Inside the Karmelo Anthony Trial, with Court TV Reporter Cody Thomas

Summary

---

MK True Crime – "Inside the Carmelo Anthony Trial"

Podcast: MK True Crime
Episode Air Date: June 11, 2026
Host: Ashley Merchant (Defense Attorney, Atlanta)
Co-Host: Dave Aronberg (Former State Attorney, Florida)
Guest: Cody Thomas (Court TV Field Reporter)
Main Theme: A deep dive into the high-profile Texas murder trial of Carmelo Anthony, reactions to the verdict, jury selection controversies, strategy breakdowns, expert analysis, and insights from inside the courtroom.

---

Episode Overview

This episode focuses sharply on the sensational trial and conviction of Carmelo Anthony, a 17-year-old Texas track athlete convicted for the murder of Austin Metcalfe at a high school track meet. With Court TV reporter Cody Thomas providing vivid details as an eyewitness to the courtroom proceedings, hosts Ashley Merchant and Dave Aronberg guide listeners through the trial's legal complexities, the emotional weight on both families, the strategic missteps, public outcry over jury composition, and community reactions. The episode also briefly covers the unrelated George Pino vessel homicide case in Florida.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Carmelo Anthony Trial: Case Summary and Reactions

• Verdict Recap: Carmelo Anthony found guilty of murder, sentenced to 35 years for stabbing Austin Metcalfe.
• Emotional Aftermath: Both hosts discuss the deep tragedy—for the Metcalfe family (victim irretrievably lost), and for the Anthony family (son facing decades in prison).
• Host insight: "At least Carmelo Anthony gets to leave prison one day for his sake. He's not going to lose his life over it, like Austin Metcalfe did." – Dave Aronberg ([02:38])
• Bad Decisions, Tragedy: Ashley emphasizes the sequence of reckless choices leading to senseless violence.

2. Jury Selection, Diversity, and Batson Challenges

• Jury Controversy: Widespread concern over the jury’s lack of Black members, although there were jurors of other ethnicities.
• Legal Context: Explanation of Batson v. Kentucky (1986) and its importance in prohibiting racially motivated juror strikes.
• Anecdotes: Ashley and Dave share personal stories of jury selection, emphasizing how “race-neutral” justifications must be scrutinized but are rarely overturned on appeal.
• Notable Quote: "First of all, he didn't have an all white jury. But second of all, it's very hard to prove Batson. I can tell you that I have won one appeal in 25 years on a Batson challenge. One." – Ashley Merchant ([07:29])

3. Why Didn’t Carmelo Anthony Testify?

• Strategic Dilemma: The defense’s self-defense claim usually requires the defendant to testify—they chose not to, shocking many experts.
• Possible Rationale: Avoidance of “opening the door” to potentially damaging prior altercation evidence about Anthony's past at school.
• Host Critique: "If you are going to say self-defense, you have to take the stand even if something's going to come out against you, right? You just have to." – Dave Aronberg ([14:08])
• Consequence: The jury didn’t hear from Anthony directly, nor from character witnesses, likely hurting the defense.

4. Inside the Courtroom: Cody Thomas’ Eyewitness Report

• Court Atmosphere:
  • Heavy emotional weight throughout the trial; tight, fast-paced schedule enforced by the judge.
  • 21 prosecution witnesses, six defense (many student eyewitnesses).
  • Common denominator across testimony: “Carmelo Anthony was the instigator and aggressor.” ([27:59])
• Judge’s Conduct:
  • Strict, unbiased, enforced rules equally on both sides—“an equal opportunity a-hole,” per Ashley ([30:36]).
• Jury Selection Details:
  • The issue with three Black female jurors struck was explained: prosecution cited occupational bias (they were teachers), not race.
  • The final jury was majority white, with some diversity (Asian, Middle Eastern members).
  • Of 600 pooled jurors, only a handful were Black by the end.
  • “No one sensed anything nefarious as far as targeting... I didn’t sense that.” – Cody Thomas ([39:46])
• Defense Critique:
  • Poor witness prep: one defense witness admitted to having only talked with defense for two minutes; prosecutor was more familiar.
  • Abrupt defense rest.
  • Lack of an investigator apparent.
  • Possible ineffective assistance of counsel claim discussed.
• Missing Explanation:
  • Defense never addressed why Anthony brought a knife to a track meet—juries left without a plausible or emotional rationale.

5. Community Response & Outside the Courthouse

• Scene Outside: Tense, protests, heavy police presence, “verbal confrontations... everyone had a selfie stick... everyone's an independent journalist.” ([50:00])
• Tensions High: Both sides’ advocates and family members clashed verbally but no physical violence.

6. Public Transparency and Cameras in the Courtroom

• Media Blackout: No cameras or audio in the court. Cody Thomas and a few others were the only direct observers.
• Cody's Call for Openness: “Transparency is extraordinarily important in these. Because... the optics, you know, black kid, white kid... I just wish, you know, on the outside, of course, no one knows that.” ([51:37])
• Host Agreement: More transparency would reduce suspicion and misinformation.

7. Additional Segment: George Pino Vessel Homicide Case (Florida)

• Quick Recap: Prominent Miami developer facing manslaughter and vessel homicide for a high-profile fatal boat crash (killed a 17-year-old and injured another).
• Uniqueness: Charges elevated after media scrutiny exposed flaws in the initial investigation; emotional courtroom moments.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Accountability:

  "The uncontrollable truth in this case is that bad outcomes are often the result of bad decisions. One bad decision leads to another and that's what ends up with two boys on this collision course that ended in tragedy." – Ashley Merchant ([55:52], closing argument)

• On the Defense’s Strategy:

  "We all expected to hear character witnesses. We expected to hear from people. And there was a big void." – Ashley Merchant ([14:39])

• Eyewitness View:

  "It was one of the most emotionally heavy trials that I've covered... You have emotions on two sides of the spectrum..." – Cody Thomas ([27:59])

• On Jury Diversity:

  "Of course it was a majority white jury, but there was a sprinkle of diversity in there. But of course, you know, that big headline with the optics of this being... black kid, white kid, heinous crime, no black... people on the jury. Is this really a jury of his peers? ...I didn't sense anything nefarious." – Cody Thomas ([39:46])

• On Defense Preparation:

  "Why is the prosecution having a better relationship with a defense witness? I mean, just the simple fact of that didn't make any sense to me." – Cody Thomas ([37:53])

• On media transparency:

  "Transparency is extraordinarily important in these. Because... the optics, you know, black kid, white kid. I think transparency is extraordinarily important in these..." – Cody Thomas ([51:37])

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• [01:05] – Recap of Carmelo Anthony verdict and sentencing
• [03:40] – Audience questions on Batson and jury selection
• [07:29] – Batson explained in detail
• [14:08] – Debate on Anthony not testifying, opening the door to past incidents
• [15:31] – Court TV (Cody Thomas) SOT: verdict read, courtroom reaction
• [27:28] – Cody Thomas joins, gives firsthand courtroom account
• [29:53] – Judge's style and conduct
• [36:36] – Defense team’s lack of readiness, witness mishaps
• [39:46] – Cody on jury selection, no evidence of racial bias in strikes
• [43:29] – Sentencing arguments, prosecution’s closing emphasis
• [45:17] – “Tent culture” and rivalry dynamics at track meets
• [49:10] – Tense scenes outside the courthouse on verdict day
• [51:37] – Media blackout, case for cameras in court
• [55:52] – Ashley's closing statement: the need for accountability
• [64:12] – Dave's closing, shifting to Karen Reed case (beyond main topic)

---

Structure & Flow

• Begins with verdict overview, reactions, and legal breakdown (Ashley & Dave)
• Moves into deep-dive on jury composition, Batson challenge, and appeals
• Discussion of defense strategic choices, especially the decision not to put Carmelo on the stand
• Cody Thomas segment: Inside accounts of the trial, judge, and defense team, with focus on missing pieces and public reactions
• Community response, perceptions of justice, and controversies surrounding transparency
• Brief transition to the George Pino manslaughter trial
• Closing statements focus on lessons, accountability, and the meaning of justice

---

Summary Takeaway

The episode provides a rich insider view of the Carmelo Anthony murder trial—illuminating courtroom dynamics, the emotional toll, and the public controversies around race, legal process, and perception of justice. The defense’s strategic gaps, particularly not allowing Anthony to testify, are examined as crucial missteps. Insights from Court TV’s Cody Thomas demystify much of what happened in the closed courtroom and give listeners a clearer, more nuanced perspective on the fairness, the stakes, and the tragic consequences for two families and a divided community.

