|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a stunning courtroom development last week, South Carolina circuit court judge Roger M. Young quashed a murder indictment against Michael Colucci — the Lowcountry jeweler previously accused of killing his wife, Sara Lynn Colucci, in what prosecutors alleged was a staged suicide.
To help unpack the legal significance of this ruling, FITSNews sat down with attorney Lauren Taylor — a seasoned Palmetto State litigator known for her insightful and candid commentary on complex criminal cases. Taylor discussed what judge Young’s decision reveals about prosecutorial conduct, the state’s burden of proof and broader issues of trust within South Carolina’s judicial system.
Sara Lynn Colucci was found dead in May 2015, hanging by a garden hose on a fence outside a jewelry shop the couple owned. Her husband, Michael, told authorities she had died by suicide — a theory supported by Sara’s long history of mental health issues, substance abuse and family trauma – including the suicide of a previous husband. But prosecutors claimed Michael Colucci staged the scene to cover up a murder – leading to his indictment a year later and a 2018 trial which ended with jurors unable to reach a verdict.
This month, the state’s second attempt to try Colucci collapsed under the weight of what judge Young described as a Brady violation — namely the government’s failure to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
***
***
‘A FOUL WITH HARM’
At the center of the defense’s successful bid to quash the murder indictment was testimony from Sara Colucci’s mother, Barbara Moore. According to Moore, shortly before Sara’s death she confided that if it weren’t for her children, she would have hanged herself — in the same location and using the same method by which she ultimately died.
Moore claimed she provided this information to lead investigator David Owen of the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) during an interview at her home in 2015, but Owen denied being told about it at that time.
During the hearing, former prosecutor Megan Burleson — who prosecuted Colucci during his initial trial in 2018 — was confronted with video of her repeatedly instructing Moore not to testify about Sara Colucci’s statements. Burleson cited hearsay concerns, but Young determined that no formal attempt had been made to admit the statements under South Carolina’s evidentiary rules.
“This court believes that our courts should demand better from the state,” Young said. “To simply allow this trial to go forward so many years later, with key witnesses and experts denied access to crucial information at the time of their involvement, amounts to a foul with harm”.
***
In her interview with FITSNews, Taylor described the situation as a textbook Brady violation — the kind of prosecutorial error that fundamentally undermines due process.
“Brady versus Maryland is one of the foundational cases that is like criminal law 101,” Taylor said. “If there’s any evidence that indicates the defendant did not commit the crime, the state has to turn it over — whether it helps their case or not.”
Taylor noted that the newly disclosed evidence — including Moore’s statement about Sara Colucci’s suicidal ideation and a contemporaneous text from Sara saying she planned to shoot herself — could have materially changed the outcome of both the grand jury’s decision to indict and the jury’s deliberations at trial.
“At the end of the day, you know, this isn’t a situation where there’s a murderer who is on the loose,” Taylor said. “If it is not Mr. Colucci, then it is in fact Mrs. Colucci committed suicide. It’s a case where there may not have been a crime at all. And if you can’t get there and you were playing some tricks, then you’re certainly not going to get there when the rules are being upheld.”
***
RELATED | TOSSED: S.C. JUDGE QUASHES MICHAEL COLUCCI’S MURDER INDICTMENT
***
A PROSECUTOR’S COMBATIVE TURN ON THE STAND
The hearing itself featured several dramatic moments — none more striking than the testimony of former prosecutor Burleson, who led the State’s prosecution during the original trial in 2018. Her combative exchanges with the defense raised eyebrows in the courtroom and prompted a stern warning from the judge.
“I think you can even see the face of the prosecutor in the side view,” Taylor said. “I was watching on Court TV, and he is kind of like visibly uncomfortable with the exchange… That was a very shocking performance that she put on and it certainly did not bode well for the attorney general’s office.”
Taylor acknowledged how emotionally consuming these cases can be for prosecutors and defense attorneys alike. “
“When you try these cases, people get so emotionally involved,” she said. “It becomes part of your life… and of course, she wants to defend her office and all the hard work that they did put into putting this case together.”
Still, Taylor emphasized that personal investment does not excuse ethical missteps — especially in a murder trial.
“You have to have these people that are investigating these crimes… operate with the utmost level of integrity,” she said. “If the investigators or prosecutors are not able to fully and unbiasedly conduct investigations, then… it corrupts the whole system.”
***
***
PARALLELS WITH MURDAUGH AND BROADER CONCERNS
Not surprisingly, the hearing drew comparisons to the double homicide trial of convicted killer Alex Murdaugh – specifically the role Owen, who also led the Murdaugh investigation. In both cases, defense attorneys raised concerns about whether Owen misled grand juries and failed to document critical information.
“You know, SLED agent David Owen was also the lead investigator on the Murdaugh case,” Taylor noted. “And when he took the stand during that trial, there were a lot of questions about what he presented to the grand jury and did he lie to the grand jury in that?”
She said the recurring presence of certain investigators in high-profile controversies signals a systemic issue.
“It’s kind of an unfortunate situation,” Taylor said. “But I do think it’s really relevant that a lot of these people are involved in the same cases. And that’s an issue that we really need to take an introspective look through SLED, through our judicial system.”
“If we have a problem in the investigative unit in our state… of course our attorney general’s office is going to be handicapped every step of the way,” she added. “So it’s a ground-up issue, it appears to be, the more we keep seeing these same names appear.”
***
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Judge Young’s dismissal was issued without prejudice, meaning the state can present the case again to a grand jury.
“That means that the state is free to file again,” Taylor said. “He did encourage them to be much more specific in their grand jury filings and to really think about this case before they put it forward.”
Taylor emphasized that the judge’s ruling wasn’t about letting anyone off the hook — it was about restoring confidence in the process.
“What he did yesterday was absolutely necessary for the state of South Carolina to rebuild our reputation nationally,” she said. “We’ve had a lot of things happen in our court system down here that is kind of a black eye on our state.”
Whether South Carolina’s attorney general will re-indict Colucci remains to be seen. For now, Young’s order lifts the immediate threat of prosecution and underscores a broader call for reform in how the state handles serious criminal cases.
***
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.
