Police said phone searches and conflicting statements led to a first-degree murder charge months after a man was found shot in his home.

HUNTERSVILLE, N.C. — A Huntersville woman has been charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of her husband after police said her phone searches and changing statements undermined her claim that he died during a struggle over a gun.

Susan Michelle Perry, 54, was arrested in February in the death of her husband, Robert “Joe” Perry, 58, after investigators revisited the case months after the shooting. Police said officers first responded shortly before 1 p.m. on Nov. 10, 2025, to the couple’s home in the 8500 block of New Oak Lane, where they found Joe Perry with a gunshot wound to the chest. The case now centers on whether the shooting was an act of self-defense or an intentional killing, with detectives pointing to search history, scene evidence and what they described as inconsistent accounts from Michelle Perry.

According to an arrest affidavit, officers arriving at the home found Michelle Perry kneeling on the floor. A search of the residence led them to Joe Perry, who was lying on the floor of his office with a gunshot wound to the chest. Police said a firearm was on a nearby table and blood droplets were visible around a stool in the room. Perry initially told investigators she heard a “thud,” ran to the office and found her husband on his side in a pool of blood. She then called 911, according to the affidavit. That first account treated the shooting more like a sudden discovery than a direct confrontation, and it appears to have shaped the early stage of the investigation before detectives later examined digital evidence from the couple’s phones.

Investigators said the case shifted after they downloaded data from the phones and reviewed Michelle Perry’s internet searches. In the affidavit, police said her phone showed searches about how much her husband’s wedding ring was worth, what to do if a husband wants a divorce and the wife has no money, and the phrase “center mass shots.” Detectives later reinterviewed Perry on Feb. 6, 2026, and said she changed her version of events. This time, according to police, she said she and her husband had talked the night before about a possible divorce. She told investigators they argued the next day in his office, where he had a gun while sitting on a stool. Perry said he was not pointing the gun at her, but she feared he might shoot her, grabbed the weapon and struggled with him before it fired into his chest. Police said that second version still raised doubts because of other inconsistencies and because it came only after detectives had reviewed the phone evidence.

The case remains notable not only because of the allegation itself but because of how much of it turns on reconstruction after the fact. The public record does not describe witnesses inside the room at the moment Joe Perry was shot, so investigators appear to be relying on scene details, timing, medical findings and Perry’s own statements. Detectives said she gave conflicting information about how long she waited before calling 911 and where she put the gun after the shooting. A medical examiner also concluded that Joe Perry had been shot at close range, a finding that added weight to the scrutiny of her later account. Still, the affidavit released publicly leaves some important details unanswered. It does not fully explain the precise physical evidence tying the gunfire to an intentional act, nor does it publicly set out whether prosecutors believe the shooting was planned in advance or escalated during a domestic argument that turned deadly.

The legal case now moves forward in Mecklenburg County, where Perry was booked into jail after her arrest. Reports said she remained held on a $150,000 bond. The first-degree murder charge is among the most serious in North Carolina law and signals that prosecutors believe they can prove an intentional killing rather than an accident. A court appearance was scheduled for Feb. 27, 2026. That hearing is expected to address the next steps in the prosecution, including the status of counsel, scheduling and the handling of evidence. As the case develops, prosecutors will likely focus on the search history, the evolution of Perry’s statements and the physical layout of the office where the shooting happened. Defense lawyers, in turn, are expected to challenge whether those facts prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt and whether the state can rule out a struggle over the weapon.

The case file so far offers only a narrow glimpse into the couple’s final days, but it points to strain in the marriage before the shooting. Police said Perry told them she and her husband had discussed divorce the night before he died. That detail, along with the search about what to do if a husband wants a divorce and the wife has no money, gave investigators a possible motive theory tied to money and the future of the marriage. Even so, the public record does not establish the full history of the relationship, whether either spouse had previously reported threats or violence, or whether anyone else had firsthand knowledge of the argument Perry described. Those gaps mean the courtroom process, rather than the initial police narrative, will likely determine how much more becomes public about the marriage, the shooting and what prosecutors say happened inside the office.

For now, Perry remains charged with first-degree murder in her husband’s death, and the next milestone is the court process following her February 2026 arrest. The central dispute remains whether Joe Perry was killed during a struggle or whether detectives were right to treat the shooting as intentional.

Author note: Last updated March 15, 2026.