SC Supreme Court to take up Murdaugh’s appeal over clerk’s alleged jury tampering

The South Carolina Supreme Court is set to take up convicted double-murderer Alex Murdaugh’s appeal.

The order released Tuesday means that the five justices who make up the state’s highest court will bypass the appeals court and directly take up the question of whether Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill prejudiced the jury during Murdaugh’s trial in the winter and spring of 2023.

While a lower court ruled that Hill did have inappropriate conversations with jurors, they did not find any evidence of prejudice. But Tuesday’s order sets up a clash of what legal standard is necessary to prove that a state official tampered with a jury. Prosecutors with the South Carolina’s Attorney General’s Office have argued that a new trial is not necessary as there was no evidence that Hill’s actions prejudiced the jury while Murdaugh’s defense attorneys have said that the very fact that she inappropriate contact with the jury warrants a new trial.

Murdaugh’s attorneys have argued that Hill violated Murdaugh’s right to a fair trial by, among other actions, telling juror’s to disregard his testimony and denying them smoke breaks during deliberations.

This was all in an effort to drive future sales of a book she planned to write, according to Murdaugh’s attorneys, Dick Harpootlian, Jim Griffin, Phil Barber and Maggie Fox.

When reached, Harpootlian declined to comment about the appeal.

The certification comes after former South Carolina Supreme Court Judge Jean H. Toal denied Murdaugh’s motion for a new trial on these grounds. Toal made her decision following a day-long examination of the jurors, as well as Hill and fellow clerk of court Rhonda McElveen.

In endorsing the prosecution’s argument, Toal relied on precedent drawn from a case known as South Carolina v. Green, which required the defense to prove that not did Hill have inappropriate contacts with the jurors but that those statements also influenced their verdict.

A spokesperson for the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office declined to comment about the matter.

For their part, the Murdaugh’s attorneys will the state supreme court to adopt the precedent outlined in a federal case, Remmer v. United States. In Remmer, the U.S. Supreme Court found that making inappropriate statements to the jury was presumed to be prejudicial and it was up to the state to prove they were not.

Hill has since resigned from her position as clerk of court under a cloud of controversy. While on the stand, Hill adamantly denied tampering with the jury. She is currently facing a state ethics investigation for use of state funds and facilities and admitted to plagiarizing portions of her book, “Behind the Doors of Justice,” from an unpublished BBC article that was mistakenly emailed to her. Hill’s son, the former Colleton County IT director, was also charged with wiretapping.

Murdaugh, the fourth generation heir to a powerful legal and political family in South Carolina’s Lowcountry, was found guilty of murdering his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, at the family’s sprawling 1,500 acre farm, Moselle.

Prosecutors with the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office argued that Murdaugh, at the time a prominent personal injury attorney, committed the murders to stave off the looming discovery of the thefts of millions of dollars from his clients, family and law firm. The embezzlements stretched back more than a decade as Murdaugh attempted to pay off debts and fund an expensive opiate addiction, according to evidence that emerged at his trial.

This is a breaking news story. Check back here for more details.