---

For listeners wanting to understand the full spectrum of this case—the law, the strategy, the people, and the fallout—this episode delivers a thorough, accessible, and authentic look into one of the year's most talked-about trials.

Transcript

[Angie Hicks]

Hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of angie. From Roof Repair to Emergency Plumbing and more. When you use Angie for your home projects, you know all your jobs will be done well, Angie the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find a pro for your [e-mail]

[Ashley Merchant]

at

[DSW Announcer]

DSW, we ask the important questions like what shoes are you going to wear? Whether you're prepping for wedding season, festival season or just planning the ultimate vacay, the right shoes can make or break an rsvp. So own the moment. You've got big plans and we've got just the shoes at the perfect price, of course. Get ready to get ready with Designer Shoe Warehouse. Head to your DSW store or dsw.com today and let us surprise you.

[Ashley Merchant]

Welcome to the MK True Crime Show. I'm Ashley Merchant, a criminal defense attorney from Atlanta, Georgia. Today I am joined by my co host Dave Aronberg and he is a former state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida and managing partner at Dave Aronberg Law. Hey, Dave.

[Dave Aronberg]

Hello, Ashley. Let's go over what we have on the docket today. Carmelo Anthony, Yeah, it's blowing up all over the Internet. He was found guilty of murder and sentenced to 35 years in prison for the stabbing death of 17 year old Austin Metcalfe at a Texas track meet last year. We'll break down the verdict, the sentence and what surprised us about the high tension trial.

[Ashley Merchant]

And prominent Florida real estate broker George Pino is on trial this week for vessel homicide and manslaughter. We'll discuss the details of the boat crash that killed one of his daughter's friends and permanently injured another and what to expect as the trial picks up later.

[Dave Aronberg]

Cody Thomas, field reporter for Court tv, joins us to share his experience covering the the Carmelo Anthony trial. You won't want to miss that. But first, let's talk about the verdict.

[Ashley Merchant]

Ashley oh my gosh, let's talk about it. This was just crazy. I mean, watching everything and watching all the people, especially the people to me, Dave, that didn't really know a lot about what's actually going on in the courtroom. So I'm glad we have this chance to kind of break it down. And I actually reached out to people on social media and said send me questions. I want to explain it. Dave wants to explain it. We want to kind of get into it because there's so many questions here and I think people can't really get reliable information about what went on in that jury room and what went on in that courtroom. And I know we're gonna have our guest coming up in a few minutes that's actually from the courtroom. You know, he was physically there, so he can answer a lot of our questions. But you and I are gonna get to go through some of the legal process as to how this case sort of unraveled.

[Dave Aronberg]

You know, I'm excited to go over it, even though the case is tragic and you just. Even. We talk about Carmela Anthony's mother taking the stand during the sentencing. And, you know, you see that there were multiple victims here. But at least Carmela ant Anthony gets to leave prison one day for his sake. He's not going to lose his life over it like Austin Metcalfe did. And Carmelo Anthony's mother, she gets to have her son live another day. Not like the mother of Austin Metcalfe or his twin brother who have to deal with a permanent passing of their loved one. And it was so unnecessary that this whole thing happened. And, you know, I know that you're 17 years old and your brain is not stopping to develop it. It hasn't fully developed until you're like 25, 26. But come on, everyone knows that you don't bring a big knife to a track meet. And everyone knows you don't break out the knife after someone just pushes you and stabs him to death. You just know, even at the age of 17, not to do that.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right? You do. And most of the questions that I've seen, though, well, there's kind of two categories of questions. A lot of folks want to know what's going to happen with the appeal and, you know, what are the grounds for appeals and stuff. But most of the questions I've had is about jury selection, which I thought was interesting and something that we can talk about. So a couple people. I'll just throw out some of the questions I've got and then let's talk about it for a minute. But a lot of folks have asked, what is Batson? So I want to talk about that, because there's this legal term we throw around, Batson. And then a lot of people have also tried to try to understand how the jury ended up looking like it did. And so it wasn't an all white jury, but it did not have anybody who identified as African American on it. So it's had some people who identified it, you know, different. Different races, you know, different ethnic groups, but nobody that really identified outright as a black person, a black male or a black female. So a lot of folks were really upset about that. So kind of just Want to walk our viewers through how a jury is actually selected so that they understand how we end up with the juries we get. Because I think there's been a lot of outrage about that. So I don't know if you want to start with Batson. You know what Batson is. I think as the state, you probably had people like me, you know, jumping up and down saying, Batson, more than. More than ever. But, you know, Batson, just for our viewers, Dave's going to explain it a little bit. But it's. It's a case. You know, all these cases, when we throw out these names, Miranda, there's a person named Randa Batson, there's a person named Batson. So the cases are actually named after defendants. And I think that's always fun because you're always curious, you know, what happened? How did that case end up in the Supreme Court? But Batson is essentially what talks about juries and what the makeup is, the racial makeup of juries and how we pick jurors.

[Dave Aronberg]

Yeah, it comes from 1986. It's a U.S. supreme Court case. It's Batson versus Kentucky. And the court ruled that discriminatory exclusions of jurors violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. And so you have these things called Batson challenges. And defense lawyers love it, because when prosecutors strike jurors that the defense doesn't like, and by the way, it works both ways, but still, defense lawyers like to use it. So in a prosecutor, like in a case like this, if a juror is struck for any reason, and in jury selection, you get what's called peremptory challenges, which means that you could strike a juror for any reason as long as it's not a bad reason. And that's where Batson comes in. You have a limited number of these, so you have unlimited for cause strikes. So if a juror says, I can't be unbiased, I've made my mind up. Struck. That's a four cause strike. But what if you just think, this juror's not gonna be with us? I just have that gut feeling. Strike. And because of Batson, though, the other side could say, you, Honor, they're striking this juror because he's black. He's trying to remove the black jurors from the jury. And that would be illegal because although you can remove a juror for any reason using your limited number of peremptory strikes, and you can't strike them for a bad reason like race. And so what you have to do Is the party making the objection has to show that there's an inference here that the opposing party, the prosecutor here, used the challenge to exclude a juror based on race. And then if the court finds that a prima facie case is made, the burden shifts to the party who made the strike. The prosecutor, to provide a race neutral reason. So I. Your Honor, and I've had this where I struck a. I had a black defendant, and I struck a black juror. It was an animal felony, animal cruelty case. And the defense said, you, Honor, that's illegal under Batson. And I said, no, no, no. I'm striking this juror because when I asked this juror about his feelings towards dogs, he says, I don't have any dogs. I don't care about dogs. That's my reason. And the judge agreed. And he was struck. Right.

[Ashley Merchant]

And that's a good reason. That is a good reason. And, you know, I think it's interesting, going into cases, one of the things that we always do as defense lawyers is we try to identify the type of jurors that we want. And sometimes that has race to do with it. You know, maybe in this case, they wanted certain races, but more often than not, it's a different type of juror. And I just want to kind of explain that to everyone. One of the questions I got was they were. They had heard, and I don't even know if this is true or not, they'd heard there were three black females that were struck from the jury. Okay, so what if. And I think the outrage was, well, why were there three black females struck? What if all of those three black females had lost a son to a knife? You know, I mean, that could happen. And so there's a lot of time that you see somebody that looks like the juror that you want, but maybe they've had a life experience that you don't want. There's also. We strike a lot of people if they say that they can't sit in judgment. I'm sure, Dave, when you were a state attorney, you probably struck those people a little more than I would like to strike them. But we oftentimes have highly, highly religious people who are on the jurors on the panel, and they say, you know, I just. I can't sit in judgment of someone else. I just, you know, I don't believe in that. And so we have to strike those people. No matter what color they are, we have to strike them. You know, at least the state does. And I don't usually object to that, because you Know, that's a, that's a fair reason to strike, but so it's, it's not so simple. I think with jury selection, it's one of the reasons I wanted to talk about it, because I know a lot of people feel very angry about how this jury looked. And I understand that because as soon as I saw the jury, I thought, couldn't you have done a better job with this jury just to make people feel better about the system? But we don't know what happened. We don't know why those folks were struck. We don't know the different reasons. And it doesn't necessarily mean that the system's racist or it's rigged or something like that, because the process is a process of deselection. I had a lot of people ask, is that going to be something where we can win a new trial? They can win on appeal because he had an all white jury. First of all, he didn't have an all white jury. But second of all, it's very hard to prove Batson. I can tell you that I have won one appeal in 25 years on a Batson challenge. One. And I will never forget it. And your example earlier, Dave, kind of reminded me of it. I was trying to prove that the state, the prosecutor, had struck people because they were minorities. And one of the questions that he had said his race neutral reason was that he struck people who had gold teeth. And immediately I was like, whoa, that sounds like the absolute most racist reason to strike people. Well, his answer was, I don't like, like jurors who like to stand out. And people who have gold teeth, they like to stand out. And the whole appeal was whether or not that was a race neutral reason or not. Luckily, the court of appeals ruled in my favor and said that's not a race neutral reason. And so I got a new trial for my client. But that's what this decision comes down to. It's such a fine decision as to whether or not, I mean, it makes sense. Maybe you don't like people who like to stand out. I mean, he said, I don't like people who have pink hair. I happen to have dyed my hair pink for that case just for fun. But you did. I actually did.

