Podcast appearances and mentions of judge toal

On today's show: 1. City cites unlawful activity and strip shows for Aura Latin Club's Ann Street closure https://www.counton2.com/news/city-cites-unlawful-activity-and-strip-shows-for-aura-latin-clubs-ann-street-closure/ 2. MUSC to cease gender affirming care under new state law, sparking widespread debate https://www.abcnews4.com/news/local/musc-to-cease-gender-affirming-care-under-new-state-law-sparking-widespread-debate-south-carolina-transgender-healtcare-wciv-abc-news-4-2024 3. Alex Murdaugh asks S.C. Supreme Court to review Judge Toal's jury tampering decision - https://ca.news.yahoo.com/alex-murdaugh-asks-c-supreme-200821165.html 4. New rule restricts what's allowed on shelves in SC public libraries https://www.live5news.com/2024/07/10/new-rule-restricts-whats-allowed-shelves-sc-public-libraries/ This episode's music is by Tyler Boone (tylerboonemusic.com). The episode was produced by LMC Soundsystem.

Alex Murdaugh and his hopes for a new murder trial have taken a huge blow in South Carolina after Judge Toal ruled that there was not enough 'there' there when it comes to alleged impropriety by the court clerk, Becky Hill.After hearing testimony from the jurors who sat in the box during the trial, Judge Toal was simply not convinced by the narrative being pitched by Murdaugh and his team and now according to Murdaugh's lawyers, their next step is to appeal the ruling.(commercial at 9:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Juror testifies comments by clerk of court influenced her decision to convict Alex Murdaugh of murder | CNN

Alex Murdaugh and his hopes for a new murder trial have taken a huge blow in South Carolina after Judge Toal ruled that there was not enough 'there' there when it comes to alleged impropriety by the court clerk, Becky Hill.After hearing testimony from the jurors who sat in the box during the trial, Judge Toal was simply not convinced by the narrative being pitched by Murdaugh and his team and now according to Murdaugh's lawyers, their next step is to appeal the ruling.(commercial at 9:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Juror testifies comments by clerk of court influenced her decision to convict Alex Murdaugh of murder | CNNBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Alex Murdaugh and his hopes for a new murder trial have taken a huge blow in South Carolina after Judge Toal ruled that there was not enough 'there' there when it comes to alleged impropriety by the court clerk, Becky Hill.After hearing testimony from the jurors who sat in the box during the trial, Judge Toal was simply not convinced by the narrative being pitched by Murdaugh and his team and now according to Murdaugh's lawyers, their next step is to appeal the ruling.(commercial at 9:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Juror testifies comments by clerk of court influenced her decision to convict Alex Murdaugh of murder | CNN

In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted?  The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity.  Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice.  In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted? The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity. Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice. The conversation highlighted a legal paradox at the heart of the debate: does the intent behind Becky Hill's alleged influence bear more weight than the impact of her actions? Motta argued that the focus on intent over actual impact might set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing clerks or other court officials leeway to discuss the case with jurors, as long as the intent to influence is not proven. This, he contends, undermines the foundational principle that any communication about the case with jurors is inherently improper. As Murdaugh's legal team gears up for the appeal, the discourse shifts to the appellate courts' role in reassessing Judge Toal's decision. Motta predicts that the appellate court will not only review the decision based on the record but also scrutinize the standard applied by Judge Toal during the evidentiary hearing. The possibility of a new trial, therefore, hinges on whether the appellate court finds Toal's interpretation of the law and her judgment in this instance to be flawed. The case stands as a pivotal moment for the justice system, challenging legal professionals and the public to consider the delicate balance between the letter of the law and the spirit of justice. The Murdaugh saga, with its twists and turns, serves as a litmus test for the legal community's adherence to principles of fairness, impartiality, and the sanctity of the jury system. As we stand at this crossroads, one must ponder: Will the appellate process unveil a path to retrial for Alex Murdaugh, thereby reinforcing the integrity of the justice system? Or will it affirm Judge Toal's decision, setting a precedent that could reshape our understanding of jury tampering and its implications for future trials? In the labyrinth of legal entanglements, the pursuit of justice continues, reminding us that the journey is often as significant as the destination. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted?  The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity.  Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice.  In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted? The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity. Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice. The conversation highlighted a legal paradox at the heart of the debate: does the intent behind Becky Hill's alleged influence bear more weight than the impact of her actions? Motta argued that the focus on intent over actual impact might set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing clerks or other court officials leeway to discuss the case with jurors, as long as the intent to influence is not proven. This, he contends, undermines the foundational principle that any communication about the case with jurors is inherently improper. As Murdaugh's legal team gears up for the appeal, the discourse shifts to the appellate courts' role in reassessing Judge Toal's decision. Motta predicts that the appellate court will not only review the decision based on the record but also scrutinize the standard applied by Judge Toal during the evidentiary hearing. The possibility of a new trial, therefore, hinges on whether the appellate court finds Toal's interpretation of the law and her judgment in this instance to be flawed. The case stands as a pivotal moment for the justice system, challenging legal professionals and the public to consider the delicate balance between the letter of the law and the spirit of justice. The Murdaugh saga, with its twists and turns, serves as a litmus test for the legal community's adherence to principles of fairness, impartiality, and the sanctity of the jury system. As we stand at this crossroads, one must ponder: Will the appellate process unveil a path to retrial for Alex Murdaugh, thereby reinforcing the integrity of the justice system? Or will it affirm Judge Toal's decision, setting a precedent that could reshape our understanding of jury tampering and its implications for future trials? In the labyrinth of legal entanglements, the pursuit of justice continues, reminding us that the journey is often as significant as the destination. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted?  The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity.  Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice.  In the high-stakes drama enveloping Alex Murdaugh's quest for a new trial, the legal community and public alike stand at a crossroads, pondering the intricate dance of law, ethics, and justice. A recent development, as dissected in an episode of "Hidden Killers" hosted by Tony Brueski with guest Bob Motta, defense attorney and host of the podcast Defense Diaries, casts a long shadow over the future of Murdaugh's pursuit of a retrial. The question now looms large: Is the path to justice a labyrinthine journey fraught with legal complexities, or a straightforward road that's merely seen as convoluted? The core of the controversy stems from Judge Toal's decision to deny Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite compelling testimony from a juror – referred to as Juror Z – who admitted their verdict was influenced by former clerk of court, Becky Hill. This revelation might have been seen as a "slam dunk" for Murdaugh's defense, suggesting a clear breach of the juror's impartiality. Yet, Judge Toal's ruling was unmoved by this testimony, sparking a debate that transcends the courtroom and delves into the very essence of legal integrity. Bob Motta provided insight into the legal proceedings, suggesting that Judge Toal, with her storied legal background and tenure on the South Carolina Supreme Court, had likely anticipated the appeal long before the hearing concluded. Her decision to deny the retrial, according to Motta, was based on a stringent interpretation of what constitutes jury tampering, emphasizing the need for evidence that the tampering directly affected the trial's outcome. This interpretation, however, raises questions about the sufficiency of a juror's admission of influence in altering the course of justice. The conversation highlighted a legal paradox at the heart of the debate: does the intent behind Becky Hill's alleged influence bear more weight than the impact of her actions? Motta argued that the focus on intent over actual impact might set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing clerks or other court officials leeway to discuss the case with jurors, as long as the intent to influence is not proven. This, he contends, undermines the foundational principle that any communication about the case with jurors is inherently improper. As Murdaugh's legal team gears up for the appeal, the discourse shifts to the appellate courts' role in reassessing Judge Toal's decision. Motta predicts that the appellate court will not only review the decision based on the record but also scrutinize the standard applied by Judge Toal during the evidentiary hearing. The possibility of a new trial, therefore, hinges on whether the appellate court finds Toal's interpretation of the law and her judgment in this instance to be flawed. The case stands as a pivotal moment for the justice system, challenging legal professionals and the public to consider the delicate balance between the letter of the law and the spirit of justice. The Murdaugh saga, with its twists and turns, serves as a litmus test for the legal community's adherence to principles of fairness, impartiality, and the sanctity of the jury system. As we stand at this crossroads, one must ponder: Will the appellate process unveil a path to retrial for Alex Murdaugh, thereby reinforcing the integrity of the justice system? Or will it affirm Judge Toal's decision, setting a precedent that could reshape our understanding of jury tampering and its implications for future trials? In the labyrinth of legal entanglements, the pursuit of justice continues, reminding us that the journey is often as significant as the destination. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week In Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week In Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week In Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news.       This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events.       Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience.  Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week In Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent twist in the Alex Murdaugh case saga, discussions have veered into the complex territory of appellate courts, jury influence, and the role of key figures like Judge Toal and Becky Hill. The "Hidden Killers" podcast, hosted by Tony Brueski, featured an enlightening conversation with Robin Dreeke, a retired FBI Special Agent, delving into the nuances of the ongoing legal battle. This discourse raises a crucial question: Is the judicial system's integrity at stake, or is it functioning precisely as intended, ensuring the utmost scrutiny and fairness in high-profile cases? Murdaugh's journey towards a potential retrial hit a significant roadblock when Judge Toal, overseeing the evidentiary hearing, deemed the presented arguments insufficient for granting a new trial. Despite a juror's assertion that Becky Hill, the former clerk of court, had influenced their verdict decision, Judge Toal ruled against Murdaugh's appeal for a retrial. This decision has ignited debates on the standards of proof required to overturn a conviction and the judicial discretion wielded by judges. Dreeke and Brueski pondered the future steps for Murdaugh, emphasizing that the saga is far from over. Dreeke speculated, "I would put money on that we will see an Alex Murdaugh retrial, probably just not as soon as we wanted it to be." The conversation shifted towards Judge Toal's motivations, contemplating whether her decision was influenced by a desire not to be the one granting Murdaugh a new trial. This speculation opens a broader discussion on the challenges and pressures faced by judges in high-stakes legal proceedings. Central to the retrial request is the allegation against Becky Hill for jury tampering. The juror's testimony that Hill's words swayed their decision has spotlighted the intricate balance between juror independence and external influences. Dreeke remarked on the importance of the judicial system's checks and balances, expressing relief that the system appears to be working, despite individual missteps. The podcast delved into the potential implications of the appellate process and the roles of both the defense and prosecution in navigating these legal waters. The discussion highlighted the systemic safeguards designed to correct or uphold trial outcomes through appellate review. Yet, it also touched on the personal and professional dilemmas judges like Toal face, balancing legal standards with public and personal expectations. Brueski and Dreeke's conversation leaves listeners with more questions than answers. What will the appellate courts decide, and how will additional evidence or allegations, such as the unresolved wiretapping investigation related to Becky Hill, affect the case's trajectory? Moreover, the speculation around juror motivations and the integrity of their testimony adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted case. As the Alex Murdaugh case continues to unfold, the "Hidden Killers" podcast episode serves as a microcosm of the broader debates surrounding the American legal system. How far can, and should, the system go to ensure justice is served fairly and impartially, especially in cases that capture the public's attention and scrutiny? In conclusion, the discussions between Brueski and Dreeke offer a fascinating glimpse into the inner workings of legal strategy, judicial discretion, and the quest for justice in a highly publicized case. As the saga progresses, the overarching question remains: Will the judicial system's mechanisms for review and appeal ultimately reinforce the public's trust in its ability to deliver justice, or will it underscore the complexities and potential frailties within? The Alex Murdaugh case, with its layers of legal, ethical, and societal implications, continues to challenge and provoke, ensuring its place in the annals of true crime and legal analysis for years to come. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

In a recent twist in the Alex Murdaugh case saga, discussions have veered into the complex territory of appellate courts, jury influence, and the role of key figures like Judge Toal and Becky Hill. The "Hidden Killers" podcast, hosted by Tony Brueski, featured an enlightening conversation with Robin Dreeke, a retired FBI Special Agent, delving into the nuances of the ongoing legal battle. This discourse raises a crucial question: Is the judicial system's integrity at stake, or is it functioning precisely as intended, ensuring the utmost scrutiny and fairness in high-profile cases? Murdaugh's journey towards a potential retrial hit a significant roadblock when Judge Toal, overseeing the evidentiary hearing, deemed the presented arguments insufficient for granting a new trial. Despite a juror's assertion that Becky Hill, the former clerk of court, had influenced their verdict decision, Judge Toal ruled against Murdaugh's appeal for a retrial. This decision has ignited debates on the standards of proof required to overturn a conviction and the judicial discretion wielded by judges. Dreeke and Brueski pondered the future steps for Murdaugh, emphasizing that the saga is far from over. Dreeke speculated, "I would put money on that we will see an Alex Murdaugh retrial, probably just not as soon as we wanted it to be." The conversation shifted towards Judge Toal's motivations, contemplating whether her decision was influenced by a desire not to be the one granting Murdaugh a new trial. This speculation opens a broader discussion on the challenges and pressures faced by judges in high-stakes legal proceedings. Central to the retrial request is the allegation against Becky Hill for jury tampering. The juror's testimony that Hill's words swayed their decision has spotlighted the intricate balance between juror independence and external influences. Dreeke remarked on the importance of the judicial system's checks and balances, expressing relief that the system appears to be working, despite individual missteps. The podcast delved into the potential implications of the appellate process and the roles of both the defense and prosecution in navigating these legal waters. The discussion highlighted the systemic safeguards designed to correct or uphold trial outcomes through appellate review. Yet, it also touched on the personal and professional dilemmas judges like Toal face, balancing legal standards with public and personal expectations. Brueski and Dreeke's conversation leaves listeners with more questions than answers. What will the appellate courts decide, and how will additional evidence or allegations, such as the unresolved wiretapping investigation related to Becky Hill, affect the case's trajectory? Moreover, the speculation around juror motivations and the integrity of their testimony adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted case. As the Alex Murdaugh case continues to unfold, the "Hidden Killers" podcast episode serves as a microcosm of the broader debates surrounding the American legal system. How far can, and should, the system go to ensure justice is served fairly and impartially, especially in cases that capture the public's attention and scrutiny? In conclusion, the discussions between Brueski and Dreeke offer a fascinating glimpse into the inner workings of legal strategy, judicial discretion, and the quest for justice in a highly publicized case. As the saga progresses, the overarching question remains: Will the judicial system's mechanisms for review and appeal ultimately reinforce the public's trust in its ability to deliver justice, or will it underscore the complexities and potential frailties within? The Alex Murdaugh case, with its layers of legal, ethical, and societal implications, continues to challenge and provoke, ensuring its place in the annals of true crime and legal analysis for years to come. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

