CRIME & COURTS

The Battle Of The Shackles: Murdaugh Withdraws Motion After Prosecutors Push Back

Prosecutors, defense attorneys trade barbs prior to Alex Murdaugh abruptly withdrawing motion over courtroom attire…

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

It took less than 48 hours for one of the first legal skirmishes of Alex Murdaugh‘s retrial to flare up — and fizzle out.

Last week, Murdaugh’s attorneys asked newly appointed South Carolina circuit court judge Debra McCaslin to let the convicted financial fraudster and accused double murderer appear at his second murder trial and televised pretrial hearings in civilian clothing and without visible shackles, arguing there was no individualized security concern justifying restraints.

By Thursday afternoon (June 25, 2026), after a sharply worded response from the South Carolina attorney general’s office, the defense withdrew the motion altogether.

In between, prosecutors declared Murdaugh wasn’t “special,” defense attorneys accused the state of engaging in “histrionics,” and both sides managed to transform what is ordinarily a routine procedural issue into one of the first spirited exchanges ahead of the most anticipated retrial in South Carolina history.

The original defense motion largely mirrored one filed before Murdaugh’s first murder trial in 2023.

Attorneys Dick HarpootlianJim GriffinPhil Barber and Maggie Fox argued the U.S. supreme court has long prohibited defendants from appearing before jurors in visible restraints absent a specific security need. They maintained Murdaugh has never attempted to escape, threatened courtroom personnel or engaged in disruptive conduct that would justify shackling him in front of prospective jurors or television cameras.

The motion also argued that because televised pretrial hearings are widely viewed — including by potential jurors — allowing Murdaugh to appear in prison garb and restraints could undermine the presumption of innocence before jury selection even begins.

Support FITSNews … SUBSCRIBE!

***

‘HE IS NOT SPECIAL’

Chief prosecutor Creighton Waters wasn’t persuaded.

In a six-page response (.pdf) filed Wednesday, the lead prosecutor on the case reminded the court that Murdaugh is not merely a pretrial detainee awaiting trial. He is currently serving a 27-year state prison sentence for financial crimes alongside a concurrent 40-year federal sentence.

While acknowledging the legal analysis changes once a jury is seated, prosecutors argued no such concerns existed during a non-jury scheduling conference.

They also deferred to the S.C. Department of Corrections (SCDC), which maintains inmates should ordinarily remain in restraints and prison attire during court appearances, noting that becoming unrestrained and changing into civilian clothing are “the first two steps of any escape attempt.”

The filing further pointed to disciplinary issues while Murdaugh has been incarcerated, including a contraband incident involving a book during his first trial and subsequent prison disciplinary sanctions.

Then came the line likely to draw the most attention.

“This case is ultimately about the fact that (the) defendant thinks he is special,” prosecutors wrote. “He is not.”

***

RELATED | MURDAUGH HEADED BACK TO COURT

***

DEFENSE FIRES BACK…

The defense answered with a pointed reply (.pdf) of its own, calling the state’s filing “without merit.”

Murdaugh’s defense team further accused prosecutors of resorting to rhetoric instead of legal analysis – and argued the state had failed to identify any individualized security concern that would justify displaying Murdaugh in shackles before prospective jurors.

The attorneys also reminded the court that former circuit court judge Clifton Newman granted essentially the same request prior to Murdaugh’s first trial without any objection from the state.

Then came perhaps the sharpest jab of the filing. Responding to what they characterized as prosecutors’ “ad hominem rhetoric,” the defense compared prosecutors’ current arguments to their early dismissal of allegations against former Colleton County clerk of court Rebecca “Becky” Hill.

“The state’s ad hominem rhetoric recalls (its) initial response to former Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill’s misconduct at the first trial,” the filing stated. “Five justices of our Supreme Court apparently found it plausible.”

After defending the motion for three pages, however, Murdaugh’s attorneys abruptly changed course.

Rather than asking McCaslin to decide the issue during Monday’s scheduling conference, they withdrew the request altogether.