[Dave Aronberg]

You were in court as a lawyer. I had pink hair.

[Ashley Merchant]

Pink hair. Hot pink hair. Because he said that he did not like jurors who like to stand out. And he said that's why he struck people who had gold teeth. And he also would have struck someone who had different colored hair, like pink hair, because he didn't like them to stand out. He didn't think they'd be good jurors, they weren't good citizens, weren't good jurors, stuff like that. And I was like, oh, well, my God, I can't get on gold teeth, but I can get pink hair. And I got pink hair. But that's what Batson is, you know. So I just wanted to kind of explain that. Some of the other questions Dave we got were, you know, obviously a lot of things about grounds for appeal. But one of the big ones I want to talk about, and I know we're going to talk about this with our guest, was why did Carmelo Anthony not take the stand? And I have a very big opinion on that because I went down some rabbit holes looking at some of the case pleadings. So I've got my opinion. I mean, were you surprised DAV about why he didn't take the stand?

[Dave Aronberg]

I don't know if I've ever seen a self defense claim where the defendant did not take the stand. I can't recall it because by definition, if you claim self defense, you've got to show that you were in reasonable fear of your life. How do you show that you show that by taking the stand and saying, I was scared for my life. Now they try to have it both ways. They didn't want Carmelo Anthony to take the stand, so they tried to get the evidence in through his friends, through other people. And his friends were not great witnesses. One of them, in fact, said the opposite. And so it was a train wreck, the whole thing.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, no, it really was a train wreck. And a lot of folks asked also why there weren't character witnesses. You know, why did they not call people? Why did the defense not put up character witnesses for Carmela Anthony? And I mean, in my opinion, I would have definitely wanted him to testify. I would have definitely wanted to see those character witnesses. And you're allowed. That was a question. Are you allowed under Texas law, you're allowed to call character witnesses? It doesn't happen often because it makes defense lawyers very nervous to do that because of, of a concept called opening the door. And I wanna walk through to our viewers what that means because I think that's what happened in this case. So essentially, if your client is squeaky clean, doesn't have any wrongdoing in their past, no prior arrest, no prior acts of violence, stuff like that, you can call witnesses, character witnesses to testify as to their general character in the community. You can't call witnesses to testify about specific Good acts. So you can't say, oh, was, you know, Johnny helped me at church and Johnny bought my groceries for me. Can't do. But you can have someone say, well, you know, I know Johnny. I've known Johnny for 20 years and I know he's a truthful person. I know he's a good person. You can testify about that. So that's general. Well, what happens though is you have to make a decision because if you put that up, you are opening the door to any bad character. And it makes defense lawyers very, very nervous because there could be things hidden in the deep, dark paths of our clients that make us very nervous. Now, I'll tell you, for a 17 year old, I would have been a lot less nervous because how much life has he lived? How much could he have in his past? But I thought when I heard that he didn't take the stand, I thought, there's something, there's some reason. And so I combed the record and I found in one of the bond hearing transcripts his father testified that he had never been arrested before, but he testified. And I think this is so significant, that he had a prior altercation at school and that that was the only time he had been in trouble before. And immediately, immediately I don't know what that prior altercation is, but immediately I knew that's why he didn't take the stand, because that would have come in and think about Dave, if you were a prosecutor, what would you have done if you had a prior act of something? We don't know what a prior act at school. And I have the exact language of what he testified to. He said an altercation, that school year altercation.

[Dave Aronberg]

Okay. All right. Well, no matter what it is, Ashley, I think though, if you are going to say self defense, you have to take the stand even if something's going to come out against you, right? Yeah. You just have to. Because how else will the jury put themselves in your shoes that you were in reasonable fear of your life? The only other way I could see it is if there was a clear video that showed that you obviously were in fear of your life, that someone's coming after you, then you may not need to take the stand. But here there was no video. You had to do it. And I thought that just sealed his fate when he did not.

[Ashley Merchant]

No, it did. That sealed his fate. And then not having character witnesses to testify about him, that definitely sealed his fate. But I think a lot of folks are curious and I was curious why. You know, because we all assumed he was Going to take the stand. We all expected to hear character witnesses. We expected to hear from people. And there was a big void. And so I think it's reasonable that they were worried about that altercation coming in. And the fact that he used the word altercation at school tells me he got in a fight at school. Because an altercation, that's, you know, I'm not saying it's a physical fight. I'm not saying it was a knife fight, but it's an altercation. That doesn't mean you brought in, you know, that you got busted for bringing in a vape. You know, an altercation is between two people. And so I think that they were worried about the jury hearing that if he did take the stand. And, you know, that's a significant, significant issue. I think we've got a SOT from the actual hearing from the actual court. If we could go ahead and play

[Cody Thomas]

that SOT one, the verdict, guilty of

[Courtroom Reporter]

that top charge of murder. And as you just stated, five to 99 years behind bars. We're sitting in there, we're waiting for that verdict to come in. We reconvened once they let us know it was happening. We sat in there, waited for those parties to come back in, and then that verdict was read. And of course, we know the jury had the, the option of manslaughter if they chose that, but they did not, clearly they did not see this as self defense. They thought this was murder. They thought he went in there. You know, in the altercation, there was intention behind what he did because they really outlined the, the definition of murder before the jury went back to deliberate, that it was the deliberate, the incident, intentional cause of harm or death by another person. So that's the way the jury saw it. And of course, Ted, the reaction in the courtroom, there was tears on both sides, obviously, for two different reasons. You know, the Metcalf side feels that there's been, you know, vindication for their son's death. There's been justice served. But on the Carmelo side, of course, now Carmelo's going to jail for a very long time. We'll be seeing his family through plexiglass for a very long time.

[Ashley Merchant]

This is heartbreaking.

[Tax Relief Advocates Announcer]

We've all heard those scary IRS radio ads that try to frighten you into calling. But tax relief advocates is different. If you owe the IRS 5,000, 50,000 or even $500,000, TRA has a solution for your tax problem. It doesn't matter if you're in your car at work or with your kids. No matter where you are, visit tra.com don't lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe. Their passion is taxes and helping people and businesses fix IRS problems. They have over 1000 five star Google reviews and an A rating with the Better Business Bureau. You no longer need to fear the irs. Generous tax relief programs are available now to give you a fresh start. So don't wait. Simply visit tra.com that's tra.com or call 800-583-6429. Once again, that's 800-583-6429. Tax relief advocates real solutions for real people.

[Angie Hicks]

Hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of Angie. One thing I've learned is that you buy a house, but you make it a home. For decades, Angie's helped millions of homeowners hire skilled pros for the projects that matter. Angie, the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find a pro for your [e-mail] time

[Select Quote Announcer]

for some life talk. You probably have life insurance, but you might be paying too much for too little coverage. And did you know if you get it through your employer that you that and then you're laid off that you could lose your coverage? Scary to think about, but it's simple to fix. Thanks to select Quote for over 40 years, select Quote has been one of the most trusted insurance brokers out there, helping more than 2 million Americans secure over $700 billion in coverage. Unlike one size fits all life insurance companies, Select Quotes licensed agents work for you for free. In as little as 15 minutes, they will compare policies from top rated carriers to find the best fit for for your health and budget. Head to selectquote.com and a licensed agent will find the right policy for you, get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than [e-mail] Megan save more than 50% on term life [e-mail] Megan today to get started,

[Ashley Merchant]

Dave, I want to turn to, to Pinot. So that's down in your neck of the woods. Can you catch us up to what's going on in that case?

