|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by JENN WOOD
***
Just hours after defense attorneys for accused killer Alex Murdaugh questioned the integrity of South Carolina’s investigation into documented jury tampering by former Colleton County clerk of court Rebecca “Becky” Hill, a motion was filed seeking to unseal files tied to the criminal inquiry into the disgraced official. According to attorney Joe McCulloch – who filed the complaint – the public deserves to know what investigators uncovered and why no criminal jury tampering charges were ever filed against Hill.
McCulloch represents former Murdaugh juror Myra Crosby — the now-infamous “egg juror” whose eleventh hour dismissal from the panel was instrumental in securing convictions against Murdaugh during his internationally watched double homicide trial in early 2023.
Those convictions were reversed last week by the S.C. supreme court, which unanimously – and decisively – concluded Hill “placed her fingers on the scales of justice” and improperly influenced jurors during the six-week trial in Walterboro, S.C.
McCulloch’s motion (.pdf) seeks partial lifting of protective orders that have shielded large portions of the post-trial jury tampering investigation from public view since early 2024.
The filing landed on the same afternoon Murdaugh attorneys Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin addressed reporters in Columbia, S.C. announcing a newly filed federal civil rights lawsuit against Hill. Harpootlian and Griffin openly criticized S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson, the South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and the state’s handling of the jury tampering investigation.
“Coincidentally, he has not looked into the attempted jury tampering of Becky Hill,” Harpootlian said of Wilson. “Clearly the statute says he, whoever tampers with the jury or attempts to tamper with a jury, is guilty of a crime.”
Throughout the press conference, Harpootlian and Griffin said major questions surrounding Hill’s conduct remained unanswered — particularly related to Crosby’s controversial removal from the jury on the morning deliberations began.
McCulloch’s motion appears aimed directly at forcing those questions into public view.
***
FIGHTING OVER FILES…
McCulloch’s filing asked the court to partially unseal investigative materials generated during the state’s “investigation” into whether Hill improperly influenced Murdaugh’s jury.
Those records were largely sealed under a January 2024 protective order issued by former chief justice Jean Toal during evidentiary hearings on Murdaugh’s motion for a new trial. At the time, Toal concluded confidentiality was necessary because of ongoing investigations surrounding the jury tampering allegations.
But McCulloch argues that rationale no longer applies.
According to the filing, both SLED and the attorney general’s office previously resisted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by asserting the investigation remained active. Yet during Hill’s December 2025 plea hearing, S.C. eleventh circuit solicitor Rick Hubbard stated investigators lacked sufficient evidence to pursue jury tampering charges against Hill.
According to McCulloch, that position is difficult to reconcile following the supreme court’s emphatic reversal of Murdaugh’s convictions.
“The State’s declaration at the time of Hill’s sentencing that the evidence was insufficient to support a jury-tampering indictment against the Clerk of Court, stands in dramatic contrast and appears incongruent with the Supreme Court’s detailed opinion reaching an opposite conclusion,” the motion stated.
The filing argued “the public interest and the ends of justice are best served by transparency.”
***
RELATED | MURDAUGH SUES BECKY HILL
***
LINGERING QUESTIONS…
Crosby’s removal from the jury has long remained one of the most controversial — and mysterious — episodes in the Murdaugh saga.
On March 2, 2023 — the same day deliberations began — Crosby was removed after allegations surfaced that she improperly discussed the case outside of court. Her dismissal became national news after she exited the courthouse carrying a dozen eggs, creating the now-infamous “egg juror” nickname.
But questions surrounding her removal never disappeared.
Murdaugh’s attorneys later alleged Hill manipulated or fabricated concerns involving Crosby’s ex-husband and a supposed Facebook post in order to engineer her removal from the panel — allegations that eventually became central to the jury tampering litigation that unraveled the verdict itself.
According to Murdaugh’s newly filed federal lawsuit against Hill, the alleged Facebook post never existed.
“Ms. Hill never saw any such Facebook post,” the complaint stated. “She made it up.”
The lawsuit further accused Hill of privately questioning Crosby about her views on Murdaugh’s guilt and attempted to determine whether she was leaning toward conviction or acquittal before dismissing her from the panel.
Those issues moved back to the forefront Monday during Harpootlian and Griffin’s press conference, where both attorneys openly questioned not only Hill’s conduct — but the adequacy of the state’s investigation into it.
***
***
Griffin described Crosby’s removal as “very suspicious” and suggested the defense still does not know the full scope of what occurred behind the scenes during the trial.
“We have a lot of questions that we would like answered,” Griffin said. “Was she a lone wolf?”
He specifically encouraged reporters to follow up with McCulloch, who has spent months investigating Crosby’s removal and now seeks access to the sealed jury tampering files.