In a recent twist in the Alex Murdaugh case saga, discussions have veered into the complex territory of appellate courts, jury influence, and the role of key figures like Judge Toal and Becky Hill. The "Hidden Killers" podcast, hosted by Tony Brueski, featured an enlightening conversation with Robin Dreeke, a retired FBI Special Agent, delving into the nuances of the ongoing legal battle. This discourse raises a crucial question: Is the judicial system's integrity at stake, or is it functioning precisely as intended, ensuring the utmost scrutiny and fairness in high-profile cases? Murdaugh's journey towards a potential retrial hit a significant roadblock when Judge Toal, overseeing the evidentiary hearing, deemed the presented arguments insufficient for granting a new trial. Despite a juror's assertion that Becky Hill, the former clerk of court, had influenced their verdict decision, Judge Toal ruled against Murdaugh's appeal for a retrial. This decision has ignited debates on the standards of proof required to overturn a conviction and the judicial discretion wielded by judges. Dreeke and Brueski pondered the future steps for Murdaugh, emphasizing that the saga is far from over. Dreeke speculated, "I would put money on that we will see an Alex Murdaugh retrial, probably just not as soon as we wanted it to be." The conversation shifted towards Judge Toal's motivations, contemplating whether her decision was influenced by a desire not to be the one granting Murdaugh a new trial. This speculation opens a broader discussion on the challenges and pressures faced by judges in high-stakes legal proceedings. Central to the retrial request is the allegation against Becky Hill for jury tampering. The juror's testimony that Hill's words swayed their decision has spotlighted the intricate balance between juror independence and external influences. Dreeke remarked on the importance of the judicial system's checks and balances, expressing relief that the system appears to be working, despite individual missteps. The podcast delved into the potential implications of the appellate process and the roles of both the defense and prosecution in navigating these legal waters. The discussion highlighted the systemic safeguards designed to correct or uphold trial outcomes through appellate review. Yet, it also touched on the personal and professional dilemmas judges like Toal face, balancing legal standards with public and personal expectations. Brueski and Dreeke's conversation leaves listeners with more questions than answers. What will the appellate courts decide, and how will additional evidence or allegations, such as the unresolved wiretapping investigation related to Becky Hill, affect the case's trajectory? Moreover, the speculation around juror motivations and the integrity of their testimony adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted case. As the Alex Murdaugh case continues to unfold, the "Hidden Killers" podcast episode serves as a microcosm of the broader debates surrounding the American legal system. How far can, and should, the system go to ensure justice is served fairly and impartially, especially in cases that capture the public's attention and scrutiny? In conclusion, the discussions between Brueski and Dreeke offer a fascinating glimpse into the inner workings of legal strategy, judicial discretion, and the quest for justice in a highly publicized case. As the saga progresses, the overarching question remains: Will the judicial system's mechanisms for review and appeal ultimately reinforce the public's trust in its ability to deliver justice, or will it underscore the complexities and potential frailties within? The Alex Murdaugh case, with its layers of legal, ethical, and societal implications, continues to challenge and provoke, ensuring its place in the annals of true crime and legal analysis for years to come. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

In a recent twist in the Alex Murdaugh case saga, discussions have veered into the complex territory of appellate courts, jury influence, and the role of key figures like Judge Toal and Becky Hill. The "Hidden Killers" podcast, hosted by Tony Brueski, featured an enlightening conversation with Robin Dreeke, a retired FBI Special Agent, delving into the nuances of the ongoing legal battle. This discourse raises a crucial question: Is the judicial system's integrity at stake, or is it functioning precisely as intended, ensuring the utmost scrutiny and fairness in high-profile cases? Murdaugh's journey towards a potential retrial hit a significant roadblock when Judge Toal, overseeing the evidentiary hearing, deemed the presented arguments insufficient for granting a new trial. Despite a juror's assertion that Becky Hill, the former clerk of court, had influenced their verdict decision, Judge Toal ruled against Murdaugh's appeal for a retrial. This decision has ignited debates on the standards of proof required to overturn a conviction and the judicial discretion wielded by judges. Dreeke and Brueski pondered the future steps for Murdaugh, emphasizing that the saga is far from over. Dreeke speculated, "I would put money on that we will see an Alex Murdaugh retrial, probably just not as soon as we wanted it to be." The conversation shifted towards Judge Toal's motivations, contemplating whether her decision was influenced by a desire not to be the one granting Murdaugh a new trial. This speculation opens a broader discussion on the challenges and pressures faced by judges in high-stakes legal proceedings. Central to the retrial request is the allegation against Becky Hill for jury tampering. The juror's testimony that Hill's words swayed their decision has spotlighted the intricate balance between juror independence and external influences. Dreeke remarked on the importance of the judicial system's checks and balances, expressing relief that the system appears to be working, despite individual missteps. The podcast delved into the potential implications of the appellate process and the roles of both the defense and prosecution in navigating these legal waters. The discussion highlighted the systemic safeguards designed to correct or uphold trial outcomes through appellate review. Yet, it also touched on the personal and professional dilemmas judges like Toal face, balancing legal standards with public and personal expectations. Brueski and Dreeke's conversation leaves listeners with more questions than answers. What will the appellate courts decide, and how will additional evidence or allegations, such as the unresolved wiretapping investigation related to Becky Hill, affect the case's trajectory? Moreover, the speculation around juror motivations and the integrity of their testimony adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted case. As the Alex Murdaugh case continues to unfold, the "Hidden Killers" podcast episode serves as a microcosm of the broader debates surrounding the American legal system. How far can, and should, the system go to ensure justice is served fairly and impartially, especially in cases that capture the public's attention and scrutiny? In conclusion, the discussions between Brueski and Dreeke offer a fascinating glimpse into the inner workings of legal strategy, judicial discretion, and the quest for justice in a highly publicized case. As the saga progresses, the overarching question remains: Will the judicial system's mechanisms for review and appeal ultimately reinforce the public's trust in its ability to deliver justice, or will it underscore the complexities and potential frailties within? The Alex Murdaugh case, with its layers of legal, ethical, and societal implications, continues to challenge and provoke, ensuring its place in the annals of true crime and legal analysis for years to come. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

In the ongoing legal drama surrounding Alex Murdaugh, the recent denial of a new trial by Judge Toal has sparked intense debate and speculation over the future of the case. Despite a juror, known only as Juror Z, explicitly stating that their decision was influenced by the words of Becky Hill, the clerk of court, Judge Toal found this testimony insufficient to warrant a retrial. This decision has left many questioning the integrity of the trial process and what lies ahead for Murdaugh. Jennifer Coffindaffer, a retired FBI special agent and guest on Tony Brueski's "Hidden Killers" podcast, shared her insights into the court's proceedings. Coffindaffer was not surprised by the outcome, given the strict criteria set by Judge Toal for proving jury tampering. According to Coffindaffer, the requirement to prove intent made it an almost impossible task for Murdaugh's defense. "When I saw that narrow focus, I thought, 'Oh my God, there's no way they're going to be able to prove that because you'd have to get into her mind,'" Coffindaffer explained. The controversy centers on Becky Hill's alleged statements to Juror Z, which purportedly swayed the juror's decision. Despite this claim, Judge Toal concluded that the evidence presented was not enough to overturn the verdict. This has led to discussions about the role of intent in jury tampering and whether the mere impact of Hill's words, regardless of her intention, should have been enough to prompt a retrial. Brueski and Coffindaffer speculated on Judge Toal's reluctance to grant a new trial. "I do halfway wonder about, did Judge Toal just not want to be the person to give Alex Murdaugh a new trial," Brueski pondered, suggesting that Toal might prefer to leave such a contentious decision to an appellate court. This raises questions about the personal and professional pressures judges face in high-profile cases and how these pressures might influence their decisions. The discussion also delved into the peculiar situation of having one juror's testimony against the collective memory of the others. Coffindaffer noted the unusual nature of the case, where 11 jurors contradicted the experiences of one, highlighting the challenges in proving jury tampering under such circumstances. As Murdaugh's legal team prepares to challenge the ruling, the appellate process looms as the next battlefield. Coffindaffer gave the possibility of an overturned decision a slim 10 percent chance, citing the robust experience of Judge Toal and the legal precedent she established. Yet, the door remains ajar for Murdaugh's defense to present their case to higher courts, which could scrutinize Toal's narrow interpretation of the law and the evidence presented. This phase of the Murdaugh saga leaves us with more questions than answers. How will appellate courts view the singular influence of Becky Hill on Juror Z? Will further investigations into Hill's actions or other undisclosed evidence shift the legal landscape? And most importantly, can the appellate process provide a clearer resolution to a case mired in controversy and public intrigue? In conclusion, the decision not to grant Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite the dramatic claims of jury influence, underscores the complexities of legal procedures and the high stakes involved in overturning a conviction. As the case advances through the appellate courts, the public, legal experts, and those directly involved in the case watch closely, eager to see whether justice will serve the letter of the law or if the spirit of fairness will guide the final outcome. Will the appellate courts offer Murdaugh another shot at freedom, or will the current verdict stand as a testament to the judicial system's rigor? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the debate over justice, intent, and influence in the courtroom is far from over. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent turn of events that continues to grip the nation, the legal saga of Alex Murdaugh took another twist with Judge Toal denying a retrial for the disgraced South Carolina lawyer, despite a juror's testimony suggesting influence by Becky Hill, the clerk of court. This decision raises profound questions about the justice system, jury influence, and the psychological aspects of legal proceedings. Tony Brueski, host of the "Hidden Killers" podcast, delved into these complexities with Shavaun Scott, a psychotherapist and author, shedding light on the psychological underpinnings and implications of this pivotal moment in the Murdaugh case. The crux of the discussion centered on Judge Toal's decision to deny a retrial for Murdaugh, despite Juror Z's admission that Hill's comments had influenced their guilty verdict. Scott, expressing a mixture of expectation and personal relief at the decision, highlighted the emotional toll the trial has taken on those following the case closely. "I just don't want to see us all go through that again," Scott admitted, emphasizing the personal bias that comes with such emotionally charged cases. Becky Hill's role in the trial has been a point of contention, with her actions deemed "incredibly unprofessional" by Scott. The conversation explored the nuanced reality that jurors, like all individuals, are constantly influenced by their environment and unconscious biases. Scott pointed out the difficulty in acknowledging these influences, noting it's "rather remarkable that that juror was able to be honest and recognize that there was an influence there." A key issue in the debate over whether to grant a retrial was the emphasis on Hill's intent. Brueski and Scott discussed the problematic nature of this focus, questioning the relevance of intent when the influence on the juror's decision was evident. This led to broader reflections on the qualifications and psychological insight—or lack thereof—of judges in the legal system. "Judges, they're not psychologists," Brueski remarked, suggesting a gap in the system where psychological understanding is crucial yet often absent. The discussion also ventured into potential solutions for the systemic issues highlighted by the case. Scott lamented the national problem of judges lacking psychological insight, especially in sensitive areas like child custody. While there seems to be no easy fix, the conversation underscored the importance of educating judges on psychological dynamics to improve decision-making in court. Looking forward, the conversation shifted to Murdaugh's prospects in the appellate courts. Scott speculated on the slim chance of overturning Judge Toal's decision, given the stringent criteria set for proving jury tampering. Yet, both Brueski and Scott acknowledged the importance of ensuring procedural correctness, even if it means revisiting the traumatic details of the Murdaugh trial. The dialogue concluded with speculative thoughts on the broader implications of the case for South Carolina's legal system. Scott suggested that the acceptance of jury influence by figures like Hill might be indicative of a cultural norm within the state's courts—a norm that this high-profile case has brought to light. In sum, the denial of a retrial for Alex Murdaugh raises as many questions as it answers. While the decision may offer temporary relief to those dreading another emotionally charged trial, it also exposes deep-seated issues within the justice system, from the qualifications of judges to the potential for jury manipulation. As this saga continues to unfold, one question lingers: How will this case shape the future of legal proceedings in South Carolina and beyond? Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In the ongoing legal drama surrounding Alex Murdaugh, the recent denial of a new trial by Judge Toal has sparked intense debate and speculation over the future of the case. Despite a juror, known only as Juror Z, explicitly stating that their decision was influenced by the words of Becky Hill, the clerk of court, Judge Toal found this testimony insufficient to warrant a retrial. This decision has left many questioning the integrity of the trial process and what lies ahead for Murdaugh. Jennifer Coffindaffer, a retired FBI special agent and guest on Tony Brueski's "Hidden Killers" podcast, shared her insights into the court's proceedings. Coffindaffer was not surprised by the outcome, given the strict criteria set by Judge Toal for proving jury tampering. According to Coffindaffer, the requirement to prove intent made it an almost impossible task for Murdaugh's defense. "When I saw that narrow focus, I thought, 'Oh my God, there's no way they're going to be able to prove that because you'd have to get into her mind,'" Coffindaffer explained. The controversy centers on Becky Hill's alleged statements to Juror Z, which purportedly swayed the juror's decision. Despite this claim, Judge Toal concluded that the evidence presented was not enough to overturn the verdict. This has led to discussions about the role of intent in jury tampering and whether the mere impact of Hill's words, regardless of her intention, should have been enough to prompt a retrial. Brueski and Coffindaffer speculated on Judge Toal's reluctance to grant a new trial. "I do halfway wonder about, did Judge Toal just not want to be the person to give Alex Murdaugh a new trial," Brueski pondered, suggesting that Toal might prefer to leave such a contentious decision to an appellate court. This raises questions about the personal and professional pressures judges face in high-profile cases and how these pressures might influence their decisions. The discussion also delved into the peculiar situation of having one juror's testimony against the collective memory of the others. Coffindaffer noted the unusual nature of the case, where 11 jurors contradicted the experiences of one, highlighting the challenges in proving jury tampering under such circumstances. As Murdaugh's legal team prepares to challenge the ruling, the appellate process looms as the next battlefield. Coffindaffer gave the possibility of an overturned decision a slim 10 percent chance, citing the robust experience of Judge Toal and the legal precedent she established. Yet, the door remains ajar for Murdaugh's defense to present their case to higher courts, which could scrutinize Toal's narrow interpretation of the law and the evidence presented. This phase of the Murdaugh saga leaves us with more questions than answers. How will appellate courts view the singular influence of Becky Hill on Juror Z? Will further investigations into Hill's actions or other undisclosed evidence shift the legal landscape? And most importantly, can the appellate process provide a clearer resolution to a case mired in controversy and public intrigue? In conclusion, the decision not to grant Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite the dramatic claims of jury influence, underscores the complexities of legal procedures and the high stakes involved in overturning a conviction. As the case advances through the appellate courts, the public, legal experts, and those directly involved in the case watch closely, eager to see whether justice will serve the letter of the law or if the spirit of fairness will guide the final outcome. Will the appellate courts offer Murdaugh another shot at freedom, or will the current verdict stand as a testament to the judicial system's rigor? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the debate over justice, intent, and influence in the courtroom is far from over. