The South Carolina Supreme Court is set to review an appeal from Alex Murdaugh, who was convicted of murdering his wife and son, in a case that is skipping the intermediate appellate courts and heading straight to the state's high tribunal. The claim that Becky Hill, the Colleton County Clerk of Court at the time, may have inappropriately influenced the jury is at the center of the appeal. Murdaugh's defense contends that Hill's "inappropriate conversations" with jurors could have tainted their decision, despite a lower court judge finding no evidence of prejudice in the guilty verdict. This development was reported yesterday by QCNews.
In a secondary motion, Murdaugh's legal team is seeking to mitigate his 40-year federal sentence for financial crimes, with arguments that it is excessively severe. His attorney claims that, while the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office has refused to offer comments on the ongoing legal proceedings, Murdaugh is preparing for the appeal set for October in Virginia. Details of this upcoming appeal were also noted in coverage from QCNews.
Retired Chief Justice Jean Toal previously addressed the issue, concluding that Hill did engage in improper conduct with jury members, motivated by the allure of celebrity, but this did not warrant a new trial. "I simply do not believe that the authority of our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial such as this on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-influenced clerk of courts," Toal remarked, delineating the question of whether secret advocacy for a guilty verdict by a state official necessarily translates to jury prejudice. Former Clerk Hill, who is under state investigation and faced with several ethics violations, denied the allegations but resigned her position. These details were outlined by WTAE.
Meanwhile, Murdaugh remains imprisoned, serving two life sentences for the June 2021 killings of his son Paul and wife Maggie, on the family estate in South Carolina. The defense maintains that the jury's verdict could have been unduly swayed by Hill's actions, as quoted in Gazettextra: "The trial court abused its discretion when finding that the jury’s verdict was not affected by Ms. Hill’s tampering despite a juror’s uncontradicted testimony that her verdict was affected."