“We hope to get to the bottom of that,” Griffin added.
Harpootlian went even further — questioning whether SLED could impartially investigate allegations tied to a conviction the agency spent years defending.
“Does it make sense to have the agency who has an inherent conflict — they want the conviction sustained — investigating whether it was valid or not?” he asked.
The defense attorneys also signaled that both the federal civil lawsuit against Hill and McCulloch’s unsealing effort are intended to force a broader accounting of what happened during the trial and its aftermath.
“With this lawsuit,” Griffin said, “we have subpoena power, we can take depositions, and so we’re going to be able to understand the entire scope of her conduct.”
Phil Barber, another member of Murdaugh’s legal team, framed the issue even more broadly.
“The integrity of the jury process was violated by somebody sworn to uphold it,” Barber said. “That cannot go unanswered.”
***
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The battle over these sealed records could become one of the next major flashpoints in the ever-expanding fallout from the Murdaugh case.
Last week’s supreme court ruling transformed long-disputed allegations into formal judicial findings — concluding Hill improperly influenced jurors and violated Murdaugh’s constitutional right to a fair trial.
But significant questions remain unresolved:
What exactly did investigators uncover?
How extensive was the inquiry into Hill’s conduct?
Did prosecutors seriously consider jury tampering charges?
And were other individuals ever scrutinized?
McCulloch’s motion now seeks to force at least some of those answers into public view.
And after Monday’s extraordinary press conference — during which Murdaugh’s attorneys openly accused state officials of failing to fully investigate the jury tampering scandal — the pressure surrounding those sealed files is only intensifying.
***
THE LETTER AND MOTION…
(S.C. Judicial Branch)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.
***
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.
7 comments
For the love of God, dude … you’ve had the same hairstyle since 1970!
Let’s get serious and SCIENTIFIC.
The economic, fair, realistic, swift, and visionary solution is: bench re-trial with the retrial judge empowered to call the court’s own expert witnesses and lay witnesses if necessary.
Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) wrongful convictions have been correctly reversed; but he remains a criminal defendant entitled UNDER THAT SAME SIXTH AMENDMENT to a speedy retrial.
Justice for Paul and Maggie means finding the real shooters after RAM is exonerated on a speedy retrial.
There is precedent in South Carolina for that happening.
Justin Mallory was FALSELY accused of stabbing his wife Nakeya to death. His jury deadlocked and he opted for a bench retrial. Judge Thomas W. Cooper, after whom many judicial candidates testify they want to model themselves, bench-tried Justin Mallory and cleared him. Thereafter, Justin Mallory pushed Richland County’s Sheriff’s Department to re-investigate.
An initially-missed fact was noticed: the stabber was left-handed.
And he was found to be Joshua Porch, arrested in California, tried and convicted.
RAM suffered immensely by being wrongly convicted; but he must still suffer from being wrongly accused.
His lawyers seem callous about the time it takes to mount a retrial.
It need not be so if both sides agree to a bench trial. Nothing prevents it from being a three-judge bench trial.
Those who oppose this idea are unwittingly or intentionally protecting the real shooters.
I shall, for now, God willing and FITS permitting, leave aside the insane idea which won’t go away but insists that Becky Hill was bribed by Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) and/or his defense team to push the jury to find RAM guilty!?!?!
And the more I ask the logical question: “If the Defense had bribed Becky Hill to influence the jury, wouldn’t she have influenced them to return a NOT GUILTY verdict and been done with it?” the more I get insulted.
But what alarms me more than the insults is RAM’s Defense team’s failure to appreciate and counter the hold insanity has taken hold of the public.
It’s the same insanity which made the first jury buy the Prosecution’s insane motive theory.
And RAM’s current Defense team STILL thinks its shock at the insanity of the Prosecution’s motive theory will carry the day with the next jury if only it were not manipulated by Becky Hill.
The majority of internet commenters are not manipulated by Becky Hill; yet, they buy the Prosecution’s insane motive theory and even defend it and confabulate reasons to defend it.
I wrote that I shall put that aside for now but didn’t quite do that.
Yet, I move to the ONE AND ONLY item of true evidence the Prosecution has and warn RAM’s Defense that unless they counter it more effectively, they will doom RAM again.
Here is part of a thread from David Pascoe for AG’s FaceBook post:
“Janice Squires Randall
She needs to be in jail. He admits to lying about being there before his wife and son were murdered. Now he gets a new trial at taxpayers expense. No wonder it’s called CRIMINAL justice.