[Dave Aronberg]

Well, this is a big case now. First, kudos to our intrepid producers here. Michelle, Natasha, they're, they're amazing because I asked them about this case and they had it ready. I mean they, they did the research and because I think this is a big deal not just in South Florida but nationally to talk about. So George Pino is a big time player. He's a developer in Miami and very well connected and he got into a boating accident. He was initially just charged with some misdemeanors. And there was such an outcry that they went back prosecutors and they looked at it again and now they've charged him with vessel homicide and manslaughter. And these are both second degree felonies. Both can carry a sentence of up to 15 years in prison. And this stems from a 2022 boat crash that killed Pino's daughter's friend, a 17 year old girl. Say her name, Luciana Lucy Fernandez. And it left another friend of hers, Katharina Katie puig, who's now 21, with long term physical and neurological disabilities. The whole thing's so tragic, but it blew up because Pino is so prominent in real estate. And also the students involved, they go to a well known Catholic private school in the area. So this whole thing was just misdemeanors until the Miami Herald published a series of articles exposing flaws in the investigation by the Fish and Wildlife Commission, which handles boat crashes. And after the misdemeanor charges were recommended, there was such a public outcry that the state attorney's office revisited the case. And now here we have it. And so it's already started off in an unusual way. Now, when this trial started, you had opening arguments. And the reason why Pino is being charged is because it wasn't just allegedly a pure accent, that apparently he was reckless, that there was lots of alcohol involved, that he had negligence that led to the crash. In fact, let's hear the prosecutor sought to describe why Pino's on trial here.

[I]

There's no evidence to conclusively prove that George Pino was drunk. He's not charged with boating under the influence, causing a death. There's no evidence that he deliberately crashed his boat into that channel marker. If the evidence supported that, he wouldn't be charged with manslaughter and vessel homicide,

[Dave Aronberg]

he'd be charged with murder.

[I]

But the evidence does support a finding. The evidence in this case will show conclusively this was not just an accident. This was a bunch of factors that when they all come together form the inescapable conclusion that George Pino was reckless and he was culpably negligent. And as a result, Lucy's gone. And that's why at the end of this trial, I will ask you to return a verdict of guilty.

[Dave Aronberg]

Also, there's a video of him where he breaking down. That was something that had to stop the trial. He was like breaking down in front of everyone. Can we show that? I Want to, we can talk over it as you show this, this video.

[Ashley Merchant]

I'm curious. In this video, Dave, it looks like, and it's been reported that maybe next to him is one of his daughters. Is that traditional in Florida?

[Dave Aronberg]

Not that I'm used to. And you know that that woman next to him is reportedly one of his daughters. And I. It's not like when in our courtrooms here in Palm beach county, we're not used to the family sitting at the defense table, unless she's a paralegal there or something. You know, I don't understand. The judge allowed Pinot to step out, remove the jury. And it's, it's just, it's, it's awful. So if you want to know what happened here, Pino and his wife, they took their daughter, who was celebrating her 18th birthday, and 11 of their friends to a sandbar in Biscayne bay back in September 2022. They were going over to the Ocean Reef Club, very nice place, a private club, for dinner. And Pino apparently, allegedly was driving just under 50 miles an hour on the boating on the wrong side of the channel before he slammed into a bright green channel marker, sending pino and all 13 of his passengers into the water. And poor Lucy was critically injured during the collision and died in the hospital. And the prosecutors are alleging that he drank alcohol, provided alcohol to his daughter's underage friends and then sped. And he didn't wear a kill switch, and he was driving over 20 miles per hour faster than he was earlier in the day and was drinking. And then here's the craziest part. He admitted to consuming two beers, but 61 empty and partially empty bottles and cans of alcoholic beverages were found on his salvage boat after the wreck. Fortunately for him, he has a really good defense lawyer. Howard Schrebnick. Fun fact, Ashley. Howard Schrebnick, one of the top criminal defense lawyers in all of Florida, his partner in the past, I don't know if he still works with his brother. His younger brother was my summer camp counselor when I was a kid.

[Ashley Merchant]

There you go. Oh, my God. That's. That's full circle. Well, I see why Mr. Pino was crying does not look good for him. But we will keep you posted on this. But next up, we're really excited to welcome Cody Thomas of Court tv. And he was actually in the courtroom and on the ground for the Carmella Anthony case. He is going to discuss that with us. Who is, as we all know, as we've been discussing, is the high school athlete from Texas who was just convicted of stabbing a fellow classmate, 17 year old Austin Metcalf, to death last year. Stay tuned.

[Tax Relief Advocates Announcer]

We've all heard those scary IRS radio ads that try to frighten you into calling, but Tax Relief Advocates is different. If you owe the IRS 5,000, 50,000 or even $500,000, TRA has a solution for your tax problem. It doesn't matter if you're in your car, at work or with your kids. No matter where you are, visit tra.com don't lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe. Their passion is taxes and helping people and businesses fix IRS problems. They have over 1000 five star Google reviews and an A rating with the Better Business Bureau. You no longer need to fear the irs. Generous tax relief programs are available now to give you a fresh start. So don't wait. Simply visit tra.com that's tra.com or call 800-583-6429. Once again, that's 800-583-6429. Tax relief advocates real solutions for real people

[DSW Announcer]

At DSW, we ask the important questions like what shoes are you going to wear? Whether you're prepping for wedding season, festival season, or just planning the ultimate vacay, the right shoes can make or break an rsvp. So own the moment. You've got big plans and we've got just the shoes at the perfect price of course. Get ready to get ready with Designer Shoe Warehouse. Head to your DSW store or dsw.com today and let us surprise you.

[Dave Aronberg]

Starting something new, especially a business Business, is hard. So much work goes into this thing that you're not entirely sure will work out and it can be hard to make that leap of faith. It helps though when you have a partner like Shopify on your side. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses all around the world and 10% of all E commerce in the United States. With hundreds of templates, Shopify helps you build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style. It's packed with great AI tools that write product descriptions, page headlines, and even enhance your product images. Their marketing tools also help you create email and social media campaigns wherever your customers are scrolling. That's really helpful. Plus, Shopify provides world class expertise in everything from managing inventory to international shipping to processing returns. All with 24. 7 award winning support. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.com mktc Go to shopify.com mktc that's shopify.com mktc

[Ashley Merchant]

welcome back to the MK True Crime Show. Joining us now is Cody Thomas. He's a field reporter for Court tv and he's the of on the Record. So excited. Cody, you have been inside the courtroom this entire time covering the Carmelo Anthony trial that we have all not been able to watch, which is killing us. No audio, no video allowed. And you're one of the few that actually was in there. So we have so many questions for you. But can you just tell us the overall feel of the trial? I mean, it had to be heavy. Like this is two young lives that are ruined. It's. It's just heartbreaking.

[Cody Thomas]

Yeah, Ashley, it was, it was one of the most emotionally heavy trials that I've covered in my three and a half years at Core tv. Because you have, you have emotions on two sides of the spectrum, right. You have this one family who's lost their child and loved one forever. Then you have this other family whose son and loved ones Liberty was at stake for four days, you know, as this trial went on. But I will tell you, as emotionally heavy as this trial was, it was really full throttle and pedal to the metal. The judge was wasting no time. It was prompt. I mean, we had. Thursday was the beginning of, you know, official testimony. Thursday, Friday we had a Saturday session and then a little bit of Monday before both sides rested. But it was, it was nine hours a day inside that courtroom with one 40 minute lunch break and then one, maybe two 10 minute breaks in the afternoon just to go to the bathroom and everything for people in the gallery. So the judge is really moving this thing along. And, you know, the prosecution called 21 witnesses. The defense called six witnesses. A lot of those eyewitnesses were students, of course, who were under the tent at that track meet. And you were hearing all sorts of, you know, different but very similar accounts of what happened that day that all had the common denominator, that Carmelo Anthony was the instigator and he was the aggressor. So you're hearing all this different stuff and you're seeing body cam footage and you're hearing 911 calls. Just a very grave situation, a grave trial. And again, emotionally heavy story to listen to while we were in that courtroom.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, I mean, extremely emotionally heavy to one life lost and one about to be lost. Or, you know, luckily not lost forever, but. But definitely freedom taken. I'm curious, you know, as a defense lawyer, when I watch these cases, I love to see how the judge is and how the feel is, you know, are they. You can tell, I mean, they're ruling against the defense, they're ruling against the state. You can tell if there's a bias at all. I mean, did this judge, he, you know, seemed very, you know, militant on how fast he was moving, but how did he seem unbiased? Did he seem to treat both sides the same?

