A Halifax County jury Wednesday found a Roanoke Rapids man not guilty of stabbing a victim to death in July of 2020.
Geoffrey Davis, the attorney who represented Tyrone Price in his trial in the death of Jerome Peters, said, “I am happy that Mr. Price can finally put this behind him. Anyone who knows him and his family knows what a hard-working, good-natured person he is. He was completely innocent of any homicide in this matter because he made the only choice that was available to him in a bad situation when he defended himself. It's just unfortunate that he had to risk spending the rest of his life in prison to be acquitted by the jury.”
Davis said evidence showed that Peters rode to Tight Edge barber shop in the Forest Hills Shopping Center with his adult daughter specifically to confront Price.
Price was sitting in the barber's chair getting a haircut when Peters entered the barbershop and immediately struck Price in the face.
Peters then pulled out a knife, began brandishing it, and threatened Price.
Price grabbed a pair of barber scissors off the counter to defend himself. He escaped outside and Peters followed.
“The evidence from the defense showed that Mr. Peters continued to threaten Mr. Price outside the barbershop, and rather than leave and de-escalate the situation, Mr. Peters acted like he was going to attack Mr. Price again with the knife,” Davis said. “Mr. Price struck him once with the scissors in the chest. Mr. Peters continued arguing for a moment, and then collapsed.”
The state's evidence showed that the scissors had penetrated Peters' heart and he died as a result.
“From the start, Mr. Price has maintained that he acted in self-defense in this matter, and that he only struck Mr. Peters with the scissors to prevent Mr. Peters from attacking him further,” Davis said. “Evidence at trial established that Mr. Peters had been stalking and threatening Mr. Price leading up to this incident because Mr. Price barred Mr. Peters from coming to his house where Mr. Price and several other friends played cards regularly. Evidence also established that Mr. Peters had a lengthy record of assaults and threats resulting in criminal prosecution, while Mr. Price was 50-years-old with no prior criminal history.”
Price was initially charged with second-degree murder. The charge was upgraded when the state chose to indict him for first-degree murder. “Despite the fact that Mr. Price had no prior criminal history, if he was convicted of that charge the court would have to sentence him to life without parole,” Davis said.
Davis said he presented evidence which demonstrated that Peters had a history of violent and assaultive behavior, and that he attacked Price while Price was getting a haircut. “Mr. Price took reasonable and appropriate steps to defend himself, and sadly, Mr. Peters, for all his faults, died as a result.”
Davis told the jury, “I don't think that we should lose sight of how tragic this situation is, both for Mr. Price who has had to defend himself in this criminal case for three years, and for Mr. Peters and his family. It's awful that we live in a world where something as simple as Mr. Price asking Mr. Peters not to come to his house anymore can result in a violent attack on Mr. Price — an innocent, hard-working person with no criminal history — and also result in the death of Mr. Peters.”
However, Davis said, North Carolina law states that a person who is attacked has no obligation to retreat and can stand their ground. “Legally, the accused can match force with force regardless of the character of the assault being perpetrated by the aggressor. I know for a fact that if Mr. Price could undo all of this, he would, and that he bore no ill-will to Mr. Peters. It's a terrible tragedy, but it would have never happened if Mr. Peters had not planned, initiated, and continued to behave violently towards Mr. Price, placing him in reasonable fear for his life.”
Speaking with jurors after the court released them, Davis said several of them indicated there were two issues with the state’s case — the defense pointing out several major inconsistencies regarding the testimony of Peters' daughter, especially compared to what she told the responding law enforcement officers as recorded by their body cameras and that the state called only one of the direct eyewitnesses to the stand, which was Peters’ daughter. “Even though the defense did not have to present any evidence under the law, we called another of the eyewitnesses — Mr. Price's barber — and the defendant. Their testimony differed significantly from the state's only eyewitness to the incident in the important particulars.”