2d
Reply
Marie Faltas
Janice Squires Randall , Alex Murdaugh was in his HOME of Moselle which has many parts BEFORE and AFTER, but NOT DURING the shootings. There is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE of when EXACTLY the shootings occurred between Paul’s video of 8:49 pm and Alex’s 911 call of 10:10 pm. We know FOR SURE that the dinner all three of Alex, Paul and Maggie, had TOGETHER ended at 8:30 pm and that the kennels are some 100 or so yards from the house. How does that prove Alex did the shootings?
1d
Reply
Janice Squires Randall
Marie Faltas why did he tell an employee at his mother’s I believe what to say. You have your opinion I have mine.
1d
Reply
Marie Faltas
Janice Squires Randall, again, if the shootings occurred AFTER Alex Murdaugh left Moselle for Almeda, it does not matter how long or how short his visit to Almeda was. We know FOR SURE that he left Moselle for Almeda at 9:02 pm. That is from THREE UNDISPUTED SOURCES: Alex’s own phone, the FBI download of his car, and General Motors’ BELATED production of Alex’s car’s tracking data. All you need to know to understand that Alex could NOT be the shooter is that the shootings AND THE CLEANING OF THE SCENE could NOT have happened between 8:49 pm and 9:02 pm. There are more compelling medical reasons, too. These are not “opinions”; they are facts.
1d
Reply
Linda Lollis Reece
Marie Faltas why would he lie about not being at the kennels? What would make him not tell the truth about being there?
5h
Reply
Marie Faltas
Linda Lollis Reece, I explained many times that I do NOT KNOW, and I do not think he even knows, why he DID NOT VOLUNTEER having been at the kennels at 8:49 pm; but I do not think that has ANY IMPORTANCE because it is clear from MEDICAL EVIDENCE (victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy compared to the KNOWN time and contents of their last meal at 8:30 pm) that the shootings happened closer to 9:30 pm than to 8:54 pm. He had volunteered that he was with them at dinner in the house; and the house is within few minutes walking distance from the kennels. So, what is the big deal? He could not have been the shooter even if had VOLUNTEERED having gone to the kennels if you accept the MEDICALLY-CORRECT time of the shootings. And remember again, he NEVER ever says to first responders that he never went to the kennels. They just did not ask him; and he did not volunteer it.”
The to everything is: when EXACTLY did the shootings occur?
A penny of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Those who pinch the penny of prevention want to cash in on the pound of cure.
That goes for the penny to properly train law enforcement and crime scene investigators compared to the pound of high-salaried prosecutors and defense attorneys and prosecutors-turned-defense-attorneys all in a case bound to ultimately fail due to investigatory failures from the start.
Ever heard the expression “like a chicken with its head cut off”? It means furiously flapping around.
Ever heard the expression “a stick-to-your-ribs mean”? It means fatty meals are emptied from the stomach much later than light ones.
Now, you might say human observation is that one has a bowel movement almost immediately after a large and fatty meal.
True; but that movement is NOT the meal you just ate. It is the prior meal(s) that got SLOWLY moved down the digestive tact, broken down, and absorbed with ONLY the indigestible residue passing down to the terminal part of the digestive tract and waiting there.
Waiting there for what?
For one of both of two things: enough volume to open the anal sphincter and/or signals from the very upper digestive tract that “more food is coming so you, distal colon and anus, better get empty and ready for it because you do not know how much it will be.”
How do the terminal colon and anus get those signals? The reflexes of the autonomic nervous system.
They start with the dento-colonic reflex. You are more likely to have a bowel movement after brushing your teeth in the morning.
Next is the gastro-colonic reflex. Even babies have bowel movements right after every feed. If that were the milk they just received, they would starve to death. Instead, it is the residue of the milk from the prior feeds.
The reflexes go the other way, too.
Adults and babies feel hungrier after a bowel movement because the terminal colon tells the stomach “I’m good and empty and ready for the residue of the next meal to come down my way.”
That is why babies have more bowel movements a day because they need more feeds a day at the stage of fastest growth. As the growth curve slows, the number of bowel movements decreases until one bowel movement a day becomes the norm for adults.
These are, of course, the physiological, not pathological, sequences.
What does this have to do with Paul and Maggie?
We know FOR SURE that their last meal started after 8:00 pm on 7 June 2021 and ended at 8:30 pm that day.
We also know with relative certainty what they had eaten because Blanca testified what she had cooked and left on the stove for them.
It would have been MANDATORY for properly-trained first investigators on the scene to collect that/those pots left on the stove and precisely measured how much, if any, food was left and precisely subtracted that from the total capacity of the pot(s) left on the stove and the dirty dishes, if any, around.
Of course, with three people sharing the same dinner from the same pot(s), it would have been an educated guess to apportion how much each of the three ate and drank.