[Cody Thomas]

He absolutely did. Surprisingly enough, he was, you know, we. He was laying down the law in that courtroom. There was a lot of rules that he had. You know, of course, the no cameras and no audio being recorded. You couldn't wear any sort of clothing that had any sort of signage leaning one way or the other. And, you know, each, the defense attorney and the prosecutor, if they were going over time in their opening statement or closing argument, he was making sure that, hey, you got two minutes left. You've been running or, you know, approach or whatever, whatever, whatever he had to say to, you know, wrangle the courtroom the way he wanted to. But I didn't sense any bias on his behalf at all. Which was, you know, interesting because, you know, in a lot of cases we cover here at Court tv, you can kind of tell by the attitude of the judge sometimes which way they're kind of leaning. But this one was kind of down the middle to me, Ashley, that's why

[Ashley Merchant]

I was curious, because we can see that when we're watching the trial. I mean, you can definitely tell. And, you know, sometimes it's not real bias. Sometimes, you know, one side kind of deserves it more than the other. But it seemed like this was a judge that was really, really fair. He did run a tight ship, though. I saw that he had time limits on everyone, which, which, you know, personally, I'm like, hey, that's fine. As long as you're an equal opportunity. A hole is kind of how I call it. If you're going to control one side, at least control the other side the same way. You know, like, I'm fine with that as a player.

[Cody Thomas]

Yeah, absolutely.

[Ashley Merchant]

Can you tell us.

[Cody Thomas]

Go ahead, go ahead.

[Ashley Merchant]

No, no, no. Finish, please.

[Cody Thomas]

Well, well, to the, to the topic of the tight ship, the, the day that the defense rested, that would have been two days ago, on Monday. Right. And again, we talk about these 40 minute lunch breaks. And there was a lunch break we had on Monday, and when we came back, he told us to be back right, at 12:30. Not really to be back at 12:30, but in seats at 12:30 inside the courtroom so we can get started. Right. And so we get back outside of that courtroom, you know, 1220ish, everyone's getting there.

[Dave Aronberg]

Early.

[Cody Thomas]

And it was odd because, you know, he's been so such a stickler about all, you know, being prompt. And then so we get back and it's 12:45, then it's 1pm and we're looking around like this is. This is abnormal. Right. Long story short, an hour and 45 minutes go by with no explanation as to why we're all still sitting out there. So, of course, all that speculation starts coming in. Are they brokering a last minute plea deal? Are they prepping Carmelo Anthony to testify? But then, you know, we end up going back inside and then the defense just kind of abruptly rests. You know, it's kind of surprising after only six witnesses. You know, some of the witnesses were considered a little lackluster. I don't know what, you know, where they were going with their narrative, but. But they rested very, you know, just out of nowhere. But again, that hour and 45 minutes, I should have told us something when we were sitting there, that something imminent was on the horizon when we were sitting outside that courtroom on Monday.

[Ashley Merchant]

So you all were not allowed in during that conference, whatever they were talking about. Interesting.

[Cody Thomas]

And there's been no rumors about Carmelo Anthony's. The only people I saw were Carmelo Anthony's parents going inside. So there were no, there was no circulation about what was, you know, going on in there during that time.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, well, you know, they have to go over your right to testify, you know, because that's one of the things that the lawyer can't control. That's one of the things that the defendant has an absolute right to choose if they testify or not. So the judge always has to go over colloquy, but that's a little long for that colloquy. It's usually maybe 10 minutes. So I'm wondering if they had some other things they were fighting over that would be very interesting to. To. I have my guess, but that'll be very.

[Dave Aronberg]

What's your guess? What's your guess?

[Ashley Merchant]

This is what I thought. Yeah, so I've thought this all along because this is something. I mean, I love my clients to testify. So this is something I agonize over in every single case. What is going to bite me in the butt if my client testifies? And there was a prior altercation that Carmelo Anthony had had at school. It was not a criminal arrest, but a prior altercation can actually come in if you testify and open the door to character. So my guess is they were going back and forth because I guarantee that lawyer did not want to put him on the stand if there was a risk that that might come out. And so they were probably arguing back and forth whether they were going to be able to go into that and quite frankly, whether or not his witnesses had, had opened the door, because I think those lackluster witnesses were lackluster because they were terrified to open the door to whatever that altercation was. And I, I get that because I've been there. You know this. When you hear the words you open the door, you literally just want to vomit as a defense lawyer because it's the absolute worst thing ever. So I'm guessing it had something to do with that.

[Cody Thomas]

What do you think is why you're the expert? I mean, it sounds, that sounds. I'm just, I'm just a TV boy. You know, I had this report out here and there's lights on. Yeah, I mean, yeah, all of us are sitting there with no explanation. And the thing that we were thinking about was the plea deal situation. We're like, oh, you know, because you got to think about the facts of this case for the facts. Right. It's an uphill battle from the beginning. And you know, they never really. Which to my surprise, they never addressed the defense why he had a knife in the first place on school grounds. They had this officer that was on the stand for maybe 12 minutes, 10 or 12 minutes, and the only thing they got out of him, to me that was of no. Was that in Texas it's not illegal for, you know, a 17 year old kid to carry a knife with a blade that's less than five and a half inches because his blade was three and a half. He said it was not, you know, criminally illegal. Of course it was against some school policy, but not illegal in the eyes of the law. And that's pretty much all they got out of it. But you still have to explain why this teenager, I feel, had a knife in his book bag at a track meet. Because during the entire prosecution's case, when they had all those eyewitness students who were under the tents, all of them testified and said, you know, we've never heard of a knife at a track meet, let alone somebody sitting here ready to use it. So they never went into that. No one ever threw out a reasoning as if, you know, maybe he loved to camp. Maybe they cut nylon when they're setting the chin up. They didn't, they didn't address any of it. So that was surprising.

[Ashley Merchant]

He forgot it. Yeah, you know, that was surprising. That was really surprising to me too, because I Have a daughter who ran track. And I was actually. This case made me think back about all the memos we get. Every time she would have a track meet, you get like this printout that says what you're allowed to bring, what you're not allowed to bring. Some campuses are, you know, you have to have that clear bag thing, some don't. It's going to be hot. Bring a water bottle. They always said, don't bring valuables and don't bring weapons. Like, literally in bold on every single flyer, it reminded the parents, you know, and. And the kids, you can't bring that. And so I just was thinking back to that, and I was like, you. She carried a track bag. I mean, it's got bio freeze in it. It's got, like, blister cream. It doesn't have a weapon. Like, that's like, how did that get in there? And I wanted to hear that. I wanted that explanation, and I think the jury probably wanted it.

[Cody Thomas]

That's what I was going to say. I'm sure the jury wanted to hear that as well. You know, why. Why this was here and if I ran track as well in high school, Ashley, and also my mother was a middle school principal, so I had all the. All the knowledge of the school rules. Generally speaking, of course, I grew up in Georgia and this is in Texas. But, you know, weapons on school grounds are. Are prohibited, I feel, you know, nationwide. I mean, you don't hear about just guns walking in school just because it's a lawful carry state. You can't really do that. You know what I mean? So. So again, to your point, I'm sure the jury wanted to hear that, and that's something they just never got. Even if it was, you know, just the narrative that the defense was trying to paint, they threw no option out there for them to even consider as to why this was even there.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Dave Aronberg]

Cody, what do you think overall, the defense? I mean, we've been critical of them because they didn't call their client to the stand, and they didn't seem prepared on some of their witnesses. One of their witnesses backfired on them. Do you think they did an okay job or you think there's an ineffective assistance of counsel claim coming?

[Cody Thomas]

I would not be surprised if that claim was coming, Dave. That's kind of. That's kind of the sentiment that we got, you know, as media, you know, just the aura we got of that. They only called these six witnesses. And to your point, Dave, I believe you're talking about that witness they called where it was surprising to me. Again, I'm no lawyer. I don't have any, you know, expertise on strategy when it comes to litigation. But he calls a witness, this student, and the first thing he says is, you know, so we've never talked before, have we? The student's like, no, sir. And he's like, other than the two minutes out here in this hallway before you got on the stand? Yes, sir, that's correct. And I'm just thinking, you know, witness preparation, that's not a secret. We know that's. That's a real thing. And so, you know, he's asking them questions. He's trying to, you know, paint this narrative. And this kid's just kind of negating, you know, just things that he's trying to say. And then the kicker to me was that under cross examination, the prosecutor gets up there and is like, so you and I have talked longer than two minutes, haven't we? Yes, sir. I've texted your father even last night. This was a Saturday witness, so this would have been the Friday night I was texting your father last night. Yes, sir. And I'm just sitting there thinking, why is the prosecution having a better relationship with a defense witness? That. I mean, just the simple fact of that didn't make any sense to me

[Ashley Merchant]

and makes no sense.

