|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After two long weeks sitting as an alternate in one of the most chilling, confounding and controversial murder trials in South Carolina history, a former Greenville County juror told FITSNews his mind is spent.
“I told my my co-workers, like, my brain is just – it’s exhausted,” he said. “It’s tired – I just want to be locked away in a cabin in the mountains for like, a week and not talk to anyone.”
It wasn’t until after jurors convicted 32-year-old Zachary David Hughes of the savage, ritualistic ‘Rose Petal Murder’ of 41-year-old veterinary technician Christina Parcell on October 13, 2021 (and after Hughes was sentenced to life in prison for the crime) that they learned the whole story of the crime.
Specifically, it wasn’t until after Hughes was sentenced they discovered the truth related to allegations of child sex abuse material (CSAM or “child porn”) found at the scene of the crime and linked to the victim’s fiancée, Bradly Post.
And linked to the victim herself…
***
Parcell’s brutally murdered body was discovered shortly after 11:00 a.m. EST on October 13, 2021 in the front living room of a suburban home owned by her sister, Lutina Parcell. She was found there, unresponsive, by Post.
“I think she’s gone,” Post told a 911 operator.
When the operator asked if Post believed his fiancée was no longer “viable,” Post replied there was “a lot of blood” and that Parcell’s “eyes are open.”
As we exclusively reported at the time, the killer sprinkled rose petals – or deadheaded roses – around Parcell’s body after dragging (and posing) her in the front living room of the house.
“Rose petals were sprinkled around her body,” a source familiar with the killing told this news outlet. “She was dragged – there were drag marks. The scene was staged.”
Parcell’s cause of death was recorded by the Greenville county coroner as a homicide due to “multiple sharp force injuries.” According to forensic pathologist Claire Rose, “there were thirty-five sharp force injuries to Ms. Parcell,” including 27 to the head and neck area. Among those wounds were six separate stab wounds to the right side of Parcell’s neck – wounds which perforated both her right carotid artery and her right jugular vein.
These wounds caused massive bleeding which resulted in her death.
Hughes was arrested on November 3, 2021 by GCSO deputies and charged with Parcell’s murder. Multiple cameras depicted him entering and leaving the residence – and his DNA was found under Parcell’s fingernails. The arrest shocked the Upstate seeing as Hughes – a classically trained concert pianist – had no known connection to Parcell at the time. During the trial, Hughes took the stand and confessed to committing the killing – but claimed it was not murder because he did it to protect Parcell’s underage daughter, who was allegedly being abused by Post and Parcell.
***
Forensic pathologist Dr. Claire Rose testifies as to the graphic stab wounds – and resulting injuries – sustained by victim Christina Parcell in the #RosePetalMurder pic.twitter.com/ygnQZEvP4A
— FITSNews (@fitsnews) February 14, 2025
***
“I realized that there is an incredible danger that what Christina Parcell was, was a future preview of what (the child) could potentially become if she was left in this woman’s custody and was raised by her,” Hughes’ testified. “And the facts have borne out that I was right.”
Hughes was later revealed to be close friends with the father of the child, Greenville music producer John Mello – has also been criminally charged in connection with Parcell’s murder.
Mello – who was in Italy at the time of the murder – communicated extensively with Hughes in the weeks leading up to the killing, allegedly providing him with information which enabled him to make sure Parcell was alone at her sister’s suburban home in Greer, S.C. at the time of the brutal slaying. Mello and Hughes used the encrypted smartphone application WhatsApp to communicate with each other – exchanging at least 1,769 encrypted messages.
All communication ceased on the day of the murder, however.
“How did the music research go?” Mello wrote to Hughes just moments after the killing.
“Good,” Hughes responded. “I’ll tell you over the phone.”
Hughes also conspired with Mello to send illicit, incriminating photos of Parcell to her neighbors in the hopes of causing her to lose custody of the young girl. He was charged with harassment and conspiracy in relation to those charges, and found guilty of them by jurors, along with a slew of charges related to the murder.
As exhausted as jurors are from attempting to make sense of this convoluted story, the juror we spoke with is still thinking about the trial and the resulting verdict.