“Mr. Murdaugh will not waste the court’s time at the upcoming status conference arguing about the optics of the status conference,” the filing concluded.

Instead, the defense said it would rather focus on what it described as more substantive issues expected to arise before retrial, including recently filed motions seeking additional DNA testing, expanded access to case materials and a change of venue.

***

RELATED | FLURRY OF MURDAUGH MOTIONS FILED

***

THE FIRST OF MANY?

In the grand scheme of the retrial, the shackling dispute is likely to prove insignificant.

But the exchange offered an early preview of what is almost certain to define the months ahead.

The same lawyers who battled through six weeks of testimony in Walterboro three years ago are once again trading punches — this time against the backdrop of a South Carolina supreme court decision that sharply criticized the conduct of Murdaugh’s first trial and ordered the case back for a do-over.

If the opening round is any indication, neither side intends to ease into the rematch.

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

Jenn Wood (Provided)

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.

***

Subscribe to our newsletter by clicking here…

*****

Related posts

CRIME & COURTS

Judge Denies ‘Stand Your Ground’ Immunity In Scott Spivey Shooting

Jenn Wood
CRIME & COURTS

Wiretapping Investigation Launched Into Fired S.C. Elections Director

Will Folks
CRIME & COURTS

Former York County Sheriff Arrested

Andrew Fancher

13 comments

Avatar photo
The Colonel Top fan June 25, 2026 at 6:26 pm

Wait, they want a change of venue on their change of venue?

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 26, 2026 at 8:44 am

To the recurring headache of that kennels video, I respond:
Paul was NOT shot “BEFORE he was able to send it.” Paul did not send the kennel video BECAUSE IT WAS USELESS.
If you look carefully, there was NO “pone” or any other lesion on that furiously-wagging tail of Cash-the-dog.
It had been either an optical illusion or some caked dirt which Paul had mistaken for “a pone” and wanted the veterinarian friend of Rogan Gibson’s girlfriend to look at and suggest remedies or continued passive observation.
By the time Paul took that video AND sleeved Cash-the-dog’s tail in Paul’s non-phone-holding palm, that caked dirt had fallen off or that swollen insect bite has flattened out AND Paul put his OWN phone back in his OWN pocket.
Think about it!
If Paul had been shot BY ALEX right after the kennel video: (1) Why was the phone left in Paul’s pocket and not taken by Alex along with Maggie’s phone? (2) Wouldn’t Cash-the-dog have run away spooked by the gunfire and had Paul’s blood at least on its paws? (3) Would Alex have had time to catch BOTH dogs (Cash and Bubba), clean them, and put both of them in their kennels in the SIX MINUTES between the last activity on Maggie’s phone and Alex leaving for Almeda?
Instead, the grounds/kennels-keeper testified that when he went to Moselle unsuspectingly in the morning, the dogs were ALL locked in their kennels and just hungry.
Of course, as I previously explained MANY TIMES, the REAL time of the shootings is closer to 9:30 pm judging by the victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy compared to the KNOWN time and composition of their last meal.