[Cody Thomas]

Again, a defense witness, you guys, defense, I kind of implore it. This kid said that Carmelo Anthony was the aggressor. Why would you call a witness, I guess, that you never talked to because

[Ashley Merchant]

he'd only talked to him for two minutes.

[Cody Thomas]

Well, I mean, yeah. And then again, backfired against you. Like, I. I don't know. That was a shock to me. That was what I took away from the defense's case out of these six witnesses.

[Ashley Merchant]

So, like, you're in the courtroom. I mean, did they have an investigator that you could see? I mean, I'm just curious because normally, you know, we see the. The defense table and there's like, all these assistants and stuff. We saw how much money was raised, and I certainly don't want to, you know, be judgy about what they spend their money on. But, like. Like, I'm not going to try a murder case without my investigator. No way. You know, and, yeah, not going to be calling witnesses that I don't know what they're going to say, because my investigator is going to have recorded their statements ahead of time, and I'm going to have it locked down exactly what they're going to say. So, like, did you see any of that?

[Cody Thomas]

I was Going to say there's an investigator. If he was sitting there, I didn't see him. And they didn't, they didn't call him, they didn't say anything, you know, of that nature again. Yeah, you know, their case, their case ended and it rested so abruptly, like we were expecting more. Because I remember sitting back there in the row of media, there was only eight of us in there. And when we came back in after that long break that we had no explanation for, we sit down with our laptops ready to go and then the defense rests, your honor, and we all just kind of. Okay, that's it, you know, and then the state dressed in the. So that was it.

[Dave Aronberg]

Yeah, right. Yeah, yeah. What about the claims that the judge or prosecutor errored in the jury selection where they were intentionally trying to target at black jurors? Do you think that there's anything nefarious going on or do you think that the answers you heard gave legitimacy to striking them?

[Cody Thomas]

So of course, when that was, you know, I was there for the third day of jury selection when this was going down. Of course I was running in and out of the courtroom because we were allowed to float during that day. I was doing television and running back in. But the issue was it came down to these three black women, right, that the, that they wanted to strike. And they, you know, the defense claimed they're striking them on, you know, racial bias, but then they said, the prosecution said they were striking them based on occupational bias because all three of them were teachers and this happened at a school and you know, that was where they went with that. And then of course, the judge granted, you know, them to be stricken how that, how that went. So those are the only three black jurors that were, I guess, possible towards the end, but there were three Asian women and then two other middle Eastern, you know, East Indian looking women that were on, on the jury as well. So of course it was a majority white jury, but there was a sprinkle of diversity in there. But of course, you know, that big headline with the optics of this being, you know, black kid, white kid, heinous crime, no black, no black people on the jury. Is this really a jury of his peers? Which I guess I can see, you know, besides where that's coming from, but I didn't sense anything nefarious as far as, you know, targeting, you know, that like, listen, let's make sure, let's not have any African Americans on the jury. I didn't sense that. But of course, I don't know what was Going down, you know, back in the, in the room when they were making those final selections.

[Ashley Merchant]

So the state wanted to strike them because they were teachers, not the defense, right?

[Cody Thomas]

Not. Yes, correct.

[Ashley Merchant]

Because I was wondering, I was like, well, you know, I would be nervous to have a teacher on if I was the defense. That would, that would make me nervous. So that would have been an interesting call on their part. But state, that's kind of, kind of surprising. When in the pool, whenever were you able to see, like when the jurors actually came in the full panel? I mean, I'm sure there were a couple hundreds. I mean, what did they have some diversity in the panel.

[Cody Thomas]

So we weren't able to. We had. And where we were sitting, there was a screen, like we were in the courtroom where the, you know, trial was going to take place, and then there was a screen. So we saw the, you know, the prosecutor and the defense attorney, but we did not see the faces of the jury. We heard them speaking when they were asking questions. And you know, a lot of, a lot of the issues that were raised in the hours, hours there was, you know, some of these jurors were parents and they, you know, obviously there was no more black jurors in the entire pool. It was 600 people they pooled together for this and by the time got there on Wednesday that, you know, whittled it down to 250 and then they had that to choose from as they were going. But a lot of the issues that were being presented was that they couldn't see themselves sending this young man away for the rest of his life. You know, only being 19 years old. That was, that was a commonality, you know, them being parents. A lot of them said, you know, maybe, you know, five or ten years as the, you know, the defense was asking questions, the prosecution was asking questions, you know, trying to, you know, weed out the, the ones they didn't want, of course. And you know, the defense and the prosecution had 10 strikes each to, you know, make the strikes when they got down to that selection. But that was a common issue that was coming up. They couldn't, they couldn't put this kid away for a long time or forever. You know, regardless of, you know, you got a kid over here that's gone forever. You know, that was one of the things in their closing argument, the prosecution's case, they were well before the sentencing, just after the guilt phase, before the sentencing phase. When they did those last minute closing arguments, the, the prosecutor was pretty much saying, hey, I'm not telling you what to do. But you could send a message with your, with your choice here. You know, community was a common word. He was, you know, holding people accountable in the community. And he said, you know, if you're considering a life sentence, think about the Metcalf family. Then, you know, he had a big bellowing voice and he pointed at, he was like, Jeff Metcalf, Megan Metcalf, Hunter Metcalf have all been sentenced to life sentences. A life sentence of a void in their hearts in their home. And I thought that was very powerful, of course, and I'm sure the jury took that into consideration once they went back in there and started deliberating that sentence that ultimately ended up being 35 years.

[Dave Aronberg]

But why didn't they put on the Metcalfs onto the stand to reach the jury that way instead of just arguing about it?

[Cody Thomas]

That was what we were. We thought that fronter Metcalf was going to take the stand. He wasn't there the entire trial. The twin brother who was also under the tent that day. And so, you know, we're sitting around thinking, he's not in here in the gallery, which, you know, testifying witnesses aren't allowed in the gallery. So we thought the prosecution was going to end with a bang. You know, they started off with their forensic video analyst, then they went down to like the head track coach at Memorial. Then they had a slew of children, a slew of eyewitnesses, students from all different assortments that saw what they saw. And on the topic of them, their stories all pretty much corroborated the way I've described it as. It's like a tree, the same trunk, but just different branches. Some students may have said it was a one handed push, some students may have said it was a two handed push. A little more aggressive than whatever. But, but the commonality is that, you know, Austin did, you know, initiate the physical contact, but it wasn't anything they were scared of. They thought it was just two boys mouthing off because, I mean, we've all been in competitive sports. Dave, you and I have been young men before. You know how boys can get when all the hormones get to running and you have friends around and you know all that, you get the trash talking. But they thought that was.

[Ashley Merchant]

And your rivals, I mean, your rivals, like you're. I was thinking about, I was like, we chant for our teams, we have like weird sayings and phrases and you know, we dress ourselves, we body paint ourselves in our team colors. Like there's an immense amount of rivalry, you know, and for this kid to go in the other, essentially, locker room, I mean, just seemed. Seemed like a bad idea. Seemed like a really bad idea.

[Cody Thomas]

And, Ashley, that. That's a good point, the locker room thing, because a huge part of. Of the prosecution's case was this phrase they called tent culture, which. You had a daughter that ran track, I ran track. You know, those tents. That's where the teams are. And while track is, you know, you change.

[Ashley Merchant]

You change clothes in those tents.

[Dave Aronberg]

Right, right.

[Cody Thomas]

And, you know, that's the point they made. Locker room. Like, it's like, if you're in the NFL, if the Colts are playing the Texans or something, they're not going to go hang out in the locker room just because the running backs know each other. You know, they'll hang out afterward, but not during the competition. So that was the point that the prosecution was trying to hammer on, to which, you know, the defense was challenging. And you and I know this well, Ashley, that, you know, track meets a little more social than other sporting events, that you can walk by, you know, what's up, dude? If you know him from the rival school. But. But the prosecution was saying, you know, you wouldn't go into there and hang for 20 or 30 minutes. So that was the whole. That was a big contentious part of this whole storyline.

[Dave Aronberg]

Why. Why do you think Cody, he was there. Why did he go on that tent? There were all these tents there. Why was he choose. Why did he choose that tent?