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent turn of events that continues to grip the nation, the legal saga of Alex Murdaugh took another twist with Judge Toal denying a retrial for the disgraced South Carolina lawyer, despite a juror's testimony suggesting influence by Becky Hill, the clerk of court. This decision raises profound questions about the justice system, jury influence, and the psychological aspects of legal proceedings. Tony Brueski, host of the "Hidden Killers" podcast, delved into these complexities with Shavaun Scott, a psychotherapist and author, shedding light on the psychological underpinnings and implications of this pivotal moment in the Murdaugh case. The crux of the discussion centered on Judge Toal's decision to deny a retrial for Murdaugh, despite Juror Z's admission that Hill's comments had influenced their guilty verdict. Scott, expressing a mixture of expectation and personal relief at the decision, highlighted the emotional toll the trial has taken on those following the case closely. "I just don't want to see us all go through that again," Scott admitted, emphasizing the personal bias that comes with such emotionally charged cases. Becky Hill's role in the trial has been a point of contention, with her actions deemed "incredibly unprofessional" by Scott. The conversation explored the nuanced reality that jurors, like all individuals, are constantly influenced by their environment and unconscious biases. Scott pointed out the difficulty in acknowledging these influences, noting it's "rather remarkable that that juror was able to be honest and recognize that there was an influence there." A key issue in the debate over whether to grant a retrial was the emphasis on Hill's intent. Brueski and Scott discussed the problematic nature of this focus, questioning the relevance of intent when the influence on the juror's decision was evident. This led to broader reflections on the qualifications and psychological insight—or lack thereof—of judges in the legal system. "Judges, they're not psychologists," Brueski remarked, suggesting a gap in the system where psychological understanding is crucial yet often absent. The discussion also ventured into potential solutions for the systemic issues highlighted by the case. Scott lamented the national problem of judges lacking psychological insight, especially in sensitive areas like child custody. While there seems to be no easy fix, the conversation underscored the importance of educating judges on psychological dynamics to improve decision-making in court. Looking forward, the conversation shifted to Murdaugh's prospects in the appellate courts. Scott speculated on the slim chance of overturning Judge Toal's decision, given the stringent criteria set for proving jury tampering. Yet, both Brueski and Scott acknowledged the importance of ensuring procedural correctness, even if it means revisiting the traumatic details of the Murdaugh trial. The dialogue concluded with speculative thoughts on the broader implications of the case for South Carolina's legal system. Scott suggested that the acceptance of jury influence by figures like Hill might be indicative of a cultural norm within the state's courts—a norm that this high-profile case has brought to light. In sum, the denial of a retrial for Alex Murdaugh raises as many questions as it answers. While the decision may offer temporary relief to those dreading another emotionally charged trial, it also exposes deep-seated issues within the justice system, from the qualifications of judges to the potential for jury manipulation. As this saga continues to unfold, one question lingers: How will this case shape the future of legal proceedings in South Carolina and beyond? Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In the ongoing legal drama surrounding Alex Murdaugh, the recent denial of a new trial by Judge Toal has sparked intense debate and speculation over the future of the case. Despite a juror, known only as Juror Z, explicitly stating that their decision was influenced by the words of Becky Hill, the clerk of court, Judge Toal found this testimony insufficient to warrant a retrial. This decision has left many questioning the integrity of the trial process and what lies ahead for Murdaugh. Jennifer Coffindaffer, a retired FBI special agent and guest on Tony Brueski's "Hidden Killers" podcast, shared her insights into the court's proceedings. Coffindaffer was not surprised by the outcome, given the strict criteria set by Judge Toal for proving jury tampering. According to Coffindaffer, the requirement to prove intent made it an almost impossible task for Murdaugh's defense. "When I saw that narrow focus, I thought, 'Oh my God, there's no way they're going to be able to prove that because you'd have to get into her mind,'" Coffindaffer explained. The controversy centers on Becky Hill's alleged statements to Juror Z, which purportedly swayed the juror's decision. Despite this claim, Judge Toal concluded that the evidence presented was not enough to overturn the verdict. This has led to discussions about the role of intent in jury tampering and whether the mere impact of Hill's words, regardless of her intention, should have been enough to prompt a retrial. Brueski and Coffindaffer speculated on Judge Toal's reluctance to grant a new trial. "I do halfway wonder about, did Judge Toal just not want to be the person to give Alex Murdaugh a new trial," Brueski pondered, suggesting that Toal might prefer to leave such a contentious decision to an appellate court. This raises questions about the personal and professional pressures judges face in high-profile cases and how these pressures might influence their decisions. The discussion also delved into the peculiar situation of having one juror's testimony against the collective memory of the others. Coffindaffer noted the unusual nature of the case, where 11 jurors contradicted the experiences of one, highlighting the challenges in proving jury tampering under such circumstances. As Murdaugh's legal team prepares to challenge the ruling, the appellate process looms as the next battlefield. Coffindaffer gave the possibility of an overturned decision a slim 10 percent chance, citing the robust experience of Judge Toal and the legal precedent she established. Yet, the door remains ajar for Murdaugh's defense to present their case to higher courts, which could scrutinize Toal's narrow interpretation of the law and the evidence presented. This phase of the Murdaugh saga leaves us with more questions than answers. How will appellate courts view the singular influence of Becky Hill on Juror Z? Will further investigations into Hill's actions or other undisclosed evidence shift the legal landscape? And most importantly, can the appellate process provide a clearer resolution to a case mired in controversy and public intrigue? In conclusion, the decision not to grant Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite the dramatic claims of jury influence, underscores the complexities of legal procedures and the high stakes involved in overturning a conviction. As the case advances through the appellate courts, the public, legal experts, and those directly involved in the case watch closely, eager to see whether justice will serve the letter of the law or if the spirit of fairness will guide the final outcome. Will the appellate courts offer Murdaugh another shot at freedom, or will the current verdict stand as a testament to the judicial system's rigor? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the debate over justice, intent, and influence in the courtroom is far from over. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent turn of events that continues to grip the nation, the legal saga of Alex Murdaugh took another twist with Judge Toal denying a retrial for the disgraced South Carolina lawyer, despite a juror's testimony suggesting influence by Becky Hill, the clerk of court. This decision raises profound questions about the justice system, jury influence, and the psychological aspects of legal proceedings. Tony Brueski, host of the "Hidden Killers" podcast, delved into these complexities with Shavaun Scott, a psychotherapist and author, shedding light on the psychological underpinnings and implications of this pivotal moment in the Murdaugh case. The crux of the discussion centered on Judge Toal's decision to deny a retrial for Murdaugh, despite Juror Z's admission that Hill's comments had influenced their guilty verdict. Scott, expressing a mixture of expectation and personal relief at the decision, highlighted the emotional toll the trial has taken on those following the case closely. "I just don't want to see us all go through that again," Scott admitted, emphasizing the personal bias that comes with such emotionally charged cases. Becky Hill's role in the trial has been a point of contention, with her actions deemed "incredibly unprofessional" by Scott. The conversation explored the nuanced reality that jurors, like all individuals, are constantly influenced by their environment and unconscious biases. Scott pointed out the difficulty in acknowledging these influences, noting it's "rather remarkable that that juror was able to be honest and recognize that there was an influence there." A key issue in the debate over whether to grant a retrial was the emphasis on Hill's intent. Brueski and Scott discussed the problematic nature of this focus, questioning the relevance of intent when the influence on the juror's decision was evident. This led to broader reflections on the qualifications and psychological insight—or lack thereof—of judges in the legal system. "Judges, they're not psychologists," Brueski remarked, suggesting a gap in the system where psychological understanding is crucial yet often absent. The discussion also ventured into potential solutions for the systemic issues highlighted by the case. Scott lamented the national problem of judges lacking psychological insight, especially in sensitive areas like child custody. While there seems to be no easy fix, the conversation underscored the importance of educating judges on psychological dynamics to improve decision-making in court. Looking forward, the conversation shifted to Murdaugh's prospects in the appellate courts. Scott speculated on the slim chance of overturning Judge Toal's decision, given the stringent criteria set for proving jury tampering. Yet, both Brueski and Scott acknowledged the importance of ensuring procedural correctness, even if it means revisiting the traumatic details of the Murdaugh trial. The dialogue concluded with speculative thoughts on the broader implications of the case for South Carolina's legal system. Scott suggested that the acceptance of jury influence by figures like Hill might be indicative of a cultural norm within the state's courts—a norm that this high-profile case has brought to light. In sum, the denial of a retrial for Alex Murdaugh raises as many questions as it answers. While the decision may offer temporary relief to those dreading another emotionally charged trial, it also exposes deep-seated issues within the justice system, from the qualifications of judges to the potential for jury manipulation. As this saga continues to unfold, one question lingers: How will this case shape the future of legal proceedings in South Carolina and beyond? Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In the ongoing legal drama surrounding Alex Murdaugh, the recent denial of a new trial by Judge Toal has sparked intense debate and speculation over the future of the case. Despite a juror, known only as Juror Z, explicitly stating that their decision was influenced by the words of Becky Hill, the clerk of court, Judge Toal found this testimony insufficient to warrant a retrial. This decision has left many questioning the integrity of the trial process and what lies ahead for Murdaugh. Jennifer Coffindaffer, a retired FBI special agent and guest on Tony Brueski's "Hidden Killers" podcast, shared her insights into the court's proceedings. Coffindaffer was not surprised by the outcome, given the strict criteria set by Judge Toal for proving jury tampering. According to Coffindaffer, the requirement to prove intent made it an almost impossible task for Murdaugh's defense. "When I saw that narrow focus, I thought, 'Oh my God, there's no way they're going to be able to prove that because you'd have to get into her mind,'" Coffindaffer explained. The controversy centers on Becky Hill's alleged statements to Juror Z, which purportedly swayed the juror's decision. Despite this claim, Judge Toal concluded that the evidence presented was not enough to overturn the verdict. This has led to discussions about the role of intent in jury tampering and whether the mere impact of Hill's words, regardless of her intention, should have been enough to prompt a retrial. Brueski and Coffindaffer speculated on Judge Toal's reluctance to grant a new trial. "I do halfway wonder about, did Judge Toal just not want to be the person to give Alex Murdaugh a new trial," Brueski pondered, suggesting that Toal might prefer to leave such a contentious decision to an appellate court. This raises questions about the personal and professional pressures judges face in high-profile cases and how these pressures might influence their decisions. The discussion also delved into the peculiar situation of having one juror's testimony against the collective memory of the others. Coffindaffer noted the unusual nature of the case, where 11 jurors contradicted the experiences of one, highlighting the challenges in proving jury tampering under such circumstances. As Murdaugh's legal team prepares to challenge the ruling, the appellate process looms as the next battlefield. Coffindaffer gave the possibility of an overturned decision a slim 10 percent chance, citing the robust experience of Judge Toal and the legal precedent she established. Yet, the door remains ajar for Murdaugh's defense to present their case to higher courts, which could scrutinize Toal's narrow interpretation of the law and the evidence presented. This phase of the Murdaugh saga leaves us with more questions than answers. How will appellate courts view the singular influence of Becky Hill on Juror Z? Will further investigations into Hill's actions or other undisclosed evidence shift the legal landscape? And most importantly, can the appellate process provide a clearer resolution to a case mired in controversy and public intrigue? In conclusion, the decision not to grant Alex Murdaugh a new trial, despite the dramatic claims of jury influence, underscores the complexities of legal procedures and the high stakes involved in overturning a conviction. As the case advances through the appellate courts, the public, legal experts, and those directly involved in the case watch closely, eager to see whether justice will serve the letter of the law or if the spirit of fairness will guide the final outcome. Will the appellate courts offer Murdaugh another shot at freedom, or will the current verdict stand as a testament to the judicial system's rigor? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the debate over justice, intent, and influence in the courtroom is far from over. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent turn of events that continues to grip the nation, the legal saga of Alex Murdaugh took another twist with Judge Toal denying a retrial for the disgraced South Carolina lawyer, despite a juror's testimony suggesting influence by Becky Hill, the clerk of court. This decision raises profound questions about the justice system, jury influence, and the psychological aspects of legal proceedings. Tony Brueski, host of the "Hidden Killers" podcast, delved into these complexities with Shavaun Scott, a psychotherapist and author, shedding light on the psychological underpinnings and implications of this pivotal moment in the Murdaugh case. The crux of the discussion centered on Judge Toal's decision to deny a retrial for Murdaugh, despite Juror Z's admission that Hill's comments had influenced their guilty verdict. Scott, expressing a mixture of expectation and personal relief at the decision, highlighted the emotional toll the trial has taken on those following the case closely. "I just don't want to see us all go through that again," Scott admitted, emphasizing the personal bias that comes with such emotionally charged cases. Becky Hill's role in the trial has been a point of contention, with her actions deemed "incredibly unprofessional" by Scott. The conversation explored the nuanced reality that jurors, like all individuals, are constantly influenced by their environment and unconscious biases. Scott pointed out the difficulty in acknowledging these influences, noting it's "rather remarkable that that juror was able to be honest and recognize that there was an influence there." A key issue in the debate over whether to grant a retrial was the emphasis on Hill's intent. Brueski and Scott discussed the problematic nature of this focus, questioning the relevance of intent when the influence on the juror's decision was evident. This led to broader reflections on the qualifications and psychological insight—or lack thereof—of judges in the legal system. "Judges, they're not psychologists," Brueski remarked, suggesting a gap in the system where psychological understanding is crucial yet often absent. The discussion also ventured into potential solutions for the systemic issues highlighted by the case. Scott lamented the national problem of judges lacking psychological insight, especially in sensitive areas like child custody. While there seems to be no easy fix, the conversation underscored the importance of educating judges on psychological dynamics to improve decision-making in court. Looking forward, the conversation shifted to Murdaugh's prospects in the appellate courts. Scott speculated on the slim chance of overturning Judge Toal's decision, given the stringent criteria set for proving jury tampering. Yet, both Brueski and Scott acknowledged the importance of ensuring procedural correctness, even if it means revisiting the traumatic details of the Murdaugh trial. The dialogue concluded with speculative thoughts on the broader implications of the case for South Carolina's legal system. Scott suggested that the acceptance of jury influence by figures like Hill might be indicative of a cultural norm within the state's courts—a norm that this high-profile case has brought to light. In sum, the denial of a retrial for Alex Murdaugh raises as many questions as it answers. While the decision may offer temporary relief to those dreading another emotionally charged trial, it also exposes deep-seated issues within the justice system, from the qualifications of judges to the potential for jury manipulation. As this saga continues to unfold, one question lingers: How will this case shape the future of legal proceedings in South Carolina and beyond? Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

There will be no new double murder trial for Alex Murdaugh, despite the fact that one juror says her vote was influenced by comments made by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill.  According to the Juror Z,   “She made it seem like he was already guilty.”  Hill allegedly made comments such as "watch him closely" and "watch his body language."  During Juror Z's testimony, she was asked by Judge Jean Toal if her verdict based entirely on the testimony,  evidence,  and law presented  in this case. The juror answered yes.  She was also asked if she heard Becky Hill make any comment about this case before your verdict. Again Juror Z answered yes, and that the comments influenced her decision.  Prosecutor Creighton Waters that in her affidavit the juror had responded that, "I voted guilty because I felt pressure by the other jurors."  After hearing all the testimony, Judge Toal ruled that the defense did not show that Hill's improper comment or question actually influenced the juror's verdict.  Joining Nancy Grace Today: Tim Jansen -  Criminal defense lawyer and fmr. Federal Prosecutor, Legal Analyst for Tallahassee Democrat's Newspaper, www.jansenlawoffice.com   Dr. Bethany Marshall   - Psychoanalyst www.drbethanymarshall.com/, Instagram & TikTok: drbethanymarshall, Twitter: @DrBethanyLive, appearing in the new show “Paris in Love” on Peacock  Chris McDonough - Director At the Cold Case Foundation, Former Homicide Detective, Host of YouTube channel- ‘The Interview Room', ColdCaseFoundation.org   Dr. Michelle DuPre - Forensic Pathologist, Medical Examiner and Detective: Lexington County Sheriff's Department, Author: “Money, Mischief, and Murder…the Murdaugh Saga. The rest of the story” available now on Amazon. “Homicide Investigation Field Guide" & "Investigating Child Abuse Field Guide", Forensic Consultant,DMichelleDupreMD.com   Jennifer Wood - (SC) Director of research at FITSNews.com, Twitter: @IndyJenn_  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Lawyer Jim Griffin stated, "We feel vindicated on the facts." He added, "There's an innocent man here who was wrongly convicted."    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction.    During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did.    Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial.    However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict.    Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations.    Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews.    Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping.    Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict.    Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home.    In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction. During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did. Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial. However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict. Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations. Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews. Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping. Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict. Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home. In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Lawyer Jim Griffin stated, "We feel vindicated on the facts." He added, "There's an innocent man here who was wrongly convicted."    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction.    During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did.    Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial.    However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict.    Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations.    Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews.    Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping.    Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict.    Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home.    In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction. During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did. Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial. However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict. Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations. Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews. Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping. Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict. Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home. In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction. During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did. Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial. However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict. Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations. Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews. Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping. Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict. Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home. In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a hearing that could potentially impact the fate of Alex Murdaugh, a juror from his 2023 murder trial has alleged feeling pressured by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill and other jurors to render a guilty verdict. The hearing, overseen by retired South Carolina Judge Jean Toal, aims to investigate claims of jury tampering by Hill and how it may have influenced Murdaugh's conviction.    During the hearing on Monday morning, a juror identified as Juror Z came forward with startling allegations against Hill. Juror Z stated that Hill instructed the jury to closely monitor Murdaugh's actions and made other comments that raised concerns. "To me, it felt like she made it seem like he was already guilty," Juror Z remarked. When asked by the judge if Hill's comments had an impact on their verdict, Juror Z confirmed that it did.    Juror Z further revealed that the jury's foreperson had mentioned that Murdaugh was "crying on cue," and jurors often discussed the trial outside of the courtroom before deliberations. Additionally, Juror Z claimed that Hill pressured them to speak to television reporters after the trial.    However, a majority of the other jurors who were questioned offered different accounts. Many stated that they had not heard Hill make any comments about Murdaugh, and some denied that such comments were ever made. Among those who admitted to hearing Hill's comments, they maintained that it did not influence their decision to deliver a guilty verdict.    Becky Hill took the stand on Monday afternoon to respond to these allegations.    Previously, Murdaugh's legal team had presented affidavits signed by a juror who voted to convict him, the one who was removed from the jury, and testimony from a paralegal involved in the jury interviews.    Additionally, Toal had heard testimony from a juror publicly identified as Juror X ahead of Monday's hearing. Juror X had been accused by Murdaugh's defense of pressuring the jury to reach a quick verdict to secure a book deal and media appearances related to the trial. However, this opportunity was jeopardized after the trial concluded with a guilty verdict. Moreover, Juror X faced criticism for parts of a book she authored about the trial being plagiarized, leading to the suspension of book sales, and her son being charged with wiretapping.    Judge Toal has expressed her intention to focus on whether Hill's alleged comments to the jury had an inappropriate influence on the final verdict.    Alex Murdaugh, a once-prominent attorney hailing from a politically influential South Carolina family, had received consecutive life sentences in March for the 2021 deaths of his wife and son. His actions also brought renewed attention to the 2018 "trip and fall" death of the family's housekeeper in their home.    In November, Murdaugh was sentenced to 27 years in state prison as part of a plea agreement for financial crimes, admitting to embezzling $12 million from clients over a decade. This plea deal mandated that he serve 85% of his sentence. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a daylong evidentiary hearing, Judge Jean Toal has denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The hearing centered on allegations that Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill had tampered with the jury and tainted the verdict.    Following extensive testimony from all 12 jurors who served in Murdaugh's trial and Rebecca Hill, Judge Toal made her ruling. Toal noted that while Hill's credibility as a witness was questionable, her actions did not ultimately influence the jury's decision.    "I simply do not believe that our South Carolina Supreme Court requires a new trial in a very lengthy trial on the strength of some fleeting and foolish comments by a publicity-seeking clerk of court," Judge Toal stated.    During her testimony, Hill vehemently denied tampering with the jury for financial gain or any other reason. She stated, "I did not have a conversation with any juror about any topic related to this case." When questioned about her book about the trial, Hill emphasized that the verdict's outcome did not matter to her, whether it was guilty, not guilty, or a mistrial.    Hill revealed that she had earned approximately $100,000 from the sales of her self-published book, "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders," which she co-authored. However, the book was withdrawn from sale last month after it was discovered that Hill had plagiarized a passage from a BBC News article.    Following Hill's testimony, Rhonda McElveen, the court clerk of Barnwell County who had assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, provided conflicting testimony. McElveen stated that Hill had made comments suggesting that a guilty verdict would be more advantageous for book sales.    Alex Murdaugh, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit and accompanied by his legal team, was present in the packed courtroom during the hearing. After Judge Toal's ruling, Murdaugh's lawyers announced their intention to appeal the decision.    Lawyer Jim Griffin stated, "We feel vindicated on the facts." He added, "There's an innocent man here who was wrongly convicted."    Alex Murdaugh, a former prominent personal injury lawyer, had been found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate. The evidentiary hearing aimed to determine whether Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial should be granted based on allegations of jury tampering raised by his defense.    Throughout the hearing, Judge Toal focused on Hill's testimony and the statements of former jurors to assess the validity of the tampering allegations. While most jurors denied that Hill's communications had influenced their guilty verdict, one juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially claimed that Hill had instructed the jury not to be fooled by Murdaugh and to watch him closely.    However, Juror Z's testimony during the hearing contradicted her earlier affidavit, leading to further questioning by Judge Toal. The proceedings took an unexpected turn when it was revealed that some jurors had accessed Juror Z's testimony on their cellphones during a break, violating Toal's instructions.    Despite the outcome of the murder appeal, Alex Murdaugh will remain in prison. In November, he received a 27-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to 22 counts of financial crimes against his clients, which will run concurrently with his federal sentence for similar financial crimes pleaded guilty to in September. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Alex Murdaugh and his hopes for a new murder trial have taken a huge blow in South Carolina after Judge Toal ruled that there was not enough 'there' there when it comes to alleged impropriety by the court clerk, Becky Hill. After hearing testimony from the jurors who sat in the box during the trial, Judge Toal was simply not convinced by the narrative being pitched by Murdaugh and his team and now according to Murdaugh's lawyers, their next step is to appeal the ruling. (commercial at 9:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Juror testifies comments by clerk of court influenced her decision to convict Alex Murdaugh of murder | CNN