But the bottom line is the Prosecution’s FALSE time of death at 8:49 or 8:52 pm, is ONLY 19 to 22 minutes after the last meal. THAT SOON after the last meal, the stomach contents should look almost exactly as they looked on the dinner plates.
THEY DID NOT.
They were too digested into “tan material” for the pathologist to tell exactly what they were and she “did not see any corn or beans or anything like that.” That pretty much rules out death 19 to 22 minutes after the last meal.
And it puts the most likely time of death around 9:30 pm.
Why did Maggie’s phone have some activity around 8:52 pm but not thereafter? EASY! She had laid it on the side-by-side or somewhere to have both hands free to handle the dogs; and one member of the shooting cabal got hold of it to prevent her from using it to record the events or to summon help. Once they realized someone was calling Maggie, they had to discard it far away to prevent her from reaching for it but not too far away for that member to return to the shooting cabal.
And the Defense team fell into the Prosecution’s trap and spent a lot of money proving that Alex would not have heard the shots fired at the kennels when he was at the house for some acoustic reason or another.
The real reason Alex could not hear the shots is that they were fired by the real shooter(s) AFTER Alex had left for Almeda. And, no, he would not have seen, much less suspected a pedestrian disposing of Maggie’s phone on the side of the road.
All that stuff about the phone lighting or not lighting when thrown assumes it was thrown from a moving car.
It need not have been. It could have been placed by a pedestrian.
Tell me, if you can, where I am wrong.
Stop the presses! Or don’t!
For all FITS’ claims to be asking the hard questions, FITS’ video interview with Alan Wilson and Creighton Waters omits a bombshell revelation in a deposition of FITS’ former employee, Callie Lyons, recently and curiously filed by another former employee of FITS’, Malicious Mandy Matney (“MMM”) in supposed defense against MMM’s contempt-of-court exposure.
That bombshell revelation, among many others obtained by Greg Parker’s civil defense because MMM’s text messages showed up on Callie Lyons’ i-phone is (drum rolls): the leak of the FALSE blood spatter was by former Alan Wilson employee Megan Burchstead to MMM.
I challenge you to delete this comment of mine, because your deleting is will prove you are an agent of Alan Wilson, too.
And I can, God willing, post it elsewhere, too, assuming the other outlets are not agents of Alan Wilson, too.
FITS, FITS, FITS, I earned the right to figuratively toot my own horn here, too.
Look at what I wrote two years ago, and of which I was just reminded by another commenter’s question to me yesterday:
“@marieassaad-faltas1299
2 years ago
In reference to pages 59-60 of Becky Hill’s book, am I the ONLY one left in this world with any sense of decency?
FIRST, this means THAT MALE JUROR (not the female egg juror) was discussing the case with at least three friends and talking about how long the case will take.
SECOND, nothing BUT NOTHING compelled that juror to stay on the case and make just $20/day (NOT $10 because I read Becky Hill’s ENTIRE book VERY CAREFULLY). All that juror had to do is tell the judge about the work needs. The judge would have replaced that juror with an alternate (remember? six alternates had been chosen) and no outside money would have changed hands.
THIRD, how do we know there was no explicit or tacit understanding about what that juror was to do in return for those “thousands of dollars” from his three friends? After all, that jury, ACCORDING TO BECKY HILL, communicated with their eyes. Perhaps those friends winked and nodded as the money changed hands.
FOURTH AND FOREMOST, we need to know IMMEDIATELY if that money was the three friends’ own money or whether they were funneling it from someone else.
There may have been money laundering going on if the amount exceeded $10K. Banks are supposed to report those AND it is, according to MY understanding (and I am NOT a lawyer), money laundering to break a $10K transaction into smaller ones to evade the bank’s reporting requirement.
Frankly, I think Dick and Jim are not that brilliant after all. They don’t know where it is REALLY at.
It is no longer “the trial of the century” but “the mistrial of the decade.””
And then tell me why that male, guilty-voting, juror’s receipt of outside money is as ignored as Cousin Eddie Smith’s indicted alleged crimes.
Update: “Everything is on the table” says Alan Wilson tens of times in his most recent one-on-one interview with Anne Emmerson; but NOT ONCE does he say the possibility of Alex’s actual innocence is on the table.
Also, seeing the photo of Maggie’s phone on site where it was found, it is IMPOSSIBLE for that phone to have been thrown from a moving car. The thin twigs above it are intact and separated as if by hand, NOT broken as they would have been if the phone had been thrown from above them.
And why would Alex, if he were the shooter, go to such length to separate that phone from the murder site only to help law enforcement locate it, retrieve it, and unlock it, the next morning?