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 26, 2026 at 9:04 am

The Defense is taking a complicated approach and playing into the Prosecution’s hands AGAIN.
Instead of all this talk about retrial arrangements, the Defense should push for a bench-directed-verdict-of-acquittal based on the CORRECT analysis of what the Prosecution presents as inculpatory evidence when it is in fact exculpatory.
And the Prosecution has one supposedly-inculpatory piece, and only ONE piece, which should, UNDER DUE PROCESS, be analyzed SCIENTIFICALLY.
And that is the Kennels video.
But think about it and pray Judge McCaslin has the courage to think OUTLOUD about it.
Paul was NOT shot “BEFORE he was able to send it.” Paul did not send the kennel video BECAUSE IT WAS USELESS.
If you look carefully, there was NO “pone” or any other lesion on that furiously-wagging tail of Cash-the-dog.
It had been either an optical illusion or some caked dirt which Paul had mistaken for “a pone” and wanted the veterinarian friend of Rogan Gibson’s girl friend to look at and suggest remedies or continued passive observation.
By the time Paul took that video AND sleeved Cash-the-dog’s tail in Paul’s non-phone-holding palm, that caked dirt had fallen off or that swollen insect bite has flattened out AND Paul put his OWN phone back in his OWN pocket.
Think about it!
If Paul had been shot BY ALEX right after the kennel video: (1) Why was the phone left in Paul’s pocket and not taken by Alex along with Maggie’s phone? (2) Wouldn’t Cash-the-dog have run away spooked by the gunfire and had Paul’s blood at least on its paws? (3) Would Alex have had time to catch BOTH dogs (Cash and Bubba), clean them, and put both of them in their kennels in the SIX MINUTES between the last activity on Maggie’s phone and Alex leaving for Almeda?
Instead, the grounds/kennels-keeper testified that when he went to Moselle unsuspectingly in the morning, the dogs were ALL locked in their kennels and just hungry.
Of course, as I previously explained MANY TIMES, the REAL time of the shootings is closer to 9:30 pm judging by the victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy compared to the KNOWN time and composition of their last meal.

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 26, 2026 at 9:23 am

The Bill of Rights is NOT limited to the Sixth Amendment; nor is the latter even limited to trial by an untainted jury.
Before we even get to trial/retrial, the Constitution guarantees DUE PROCESS, procedural and substantive.
But he Defense is taking a complicated approach and playing into the Prosecution’s hands AGAIN.
Instead of all this talk about retrial arrangements, the Defense should push for a bench-directed-verdict-of-acquittal based on the CORRECT analysis of what the Prosecution presents as inculpatory evidence when it is in fact exculpatory.
And the Prosecution has one supposedly-inculpatory piece, and only ONE piece, which should, UNDER DUE PROCESS, be analyzed SCIENTIFICALLY.
And that is the Kennels video.
But think about it and pray Judge McCaslin has the courage to think OUTLOUD about it.
Paul was NOT shot “BEFORE he was able to send it.” Paul did not send the kennel video BECAUSE IT WAS USELESS.
If you look carefully, there was NO “pone” or any other lesion on that furiously-wagging tail of Cash-the-dog.
It had been either an optical illusion or some caked dirt which Paul had mistaken for “a pone” and wanted the veterinarian friend of Rogan Gibson’s girlfriend to look at and suggest remedies or continued passive observation.
By the time Paul took that video AND sleeved Cash-the-dog’s tail in Paul’s non-phone-holding palm, that caked dirt had fallen off or that swollen insect bite has flattened out AND Paul put his OWN phone back in his OWN pocket.
Think about it!
If Paul had been shot BY ALEX right after the kennel video: (1) Why was the phone left in Paul’s pocket and not taken by Alex along with Maggie’s phone? (2) Wouldn’t Cash-the-dog have run away spooked by the gunfire and had Paul’s blood at least on its paws? (3) Would Alex have had time to catch BOTH dogs (Cash and Bubba), clean them, and put both of them in their kennels in the SIX MINUTES between the last activity on Maggie’s phone and Alex leaving for Almeda?
Instead, the grounds/kennels-keeper testified that when he went to Moselle unsuspectingly in the morning, the dogs were ALL locked in their kennels and just hungry.
Of course, as I previously explained MANY TIMES, the REAL time of the shootings is closer to 9:30 pm judging by the victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy compared to the KNOWN time and composition of their last meal.

