The case of 17-year-old Karmelo Anthony, accused of fatally stabbing fellow high school student Austin Metcalf during a Texas track meet, has ignited national controversy—not only over the incident itself but also due to the more than $500,000 raised for his legal defense through the Christian crowdfunding platform GiveSendGo.Wikipedia+9New York Post+9New York Post+9
Anthony admitted to the stabbing but claims he acted in self-defense. Despite the severity of the charge—first-degree murder—his family launched a fundraiser that has amassed over $515,000 as of early May 2025. The funds are intended to cover legal fees, counseling, and relocation expenses, as the family has reported receiving death threats and experiencing harassment, including strangers loitering near their home and impersonating delivery drivers .New York PostPeople.comWikipedia
The campaign has drawn sharp criticism, particularly after reports emerged suggesting the family was living in a luxurious $900,000 rental home and driving expensive cars. These reports fueled public outrage, with many questioning the use of donated funds. However, the family clarified that they had not withdrawn any money from the fundraiser at the time of these reports and that the funds would be used primarily for legal defense and relocation to ensure their safety .New York Post+1Wikipedia+1Wikipedia
GiveSendGo co-founder Jacob Wells acknowledged discomfort with hosting the fundraiser but emphasized the platform’s commitment to free speech and supporting individuals in difficult situations. He stated that the platform only removes campaigns deemed illegal or fraudulent .Orinoco Tribune+8New York Post+8New York Post+8
The situation has been further complicated by the spread of misinformation online. A fake social media account impersonating a Frisco Police Chief disseminated a fabricated autopsy report claiming Metcalf died from a drug overdose, which authorities have debunked. Both families have faced online harassment, with inflammatory and racially charged comments appearing on their respective fundraising pages .New York Post+5Wikipedia+5New York Post+5New York Post+2New York Post+2New York Post+2
This case highlights the complexities of online crowdfunding in legal contexts, especially when intertwined with issues of race, public perception, and the presumption of innocence. It raises questions about the ethical considerations of fundraising for individuals accused of serious crimes and the responsibilities of crowdfunding platforms in moderating such campaigns.Wikipedia
As the legal proceedings continue, the public remains divided, with some viewing the fundraiser as a necessary means for a fair defense, while others see it as an affront to justice and the victim’s family. The case underscores the broader societal debates surrounding criminal justice, media influence, and the role of digital platforms in shaping public discourse.
