Alex Murdaugh’s double-murder conviction in doubt after allegations of jury tampering by clerk – National & International News – TUE 5Sep2023

Alex Murdaugh’s attorneys seek new trial alleging egregious jury tampering by clerk.

Court will draw new AL voting map after state defied order to make new majority Black district.

NATIONAL NEWS

Alex Murdaugh’s attorneys seek new trial alleging egregious jury tampering by clerk

Earlier this year, disgraced South Carolina attorney Alex Murdaugh was convicted of the 2021 murders of his wife Maggie and son Paul. The verdict followed a much-watched 6-week trial, as well as innumerable documentaries and podcasts about the case. Murdaugh received two consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole, and the world largely moved on. But this saga has had many twists and turns and a particularly dramatic twist has just materialized.

Today, Murdaugh’s defense team submitted a motion to the South Carolina Court of Appeals, seeking ultimately to vacate Murdaugh’s murder conviction and requesting a new trial. Such motions are not uncommon. However, the grounds for the motion (and the evidence backing it up) are shocking and could have serious implications for this conviction.

The 65-page filing alleges that Rebecca Hill, the elected Colleton County Clerk of Court, pressured members of the jury to convict Murdaugh so she could sell a book. Several legal commentators who have weighed in say that if the allegations against Hill are proven, it’s very likely that Murdaugh’s murder conviction will be thrown out and that there will be a new trial.

What is Hill accused of?

The filing contains sworn affidavits from several jurors giving their firsthand accounts of wildly inappropriate interactions and interventions by Hill. Among other things, the filing alleges that Hill: 

• Told members of the jury “not to be fooled” by defense evidence and even testimony from Murdaugh himself. 
• Had private conversations with the jury forewoman on several occasions throughout the trial.
• Pressured the jury to come to a quick verdict. Hill allegedly told jurors they’d have to go to a hotel if they didn’t reach a verdict by 11pm.
• Denied smoke breaks to jurors during deliberations to push them to come to a quick verdict.
• Lied to the presiding Judge Clifton Newman about a Facebook post by an ex-husband of one of the jurors. This post supposedly claiming that said juror had been talking about the case outside of trial. The juror, who some speculate was leaning towards acquittal, was ultimately dismissed. Murdaugh’s attorneys argue that the offending Facebook post may never have existed.

The jury returned a unanimous guilty verdict in less than three hours. In a sworn statement, one of the jurors wrote, “I had questions about Mr. Murdaugh’s guilt but voted guilty because I felt pressured by other jurors”. 

Angenette Levy, a Law & Crime network reporter who covered the trial in Colleton County, says that she’d heard rumors during the trial that Hill was having private conversations with the jury foreperson. Levy said she was unable to verify those rumors at the time.

It is a violation of a court clerk’s oath of office to seek to influence a jury in any way. Legal commentators say that Hill could potentially face serious jail time if the allegations are borne out in an evidentiary hearing, as requested by the defense.

Murdaugh’s attorneys speak

At a press conference this afternoon, Murdaugh defense attorney Jim Griffin shared that shortly after the verdict, his team received a tip that they needed to look into what had gone on in the jury room. Initially, none of the jurors were willing to talk to the defense about any impropriety. That changed when Hill’s book, “Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders,” came out a few weeks ago. Hill began appearing on various news networks to promote the book. It was then that some jurors indicated they were willing to talk, Griffin said. Griffin and fellow Murdaugh attorney Dick Harpootlian then reached out to several of the jurors. Most still weren’t willing to talk, but a few were.

Harpootlian, an experienced litigator and state senator, said that court clerks “aren’t someone who should even talk to[jurors]about the case. I’ve never heard of that”.

The Court of Appeals must still decide whether to return the case to a lower court for an evidence hearing to examine the juror tampering allegations. Griffin and Harpootlian stressed that they did not believe that Judge Newman had anything to do with Hill’s alleged improprieties. However, they weren’t sure whether Newman would be able to preside over the hearing since he is a potential witness.

The attorneys didn’t know how long the process would take, but seemed confident that Murdaugh would get another trial on the strength of their evidence.

Click here for the full story (opens in new tab).

Court will draw new Alabama voting map after state defied order to make new majority Black district

A special panel of three federal judges has blocked Alabama’s legislature from using a new Congressional voting map that violates a previous court order. The same panel ruled last year that Alabama’s voting map violated the Voting Rights Act since only one of the seven districts was majority Black. Alabama’s population is 27% Black. The Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s ruling earlier this summer.

Alabama legislators then begrudgingly went back to the drawing board. They produced a new map where the Black population in one district was increased from about 30% to less than 40%. Voting rights groups then took the state to court, saying that the legislators chose “defiance over compliance” with two federal rulings.

The three-judge panel says that since Alabama had flouted the rulings, the court will appoint a special master to draw up a new and more representative district map for them.

Click here for the full story (opens in new tab).