In a stunning setback for the federal prosecution of the ‘Murdaugh Murders‘ crime and corruption saga – and a possible preview of coming attractions in this case – the U.S. fourth circuit court of appeals has vacated the guilty verdicts entered two years ago against accused fraudster Russell Laffitte, ordering the disgraced banker be released from prison to receive a new trial.
“We vacate Laffitte’s convictions and sentence and remand for a new trial,” a three-judge panel ruled on Thursday (November 14, 2024).
Laffitte – a key cog in convicted killer Alex Murdaugh’s web of crime and corruption – was found guilty in November of 2022 of bank fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy and misapplying bank funds related to his role in Murdaugh’s scams. In August of 2023, he was sentenced to seven years for those crimes – and has been incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Complex Coleman (FCC Coleman) in central Florida since September 28, 2023.
Those convictions have now been tossed, however, based on judicial error related to a questionable eleventh hour jury reshuffling initiated by U.S. district court judge Richard Gergel.
According to the court, the reshuffling “violated Laffitte’s right to an impartial jury.”
***
RELATED | THREE STRIKES AGAINST MURDAUGH APPEAL JUDGE
***
Sound familiar? This same basic argument is at the heart of Murdaugh’s appeal of his two state-level murder convictions – entered against him in March 2023 at the conclusion of an internationally watched trial. In Murdaugh’s case, tampering by the former Colleton County clerk of court allegedly swayed one juror’s opinion – while an alleged conspiracy involving the same clerk led to a similar last-minute jury reshuffling.
Murdaugh’s appeal is currently making its way through the state court system – and is likely to be argued before the S.C. supreme court next fall.
This news outlet addressed the Laffitte jury drama extensively in our recap of the verdicts – raising concerns about Gergel’s action. Days after the trial, the court issued a transcript (.pdf) from the chaotic proceedings which only elevated those concerns. That transcript detailed how Gergel and prosecutors in the office of U.S. attorney Adair Ford Boroughs replaced the two jurors based on, among other reasons, a strong desire to conclude the panel’s deliberations prior to the pending Thanksgiving holiday.
The jury at Laffitte’s trial deliberated for nine hours before judge Gergel received notes from two jurors. One juror indicated she needed an antibiotic and later claimed she was “feeling pressured to change my vote.” Another juror wrote she was “experiencing anxiety and unable to clearly make a decision.”
Gergel refused to allow jurors to take a break or to return to deliberate the following day. He also refused to make arrangements for the juror in need of medication.
“My instinct is that we have alternates and we should get to a verdict,” Gergel ruled.
***
Appeals court judges Steven Agee, Toby Heytens and Stephanie Thacker determined Gergel’s “instinct” violated Laffitte’s constitutional rights – at least as it related to the removal of the juror who claimed to have been “pressured.”
“It had been a long trial and a long day, and (Gergel) was grappling with the receipt of four jurors’ notes in rapid succession and faced the possibility of extending a high-profile case into the Wednesday before Thanksgiving,” Agee wrote (.pdf) for the unanimous majority. “But to permit the removal of (the juror) where the record shows a reasonable and substantial possibility that it was related to her views of the case violates the Sixth Amendment.”
“Our concerns are heightened in view (the juror)’s statement that others disagreed with her ‘decision,’ and that, after nearly eight hours of deliberations, the reconstituted jury returned a guilty verdict in less than an hour,” Agee continued.
“The district court abused its discretion,” the judges concluded, a stinging rebuke of Gergel.
Wilkins lead appellate attorney, Billy Wilkins of Greenville, S.C., argued the case on Laffitte’s behalf seven weeks ago before the fourth circuit judges in Richmond, Virginia.
“Russell Laffitte did not argue that he was entitled to a perfect trial,” Wilkins said after the judges ruled in his client’s favor. “He did successfully argue that he was not given the full protection of the rights and guarantees of the U. S. Constitution, to which everyone is entitled. The fourth circuit agreed in a unanimous opinion and vacated his conviction.”
Following the fourth circuit’s ruling, federal prosecutors made it clear they will move forward with a retrial.
“The Fourth Circuit ordered a retrial based only on the district court’s replacement of a deliberating juror,” Boroughs said in a statement provided to this media outlet. “Its ruling has no impact on the charges against Laffitte going forward. We respect the court’s decision and stand ready to prove Laffitte’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt a second time.”
***
RELATED | MURDAUGH LAWYERS CALL OUT ATTORNEY GENERAL
***
As I noted in our prior coverage, the jury drama marred what “was an absolute tour de force” by federal prosecutors. Led by Emily Limehouse, Winston Holliday and Kathleen Stoughton, the government “methodically, meticulously made a compelling case against Laffitte on each of the six charges filed against him.”
“The sheer volume of evidence and testimony left little doubt as to the outcome of the proceedings – and assuming Laffitte is granted a new trial, it is hard to imagine it going any better for him than the first one did,” I noted in my previous reporting on Laffitte’s initial appeal.
Meanwhile, Laffitte’s effort to prove a broader conspiracy – one in which he was a mere “pawn” of Murdaugh and others – largely fell flat.
In addition to his federal convictions, Laffitte is facing more than twenty state charges related to the Murdaugh saga – the dramatic unspooling of a Hampton, S.C.-based legal dynasty that has shaken the Palmetto State’s legal system to its core.
Keep it tuned to this media outlet for the very latest developments in all of these cases.
***
THE ORDER…
(U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and seven children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
4 comments
WOW!! Altho’ I did kinda see this coming …. here we go again.
What a waste of taxpayer money to give him another trial, but his rights were violated. But doesn’t he run a huge risk of possibly getting more jail time or a longer sentence? The evidence was overwhelmingly against a not guilty verdict. Or does he just hope for a hung jury?
It smacks of the good Leo boy system. This first judge should have all his verdicts pulled and looked into. Maybe he is unfit to serve as a judge. Is no one accountable for anything any more?
Lafitte is entitled to a fair trial but I think he is guilty as sin. Hopefully all the t’s will stay crossed and i’s all dotted and he will be returned to prison after the retrial for a period of at least his original sentence or even longer. .