|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a public rebuke of the South Carolina attorney general’s office, attorneys for convicted killer Alex Murdaugh are pushing back against the latest stall tactic employed by the state as they seek to delay his high-stakes appeal.
In a motion submitted this week, Murdaugh’s attorneys asked the S.C. Supreme Court to deny yet another 120-day extension request (.pdf) filed by the office of attorney general Alan Wilson on behalf of the state. If granted, this latest extension would give prosecutors a full year — 365 days — to answer the defense’s brief, which centered around bombshell allegations of jury tampering during Murdaugh’s double homicide trial.
You read that right: a full year to respond.
“Undersigned counsel is unaware of any criminal case—even a capital case—in which a state has been given a full year to respond,” the filing (.pdf) reads.
Murdaugh’s attorneys also rebuked the ongoing failure of state prosecutors to bring charges against multiple individuals tied to the case against their client – and the tampering allegations involving his internationally watched trial two years ago.
***
Once the untouchable scion of one of South Carolina’s most prominent legal and political dynasties, Murdaugh – and his empire – collapsed during the summer of 2021. His dramatic unspooling – which culminated in his convictions for murdering his wife, 52-year-old Maggie Murdaugh, and younger son, 22-year-old Paul Murdaugh – garnered international attention and spawned numerous podcasts, books and documentaries.
After the trial was concluded, seismic allegations of jury tampering – and jury rigging – only escalated the attention.
In their appeal, Murdaugh’s lawyers – Dick Harpootlian, Jim Griffin, Phillip Barber and Maggie Fox — are challenging former chief justice Jean Toal’s controversial denial of his bid for a new trial on the jury tampering allegations.
At the core of Murdaugh’s appeal is a damning accusation: that former Colleton County clerk of court Becky Hill tampered with the jury for personal financial gain. Specifically, Murdaugh’s attorneys allege Hill actively steered jurors toward a guilty verdict so she could cash in on a book about the trial.
These allegations—if proven—don’t just raise eyebrows. They could obliterate the legitimacy of the trial and lead to a vacated conviction.
In fact, many believe the allegations have already been proven – and that Toal erred greviously in not immediately granting Murdaugh a new trial.
***
RELATED | THE KEY ARGUMENTS OF MURDAUGH’S APPEAL
***
According to the motion filed this week, Wilson’s prosecutors didn’t even request the relevant trial transcripts until March 31, 2025 (.pdf) — just 10 days before their first 90-day extension expired. In the words of the defense, the delay isn’t about complexity—it’s about Wilson’s office not doing its job.
“(The state) requests a second extension… because it has not been working on this case at all,” Murdaugh’s attorneys stated.
The defense pointed out that Murdaugh’s own requests for extensions were based on concrete reasons—lengthy transcripts and the time-consuming process of uncovering post-trial misconduct. Prosecutors, they argue, are simply dragging their feet.
And with 90 attorneys on the attorney general’s payroll? Murdaugh’s legal team says the office has no excuse. If they can’t keep up, they can hire outside help—just like they have in other high-profile matters.
If the jury tampering claims against Hill (and others?) hold water, the consequences could be significant. Murdaugh’s team has cited multiple U.S. Supreme Court precedents — including Remmer v. United States and Parker v. Gladden — to argue that even minor external influences on a jury can trigger vacated verdicts.
Here, the alleged misconduct isn’t “minor.” It’s systemic and deliberate, carried out by the elected official responsible for administering the jury’s oath. And that, the defense argues, makes any delay dangerous—not just for Murdaugh’s rights, but for the public’s confidence in South Carolina’s judicial system.
Murdaugh’s attorneys also made it clear they believe their client will prevail in the appeal – further underscoring the belief the state is stalling on its response (and in its failure to prosecute Hill and others tied to this case).
***
***
“There is at least a prima facie case that the state is unlikely to prevail in this appeal, which means that delay is likely to prejudice (Murdaugh),” they wrote.
In fact, one of the cases they cited was the recent decision by the U.S. fourth circuit court of appeals to vacate the federal convictions of Russell Laffitte, a disgraced banker alleged to have been one of Murdaugh’s co-conspirators in a series of financial crimes that prosecutors insist provided his motive for murder.
According to Murdaugh’s attorneys, the jury issues in his murder trial went “well beyond the issue that recently forced (the vacating) of Russell Laffitte’s conviction.”
“Unless the state has developed an unexpectedly strong counterargument… it is likely appellant’s murder convictions will be overturned,” the filing warns.
The S.C. Supreme Court will now decide whether to grant the State’s second extension. If it does, the Attorney General’s Office will have until August 10, 2025 to respond.
In the meantime, Murdaugh remains behind bars — still convicted, still notorious, and still at the center of one of the most explosive legal sagas in South Carolina history.
Stay tuned. This one’s far from over…
***
THE DEFENSE’S RETURN…
(S.C. Supreme Court)
***
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.
5 comments
The AG should get a pass here. They are very busy filing briefs on various MAGA projects across the country.
Kind of unfair for you to expect them to address important South Carolina criminal matters when a library in Minnesota has an inappropriate book.
I wonder what the Supreme Court would say if someone sent them a list of the out-of-state, non-South Carolina briefs the AG has filed in the last year?
The man killed his wife and son, he lied about being there, so why do we want to waste money on another trial?
Because Richard M. Clark the appeal is about the rule of law and not the truth. The truth is the first causality in any criminal case. If the we let a drunk wind bag who should have been put out to retire “decide” Miss Becky’s conduct with the jury is no big deal against powerful people like AM then people like you and I are screwed.
Screw the POS. He jumped to the head of the line on the basis of his name and his idiot lawyer’s name. He’s guilty and right where he belongs.
I’m sorry but if this verdict gets overturned I will lose all hope for our justice system. This guy is guilty, the juror claiming juror tampering is looking for a payday. Not only is this a tremendous cost to SC it is just WRONG. Why are you letting his guy dictate and manipulate the Supreme Court when he has spent his whole adult professional life manipulating the system. Judge Toal forgot to mention this Juror was attracted to the “Siren Call of Celebrity” like everyone else trying to cash in on this case. The caregiver Miss Shelly even has a GoFundMe page that earned her quite a few bucks. Please SC Supreme Court please see through this lunavy and say “Appeal DENIED”.