Reply
Just another guest June 26, 2026 at 9:23 am

The Bill of Rights is NOT limited to the Sixth Amendment; nor is the latter even limited to trial by an untainted jury.
Before we even get to trial/retrial, the Constitution guarantees DUE PROCESS, procedural and substantive.
But he Defense is taking a complicated approach and playing into the Prosecution’s hands AGAIN.
Instead of all this talk about retrial arrangements, the Defense should push for a bench-directed-verdict-of-acquittal based on the CORRECT analysis of what the Prosecution presents as inculpatory evidence when it is in fact exculpatory.
And the Prosecution has one supposedly-inculpatory piece, and only ONE piece, which should, UNDER DUE PROCESS, be analyzed SCIENTIFICALLY.
And that is the Kennels video.
But think about it and pray Judge McCaslin has the courage to think OUTLOUD about it.
Paul was NOT shot “BEFORE he was able to send it.” Paul did not send the kennel video BECAUSE IT WAS USELESS.
If you look carefully, there was NO “pone” or any other lesion on that furiously-wagging tail of Cash-the-dog.
It had been either an optical illusion or some caked dirt which Paul had mistaken for “a pone” and wanted the veterinarian friend of Rogan Gibson’s girlfriend to look at and suggest remedies or continued passive observation.
By the time Paul took that video AND sleeved Cash-the-dog’s tail in Paul’s non-phone-holding palm, that caked dirt had fallen off or that swollen insect bite has flattened out AND Paul put his OWN phone back in his OWN pocket.
Think about it!
If Paul had been shot BY ALEX right after the kennel video: (1) Why was the phone left in Paul’s pocket and not taken by Alex along with Maggie’s phone? (2) Wouldn’t Cash-the-dog have run away spooked by the gunfire and had Paul’s blood at least on its paws? (3) Would Alex have had time to catch BOTH dogs (Cash and Bubba), clean them, and put both of them in their kennels in the SIX MINUTES between the last activity on Maggie’s phone and Alex leaving for Almeda?
Instead, the grounds/kennels-keeper testified that when he went to Moselle unsuspectingly in the morning, the dogs were ALL locked in their kennels and just hungry.
Of course, as I previously explained MANY TIMES, the REAL time of the shootings is closer to 9:30 pm judging by the victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy compared to the KNOWN time and composition of their last meal.

Reply
Goody3 Top fan June 26, 2026 at 10:24 am

“He is not” {special}. That says it all.

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 26, 2026 at 10:43 am

But he IS special.
Anyone who found his beloved wife and younger son shot by strangers AND had the shootings FALSELY pinned on the grieving widower and father IS special.
The system should be in the proverbial ashes and sash cloth seeking Alex Murdaugh’s forgiveness instead of continuing to humiliate and torture him.
Look at what corrupt police did to Karen Read in Massachusetts.
Look at what the system did to me.
We who faced FALSE criminal accusations with courage and dignity ARE special.
Others should learn from us, not attack us.

Reply
Noseyone Top fan June 26, 2026 at 12:19 pm

Grieving widower and father had crocodile tears! He thinks he is special and entitled and thus the mess he got himself into

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 26, 2026 at 1:17 pm

And by what magic can you tell real tears from “crocodile tears”?

Reply
Noseyone Top fan June 26, 2026 at 12:17 pm

I love this comment… Go Creighton!

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 28, 2026 at 12:31 pm

Creighton should “go” consider what Paul and Maggie’s last meal and that kennels video tell us about Alex Murdaugh’s ACTUAL innocence.
How many “minutes before” the shootings people say Alex Murdaugh was at the kennels?
If you want to say under ten minutes before, what is anyone’s proof of when Paul or Maggie were ACTUALLY shot?
If you mean more that the 13 minutes between the kennels video and Alex starting his car towards Almeda, then Alex could NOT possibly have the shooter of a shooter or a silent witness to the shootings.
?If Alex had been the shooter, he would have SEEN Paul making the kennels video with his phone and putting it in his pocket. IF Alex wanted to hide evidence of Alex’s having been at the kennels supposedly under 10 minutes before the shootings, Alex would have taken the phone and PHYSICALLY destroyed it or drowned it or hid it or whatever.
Alex did NOT need Paul’s password for that.
If Alex has, as pretended by his FALSE accusers, been able to hide the big-sized shooting weapons, he would have been able to dispose of that supposedly-incriminating phone along with the shooting weapons.
Remember? The FALSE accusers also pretend Alex took Maggie’s phone AFTER shooting her and PHYSICALLY disposed of it.
Why would Alex NOT have done the same with Paul’s phone?
Remember? If Alex had been the shooter, he would have SEEN the phone in Paul’s pocket and KNOWN that Paul had made the kennels video with it. He would have taken it along with Maggie’s phone and destroyed it or hid it along with Maggie’s phone.
Alex did THE OPPOSITE of what the real shooter would have done:
(1) Alex returned to Moselle from Almeda that night. Had Alex been the real shooter, he would have spent the night in his hospitalized father’s bed in Almeda (as Maggie expected him to do, incidentally) and left the bodies to be discovered in the morning by one of the Moselle farm/kennels workers.
(2) The next morning, Alex helped SLED locate and retrieve Maggie’s phone after it had been noticed missing. Had Alex been the real shooter and the real disposer of Maggie’s phone, he would have kept his silence until the battery died and the phone would have never been located.
And AGAIN, Alex NEVER said the phrase, “I never went to the kennels.” He just omitted to report that he had gone there before going to Almeda.
And again and again, Paul’s and Maggie’s stomach’s contents AT AUTPOSY put the REAL time of the shootings closer to 9:30 pm on 7 June 2021.

