Alex Murdaugh to get new trial after court overturns murder conviction
Disgraced South Carolina lawyer Alex Murdaugh will get a new trial in the slayings of his wife and son because of what the state’s Supreme Court called “egregious, improper jury interference” by a court clerk.
Wednesday’s ruling was the latest chapter in a sensational story involving the scion of a powerful family from South Carolina’s Lowcountry. A jury convicted Murdaugh, now 57, of murder in 2023 in a case that inspired books, podcasts, a true-crime documentary and a Hulu series that dramatized the 2021 killings of Margaret Murdaugh and her 22-year-old son, Paul.
Murdaugh was sentenced to life in prison.
But the court said Murdaugh was denied a fair trial by court clerk Rebecca Hill of Colleton County, South Carolina, who “placed her fingers on the scale of justice” by making statements that may have influenced jurors to return a guilty verdict.
“Our justice system provides—indeed demands—that every person is entitled to a fair trial, which includes an impartial jury untainted by external forces bent on influencing the jury toward a biased verdict,” the justices wrote in a unanimous opinion. “Although we are aware of the time, money and effort expended for this lengthy trial, we have no choice” but to overturn the conviction and order a new trial.
‘Already guilty’
Murdaugh denied killing his wife and son, but during testimony during the trial, he admitted to stealing millions of dollars from clients and from his law firm. He later pleaded guilty to federal charges and was sentenced to 40 years in prison.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court did not address whether Murdaugh was guilty of the murders. Instead, the court focused on Hill and her attempts to influence the jury.
One juror said that before Murdaugh testified, Hill advised jury members to “watch his actions” and to “watch him closely.” Near the end of the trial, the juror said, Hill told the jury “not to be fooled” by evidence presented by defense lawyers.
The juror said Hill’s comments influenced her vote to convict Murdaugh because “it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty.”
Another juror, however, said he was not influenced by Hill’s admonition to “watch [Murdaugh’s] body language” when he took the stand.
Clerk guilty of perjury
During Murdaugh’s appeal, prosecutors argued that he was “obviously guilty” and would have been convicted regardless of Hill’s comments. The Supreme Court disagreed.
“Hill clearly advised the jurors to find Murdaugh and the evidence he presented not credible and, essentially, urged them to render a guilty verdict,” the court wrote. “Hill’s position as the Colleton County Clerk of Court, an officer of the court who managed the trial and was the primary caretaker of the jury, amplified the impact Hill’s comments had on the jury.”
Hill pleaded guilty last December to charges including perjury and obstruction of justice.
During the trial, she allowed news photographers to view sealed evidence, then lied about it under oath.
A court also found that she improperly used her position to promote a book she wrote about the trial.
Round out your reading
- Are aliens real? Pentagon’s newly released UFO files suggest the truth is out there.
- A million Americans get this knee surgery every year. But does it work?
- Is the apocalypse now? One man is tracking flights by the rich to find out.
- ‘No Mow May’: A boon for the bees or a well-intended mistake?
- We’re building a new Straight Arrow. Help us shape our future by taking our survey.
Ella Rae Greene, Editor In Chief
