A 75-page court document detailing threats, photos of guns, and aggressive text messages linked to convicted Texas killer Karmelo Anthony appears to lay out evidence prosecutors intended to use in his trial. However, a seasoned Texas criminal defense attorney notes that a key misconception about this document is the assumption that jurors were guaranteed to see any of it.
Fox News Digital acquired the filing, which was submitted by prosecutors prior to Anthony’s murder trial in accordance with Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b). Its importance has surged as Anthony pursues a new trial based on claims regarding a pretrial agreement concerning character evidence. He suggests that confusion over this agreement influenced his decision not to testify, while prosecutors challenge this assertion.
The document catalogs a range of alleged prior incidents that prosecutors may try to introduce, including claims that Anthony stalked his girlfriend before fatally stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metcalf during a high school track meet in Frisco on April 2, 2025. It also cites text messages where Anthony reportedly mentioned being “on the verge,” posed with guns, made violent threats, and discussed fighting.
Interestingly, the filing includes allegations of Anthony discussing robberies, firearms purchases, and threatening various individuals, including his girlfriend, through messages over several years. Screenshots presented in the filing are said to capture only portions of broader conversations and indicate that these alleged prior actions are separate from the offense charged.
To some, this filing might come off as a clear outline of the prosecution’s case, but appearances can be misleading. Tiffany Burks, a partner at Varghese Summersett and former prosecutor, clarified that just because a Rule 404(b) notice is filed, it doesn’t mean jurors will end up hearing the evidence. Instead, it ensures the defense is informed of the evidence prosecutors might want to present, giving them time to investigate and prepare a counterargument.
This preemptive move is essential, as it allows the defense to be prepared for any surprises during the trial. Burks explained, “The law necessitates that you submit a 404(b) notice to keep the other side informed about what may be introduced.” This filing serves more as a placeholder, helping prosecutors maintain the right to request the evidence’s admission later if it becomes relevant during the proceedings.
Rule 404(b) usually prevents prior bad acts from being introduced solely to portray a defendant in a negative light, but such evidence can be admitted if it meets necessary legal standards. Burks remarked that when she was a prosecutor, she attempted to include a wide array of potential evidence to avoid missing out on anything important.
The court filing traces back to Anthony’s school years in Louisiana, mentioning multiple fights, school punishments, and various misconduct incidents. It cites messages where Anthony allegedly described his anger, stating phrases like, “When I get mad, I see red,” or “When I get mad, I can’t control myself.”
After his trial, Metcalf’s father, Jeff, admitted he was not aware of many of these allegations until he reviewed the lengthy notice. Furthermore, the prosecutors included images and videos that they claimed showed Anthony with firearms, alongside messages about violence and drugs. Yet, it’s crucial to note that the notice itself does not serve as proof of these acts occurring.
Instead, it was intended to outline potential evidence that could be brought up in trial discussions. Burks highlighted that such prior conduct could play a significant role when a defendant claims self-defense, as it helps establish who may have been the aggressor in the situation.
Anthony asserted he acted in self-defense during the violent incident with Metcalf, which led prosecutors to file the 404(b) notice. This was done about a month ahead of the trial in order to keep open the possibility of introducing various past actions relevant to the case.
Ultimately, the jury found Anthony guilty, rejecting his self-defense argument and sentencing him to 35 years in prison after they reviewed testimonies and surveillance video related to the track meet. Whether any of the prior acts mentioned in the notice will be brought before jurors is a question that hangs in the air, as a judge must first determine the admissibility of each piece of evidence.
Burks pointed out that many mistakenly believe a lengthy 404(b) filing guarantees every allegation will be considered by the jury later on; that’s not the case. The decision on which prior-act evidence is ultimately presented hinges on prosecutors’ choices and the judge’s rulings.
