Opponent's Argument (Why Defense Fails/Was Excessive)
Argument 1: Anthony should have run away or retreated when the argument became physical.
Code of Law / Legal Principle
No Duty to Retreat (Stand Your Ground)
Rebuttal (Legal Argument)
Since Anthony was legally present at the track meet and his defense argues he did not provoke the final physical act (Metcalf’s grab/push), he had no legal duty to retreat whatsoever before using necessary force.
Simplified Explanation (Layperson's Terms)
“Texas is a ‘Stand Your Ground’ state. The law specifically says if you are legally where you are and didn’t start the physical fight, you do not have to run away. You are allowed to stand there and defend yourself with the force you think is necessary.”
Specific Legal Citation
Texas Penal Code §9.32(c) and §9.31(e)
Argument 2: The threat of one push/grab from one person does not justify the use of deadly force.
Code of Law / Legal Principle
Multiple Assailants Doctrine
Rebuttal (Legal Argument)
While the police report notes two students (Metcalf and his twin) were involved, the defense will argue that the presence of multiple hostile individuals made the single push a threat of serious bodily injury (e.g., a gang assault, being tackled, or stomped).
Simplified Explanation (Layperson's Terms)
“Anthony didn’t just see one person; he saw the main aggressor and at least one other person with him (the twin brother), acting as a group. When two or more people are hostile, the law says you can use deadly force to protect yourself from the combined threat of a serious beating.”
Specific Legal Citation
Jordan v. State, 593 S.W.3d 340 (Tex. Crim. App. 2020) (On multiple assailants)
Argument 3: Anthony couldn’t have genuinely feared for his life; the stab was an overreaction and excessive force.
Code of Law / Legal Principle
Reasonable Belief Standard
Rebuttal (Legal Argument)
Texas law requires the jury to view the situation from Anthony’s subjective perspective at the moment of the stabbing and determine if his fear was “reasonable.” The law does not impose an objective standard of measuring the amount of fear.
Simplified Explanation (Layperson's Terms)
“The law forbids anyone from telling Anthony he ‘wasn’t scared enough.’ The legal question isn’t whether he was scared, but whether his fear that he needed deadly force was reasonable given the circumstances (being surrounded by hostile individuals). Fear is personal, and the jury must put themselves in his shoes at that moment.”
Specific Legal Citation
Texas Penal Code §9.32(a)(2) (Actor’s reasonable belief that deadly force was immediately necessary)
Argument 4: The jury should consider that Anthony failed to retreat when determining if his fear was reasonable.
Code of Law / Legal Principle
No Retreat Clause / Finder of Fact Restriction
Rebuttal (Legal Argument)
The law explicitly prohibits the jury (the “finder of fact”) from considering Anthony’s failure to retreat when determining if he reasonably believed the force was necessary.
Simplified Explanation (Layperson's Terms)
“The law forbids the jury from using the ‘Why didn’t he run?’ argument against Anthony. The judge must instruct the jury that they cannot hold it against him that he chose to stand his ground instead of trying to flee the area and the confrontation.”
Specific Legal Citation
Texas Penal Code §9.32(d) (Finder of fact may not consider failure to retreat)