by JENN WOOD
***
Weeks of increasingly contentious court filings in accused killer Alex Murdaugh’s double homicide retrial will move into the courtroom on Friday (October 16, 2026), as South Carolina circuit court judge Debra McCaslin takes up urgent disputes over access to evidence and independent forensic testing.
Friday’s hearing is scheduled to take place at the Lexington County courthouse, with jury selection for Murdaugh’s ‘Retrial of the Century’ set to begin on April 5, 2027 in Sumter County.
FITSNews will provide a livestream of Friday’s hearing on YouTube, along with a live feed from the courthouse here on our website.
To recap: Murdaugh was convicted in 2023 of murdering his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, 52, and their younger son, Paul Murdaugh, 22, at the family’s Islandton, S.C. hunting property – known locally as Moselle – on the evening of June 7, 2021. He was sentenced to life in prison on those charges. Murdaugh’s murder convictions were reversed in May, however, after the S.C. supreme court found numerous issues with the conduct of the trial – including allegations of jury tampering and potential jury rigging.
Friday’s hearing comes as the parties clash over what information the defense has already received, what additional material must be produced prior to the trial and whether further testing on potentially decisive evidence should proceed before another jury hears the case.
FITSNews – which broke the ‘Murdaugh Murders’ story and has driven coverage of it ever since – has been following all of these legal battles very closely over the past few months.
***
***
THE MISSING-WEAPONS DISPUTE
Among the most closely watched questions is whether Murdaugh’s attorneys will gain access to records concerning the alleged removal of weapons and clothing from the crime scene.
As FITSNews previously reported, the defense’s September 30 motion (.pdf) sought witness statements, investigative records and state grand jury material concerning an alleged crime-scene coverup.
Neither murder weapon has been recovered.
The motion also asked whether prosecutors intended to argue at the retrial that anyone else participated in the killings or helped transport, conceal or dispose of evidence afterward.
Prosecutors invoked grand jury secrecy in their response (.pdf) and declined to confirm or deny the existence or contents of such an investigation. They also emphasized Murdaugh’s friendship with Yemassee, S.C. police chief Greg Alexander, who as we exclusively reported last month was accused by grand jury witnesses of participating in a crime scene coverup.
The defense’s reply drew a distinction between earlier investigative records from the S.C. Law Enforcement Division (SLED) into this alleged coverup and subsequent grand jury proceedings. Attorneys asked McCaslin to require a response concerning the underlying investigative materials – and to privately review grand jury testimony – before deciding what must be disclosed.
***
RELATED | South Carolina Grand Jury Zeroing In On Greg Alexander
***
DNA: WHAT TESTING WILL BE ALLOWED?
Another dispute concerns additional testing of DNA material collected from Maggie Murdaugh’s fingernails and cellphone.
Prosecutors maintained that limited unidentified DNA findings were known prior to the first trial. Their response focused on the small amount of remaining material and the possibility that further testing would consume it, leaving nothing for another examination.
The state sought a clearer testing proposal and access to the resulting data if analysis proceeded. It also agreed to provide additional underlying DNA analysis files.
The defense subsequently identified proposed Y-chromosome STR testing through Othram or its subsidiary, Sorenson Forensics, and asked the judge to allow the work to proceed.
The question is whether further testing can produce useful information — and under what conditions it should be permitted when the available evidence is limited. The presence of unidentified DNA alone does not establish who deposited it – or whether it was connected to the killings.
***
BALLISTICS: A CLOSER LOOK?
The defense also sought independent comparisons between cartridge cases from the Murdaugh investigation and .300 Blackout evidence from Allendale shootings, including the April 25, 2026 murder of Frank Alexander Brown III.
Prosecutors opposed the request, arguing that shared caliber and geographic proximity did not establish a sufficient connection. They said database searches produced no investigative leads linking the cases.
The defense argued that the absence of a database lead was different from an examiner ruling out a match after comparing the actual cartridge cases under a microscope. It proposed an examination by its own expert at SLED’s laboratory under court-imposed conditions.
No match has been established. Even a connection to a later shooting would not, on its own, exclude Murdaugh’s use of a weapon in June 2021.
***
RELATED | Murdaugh Retrial: Secrecy, Science And A Flood Of Filings
***
CELLPHONES AND CRIME-SCENE SCANS
Other disputes may turn on whether promised evidence transfers have been completed.
The fight over cell phone records escalated last week when prosecutors accused the defense (.pdf) of misrepresenting what had been provided before the first trial. Attorneys later acknowledged a ten-day error in the delivery date cited in their motion.
Their continuing request concerned native extraction files from Maggie’s and Paul’s phones, along with associated files needed by their current expert. The defense said production of the requested material at or before Friday’s hearing could resolve the motion.
Prosecutors also agreed (.pdf) to provide original FARO laser scans of the Moselle crime scene. The defense asked for a firm deadline and clarification of what the transfer would include (.pdf), saying its reconstruction experts needed the complete data to begin their work.
Those exchanges leave a practical question for Friday: which requests have been fulfilled, and which still require an order?
***
HOW TO WATCH
Friday’s hearing is focused on urgent evidence issues. Other motions remain scheduled for a hearing on November 13, 2026.
The proceedings could clarify what additional testing will be permitted and establish deadlines for evidence the defense says it needs to prepare for April’s retrial. Whether McCaslin resolves every outstanding dispute that day remains to be seen.
Follow FITSNews’ live coverage Friday on YouTube and through the live feed here at FITSNews.com.
***
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.
