|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by JENN WOOD
***
Two months after asking the South Carolina supreme court to unseal records related to the removal of former ‘Murdaugh Murders’ juror Myra Crosby — also known as the “egg juror” — prosecutors have made it clear they also support releasing the investigative files that precipitated the downfall of Colleton County clerk of court Rebecca “Becky” Hill.
So long as sensitive information is first redacted…
In a filing submitted Monday (July 6, 2026), prosecutors for S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson urged the court to unseal everything related to Crosby, the investigation into Hill by the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and the various documents and video recordings that formed the basis of the jury tampering inquiry.
The filing (.pdf) comes in response to competing motions from Alex Murdaugh and Crosby’s attorney, Joe McCulloch, seeking public access to these records – as well as Murdaugh’s request to modify an existing protective order governing their use.
Unlike earlier stages of the litigation — when prosecutors opposed unsealing the records while Murdaugh’s appeal remained pending — Wilson’s office now says the public interest favors disclosure. But prosecutors insisted transparency should not come at the expense of promises made to jurors.
“It is respectfully submitted that the sealed in camera hearings and related investigative materials that led to exclusion of Juror 785 for misconduct be unsealed,” prosecutors wrote. “However, these materials should be redacted to protect juror identifying information and other sensitive information.”
***
PLOTTING THE SHIFT…
The filing does not represent a reversal of prosecutors’ position that the records should ultimately become public – which they first acknowledged following the supreme court’s decision overturning Murdaugh’s murder convictions in May.
Instead, Friday’s filing focused almost entirely on how these records should be released.
According to prosecutors, the court repeatedly assured jurors throughout both the original murder trial and the post-trial jury tampering proceedings that their identities would remain protected. These assurances, they argued, continue to carry weight even though the litigation has entered a new phase.
The filing noted that some jurors have voluntarily spoken about the case publicly – but those individual decisions do not relieve the judiciary of its independent obligation to safeguard confidential information.
“Even if a juror can decide to go public,” prosecutors argued, “this does not relieve the court system of its independent obligation to do what it said it was going to do and protect that information.”
In support of that position, prosecutors cited multiple state and federal decisions which held that courts may release judicial records while redacting names and identifying information to protect juror privacy.
***
RELATED | MURDAUGH SUES BECKY HILL
***
BECKY HILL FILES ALSO AT ISSUE
While much of the public attention has centered on the sealed hearings involving Crosby’s dismissal, the filing also confirmed prosecutors supported releasing materials generated during SLED’s investigation into Hill.
That investigation ultimately resulted in Hill pleading guilty last December to misconduct in office and perjury charges stemming from her conduct surrounding the Murdaugh trial, though prosecutors declined to pursue criminal jury tampering charges.
The records include interview memoranda, video recordings and other investigative materials that have remained under protective order throughout the post-trial litigation.
Prosecutors argued those materials should become public as well, but only after redactions removed juror identities and other sensitive information.
***
THE ROAD TO DISCLOSURE
Even if the court grants the pending motions, prosecutors cautioned that the records will not become public overnight.
According to the filing, interview recordings must first be edited to remove identifying information – while audio recordings contain portions requiring redaction. Written interview memoranda also must be carefully reviewed. Even interviews involving non-juror witnesses may require additional redactions before they can be released.
Prosecutors are asking the court to allow sufficient time to complete that process before any records are made public.
The circuit court must now decide not whether the records should remain permanently sealed, but under what conditions they should be disclosed. If the court adopts the proposal submitted by Wilson’s office, the public would gain access to some of the most consequential records generated during the jury tampering investigation that ultimately unraveled Murdaugh’s murder convictions — while keeping juror identities and other sensitive information shielded from public view.
The ruling will also determine whether Murdaugh may use portions of those materials in his pending federal civil rights lawsuit against Hill, which alleges her misconduct deprived him of a constitutionally fair trial and seeks damages stemming from the reversal of his convictions.
***
THE MOTION…
***
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.
