The latest headlines from our reporters across the US sent straight to your inbox each weekdayYour briefing on the latest headlines from across the US<\/p>\n
One of the jurors who helped convict Alex Murdaugh last year for the murders of his wife and son testified under oath that a county clerk made comments insinuating the disbarred attorney was guilty before the jury delivered a verdict. <\/p>\n
Murdaugh returned to a South Carolina courtroom on Monday following a request by his attorneys for a new trial on the basis that Colleton County clerk Becky Hill allegedly tampered with the jury that convicted him last year for the shooting deaths of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. <\/p>\n
The defence has argued that Ms Hill advised jurors not to be \u201cfooled by\u201d Murdaugh\u2019s testimony on the stand or \u201cmisled\u201d by the defence\u2019s evidence, pushed them to reach a quick guilty verdict, and misrepresented \u201ccritical and material information to the trial judge in her campaign to remove a juror she believed to be favourable to the defence\u201d.<\/p>\n
On Monday, Judge Jean Toal called the jurors to the stand one by one and questioned them about potential comments that may have tainted their verdict. A female juror, identified only as juror Z by Judge Toal, said that Ms Hill had told some of the jurors to \u201cwatch [Murdaugh] closely. <\/p>\n
\u201cTo me, it felt like … she made it feel like he was already guilty,\u201d juror Z said. <\/p>\n
Other jurors questioned denied hearing inappropriate remarks made by Ms Hill, or being influenced by her comments. Juror E said that he heard Ms Hill say \u201cwatch [Murdaugh\u2019s] body language\u201d, but claimed that this did not affect his decision. <\/p>\n
The first of three hearings to determine whether Murdaugh should be granted a new trial kicked off with several mishaps. Judge Toal complained about the \u201cfunky\u201d sound system that interrupted her instructions to jurors, before a back-and-forth ensued between her and Murdaugh\u2019s attorney Dick Harpootlian when the defence asked to withdraw an affidavit from Juror Z stating that she was pressured by other jurors to deliver a guilty verdict. <\/p>\n
Mr Harpootlian asked the judge to remind Juror Z that her remarks on the affidavit and the fact that Ms Hills\u2019 remarks could have affected her decision both could be true. He also requested that the juror be handed a copy of the affidavit, which was not officially introduced as evidence but objected to questioning from Judge Toal about the document. <\/p>\n
\u201cIf you want me to have her look at this affidavit but you\u2019re telling me I can\u2019t question her about it, I deny that objection,\u201d Judge Toal said after Mr Harpootlian continued objecting. \u201cYou can\u2019t have your cake and eat it too … I\u2019ve made my ruling, take your seat.\u201d <\/p>\n
Then a bailiff approached the judge to announce that the jurors\u2019 phones had not been confiscated and they had tuned in to watch the proceedings on Court TV. <\/p>\n
When Mr Hapootlian asked for a recess to determine the next steps, the judge said: \u201cI\u2019m not going to take all day on this.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ms Hill also is expected to be grilled by lawyers for Murdaugh. In a sworn statement, the state branded the allegations as \u201ca sweeping conspiratorial theory\u201d and said that \u201cnot every inappropriate comment made by a member of court staff to a juror rises to the level of constitutional error\u201d.<\/p>\n
Judge Toal\u2019s rulings after a pretrial hearing this month have set a difficult standard for his lawyers to prove. She ruled the defence must prove that potential misconduct including alleged comments by Ms Hill warning jurors not to trust Murdaugh when he testifies directly led jurors to change their minds to guilty.<\/p>\n
Ms Hill has denied all of the allegations levelled against her in a September motion from Murdaugh\u2019s legal team. In a sworn statement, the state branded the allegations as \u201ca sweeping conspiratorial theory\u201d and said that \u201cnot every inappropriate comment made by a member of court staff to a juror rises to the level of constitutional error\u201d.<\/p>\n
One of the most damning accusations centres around the dismissal of juror number 785, just hours before jury deliberations began.<\/p>\n
According to Murdaugh\u2019s attorneys, Ms Hill \u201cinvented a story about a Facebook post to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty\u201d.<\/p>\n
Judge Clifton Newman, who oversaw the murder trial, removed the female juror from the panel for allegedly discussing the case with at least three other people outside of the court. The woman then prompted some light-hearted \u2013 and widely-reported \u2013 relief when she asked to pick up her \u201cdozen eggs\u201d from the jury room before she left.<\/p>\n
According to the motion, Ms Hill had gone to Judge Newman on 27 February \u2013 the day after Murdaugh testified \u2013 claiming that she had seen a post in the local Facebook group \u201cWalterboro Word of Mouth\u201d from juror 785\u2019s former husband, Tim Stone.<\/p>\n
The post purportedly claimed that the juror was drinking with her ex-husband and, when she became drunk, she expressed her views on whether Murdaugh was innocent or guilty.<\/p>\n
A follow-up post from an account called Timothy Stone apologised for the post saying that he was driven by \u201cSatan\u201d.<\/p>\n
In a court filing, Murdaugh\u2019s attorneys claim that the Mr Stone behind the Facebook posts was actually a random Georgia man who was ranting about his wife\u2019s aunt \u2013 and has no connection to the case.<\/p>\n
Murdaugh\u2019s attorneys are claiming that \u2013 based on these allegations \u2013 he should be granted a new murder trial.<\/p>\n
Judge Newman announced that he would stand down from any future proceedings in the murder case \u2013 paving the way for Judge Toal to step into the role.<\/p>\n
Ms Hill is now the subject of two investigations by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (Sled) \u2013 the same state agency that led the investigation into the murders of Murdaugh\u2019s wife Maggie and son Paul.<\/p>\n
While she and the state have pushed back against the claim of any unscrupulous behaviour in the trial, legal experts have warned that they are very serious allegations and, if true, Murdaugh could \u2013 and should \u2013 be granted a new trial.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf proven true, these allegations not only undermine the integrity of the judicial process but also represent a significant violation of Murdaugh\u2019s constitutional right to a fair trial,\u201d prominent attorney Duncan Levin told The Independent in the fall.<\/p>\n
He added: \u201cIn such cases, the law typically requires the granting of a new trial to ensure that justice is served without the taint of undue influence or misconduct.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The latest headlines from our reporters across the US sent straight to your inbox each weekdayYour briefing on the latest headlines from across the US One of the jurors who helped convict Alex Murdaugh last year for the murders of his wife and son testified under oath that a county clerk made comments insinuating the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2881,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[173],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2880","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n