First Posted: 4/7/2015

ROCKINGHAM — Jurors could not reach a unanimous verdict in Alexander Ingram’s murder trial.

Judge Richard Brown declared a mistrial late Friday afternoon following more than 11 hours of deliberations.

Ingram was on trial for the brutal beating death and robbery of Michael Collins at the Norman General Store in late November of 2012.

Jury selection for the trial began March 23 and took an entire week, with a one-day setback due to a medical emergency of one of Ingram’s defense lawyers, Stephen Freedman. Asheboro attorney Franklin Wells also represented Ingram.

After the 12 jurors and three alternates were chosen, Assistant District Attorney Dawn Layton began calling witnesses to make the state’s case against the Montgomery County man.

Among those who took the stand were Richmond County sheriff’s deputies and detectives, an agent with the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation and specialists with the state crime lab who analyzed the evidence.

Collins’ widow Tonia also gave testimony, telling the jury that Ingram, who frequently played video poker in the family’s store, was “a friend.”

His nephew, Henry Thomas Ingram — who was also charged with first-degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon — testified against him last week. He told jurors that his uncle beat Collins with a hammer after losing money on the gaming machines several times on Nov. 26.

Deputies first spoke with Alexander Ingram around five hours after the murder and noticed bloodstains on his shoes. Ingram and his mother, with whom he lived, consented to a search, but no other evidence was found.

He was arrested, as was his nephew, who later led deputies to the site of the murder weapon and a creek where his uncle’s clothes had been dumped the night before.

Crime lab experts testified that there was no blood found on the defendant’s clothes, only on the shoes. However, there was also smudge of blood on Pete Ingram’s jeans.

The biggest question for defense team, who stressed the importance of reasonable doubt during jury selection, as well as opening and closing statements, was why deputies never applied for a search warrant to obtain the clothes Pete Ingram was wearing the night of the murder, after he told them that he had changed before they came to pick him up.

Following four and a half days of witness testimony from the prosecution, the defense declined to put on evidence, feeling the state had not made its case against Alexander Ingram.

Visit www.YourDailyJournal.com for updates to this developing story.