Karmelo Anthony Case Ignites Debate About Race & Justice — The View

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: - Now there's new footage that has been released of the moments after high schooler Carmelo Anthony fatally stabbed Austin Metcalfe at a Texas track meet in April of 2025. Take a look. [00:00:13] Speaker 2: He put his hands on me. I told him not to, he put his hands on me. [00:00:19] Speaker 1: He was sentenced to 35 years in prison, which he's appealing. The case has a lot of people divided. Some people believe that race was a factor in the trial because there were no black jurors. They were, all the juror, the three black jurors that were there were educators and they were released. - They were struck. - They were struck for that. And some folks think, no, no, he got a fair trial. But is this a jury of his peers? [00:00:50] Speaker 3: - I don't think so. And you know, this has been an issue for such a long time in the judicial system where prosecutors, use what are called, you know, bats and challenges. And they, they. - Explain what that is. - It's a challenge that is used to strike a juror, generally a juror of color, for a race neutral reason. - Right. - 'Cause you're not supposed to, you're supposed to have a jury of your peers, and you're not supposed to just strike someone because they're black. And in this case, they gave the reasoning that they're educators and this happened, that these were high school students, and this happened at a school track meet. So they couldn't be impartial because of that. I don't think that's an appropriate reason. [00:01:36] Speaker 4: - They might be the best ones too. [00:01:37] Speaker 3: - Yeah, I don't think it's an appropriate reason to strike black jurors, especially when it's a young black teenager on trial, and especially when that particular area is made up of 10% of an African-American community. So I don't think he got a jury of his peers. So I think on appeal there is a legitimate thing, a legitimate reason. I also think we have to look at self-defense here, because there seems to be two systems of justice at play in this country. And there have been for a very long time. I was part of the system, so I understand that. And I believe that to be true. In this case, this young man, you heard him say, he put his hands on me, and I told him not to. This, the kid that died, and I have so much empathy for him and his family's loss, that kid was 200 pounds. This kid was 130 pounds. And so, and the other kid was also taller than he is. He was the only black kid under the tent. And he, this, the victim here had his twin brother with him, who was also a very large person. If that, if you don't fear for your life, if you weigh 130 pounds, I weigh 130 pounds. Facing somebody that's 200 pounds, I would be terrified of that. I don't understand why self-defense was rejected [00:02:53] Speaker 5: by this jury. I agree with a lot of what you're saying, especially the jury representation. That's what stood out to me. And we know there's plenty of evidence that they're sentencing disparity with people of color. The one thing to me, though, is what is a good, what is the fair sentence when you take a life? And this is what I'm struggling with, because this is a tragedy across the board. A 17-year-old is dead. A 17-year-old's gonna likely spend 35 years in jail. He has, he could appeal at 17. What would you, I'd be curious what you think, because I wrestle with it. If it was, God forbid anyone in my life, I would think 30 years seems about right. If they said life, I'd say that's too long for a 17-year-old, he could be rehabilitated. [00:03:30] Speaker 3: Look, I think, I think 35 years, if there is no self-defense claim, which is an absolute claim to this crime, absolute defense, I think that would be appropriate. But if you look at other cases, there was the other case where there was a young black man, young black kid, who was chased by Rick Chow, a store owner, accused of holding, of taking water bottles, which he didn't take the four water bottles. He was, he chased that young boy, 130 yards, which is half of a football field, and shot him in the back, claiming self-defense. And you know where he is right now? He's at home with his family, because he was found not guilty. Yeah, and there's a lot of cases like that. If that is self-defense, if that is self-defense, I don't understand why this isn't. [00:04:18] Speaker 5: But when the system fails one time, I don't think we should then say, so then the system should fail. But they're very similar self-defense claims. [00:04:23] Speaker 4: Well, Sonny, I had a question, 'cause I was wondering why the self-defense claim didn't work, and I had read that it said, you have to use the same amount of force that was brought against you, so if someone pushes you, and you push them back, that's self-defense. That's not the standard, [00:04:35] Speaker 3: because it's not only use, but attempted use. Well, no, that's what I'm asking. So if you felt your life was in danger, and you felt he was going to do more than just push you, and you weigh 130 pounds, and you're outweighed by 70 pounds, you can use the equal force. [00:04:49] Speaker 6: You know what, when I look at this case though, which to me is just sad every which way. It's sad all around. There's two families that are destroyed, there's, you know, Austin Metcalfe lost his life, Carmelo Anthony's gonna spend at least 17 years in jail, so this is just tragic. But my question is, how did this get to this point, and where the hell were the adults? These were two 17-year-olds, I mean-- [00:05:13] Speaker 1: What I understand is, you know, it is normal for runners to go under tents. To go under tents. My kids were runners. You always do that. And so there was some conversation that he was told to leave, and he was saying, "I don't want to move on." [00:05:30] Speaker 3: Well, he had been invited under the tent by a friend. [00:05:32] Speaker 1: Yes. [00:05:33] Speaker 3: He had been invited. One last thing. I know we're playing the music, but Metcalfe, Austin Metcalfe's the victim, the deceased, his father went on a podcast, and listen to it for yourself, but he called Carmelo Anthony a racial slur, and he also said that the reason that black people weren't on the jury is because black people are unable to hold bias from the trial because they don't know their own fathers, have a bunch of baby mamas running around, living off of government assistance. So that is the thing, that's the thinking of the victim's father. [00:06:01] Speaker 1: Well, let's not say that that was the victim's thinking as well. I'm not saying it was the thinking of the victim, but of the victim's father. And we'll let you sit with that.