Alex Murdaugh and his hopes for a new murder trial have taken a huge blow in South Carolina after Judge Toal ruled that there was not enough 'there' there when it comes to alleged impropriety by the court clerk, Becky Hill. After hearing testimony from the jurors who sat in the box during the trial, Judge Toal was simply not convinced by the narrative being pitched by Murdaugh and his team and now according to Murdaugh's lawyers, their next step is to appeal the ruling. (commercial at 9:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Juror testifies comments by clerk of court influenced her decision to convict Alex Murdaugh of murder | CNN

On today's show, True Sunlight Co-hosts Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell finally see some hope after five months of Murdaugh chaos. This week, Justice Jean Toal sent a strong message to Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin that her courtroom will not be a place for them to put Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill on trial in their quest to get Alex Murdaugh a new trial. Left with their playbook ripped in shreds, what will Team Murdaugh's next move be? Mandy and Liz discuss the highlights from this week's status conference and what they think will happen in the lead up to Alex's Jan. 29th hearing. The biggest question heading into Tuesday's hearing was how Justice Toal would interpret the law – if she will decide on Alex's new trial based on evidence of Becky's actions with the jurors affecting the verdict OR based on evidence showing that Becky's communication with the jury COULD HAVE affected the verdict.  And it didn't take long for Judge Toal to make a clear decision on that and set the tone for the hearing... Let's get into it... In January we're offering your first month of Soak Up The Sun membership for 50% off and our SUNscribers will get an email this Friday for 50% off their first three months of Soak Up The Sun Membership. So join our email list to get that special offer for first time members. Join Luna Shark Premium today at Lunashark.Supercast.com. Premium Members also get access to searchable case files, written articles with documents, case photos, episode videos and exclusive live experiences with our hosts on lunasharkmedia.com all in one place. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE. And for those just wanting ad-free listening without all the other great content, we now offer ad-free listening on Apple Podcast through a subscription to Luna Shark Plus on the Apple Podcasts App. Or become a member on YouTube for exclusive videos and ad-free episodes. SUNscribe to our free email list to get alerts on bonus episodes, calls to action, new shows and updates. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3KBMJcP Visit our new events page Lunasharkmedia.com/events where you can learn about the upcoming in-person and virtual appearances from hosts! And a special thank you to our sponsors: Microdose.com, PELOTON, and VUORI. Use promo code "MANDY" for a special offer! *This episode contains strong language For current & accurate updates: TrueSunlight.com facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/ Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod Twitter.com/mandymatney Twitter.com/elizfarrell youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

I attended the status conference for Alex Murdaugh. His chance for a new trial got a lot less likely after Judge Toal limited what will be allowed in when his evidentiary hearing begins on January 29th. Rex Heuermann, the suspected Long Island Serial Killer, was charged in a 4th murder. He now stands accused of murdering Maureen Brianard-Barnes. Also, breaking down the evidence against Rex. Lindsay Shiver is back in the US until her status conference & trial in the Bahamas. She is accused of conspiring to murder her former Alabama football star husband, Robert Shiver. She now says he won't let her see their children or tell where they are. Richard Allen's new attorneys say the move to another prison hasn't solved the inhumane treatment Allen has been receiving. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on 1/18/24 about several matters in Allen's case, including removing Judge Gull. Donate: PayPal - prettyliesandalibis@gmail.com Venmo - @prettyliesalibisBuy Me A Coffee - https://www.buymeacoffee.com/prettyliesrCash App- PrettyliesandalibisAll links: https://linktr.ee/prettyliesandalibisMerch: prettyliesandalibis.myshopify.com10% off with code SHERLOCK10 .Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PrettyLiesAndAlibis

True Sunlight Podcast co-hosts Mandy Matney, Liz Farrell and everyone's favorite attorney Eric Bland all agree that Alex Murdaugh has extremely low chances of getting a new trial after Justice Toal essentially took Dick and Jim's wide scope of allegations related to potential jury tampering and tore 95 percent of them to shreds.  While Dick and Jim convinced the media — and frankly, way too many other people — that this hearing will come down to Becky's credibility, Justice Toal said... Oh wait!! No it wont! Essentially, Judge Toal ruled that “prejudice must be proven and not presumed” — meaning she does not care about Becky's problems, she cares about what was said to the JURORS WHO RENDERED A VERDICT.  This was extremely validating for all of us because we have felt we've been on this lonely gaslit island for months now being pretty much the only members of the media to say there needs to be a separation between Becky's ethical issues and evidence of jury tampering.... So yes, 'Toal ya so'...  Let's get into it.... Mandy's new book, Blood on Their Hands arrived November 14th. Go to www.bloodontheirhandsbook.com to learn more.  Check out EB's new merch with a mission at theericbland.com or the Luna Shark Merch With a Mission shop at lunasharkmerch.com/ Premium Members also get access to searchable case files, written articles with documents, case photos, episode videos and exclusive live experiences with our hosts on lunasharkmedia.com all in one place. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE. And for those just wanting ad-free listening without all the other great content, we now offer ad-free listening on Apple Podcast through a subscription to Luna Shark Plus on the Apple Podcasts App. And we also offer access to exclusive video content through our new YouTube Premiere subscription. SUNscribe to our free email list to get alerts on bonus episodes, calls to action, new shows and updates. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3KBMJcP *** NEW: If you ever notice audio errors in the pod, email info@lunasharkmedia.com and we'll send you fun merch if you find something that needs to be adjusted! *** Find us on social media: Twitter.com/mandymatney - Twitter.com/elizfarrell - Twitter.com/theericbland https://www.facebook.com/cupofjustice/ YouTube *The views expressed on the Cup of Justice bonus episodes do not constitute legal advice. Listeners desiring legal advice for any particular legal matter are urged to consult an attorney of their choosing who can provide legal advice based upon a full understanding of the facts and circumstances of their claim. The views expressed on the Cup of Justice episodes also do not express the views or opinions of Bland Richter, LLP, or its attorneys. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First and foremost, we are announcing a new way to send tips and communications as we pursue answers in the death of Stephen Smith. It's time to turn up the pressure and remind everyone that this is the case to close in 2024. If you feel comfortable to send tips straight to SLED, please do so at tips@SLED.SC.gov. If you want to send confidential tips to our team in coordination with Stephen's mom Sandy, you can now do so at AnswersForStephen.com. 2024 will mark 9 years since Stephen's death and we're going to do everything in our power so that Sandy doesn't have to spend another year wondering what happened to her son. There is STILL HOPE THAT WE CAN SOLVE THIS CASE. And by the way, there is a $30,000 reward for anyone who gives information that leads to an arrest.  We refuse to let this case go cold, no matter how many distractions the Murdaugh mess throws our way. If you know something, say something. Please. For Sandy, for Stephen's family. We are begging you. AnswersForStephen.com or tips@SLED.SC.gov. Now, in this 30th episode of True Sunlight, South Carolina's Supreme Court has finally assigned someone to take over for Judge Clifton Newman and hear Alex Murdaugh's motion for a new murder trial. Who is former Chief Justice Jean Toal? And what could the appointment of this legal trailblazer mean for the future of Alex's case? True Sunlight Co-hosts Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell discuss the latest development in the Murdaugh Murders Saga. Plus they answer listener questions about Becky Hill's case and whose side they're on. Visit our new events page Lunasharkmedia.com/events where you can learn about the upcoming in-person and virtual appearances from hosts! Join Luna Shark Premium today at Lunashark.Supercast.com. Premium Members also get access to searchable case files, written articles with documents, case photos, episode videos and exclusive live experiences with our hosts on lunasharkmedia.com all in one place. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE. And for those just wanting ad-free listening without all the other great content, we now offer ad-free listening on Apple Podcast through a subscription to Luna Shark Plus on the Apple Podcasts App. SUNscribe to our free email list to get alerts on bonus episodes, calls to action, new shows and updates. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3KBMJcP And a special thank you to our sponsors: Microdose.com, PELOTON, and VUORI. Use promo code "MANDY" for a special offer! For current & accurate updates: TrueSunlight.com facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/ Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod Twitter.com/mandymatney Twitter.com/elizfarrell youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices