Podcasts about South Carolina Supreme Court

Ryan Kelly left SLED after more than a decade and took a job running internal affairs at the Charleston County Sheriff's Office. He was the person responsible for investigating misconduct allegations against other officers. On June 8, 2026, the sheriff fired him for harassment, unbecoming conduct, and improper procedures. The man who policed the police could not survive scrutiny of his own conduct.At SLED, Kelly was the lead investigator on Alex Murdaugh's staged roadside shooting — the September 2021 incident prosecutors used at trial to argue Murdaugh had a pattern of deception following the murders of his wife Maggie and son Paul. Kelly testified as one of the prosecution's final witnesses, walking the jury through how Murdaugh arranged for Curtis Smith to shoot him so Buster could collect on a life insurance policy.Kelly's termination adds to a growing credibility problem for the original prosecution. SLED's lead murder investigator, David Owen, admitted at trial that he gave inaccurate testimony to the grand jury about blood evidence. Court clerk Becky Hill pleaded guilty to perjury and obstruction of justice. The South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Murdaugh's convictions and ordered a new trial. The first retrial hearing is June 29.Defense attorney Dick Harpootlian told the Post and Courier his team needs to investigate developments that have happened since the original trial. Every name that falls from the prosecution's witness list weakens the foundation the state built the first time around. Maggie and Paul Murdaugh deserve a case that holds up. Whether this prosecution can deliver one is the question heading into the courtroom.Links:Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimer:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags:#AlexMurdaugh #RyanKelly #HiddenKillers #MurdaughRetrial #SLED #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina #DickHarpootlian #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

The prosecution's most powerful storytelling tool just got taken away. Twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony painted Alex Murdaugh as a desperate thief who would do anything to keep his world from collapsing. The South Carolina Supreme Court said it was too much, too inflammatory, and went far beyond what was needed to establish motive. The retrial has to be “efficient” with no inflammatory detail of limited probative value.That changes the entire shape of the case. The prosecution's physical evidence has always been circumstantial. No weapon. No confession. No eyewitness. The kennel video and Alex's lie about being at the scene are the anchors. But the first time around, those anchors sat inside a narrative about a man who stole from disabled clients and defrauded his own law partners. That context made everything feel inevitable. Without it, the jury has to reach guilty on the physical case with far less emotional ammunition.The AG is also floating the death penalty for the first time, and the defense is claiming statistics favor acquittal on retrial. Both sides are already fighting over timeline, venue, and who testifies. Bob Motta on whether the prosecution can still get a conviction. Tony Brueski, Robin Dreeke, and Bob Motta.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #CreightonWaters #MurdaughRetrial #SouthCarolina #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #MaggieMurdaugh #AttorneyGeneral #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers

The South Carolina Supreme Court gave prosecutors a warning they can't ignore. Twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony at the first trial was excessive. The justices said the state went too deep into details that had nothing to do with proving murder and everything to do with making Alex Murdaugh look like a terrible person. Testimony from Tony Satterfield about his brother's disability had “zero probative value.” That kind of evidence is off the table now.What's left is a circumstantial murder case that has to stand on its own for the first time. The kennel video places Alex at the scene. His lie about being there is damning. But there's no murder weapon, no confession, no eyewitness, and no DNA connecting him to the killings. The first jury heard that evidence wrapped inside a devastating portrait of a man who stole millions from people who trusted him. The second jury won't get that portrait — at least not in the same detail.Creighton Waters says the genie is out of the bottle — every juror already knows Alex's financial crimes from media coverage. The question is whether that helps or hurts the prosecution when they can't control the narrative from the witness stand. Bob Motta on the prosecution's problem. Tony Brueski, Robin Dreeke, and Bob Motta.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #CreightonWaters #MurdaughRetrial #SouthCarolina #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #MaggieMurdaugh #AttorneyGeneral #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers

Judge Debra McCaslin has been vested with exclusive jurisdiction over the Alex Murdaugh retrial and all related proceedings. During her judicial confirmation before the South Carolina General Assembly, McCaslin reportedly identified Dick Harpootlian — Murdaugh's lead defense attorney — as one of three lawyers who shaped her legal career. She reportedly rented office space from him while in private practice. Neither the prosecution nor the defense has filed a motion to recuse.Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis provides analysis on the recusal standard, what McCaslin's appointment means for both the prosecution and the defense, and the pre-trial ruling that may carry more weight than any witness. The South Carolina Supreme Court's opinion ordering the retrial directed that financial crimes evidence be sharply curtailed. McCaslin will determine the scope of that limitation. Faddis explains why that single evidentiary ruling could effectively determine the outcome before opening statements begin — and what the State must prove without the motive architecture it relied upon in the first proceeding.Attorney Eric Bland, who constructed the financial fraud case prosecutors used as their motive theory and who represented the Satterfield family, examines the implications of the Supreme Court's characterization of specific victim testimony as having “zero probative value.” Bland addresses whether the prosecution exceeded the evidentiary limits the law permitted, what the ruling means for the families who testified, and the defense's six-hundred-thousand-dollar Section 1983 complaint against Becky Hill — which asserts recovered funds would benefit Murdaugh's financial crime victims, the individuals Bland represents.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #TrueCrimeToday #DickHarpootlian #EricBland #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina

The first jury sat through more than twelve hours of financial crimes testimony. The South Carolina Supreme Court said that was excessive and ordered any retrial to sharply limit it. Now one judge — Debra McCaslin — decides where the line falls. That single ruling could shape the verdict before a witness takes the stand.McCaslin was given exclusive jurisdiction over every Murdaugh proceeding, including the retrial on charges that he killed his wife Maggie and son Paul. She reportedly rented office space from Dick Harpootlian, Murdaugh's lead defense attorney, and during her judicial confirmation reportedly named him as one of the lawyers who made an impression on her life. Neither side has moved to remove her. Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis breaks down what that silence means, what real judicial favoritism looks like from the inside, and whether McCaslin's reportedly tough sentencing record — including life sentences and rulings that backed law enforcement — cuts for or against the defense.Attorney Eric Bland brings the other side of this fight. He built the financial crimes case prosecutors used as their motive theory. He represented the Satterfield family through the process and prepared them to testify. The Supreme Court called specific victim testimony “zero probative value.” Bland confronts what that means for the families who trusted the system to use their words properly. He also responds to the defense's six-hundred-thousand-dollar civil rights lawsuit against Becky Hill, which claims any recovered funds go to Murdaugh's financial crime victims — the exact people Bland represents.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #HiddenKillers #DickHarpootlian #EricBland #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina

The woman now overseeing Alex Murdaugh's retrial reportedly rented office space from his defense attorney and named him under oath as a lawyer who shaped her career. Judge Debra McCaslin was handed exclusive jurisdiction over every Murdaugh proceeding by the South Carolina Supreme Court — the same court that reversed his murder convictions and ordered a new trial in the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. Nobody has filed a motion to remove her.Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis examines whether McCaslin's reported connection to Dick Harpootlian is a genuine problem or a headline, what her reportedly tough sentencing record tells us about how she'll run this courtroom, and the ruling that could matter more than any testimony. The Supreme Court said the first trial's financial crimes evidence went too far. McCaslin decides how far is too far the second time. That decision shapes what the next jury sees, what it never hears, and whether prosecutors can build a murder case without the motive theory they leaned on the first time.Attorney Eric Bland adds the perspective nobody else can. He built the financial fraud case. He represented the Satterfield family and watched his clients testify about what Murdaugh did to their lives. The Supreme Court said some of that testimony had “zero probative value.” Bland confronts what that language means for the people it was taken from. He also responds to Harpootlian's six-hundred-thousand-dollar civil rights lawsuit against Becky Hill, which claims any recovered money goes to Murdaugh's financial crime victims. Bland represents those victims — and his take on whether that promise carries weight lands hard.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #MurdaughCase #DickHarpootlian #EricBland #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina

When the South Carolina Supreme Court assigned Judge Debra McCaslin exclusive jurisdiction over the Alex Murdaugh murder retrial, the appointment carried a history that neither the prosecution nor the defense has publicly addressed. McCaslin reportedly rented office space from Murdaugh's lead defense attorney, Dick Harpootlian, during her years in private practice. She reportedly named him among the lawyers who made a lasting impression on her professional life during proceedings before state legislators. The two worked together on a class-action. And McCaslin presided over pretrial matters in a separate murder case in which Harpootlian served as defense counsel.The Attorney General's office has not moved to recuse her. Harpootlian has not disclosed a conflict. Neither side has filed a single motion questioning her assignment. Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis evaluates the legal standard for judicial recusal in South Carolina, what this documented history would require under the applicable rules, and why the silence from both legal teams may reveal more about their strategic calculations than any motion ever could.Faddis then turns to the decisions McCaslin will make before the retrial reaches a jury. The Supreme Court's reversal explicitly noted that the original trial included excessive financial crimes testimony and that any retrial must be sharply limited. McCaslin holds sole authority over where that boundary falls — a ruling that determines whether prosecutors retain the motive evidence that anchored the first conviction or enter the courtroom without the narrative that carried the guilty verdict.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #TrueCrimeToday #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