Reply
SubZeroIQ June 29, 2026 at 11:19 am

With God willing and FITS permitting, I shall keep pasting here my most relevant replies to comments on FITSTube and YouTube. Here is one from this morning:
@ritaeichler2066 , relax and listen!
I did not write that Alex saw the video ITSELF.
I wrote that Alex must have SEEN PAUL MAKING THE VIDEO. The threesome, who had just had dinner together, were in the narrow confines of the kennels.
If Paul and Maggie could see Bubba-the-dog closely enough to debate whether what its jaws held was a chicken or a guinea, and for Alex to summon Bubba-the-dog and extract the bird from its jaws and later see that chicken died, then Alex MUST HAVE BEEN close enough to SEE PAUL MAKING THE VIDEO then put Paul’s own phone back in Paul’s own pocket.
Had Alex been the real shooter, or had he known that some shooters would show up at the kennels and confront Paul and Maggie, Alex WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE KNOWN that video on Paul’s phone would cast suspicion on Alex; and Alex would have taken the phone from a lifeless Paul’s pocket and disposed of it along with the shooting weapons.
“by 8:49” Paul and Maggie were NOT “dead.”
There is ABSOLUTELY no support for the assumption that they were.
And for the nth time: the food in their stomachs AT AUTOPSY was too little and too digested for their lives to have ended ONLY 19 MINUTES after their KNOWN large and relatively fatty last meal.
These are NOT false facts. These are long known MEDICAL facts about human digestion.
I understand that some people’s ideas are cemented. But I can no more accept that than accept, for example, a man being can be executed for saying the earth is round while most people had a fixed idea that the earth is flat.
I am NOT an Alex troll. I am one who had been FALSELY accused of crimes but, thank God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, ultimately COMPLETELY exonerated myself beginning with a 22-26 February 2010 jury trial in the court of none other than Judge Clifton Newman.
Please respect that or hold your peace.

