A 12-person jury with no Black jurors was seated Wednesday in the Karmelo Anthony murder trial after a judge sided with prosecutors and allowed the removal of three Black female potential jurors.
The selection marks a key turn in a case tied to the 2025 stabbing death of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a Frisco track meet, where police said Anthony and Metcalf argued over seating in the stands before Anthony stabbed him in the chest with a pocketknife. The trial began to take shape as potential jurors returned to Collin County, and Judge John Roach later excused the first 150 jurors after meeting with the attorneys.
The defense objected when prosecutors struck the three women in the second round of strikes, saying they were similarly situated to a white female juror who was not removed. Prosecutors said the women were struck for a different reason: all three listed themselves as educators, and they said they did not want educators on a jury hearing a case that arose from a school function with school-aged children.
Roach accepted that explanation and ordered the strikes to stand, leaving the panel with a mixture of men and women but no Black jurors. One educator remained on the jury, but she was an esthetician who teaches at a trade school in Dallas, a distinction that underscored how closely the panel was being parsed as both sides worked through their strikes.
The defense then raised a Batson challenge, the legal objection used when one side believes jurors were removed because of race. Anna Offit, who has studied jury selection disputes, said Batson challenges are rarely made and rarely successful because the party challenging the strike must prove purposeful discrimination. She also noted that appellate review often turns on whether prospective jurors were asked the same questions, and the same follow-up questions, across racial lines.
That is why Wednesday’s jury selection may matter long after the opening panel is chosen. If the case is appealed, the Batson dispute and the judge’s ruling on the three strikes could be examined again, and the record from this stage may become as important as the verdict itself.