The woman now controlling every motion, every evidentiary fight, and the retrial itself in the Alex Murdaugh double murder case once shared an office with the man defending him. Judge Debra McCaslin reportedly rented space from Dick Harpootlian — Murdaugh's lead attorney — when both were in private practice. They worked a class-action together. And in a separate murder case where Harpootlian represented the defendant, McCaslin was the judge who reportedly denied the state's request to revoke bond.The South Carolina Supreme Court handed McCaslin exclusive jurisdiction after reversing Murdaugh's convictions for the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. The reversal came after findings that former court clerk Becky Hill's misconduct tainted the original jury. Now the question isn't just whether Murdaugh is guilty — it's whether the system running his retrial can survive its own history.Eric Faddis has been on both sides of courtrooms where a judge's connection to counsel shaped everything. He walks through what warmth toward one lawyer actually looks like in practice — in rulings, in tone, in the calls that could go either way. Then he digs into the ruling that may matter more than any witness: the first jury heard hours of financial crimes testimony. The Supreme Court said that was excessive. McCaslin now draws the line on what the next jury hears. That single decision could determine whether prosecutors can rebuild the motive that carried the first conviction — or whether they walk into round two without their strongest weapon.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Years before the South Carolina Supreme Court handed her the most closely watched murder retrial in the state's history, Judge Debra McCaslin stood before legislators and named the lawyers who left a mark on her career. One of them was Dick Harpootlian — the man who will stand at Alex Murdaugh's side when his double murder case goes back to trial for the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh.The connection runs deeper than a compliment on the record. McCaslin reportedly rented office space from Harpootlian when she was building her practice. They collaborated on a class-action involving video poker litigation. She sat as judge in a separate murder case where Harpootlian defended the accused — and when prosecutors sought to hold his client before trial, she reportedly refused. Every layer of this history was available the moment her name was announced. And yet both sides looked at the same facts and said nothing.Eric Faddis has prosecuted felonies and defended against them. He breaks down what the Harpootlian connection means inside a courtroom — where a judge's warmth toward one attorney can show up in sustained objections, evidentiary rulings, or simply the tone that shapes how a jury reads the room. Then he gets to the decision that could rewrite this retrial before it starts: the Supreme Court ruled that twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony was excessive and that any retrial must sharply limit it. McCaslin alone decides where the line falls. If prosecutors lose their motive backbone, the evidence that remains may not carry the weight the first jury felt.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Go to https://incogni.com/EMILY and use code EMILY to get 60% off annual plans. Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/ojT2fNd11Lk  Following the South Carolina Supreme Court's reversal of Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions, the case is moving toward a retrial under the exclusive jurisdiction of newly appointed Judge Deborah R. McCaslin. Concurrently, the State has filed a motion to unseal the previously restricted in camera hearing transcripts regarding the removal of "Juror 785," also known as the "egg lady juror," arguing that former protective orders should now be considered moot. This motion follows earlier requests by the juror herself to reveal the private proceedings, which include discussions between the court and counsel that may shed light on allegations of improper influence during the original trial. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Alex Murdaugh's double murder convictions in a unanimous ruling — then told prosecutors their use of financial crimes evidence went too far. Attorney Eric Bland built that financial crimes case. His clients were the ones on the witness stand. And the court just told them some of their testimony was legally worthless.Bland represented the Satterfield sons — the family of the Murdaugh housekeeper who died under suspicious circumstances and whose insurance payout Murdaugh stole. He helped unravel the financial empire that prosecutors argued drove Murdaugh to kill. Now the court has drawn a line around how much of that evidence can come back in at retrial, and Bland has to reckon with what that means for the families who already endured the first one.The questions are sharp. Did Becky Hill's comments actually move the needle with jurors? Is Harpootlian's civil rights lawsuit against Hill about accountability or about building a defense? Was this a legal correction or a gift to a convicted killer delivered on a technicality? Bland is the one person who can answer all of that from inside the case, not the sidelines.This is Eric Bland with no filter, on Hidden Killers Live.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #EricBland #MurdaughRetrial #SouthCarolina #BeckyHill #Satterfield #TrueCrime #HiddenKillersLive #JuryTampering #MurdaughCase