[Cody Thomas]

So the whole. The whole, you know, narrative, the defense's narrative was that no rain was a big part of this storyline. They said, you know, it was raining that morning, and they talked about Texas weather, how the rain could be coming down, it could be misting, it can come down again in 5 minutes, 10 minutes. And the story they were painting was that, you know, Centennial for some reason was the only school that did not have a tent that day. You know, for some reason, for some reason or another, they didn't have a tent. You could. You either. You could get under the bleachers. That was also an option. That was what the prosecution was bringing up. But the defense was trying to say he was in these bleachers, it was starting to rain. And they. We heard about this character, this student named Eddie, this. This Eddie kid that we heard about. In opening statements, the defense said, oh, Carmelo and Carmelo and Eddie knew each other. He was under the memorial tent. That's why Carmelo walked over there, because Eddie was childhood friends from a young age, five or six years old, with Carmelo's ex girlfriend, some girl who was dating at the time. So that's. That was the link they were trying to make with Eddie. Right. And so Eddie takes the stand for the prosecution, which surprised me because I'm like, if the defense is talking about Eddie, I thought Eddie was going to be a defense witness. And so Eddie gets up there under direct examination with the prosecution, all but says, you know, I knew Carmelo. Carmelo was, you know, we were cool and all, but I wouldn't say we were like, friends. And I was like, what we've heard about this Eddie guy. And then. Which the defense pushed back on. The defense did push back, and they brought up eight or nine pictures of Carmelo and Eddie in these pictures together. These, you know, group settings at Eddie's house. I think there was two or three pictures of just them. Two. But I guess, you know, the narrative that I feel like the jury went with is that, that if Carmelo's dating this girl whose family and Eddie's family are really tight because they've known each other forever, if he's dating her, then by default, he's going to be at these family gatherings at Eddie's house. Because the majority of the pictures were group settings. Right. And, you know, he's going to be cordially. He's not going to go to these houses and these. These, you know, grandmother's birthday parties and me, you know, acting a fool or anything. So that's where I feel like the jury went as far as, you know, the. The picture pushback. But, Dave, to your question or to, you know, to your point. Point, I guess it's up in the air as to why he was under that tent, because, you know, some people say he went under there the whole, you know, the instigate purposefully. Of course, you know, the jury came back with murder. So they. They decided on premeditation, whether that was 10 minutes of premeditation or two minutes of premeditation with the, you know, the hand in the bag, the. The touch me and see what happens. I guess they could take that as, you know, even though it was only five seconds, you had your hand on a blade and you thought about doing it. So that's all it takes.

[Ashley Merchant]

It's all it takes. Yeah. Yeah. Such a tragedy. So you were also outside. I want to. Before we. We lose you, I want to talk about what the scene was like outside. I know we've got S4 if we can play that. And then if you just can sort of explain how it felt walking in and out with all of these protesters, if we could play S4.

[Dave Aronberg]

Love you.

[Ashley Merchant]

So that's Carmela's mom, right?

[Cody Thomas]

And mean that. That is a testament to what that outside looks like. And I am just, you know, I got some. Some. Some. Some pushback thrown at me when I was out there for a couple of days, you know, calling me all sorts of names. Just. I'm reporting what's. What's being heard in the courtroom. I'm sorry if you don't like what's being reported. They were just coming at me. They were coming at everybody. But, you know, this is just what I'm hearing. You know, the. The. The guilt phase hadn't happened yet. I'm just telling you what each side is saying. But it was definitely very tense. But I'm just. I'm thankful that yesterday on verdict day, that was obviously the tensest day, right? They had, you know, they upped the ante on the security. You know, you got all these, you know, big sheriff deputies with the cowboy hats on, looking like they're really out of a Texas Ranger movie out there. Just trying to.

[Dave Aronberg]

Oh, my God.

[Cody Thomas]

You know, I'm serious. They had the boots on you.

[Ashley Merchant]

I know.

[Dave Aronberg]

Real deal.

[Cody Thomas]

Yeah, they are. They are. But there was a lot of profanity thrown around between each side. Each side, supporters and all. I mean, you had advocates from. From either side, you know, radicals from either side as well. Not just community members, but. But you saw a lot of verbal confrontations with people in each other's faces this close. And, you know, everyone had a selfie stick with the. With the phone on it, you know, because everyone's an independent journalist these days, and everyone has a platform and all that different stuff. But luckily, no one got hurt. There were no more, you know, physical altercations, but verbal altercations. Yeah, that was pretty rampant. Just what you saw there. That's a testament to what was going on out there.

[Dave Aronberg]

Well, verbal disagreement is very American, but using a knife to stab someone is not. And that's the tragedy in all this, especially when you're 17 years old. It just didn't have to happen. Didn't have to escalate like this. I do think the jury made the right verdict. I just, you know, I wish that the jury was more diverse so that the community would buy into it more. It does seem like this is going to be a real sticking, like a sore point for. For many years to come. And that's. That's a shame. But, you know, your. Your analysis is. Is so insightful because, you know, we didn't get access to any of this because the judge didn't allow it. Now, just as a final question here, what's your take overall on cameras in the courtroom? I know you're a member of the media, so you probably say yes, but, I mean, I don't see any reason why federal courts, state courts should ever ban cameras in the courtroom. We need more transparency, and during this time of rapid conspiracy theories, not less.

[Cody Thomas]

That is my exact sentiment, Dave. I think public transparency for things like this, especially something with as much just emotional connection, you know, and polarization that you see, again, the optics, you know, black kid, white kid. I think transparency is extraordinarily important in these. Because I'll tell you, sitting in there, you know, there, of course, there's all the racial bias claims like that against the Metcalf family. I'm sitting in there. A majority of those student eyewitnesses were either black or Hispanic. Of course, you had six or seven white kids get up there, too. But there was a lot of diversity on. On that stand. And I'll tell you, Saturday and Monday and on verdict day, actually Saturday, Monday and verdict day yesterday, there were, there, look, five boys and one girl that came in, and two of the boys were black kids and went straight to the Metcalf family. And I'm talking like the mom wrapped them up, gave them kisses on the cheek, you know, shook the dad's hand, really solid. Wow. And they're showing some of that body cam stuff. You know, these kids are crying. You know, they look like former teammates. You know, they look like, you know, big old boys, whether they're seniors or college kids or whatever they are. But there was diversity within that courtroom. And I just wish, you know, on the outside, of course, no one knows that. And, you know, it's just. It's a weird topic to try to bring up when you're talking about somebody getting stabbed. But there was. There was a lot of diversity going on there on the stand and within the gallery. And the public wouldn't know that. You know, we can come.

[Ashley Merchant]

The community needs to know that.

[Cody Thomas]

That. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. And I just. I didn't pick up on any racial bias inside that courtroom. Again, I don't know these two families from. From second base. But within that courtroom, within that trial setting, I didn't pick up on any of that.

[Ashley Merchant]

Well, that's why it's so important you were there and you're telling what happened because the world couldn't see. And it, you know, it does. When we saw the, the jury makeup, you know, we were worried about it. And you know, you hear reports and you don't know what's the truth. And knowing though what you're. Your experience was, is just, it's incredible. It's invaluable. Thank you so much for sharing it with us. We really appreciate it. I hope you have a safe trip home. And thank you for joining us.

[Cody Thomas]

Absolutely.

[Ashley Merchant]

How do our viewers mind you? Yeah, Tell everybody how they find you. What's your show and your handle?

[Cody Thomas]

Yeah, I'm a Court TV anchor. You can watch me every night from 4pm to 7pm on the desk, unless I'm out in the field like this. Facebook and Instagram is kind of my bread and butter. On Instagram, I'm Cody Toss. Facebook is me. And you'll see me sitting there on a little stool looking nice and dandy in my suit and everything. But yeah, you can find me, just my name. I'm on pretty much everything.

[Ashley Merchant]

That's awesome. We love it. Well, thank you so much. It was great having you, Dodie.

[Dave Aronberg]

Thanks for being with us.

[Cody Thomas]

Happy to do it. Happy to do it. Thanks for having me.

[Dave Aronberg]

And now for our closing statements. Next. You don't want to miss it. We'll be right back.

[Tax Relief Advocates Announcer]

We've all heard those scary IRS radio ads that try to frighten you into calling. But Tax Relief Advocates is different. If you owe the IRS 5,000 50,000 or even $500,000, TRA has a solution for your tax problem. It doesn't matter if you're in your car at work or with your kids. No matter where you are, visit tra.com don't lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe. Their passion is taxes and helping people and businesses fix IRS problems. They have over 1000 five star Google reviews and an A rating with the Better Business Bureau. You no longer need to fear the irs. Generous tax relief programs are available now to give you a fresh start. So don't wait. Simply visit tra.com that's tra.com or call 800-583-6429. Once again, that's 800-583-6429. Tax relief advocates Real solutions for real people.

