Attorney discusses Karmelo Anthony verdict

[00:00:00]Strong emotions this week in Texas after a jury found 19-year-old Carmelo Anthony guilty of murder in the stabbing of 17-year-old Austin Metaf. Anthony was sentenced to 35 years in prison. The two teens were high school track athletes at competing schools. They were both 17 at the time of the incident. The jury rejected Anony's claim that he killed Metaf in self-defense. The closely watched trial is sparking debate over self-defense, race, and school safety.

[00:00:23]This morning, we're joined by attorney Joanne Molinaro to discuss this case and why it has become so divisive. Good morning, Joan.

[00:00:30]>> Morning, ladies.

[00:00:31]>> Thanks for being with us. This is a case they're talking about all over the nation, and I know you've talked about it on your Instagram page, so I wanted to have have you on to discuss it.

[00:00:38]>> Yeah. Well, it it's a it's a sad case.

[00:00:40]It's very, very tragic. We have a young man who lost his life and and another young man who's going to be spending a good chunk of his adult life in jail.

[00:00:48]>> Absolutely. Okay. So, one of the sticking points in this case is that all the black jurors were struck from the jury. How is that even legal in 2026?

[00:00:56]>> So, to be very specific, there was a large jury pool about roughly 500 people and jurors were eliminated for largely legitimate reasons and included among that were black American jurors. I think what's causing a lot of controversy though is that once the jurors reached the strike pool, which is the area in which prosecutors and defendants council can choose to strike certain jurors, all of the black jurors remaining in that strike zone were struck by the prosecutor. Now, think of it kind of like a dinner party. You're you're planning with your partner, right? Each party gets 10 strikes, and they can strike for any reason other than race or other improper reason. And in this case, the prosecutor said had nothing to do with race, but it's very eyebrow raising that all of the remaining black jurors were struck by his strikes.

[00:01:46]>> Wow. Um Joan, 19-year-old Carmelo Anthony claimed he stabbed Austin Medaf in self-defense. So, can you explain why that argument didn't hold up with the jurors?

[00:01:55]>> Well, there are really two reasons that probably prevented that from sticking with the jurors. And the first one is a proportionality argument, right? deadly force is only permitted when there's a, you know, protection of otherwise deadly force, a shove or a push that doesn't rise to the level of saying, "I'm going to take my knife out now and respond in kind." It's not an inkind response. I think the other reason the jury probably had a problem with that was, of course, the statement that was uttered by the defendant right before he was bullied, which is, "You're going to come at me and and you're going to find out." and then he reaches into his pocket for that weapon. That provoking statement under Texas law prevented an appliance of self-defense as we would otherwise might have seen.

[00:02:40]>> Right. And of course, Anony's lawyers argue that Metaf was much larger and that's why his push was met with a stab, but the jury did not go with that argument. The jury also in Texas decides not only the verdict, but the sentence here. How did that complicate this case?

[00:02:54]So in Texas, it's one of like six states in the country that permits the jury to derive the sentence. And in this particular case, it was actually defendant who made that election. Now, the defendant elected to have the jury render the sentence before the defendant knew what the makeup of that jury might be. So they took a big gamble here. And in this situation, given the composition of the jury and what we have statistically seen happens when an all-white jury is rendering either a verdict or a sentence to a black American defendant. Some have thought perhaps that is why we're seeing a rather harsh sentence to a 17-year-old defendant.

[00:03:37]>> Wow. Okay. Well, before we let you go, we want to ask you if there is any chance for Anthony to appeal his sentence.

[00:03:43]>> So, he will. He has already filed a notice of appeal and there are going to be a number of legal bases for that appeal.

[00:03:50]>> Now, appealing a sentence is really, really hard. Under Texas law, it's going to be very hard because this sentence, while some may think it was very hard for a 17-year-old, uh it fits within the guidelines. It fits within the statutory range. So, there is very little chance that this sentence is going to be reduced or thrown out. However, there are certainly bases for throwing out the verdict altogether because of some of the process, you know, issues that we talked about. For example, uh the jury selection. Exactly.

[00:04:20]>> Well, Joanne, this is a case people are talking about all over the country. So, we appreciate your insight into why everybody's so wrapped into it. Thanks for being with us. Thank you for having