South Carolina store owner acquitted of murder after three years jailed without bond

Rick Chow walked out of a Richland County courtroom Monday a free man, three years and one week after prosecutors locked him up on a murder charge and never let him post bail. A jury deliberated for roughly eight and a half hours before finding the Columbia, South Carolina, convenience store owner not guilty in the 2023 fatal shooting of 14-year-old Cyrus Cormack-Belton.

Chow had been held without bond since the day after the shooting. That means a man who just convinced twelve jurors he acted in self-defense spent more than 1,100 days in a jail cell waiting for his chance to make that case.

The acquittal raises hard questions about a prosecution that kept a small-business owner behind bars for three years on a charge it ultimately could not prove, and about a legal system that let it happen.

The shooting outside the store

The incident began on May 28, 2023. Chow and his son, Andy Chow, suspected Cormack-Belton of shoplifting and pursued him out of their convenience store. The father and son chased the teen about 100 yards, Fox News Digital reported, citing the Post and Courier's account. Rick Chow then shot Cormack-Belton in the back with a.45-caliber Glock handgun, killing him.

Cormack-Belton was 14 years old. He was also carrying a semiautomatic pistol at the time.

That detail became the fulcrum of the trial. Chow's defense team argued that the teen aimed his gun at Andy Chow, prompting Rick Chow to fire in self-defense. The prosecution maintained Chow's actions were not justifiable. The jury sided with the defense.

Charged overnight, jailed for three years

Prosecutors moved fast. The day after the shooting, Chow was charged with murder. He was denied bond and remained in custody for just over three years while the case crawled toward trial.

Consider the math. The trial itself lasted three days. The jury needed a single extended session, early afternoon to nearly 9 p.m. on Monday, to reach its verdict. Yet the system required more than a thousand days of pretrial detention to get there.

Bond exists for a reason. It balances the state's interest in ensuring a defendant shows up for trial against the constitutional presumption of innocence. Denying bond to a store owner with no apparent flight risk, on a charge a jury later rejected in full, is the kind of outcome that should trouble anyone who cares about due process, regardless of politics.

The aftermath in Columbia

The day after the shooting, on May 29, 2023, crowds gathered outside Chow's store and cheered when they learned he had been charged with murder. Later that night, the store was vandalized.

A store owner defends himself and his son. A mob celebrates his arrest. His livelihood is trashed. And then the state holds him in a cage for three years before a jury says the whole thing was justified.

Jack Swerling, one of Chow's attorneys, spoke after the verdict. WIS News 10 captured his remarks:

"We're very pleased at the jury's deliberations and their verdict. We think it was the appropriate verdict in this case. Although it was a difficult decision to come to, because you have two different stories to the extremes."

Swerling also addressed the loss of the teen's life, and the circumstances surrounding it:

"My heart goes out to them, but a 14-year-old kid should not be roaming the streets of Columbia or South Carolina with semiautomatic pistol loaded and ready to fire."

That statement cuts to something the prosecution's framing obscured. A 14-year-old was carrying a loaded semiautomatic handgun while allegedly shoplifting. That fact does not erase the tragedy. But it cannot be separated from the self-defense question the jury had to answer.

The solicitor's response

Fifth Circuit Solicitor Byron Gipson, who prosecuted the case, told Fox News Digital he was disappointed but accepted the outcome. His full statement leaned heavily on community sentiment:

"Last night's verdict has brought on strong emotions from our local and national communities. While I am disappointed with last night's outcome and continue to believe that Rick Chow's actions were not justifiable, I respect our criminal justice system and the jury's decision."

Gipson continued:

"As our community processes this outcome, we will continue to uplift the Carmack-Belton family in our thoughts and prayers. I ask that you honor both the family and Cyrus' memory by supporting them in a peaceful manner during this difficult time."

Notice what Gipson did not address: whether holding Chow without bond for three years was appropriate given the verdict. Whether his office could have brought the case to trial sooner. Whether the evidence of a loaded gun in the teen's hand should have given prosecutors pause before seeking the most severe charge available.

Those are not rhetorical questions. They are the questions a solicitor owes the public when a defendant spends three years locked up and then walks free.

A civil suit looms

Todd Rutherford, an attorney for the Cormack-Belton family, said the family intends to file a civil lawsuit against Chow. The specific claims have not been detailed publicly. A civil case carries a lower burden of proof than a criminal trial, so an acquittal does not foreclose that avenue.

Chow, meanwhile, faces the task of rebuilding a life and a business after more than three years of incarceration. His store was vandalized. His freedom was gone. And the charge that justified all of it could not survive a jury's scrutiny.

A pattern worth watching

The Chow case fits a pattern that should alarm anyone who owns a small business in a high-crime area. Store owners and clerks who defend themselves or their property increasingly find themselves on the wrong end of aggressive prosecution, even when the facts suggest lawful self-defense.

Fox News Digital's coverage of the Chow acquittal appeared alongside reporting on Jose Alba, a former New York City bodega clerk who is now suing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and the NYPD for racial discrimination after his own controversial prosecution following a self-defense incident. Different cities, different facts, but the same uncomfortable dynamic: working people who fight back get treated like criminals, while the system moves at its own pace and on its own terms.

Rick Chow lost three years. His store was wrecked. His name was dragged through a murder trial. And at the end of it, twelve citizens said the state was wrong.

The jury gave Chow his freedom back. Nobody can give him back the time.