[DSW Announcer]

You know that thing where you get an amazing pair of shoes at a really great price and want to tell everyone about about it?

[Cody Thomas]

Yeah.

[DSW Announcer]

So do we here at Designer Shoe Warehouse. We'll give you something to brag about, like the latest styles from brands you love or the trends everyone's obsessing over. Or shoes that make you feel like, well, you. So go ahead, show off a little. Buying shoes that get you the prices that get your budget. Head to your DSW store or dsw.com today. DSW. Let us surprise you.

[Ashley Merchant]

I love when I find something that tackles the root of a problem rather than just slapping a band aid on it. This podcast is sponsored by Verasity and they are revolutionizing health by focusing on the core of our energy and weight metabolism. Verasity offers drug free doctor formulated solutions like Metabolism Ignite. It's the number one doctor recommended GLP1 booster and alternative designed for those who want results without the side effects or allergens. Founder Ali Egan, a certified hormonal health coach, created Veracity after her own metabolic struggles. The formula is a clean blend of lemon, verbena, hibiscus, green coffee bean and magnesium. It's 100% natural, caffeine free and safe to use even if you're already on GLP1 medications. Best part? No negative side effects reported in clinical trials, so it's no wonder that this has sold out 10 times. So before metabolism ignites cells out again, make sure the switch to GLP1s the natural way. Head to VeracityHealth Co and use code MK for up to 65% off your order. Once again, that's VerasityHealth Co for up to 65% off. And make sure you use my promo code MK so that they know we sent you. Welcome back to MK True Crime. Now it's time for our closing arguments. People keep asking how the system failed Carmelo Anthony, and I'll tell you what I see. After 25 years as a criminal defense lawyer and a former public defender, I don't necessarily think that the system put that knife in his bag. The system didn't make the decision to walk up to a rival's tent during a heated rivalry match. The system didn't make him stay in a confrontation that he could have easily walked away from. Every athlete knows the rules. They get there them. The parents know the rules. No weapons, respect boundaries. If there's trouble, walk away, leave. Those are not complicated concepts. The uncontrollable truth in this case is that the outcome, bad outcomes are often the result of bad decisions. One bad decision leads to another and that's what ends up with two boys on this collision course that ended in tragedy. Tragedy for both families. When it was over, instead of hearing, I made a terrible mistake, I'm sorry, I wish I could take it back. All we heard was blame. Blame the victim, blame the system, blame Racist. Blame society, blame the jury, blame the judge, blame everybody. But what we never heard was accountability. Never heard personal accountability. And that's the part that really matters. Because the law isn't just about punishment. It's mostly about deterrence. It's mostly about us wanting the next teenager standing in the same exact moment that Carmelo Anthony was standing in, to choose differently. To choose to walk away, to choose to cool off, to choose to go home alive, go home to his family. We don't honor Austin Metcalf's death by pretending that this was justified. We honor it by teaching the next kid that choices have consequences and that one terrible decision can change everyone's lives forever. Thank you for joining us.

[Dave Aronberg]

That was really well said, Ashley. Thank you. And for my closing statement, I want to return to the Karen Reed case because I got a lot of messages after my last closing statement, including one from a friend of mine, Lyssa Lissa. Thank you for reaching out. And Lissa is a Karen Reed fan who had all these reasons why she was not guilty. She gave me boom, boom, boom, all these points, and I want to debunk them, because that's what I do here. I debunk conspiracy theories and I stick to facts. So her question was, how do you explain the M.E. finding his head injury, John O' Keefe's head injury, not consistent with a car strike? Or the bites on his arm or his body temperature, or his iPhone step tracker. Or the missing 30 minutes of video when her car, Karen Reed's car was in the Sally portfolio. That was the text message he sent. Okay, let me respond. I'm going to do this as fast as I can. Number one, the medical examiner's findings on the head injury. Supposedly, the medical examiner found that John o' Keefe's injuries were entirely inconsistent with a car strike. That's what the Karen Reed supporters say. Wrong. It's a distortion of how the formal autopsy results were. The ME Officially ruled the cause of death as blunt impact injuries to the head and hypothermia. And the prosecution's crash reconstruction experts testified that a high velocity reverse vehicular strike from a heavy SUV perfectly aligns with the blunt force trauma to the head and to the physics of how Keefe's body was thrown onto the lawn. Number two, the scratches and bites on his arm. Well, they said that those deep scratches, that was from a dog, not from a car, proving he was attacked inside the house. But the prosecution got the better of that one at trial because there was no canine DNA found whatsoever on John o'. Keefe's clothing on any part of no canine DNA. Generally, if you have dog bites, they'd be dog DNA. Also, dog attacks leave these crushing punctures and specific wounding patterns, none of which were present on O' Keeffe's arm. They were linear scratches caused by O' Keefe striking the broken sharp fragments of the SUV's tail light and pieces of plastic housing during the impact. Number three, his body temperature. They say that the rate that his body cooled was not consistent with being outside, was consistent with being inside the house where he supposedly was beaten to death and then dumped on the lawn. But digital data from Okee's phone showed a steady, steep drop in internal battery temperatures starting Almost immediately after 12:30am Confirming the device and its owner were exposed to the freezing elements early that morning. How about number four, the iPhone step tracker? The Apple Health step tracker supposedly showed o' Keeffe walking steps and climbing stairs at a time when the prosecution said he was already dead. Well, that's a misunderstanding of how the mobile data is recorded in parse. During the trials, the forensic examiners testified that Apple Health does not record steps in exact real time. Instead, it logs data in aggregated chunks and relies on background algorithms that retroactively assign timestamps. So also, erratic movements, such as being hit by a car can easily be misread by an iPhone's internal system as steps or floors climbed. And lastly, the missing 30 minutes of the Sally Port video. It was port, not portfolio. Supposedly there was a deleted 30 minutes of video footage. No, it's government. They use the lowest cost alternative. Just ask the Epstein jail. Automated digital security systems in these municipal buildings. They operate emotion activated loops and they have override cycles. And so the gaps are a reflection of these routine system technicalities, not a cover up. Especially when the physical evidence is so strong. Like the broken tail light pieces found at the scene. Come on. So good. People can differ on this, and my friend Lyssa is awesome. Will remain a good friend. But what continues to amaze me is how quickly Karen Reid supporters are to jump on every conspiracy theory while completely disregarding the most definitive damning facts. Like the fact that the exact data from Karen Reid's Lexus confirms she pulled forward slightly before slamming the SUV into reverse at 74% throttle, gunning the vehicle to over 24 miles an hour for 87ft. Until a sudden 0.6 mile per hour speed drop recorded the precise physical moment. Moment that her car struck John o'. Keefe. That's data, not conjecture. So you can stick with your dog bite without any dog DNA and claim Karen Reed is innocent. I'll stick with the facts and know that she is not. That's my closing statement.

[Ashley Merchant]

Ashley, I love how passionate you get about Karen Reed.

[Dave Aronberg]

You know, just as a former prosecutor,

[Ashley Merchant]

it's like I know. Oh I bet. I bet. I understand because I get like that with, with defense cases. But so thank you so much Dave, my co host, Dave Aronberg and thank you all for joining us. We hope you have a great week. Why have I asked my H Vac guy I found on angie.com to change my grandpa's trachea tube? Because I was so amazed by how quickly he replaced our air ducts. I knew I could trust him to change Pop Pop's tube while I was on vacation.

[Cody Thomas]

Make it quick young man.

[Ashley Merchant]

Aw, see, Pop up trusts you.

[Cody Thomas]

I think we should call a doctor. Connecting homeowners with skilled pros for over 30 years. Angie the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find pros for all your home [e-mail]

[Tax Relief Advocates Announcer]

in the US there's a break in every 26 seconds. But when intruders step near Simplisafe, home security steps up.

[Cody Thomas]

Stop. This is Simplisafe. Police are on the way.

[Tax Relief Advocates Announcer]

Using AI alerts us based live agents help deter break ins. SimpliSafe no long term contracts. Save 50% on your new system with professional monitoring at simplisafe.com sxm or with promo code sxm.

[Dave Aronberg]

Outdoor deterrence requires a Simplisafe Active Guard

[Cody Thomas]

Outdoor protection plan starting at 49 99amonth.

[Dave Aronberg]

Visit simplisafe.

[Cody Thomas]

Com licenses for alarm license information. Tennessee2012.