“It’s tough,” he said. “I have battled with it back and forth. I personally, I do not think it was a fair trial.”
He’s not alone in that assessment…
***
RELATED | TESTIMONY LEADS TO JOHN MELLO’S ARREST
***
“There are multiple people in that jury who felt the same way, (who felt) there was stuff that was not allowed to be in that courtroom or be brought into that courtroom that should have been,” he continued. “Because I think if you bring in the sexual abuse and the child pornography stuff, I think that changes the case completely.”
The decision by S.C. circuit court judge Patrick C. Fant III to keep this evidence and testimony out of the trial will doubtless be examined upon appeal – as nearly half of this high-profile proceeding involved testimony proffered to the court by Hughes’ lawyers, Mark Moyer and Andrew Moorman, related to the child porn.
But according to this juror, multiple times members of the panel were able to get indications of the whole story – which did make an impact on them. But they didn’t know everything because, according to him, they scrupulously observed Fant’s order not to do any independent research about the case.
Furthermore, he said they abided by his instructions and did not consider the child sex abuse references made by Hughes – although he admitted it was impossible to erase Hughes’ testimony related to the state “hiding the truth” from their minds.
“Yes, the judge strikes that from the record, and that can’t be brought into deliberation or anything,” he said. “But that doesn’t leave your mind.”
Would the documentation of child porn (a.k.a. child sex abuse material, or “CSAM”) in this case have swung the verdict?
***
***
“If there is a sliver of proof to that, I think… I think the answer changes,” he said. “You know, I’m not taking away what he did, like, is awful. Someone getting stabbed thirty-five times – that should never happen. But I just, I don’t think there were enough facts in that case for for there to be a final answer, right?”
Hughes’ decision to take the stand and testify in his own defense surprised the jurors as much as it did those watching the trial.
“We were completely shocked,” the juror said. “And I, I speak for everyone in that room, we were blown away, because coming into Tuesday, there were a lot of holes in the state story, and there were a lot of holes that needed to be filled.”
If the defense had not decided to put Hughes on the stand, the outcome might have been very different.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if they got a ‘not guilty’ answer,” the juror said.
When asked about the DNA evidence the state ended its case on — evidence many believed to be compelling — the juror didn’t seem particularly impressed.
“Yes. I mean, that puts him with her at some point in time,” he said. “But for us to be told there was blood on the bike and there was blood in his car – but then we weren’t told whose blood it was. To me, personally, that’s huge if her blood is in there… that’s a big, big hole that needs to be filled. You wonder why? It makes no sense.”
Hughes’ approach and affect while he was on the stand was another aspect that did not play well with the jurors.
“He doesn’t show any emotion, right?” the juror said. “From a likability standpoint… absolutely not. I mean, it’s just you’ve got to show some sort of emotion. I will say this about him. I’m just gonna reiterate the fact that what he did is awful – but he is very intelligent.”
(Click to view)
***
The multiple times jurors were sent out of the courtroom by judge Fant to address legal wrangling over the child porn admissibility became a running joke with the panel.
He said they often anticipated they would be sent back to the jury room the moment an objection was made – but noted jurors did hear something interesting from within the courtroom on one occasion when the bailiff failed to completely shut the door.
“The judge was talking to (Hughes) about what he can and can’t say, and he said, like, ‘hey, judge, like, I put my hand on the Bible and said I’d tell the truth and you’re not letting me,'” the juror said. “I mean, I agree with that.”
Hughes was clearly well-positioned to evoke sympathy from the jurors – yet while they recognized there was more to the case than they were being told, the sheer savagery associated with Parcell’s slaying ultimately convinced them to convict him of her murder.
“To be completely honest, I think that is the part that killed him,” he said. “I think that’s the part that killed his case.”
The jurors have even discussed this in the aftermath, corresponding with each other on a group text thread.
“Yeah, I asked another one of the jurors, I said ‘let’s say he didn’t stab her, but let’s say he shot her and he shot her one time instead,'” the juror said. “Does that change it? Does that make him not guilty?'”
