he knew the risks taking that knife to campus and pulling it out. Self-defense or not, rational choices needed to be made."Anthony's defense objected to jury instructions saying the jurors could find Anthony's self-defense argument not viable if they believe the defendant provoked the attack, the station said.However, the prosecutor argued that a rational jury could find Anthony provoked the altercation, KTVT said, and therefore the instruction should remain. The judge agreed with the prosecutor, overruling the defense's objection, the station said.RELATED: Karmelo Anthony murder trial: Jurors begin deliberations — and can consider lesser charge of manslaughter The prosecutor waived the right to begin closing arguments Tuesday morning, so lead defense attorney Mike Howard was the first to address the jury, KTVT said.Howard focused on his client's self-defense argument, saying, "Austin Metcalf had no legal right to use force to eject Karmelo Anthony from that tent," the station reported.Howard added that "he had no legal right to put his hands on Karmelo" and that "Karmelo is in a public place," KTVT noted.Howard also asked the members of the jury to put themselves in Anthony's shoes, noting that it was raining, the station said: "You want to get out of the rain. ... Sure enough, one of the people at Memorial says, 'Yeah, come on over.'"KTVT said the defense attorney added that "Hunter Metcalf, or Austin, say, 'Who are you? You need to leave.' ... These guys are much bigger than you. Do you turn your back and walk away and take a chance with these teenage boys with their raging hormones?""Austin and Hunter had the right to tell Melo to leave, but they did not have the right to use deadly force to make him leave," Howard told the jury, according to the station. "Melo had an absolute right to [defend] himself against that."Howard also asked the jury, "How do you know in a split second of chaos when it's too late? ... Because if you wait too late to defend yourself, self-defense is meaningless," KTVT reported.Anthony did not take the stand in his defense.Following the defense's closing argument, prosecutor Bill Wirskye began speaking to the jury and rebutting Anthony's self-defense claim, the station said."This is one of those rare cases where every important fact can be boiled down to one sentence: You do not get to meet a shove with a stab, especially if you provoke the shove," Wirskye said, according to KTVT."Why didn't [Anthony] just not walk away?" Wirskye asked jurors, according to the station. "You see [he] had a choice to walk away and abandon the encounter."The prosecutor added that "you can meet deadly force with deadly force in Texas, but you can't meet force — a shove — with deadly force — a stab. Size differential, it doesn't work in this case; you don't get to kill someone just because they are bigger than you," KTVT reported.Wirskye also told the jury that "self-defense has to be a reasonable belief — a reasonable belief means a belief that would [be] held by an ordinary and prudent person in the same situation as the defendant," the station said."It has to be immediately necessary. Where was the immediate necessity to plunge a knife into an unarmed young man?" Wirskye asked the jury, according to KTVT. "It's not self-defense, folks — it's murder.