Reply
SubZeroIQ July 2, 2026 at 9:22 am

I hope you would be happy with this long comment which proves SCIENTIFICALLY that Alex Murdaugh is ACTUALLY innocent because the shootings did NOT happen as early as the Prosecution pretended.
The food in Paul and Maggie’s stomachs AT AUTOPSY was too little and too digested for their lives to have ended ONLY 19 or 22 MINUTES after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal ended at 8:30 pm on 7 June 2021, just as the sun BEGAN SETTING on that Low Country day so close to the summer soltice.
Those who took the time to attend the hearings and/or go the now-reversed trial, should take the time to read this TRUE CRIME story from Oregon as told in Atlas Obscura:
How a Victim’s Last Meal Can Identify a Killer
To solve crimes, two botanists identify half-digested potatoes, tomatoes, and lettuce under a microscope.
by Tove DanovichDecember 12, 2017
It was 10 p.m. when the two men held up a blue Dutch Brothers coffee kiosk in Eugene, Oregon. They were wearing dark clothing and had covered their faces with handkerchiefs. The first man told the lone barista to turn around with his hands on the back of his head and close his eyes. They likely hoped that the second man could grab the cash while the other watched the barista. But the plan went wrong. The barista got out his gun and shot and killed the first man. The second man tried to get in a few shots, but soon ran away on foot.
The kiosk’s surveillance cameras were out of order, and nearby cameras did not capture the two men on video. The case might have reached a dead end there if not for the criminal’s autopsy and, specifically, the identification of what the dead man ate for dinner that night.
As a forensic analyst for the Eugene Police Department, Lisa Pope doesn’t perform autopsies, but she is sometimes in the room to help tie up any forensic loose ends. Pope was there, in 2010, for the autopsy.
“[The Medical Examiner] was examining the stomach contents, which is a part I don’t like because it doesn’t smell good,” Pope recalls. “But I started paying attention—he was pulling out food that wasn’t well-digested.”
Thanks to the process of chewing combined with caustic stomach acids, it’s typically difficult to identify foods from a deceased’s stomach contents. “But he’s pulling out chunks of hamburger about the size of my index finger, a piece of cheese, then a piece of bacon about a half inch long,” Pope says. “Then he pulls out half a French fry.”
Pope recognized it at once. It was a thick cut fry with the skin still attached—a signature of Wendy’s fries. Even better, Pope knew there was a Wendy’s restaurant just a few blocks from the Dutch Brothers kiosk. She called the lead detective, and when they asked Wendy’s for surveillance footage from that night, they found clear video of the deceased suspect and his partner ordering food, eating their meal, and then trying on their masks before walking out the door. The detectives couldn’t believe it. “If it weren’t for the stomach contents, we might not have gotten that video,” Pope says.
The first forensic autopsy used to determine whether foul play was involved in a victim’s death took place in the early 1300s. Yet these autopsies were performed sparingly, and they usually aimed to simply determine whether a victim died from heart attack or poison, knife wounds or a gunshot. If a man died of a coughing fit, the autopsy may have only looked at the throat and chest—ignoring the rest of the body. Physicians only saw what they looked for, and it wasn’t until the mid-1800s that people started championing more comprehensive autopsies that looked at every organ of the body and documented each one according to a set standard.
The Dutch Brothers Kiosk is a rare example of an old-school form of stomach analysis (using only what can be detected with the eye) working. Yet a closer look at stomach contents could lead to these almost unbelievable successes happening more often. Today most autopsies only look at stomach contents to get a vague idea of how long it’s been since a victim’s last meal. It’s rare that the deceased was such a terrible chewer that foods can be identified with the naked eye. But forensic botanists and co-authors of the book Forensic Plant Science, Jane Bock and David Norris, have proven that looking at stomach contents under a microscope can be an important tool in solving a crime—even if it is only just starting to catch on.
Bock and Norris were normal, American academics—she a botanist and he an animal ecologist—until 1982, when they got a call from an Assistant Coroner in Denver. A young woman had been murdered. The investigators knew she had eaten with her boyfriend the day before at a McDonald’s. As anyone who has seen a detective show knows, the significant other is always a primary suspect. Yet some of the deceased’s stomach contents didn’t seem to match their last meal together.
The stomach stops working after death, creating a gastronomic time capsule of the victim’s last moments. Though digestion varies from person to person, a meal is typically fully digested (and the stomach empty) six hours after eating. To determine time of death, examiners commonly look at body temperature and rigor mortis (for more recently killed victims) or decomposition and insect activity (for bodies found later). They rarely rely on stomach contents.