“Yes,” the other juror responded.
***
RELATED | THE VERDICT
***
Many watching the trial had strong opinions about Parcell’s sister, Lutina Parcell, and her combative posture with the cross-examination by the defense team. While they noticed the difference, he said it didn’t strike him as odd as they had watched her during the entire trial.
“I don’t think there was a day there that she wasn’t in tears, yeah,” he said. “I mean, understandably, I can’t imagine what she’s been going through the past three-and-a-half years.”
According to the jurors, they had no idea Mello had been arrested in connection with the killing until after the verdict, but the juror we spoke with wasn’t surprised by it.
“No, it didn’t (surprise me),” he said. “It surprised me that he was in the country. Yeah… I think one other juror noticed that when Zach said Mello asked him to kill her she noticed, like, three officers stand up and go outside.”
While the alternate wasn’t involved in the actual deliberations, he said the panel have discussed it on their text thread. According to him, the decision ultimately came down to the definition of malice.
“Obviously malice was the whole thing,” he said. “You have to prove malice. And we were kind of talking about it, and I just said, like, if his mindset going in there was was to protect the little girl, I don’t know if I can consider that malice, right?”
***
Zachary Hughes was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of Christina Parcell by Judge Patrick Fant.
— FITSNews (@fitsnews) February 21, 2025
He will serve shorter concurrent and time-severed sentences for his other lesser convictions. pic.twitter.com/MqphYX58wF
***
According to the juror, two deliberating members of the panel were really struggling with the ‘malice’ aspect of the charge from judge Fant. That’s when the savage nature of the stabbing – notably an emotional reenactment of it performed in the jury room by one of the deliberating jurors – swayed the panel to a unanimous “guilty.”
One of the jurors stood up during the deliberations and reenacted the stabbing on the table in the room in which they were deliberating – striking the table thirty-five times with a stabbing motion.
“Do you not think that’s malice?” the juror asked the holdouts.
That reenactment is ultimately what resulted in the unanimous verdict, per the juror we spoke with.
“I hate to say this again, because it’s awful, but if he only stabbed her three times instead of thirty-five, I’m not so sure the answer isn’t different,” the juror said. “I think that that number stuck out to everyone in their head, and that’s what did it for them.”
Towards the end of the conversation, the juror noted he was surprised the defense didn’t tell them the specific charges Bradly Post was facing. When it was explained that the judge did not allow it, he was surprised – if not a little incensed.
“See, I think that’s a load of crap,” he said. “Yeah, you know, again, that paints a completely different picture.”
Nonetheless, he sang the praises of the judge and the court staff.
***
***
“You could tell (Fant) was a good guy,” he said. “He was good at his job. I just feel like there was stuff in that case that should have been in there.”
In addition to Hughes’ inevitable appeal of his convictions, there are two remaining ‘Rose Petal Murder’ trials. As noted, John Mello is charged with accessory before the fact to a felony and solicitation to commit a felony related to Parcell’s murder and harassment and conspiracy related to explicit mailings sent to Parcell and her neighbors in the weeks leading up to her murder. Those charges will be tried by Wilkins’ office.
Meanwhile, Post is facing five counts of sexual exploitation of a minor in the first degree, one count of sexual exploitation of a minor in the third degree, one count of third degree criminal sexual content with a minor and one count of buggery related to the CSAM found at the murder scene. His case will be prosecuted by the office of S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson.
As for Hughes, he has been remanded to the custody of the S.C. Department of Corrections (SCDC). Like all new inmates, he will be transferred to Kirkland Correctional Institution – an SCDC intake center located just north of Columbia, S.C. After a month of medical, mental health and other assessments, he will receive his placement within the SCDC system – where, barring a successful appeal of his convictions, he will spend the rest of his natural life.
What do you think of Hughes’ conviction? Vote in our poll and post your thoughts in our always-engaging comments section below…
Should jurors have convicted Zachary Hughes of the 'Rose Petal Murder?'
