Killer Watches CPR Footage of Victim in Court

A wooden gavel resting on a courtroom table with a scale of justice in the background

Gut-wrenching bodycam footage played in a Texas courtroom showed paramedics performing CPR on 17-year-old Austin Metcalf while his parents broke down in tears — and the accused killer watched from the defense table.

Story Highlights

Karmelo Anthony, 19, is on trial for the murder of Austin Metcalf, stabbed at a Frisco, Texas, track meet on April 2, 2025.
Jurors watched bodycam footage of Anthony’s arrest, during which he admitted to the stabbing and asked officers if it could be considered self-defense.
Multiple student witnesses testified that Anthony was the aggressor and that they did not believe the stabbing was justified.
The defense argues Anthony acted in fear after Metcalf physically contacted him, while prosecutors say Anthony refused repeated orders to leave and then attacked.

Bodycam Footage Rocks the Courtroom

During the second day of testimony, jurors watched intense bodycam footage that showed paramedics performing CPR on Austin Metcalf following the stabbing at a Frisco high school track meet. Austin’s parents visibly broke down as the footage played. Karmelo Anthony, seated at the defense table, showed a noticeable reaction as the video was displayed for the jury. The footage formed a central part of the prosecution’s effort to establish the severity and consequences of Anthony’s actions that night.

In addition to the emergency response footage, jurors were also shown a school resource officer’s bodycam recording capturing Anthony’s first words after the stabbing. According to Court TV, Anthony told the officer, “He put his hands on me, I told him no to,” while simultaneously admitting, “I’m not alleged. I did it,” and asking whether his actions could be considered self-defense. Prosecutors argue those statements reveal consciousness of guilt rather than a genuine belief in lawful self-defense.

Witnesses Contradict the Self-Defense Claim

Friends of Austin Metcalf took the stand and delivered emotional testimony about what they witnessed at the track meet. Multiple student witnesses were described as consistent in their accounts, identifying Anthony as the aggressor and stating they did not believe the stabbing was self-defense. Witnesses also testified that Metcalf did not appear to want to fight and that Anthony had been told to leave the tent area as many as 15 times before the fatal confrontation escalated.

Enhanced surveillance video was also shown to jurors during the first day of testimony, giving them a clearer look at the sequence of events leading up to the stabbing. Frisco police officers testified about arriving at the scene and locating Anthony along with the murder weapon. Officer Cortez described receiving a call about the stabbing while working at a nearby school and responding to find Metcalf critically wounded. The physical evidence, combined with eyewitness accounts, forms the backbone of the prosecution’s case.

Defense Argues Fear and Physical Contact

Anthony’s defense team is centering its case on the argument that Metcalf made physical contact with Anthony — described variously by witnesses as a nudge, shove, or grab — and that Anthony responded out of genuine fear. Defense attorneys are expected to argue that the level of force Metcalf used is disputed and that Anthony perceived an immediate threat. The bodycam statement about Metcalf putting “his hands on me” is the primary piece of evidence the defense is leaning on to support a claim of justified self-defense under Texas law.

Karmelo Anthony Trial: Jury watches bodycam footage as a Texas track meet dispute ends in a fatal stabbing, challenging witness accounts and courtroom narratives. Fresh details emerge on sequence, intent, and accountability as the day unfolds.https://t.co/WhjC68rCr4 pic.twitter.com/wa3kogaoba

— Azat TV (@azattelevision) June 6, 2026

Legal analysts note that self-defense cases like this typically hinge on three questions: who initiated the decisive escalation, what the defendant reasonably perceived in the moment, and whether the response was necessary and proportional. Prosecutors are expected to argue that Anthony’s refusal to leave the tent, despite repeated warnings, makes him the initiator of the confrontation. With multiple eyewitnesses contradicting the self-defense narrative and Anthony’s own admission on bodycam, the prosecution appears to hold a significant factual advantage heading into the remainder of the trial.