Yet many common models are subject to external factors such as temperature. A body found in a scorching desert will actually heat up, and a body found in a snowbank will cool more rapidly. Even rigor mortis, which can also be sped up or slowed based on the weather, relies on subjective assessments of a body’s stiffness.
While most investigators take these factors into consideration, Norris says that stomach contents are very useful, too, and can sometimes provide a more accurate timeline of the victim’s last hours. If you know about a person’s last meal and can see the volume of material left in the stomach, you can determine (if the stomach is nearly empty) that a victim was killed six hours after eating or (if full) closer to one hour after a last meal.
“This determined who the suspects were and who they weren’t,” Norris says, referring to cases where a suspect had an alibi for, say, the later possible time of death range but not the earlier one. “A lot of methods are used to determine time of death, but they all have a fairly large plus or minus factor.” In other words, stomach contents are equally or more reliable than other commonly used methods when you know the time of a victim’s last meal and can identify the meal under a microscope.
For Bock and Norris’s first case, the Denver coroner sent stomach contents swabbed onto slides. Bock, a botanist unused to dealing with dead animal material, had refused to look at them otherwise. When they examined the slides, they discovered that not only was there no trace of hamburger, but the victim’s last meal had actually been a salad—under a microscope they detected remnants of cabbage, green peppers, and kidney beans. Her last meal had been at a Wendy’s, which, in the 1980s, was one of the few fast food restaurants to have a salad bar. (Unlike the would-be Dutch Brothers robber, this woman chewed her food before swallowing, which meant fries or salad remnants couldn’t be identified by sight alone.) The boyfriend had an alibi for the evening and was no longer considered a suspect. Norris says that years later, serial killer Henry Lee Lucas confessed to her murder. (Take it with a grain of salt: Lucas has variously confessed to committing 60 to 3,000 unsolved murders.)
In another of Bock and Norris’ famous cases, a woman named Jill Coit was suspected of killing her estranged husband, Gerry Boggs. Boggs had been her ninth husband (she was married 11 times to nine different men), and they’d separated acrimoniously. Boggs was one of those men who start every morning the same way: He got up and ordered coffee, hash browns, toast, and eggs at a local diner. Then he opened the store that he ran with his brother Doug. But one morning when Doug got to work, the store was still closed. He called, but got no answer. When checked on Gerry after work, Doug discovered his brother’s body. He had been hit with a shovel, burned with a stun gun, and shot three times.
Coit was an obvious suspect—she had a pattern of marrying men for their money, and a previous husband had been killed under suspicious circumstances. She had an alibi for the later half of the day when Boggs was murdered, but not for that morning. His stomach contents were sent to Bock and Norris, who found potato and onion consistent with the contents of his last meal—breakfast. Based on that information, authorities obtained a search warrant for Coit’s home where they found the murder weapons. Jill Coit is currently serving a life sentence without possibility of parole.
Despite their early successes (and having a few of their famous cases dramatized for the television show Forensic Files), Bock and Norris have found that getting a new form of forensic science accepted by investigators is sometimes an uphill battle.
“If you pick up most textbooks on forensic science, they don’t cover botanic material at all,” Norris says. That’s one of the reasons why he and Bock wrote a textbook about forensic botany. Changing the standards for forensic science may require an overhaul of the whole system.
Yet in the 30 years he and Bock have been solving cases with botany, the number of cases they get asked to work on has gone down while the number of workshops they’ve been brought in to teach keeps increasing. They were recently invited to a regional FBI lab. “We feel that it may be a reflection that we are getting the word out.”
Over their three decade career, investigators throughout the Unites States have sent stomach contents to Bock and Norris. “Some of them would come FedEx,” Norris says. “They typically put absorbent material in with it in case the container broke, but it would be shipped like any other liquid.” Often, agents drove or flew into Colorado and delivered the contents directly to the forensic botanists. Norris says that most people are familiar with what stomach contents look like: “It looks like vomit.”
As long as the food in the sample had a cell wall—think plants rather than meat, cheese, or processed foods, which turn to “goosh,” as Norris calls it, soon after mingling with stomach acids—they can tell exactly what it was. Even when meat is relatively intact, Norris explains, since all skeletal muscle looks alike, it’s impossible to tell steak from grasshopper meat. In other words, there’s now another (admittedly macabre) reason to eat vegetables at every meal.
Gastro Obscura covers the world’s most wondrous food and drink.
© 2026 Atlas Obscura. All rights reserved.

Reply

Leave a Comment