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
Jenn Wood is FITSNews’ incomparable research director. She’s also the producer of the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts and leading expert on all things Murdaugh/ South Carolina justice. A former private investigator with a criminal justice degree, evildoers beware, Jenn Wood is far from your average journalist! A deep dive researcher with a passion for truth and a heart for victims, this mom of two is pretty much a superhero in FITSNews country. Did we mention she’s married to a rocket scientist? (Lucky guy!) Got a story idea or a tip for Jenn? Email her at jenn@fitsnews.com.
***
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.
6 comments
1. There was no evidence of CSAM found at the scene. First evidence was found on Post’s phone and later at Post’s home and in his locker at cigar bar. But not at home.
2. Sister did not own the home. They were renting.
3. Photos sent to Post’s neighbors, not Parcell’s.
4. There are a lot of rules about what evidence does and doesn’t come in. Whether something is relevant or not, whether the evidence is more privatize than prejudicial, etc. Jurors’ and bloggers’ opinions about that don’t outweigh judge’s legal ruling.
4.
Probative, not privatize. Stupid autocorrect.
Let’s suppose that the convicted killer knew about, and could prove, the sex abuse. What right did he have to take Parcell’s life? Whether he knew or didn’t know, he’s guilty of murder – an unjust taking of life. There is no way, no how, he’s not guilty. The law could justify the “homicide” IF it was to save the child while an act that might have taken the child’s life was taking place but that’s the only exception.
I listened to both Jenn and Nolan equivocate on the pod cast today. To say I was shocked with their “if” answers puts it mildly. This is open and shut, literally, he admitted that he didn’t know the victim, that the child was not there and that he took her life. The state has the right of “vengeance” not the hired hand of the baby daddy.
Are others guilty here? Absolutely, Mello and Post will be going to jail next. However, the State of South Carolina has some guilt here to boot. Supposedly, there were multiple investigations of this debacle and rather than deal with the issue, SC punted, even after both sides showed they were incapable of acting rationally.
As a survivor of CSA, I’m glad that Christina Parcell is no longer a threat to her daughter. The only real victim is the daughter. The State failed her so many times.
Even when she accused her aunt of photographing her in the shower, the police said they had “no probable cause” to search Tina Parcell’s device. WTH. If the police and judicial system had done its job and protected this child then this trial would probably not have happened. I hold them all partially responsible and they need to start doing a better job of protecting our young people. I pray to God that everyone that failed this girl be exposed and removed from their positions before they allow another child to be harmed.
I also feel like the jury failed us all by voting guilty on a case that had so many questions. Did no one wonder why they weren’t told why Bradly Post was in an orange jumpsuit? Or why they were told to disregard testimony about CSA?? I wouldn’t have been able to give a guilty verdict if I felt like I wasn’t given all the facts. I don’t feel like it was a fair trial at all. I don’t think Zach should have done what he did but it was very wrong of Judge Fant and Walt Wilkins to hide evidence and motives. All facts should be presented and then let the jury decide. That did not happen in this case. Isn’t having a fair trial supposed to be a core value in America? How can anyone expect to have a fair trial if the Judge excludes evidence?!
Free Zachery Hughes! He saved a child from 2 evil pedophiles. Why wasn’t the CSAM allowed, that Judge need to retire!
Although I’m glad the child is safe, the only evidence that she was being abused is what hughes was told. There is nothing saying that he saw anything himself. During the trial, Hughes made it out to seem that the child thought of him as a friend, just for it to be revealed that he’d only met her twice. He was also offered $5,000 once to eliminate her & turned it down so next, he was offered $10,000. I wonder if he was paid after he completed the murder. The text messages sure showed that he was relaying the fact that the mission was accomplished. Why?
The CSAM being allowed would have been too prejudicial if it were allowed. Anyone who understands the law and rules of evidence know this.
Think about this: Had the jury been allowed to hear about child’s alleged abuse (there was NO PROOF), & the jury found him not guilty, that would have basically given anyone who SUSPECTED a child of being abused a license to murder the suspected abuser. This would also be taken further into women who are being abused and it being okay to murder THEIR abusers. And animal abusers. And on and on.
The point is, murder is murder… no matter what.