The latest Alex Murdaugh case update concerns the bench, not the defendant. The South Carolina Supreme Court has vested Judge Debra McCaslin with exclusive jurisdiction over all proceedings in the Murdaugh matter — including any retrial on charges that he murdered his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul — and her professional history with lead defense counsel Dick Harpootlian is now a matter of public scrutiny.The record, as reported: early in her career, McCaslin rented office space from Harpootlian, and during her judicial screening she identified him among the attorneys who shaped her legal career, reportedly stating he made an impression on her life. In this episode, defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis applies the actual legal standards to those facts — what judicial disqualification requires, how appearance-of-impropriety analysis works, who can raise the issue, and why prior professional association between bench and bar is far more common, and far less determinative, than headlines suggest.Faddis then turns to the substantive authority McCaslin now holds. The Supreme Court's reversal — rooted in former clerk of court Becky Hill's misconduct, to which she pleaded guilty — came with a directive that any retrial sharply limit the financial-crimes testimony that consumed hours of the first trial. McCaslin will define that boundary. Faddis assesses what the State's case looks like at each possible line, which evidentiary disputes from the first trial remain unresolved, and what her reportedly stringent sentencing record signals about how she may run this courtroom.His closing analysis addresses the only question that ultimately matters: what has to go right for the State this time — and does this judge make that more or less likely?Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #DebraMcCaslin #TrueCrimeToday #MurdaughRetrial #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina #JudicialEthics

The newest Nick Reiner trial development is a 136-page probate petition filed from custody — naming both his outgoing and incoming trustees and demanding the release of more than $1.5 million held in the trust his parents established at his birth. In this extended episode, defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis conducts a complete legal examination of the dispute, from the filing's strongest claims to the family's most viable countermeasures.On the merits: the petition characterizes the trust's distributions as "mandatory and unconditional" — half payable at age thirty, a threshold Nick Reiner crossed more than two years before Rob and Michele Reiner were killed, with no payment made per the filing. Faddis evaluates that language under California trust law, the petition's invocation of the presumption of innocence — Nick has pleaded not guilty to both first-degree murder counts — the counsel-of-choice argument anchored to attorney Alan Jackson's declared readiness to resume the defense, and the reported procedural pathway by which an unopposed petition could be granted without hearing.On the opposition: trustee Paul Kanin's resignation following stated concerns about Nick's decision-making capacity, the appointment of successor Jodi Montgomery — formerly Britney Spears' conservator — and her requested custodial meeting, the operation of the slayer statute prior to any verdict, the reported freeze of the larger Reiner family trusts, the formal opposition available to Jake and Romy Reiner, and the recoverability of funds spent on defense should a conviction follow.The episode concludes with the Alex Murdaugh retrial's new presiding judge, Debra McCaslin: her reported professional history with lead defense counsel Dick Harpootlian, the disqualification standards that history implicates, and her authority over the financial-crimes evidentiary limits ordered by the South Carolina Supreme Court.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#NickReiner #RobReiner #TrueCrimeToday #ReinerCase #EricFaddis #ProbateCourt #TrueCrime #AlexMurdaugh #DebraMcCaslin #TrustLitigation

Everyone covering the Alex Murdaugh retrial is fixated on one half of Judge Debra McCaslin's story — her reported history with defense attorney Dick Harpootlian. This episode digs into the other half, and it's the half that should worry the defense.Before the South Carolina Supreme Court handed McCaslin exclusive control of the Murdaugh case — the motions, the evidentiary fights, and the retrial over the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh — she built a record on the bench described as tough, fair, and impossible to rattle. She has reportedly handed down life sentences in murder cases and sided with law enforcement when defense lawyers alleged misconduct. For a defendant whose entire path to a new trial ran through claims that the system broke, that resume cuts in a very specific direction.Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis examines both faces of this appointment with the eye of someone who has argued in front of judges exactly like her. He weighs the connection everyone's talking about — McCaslin reportedly naming Harpootlian as a lawyer who shaped her career, and once renting office space from him — against the record suggesting she gives defendants nothing they haven't earned. He explains what real judicial favoritism looks like from the inside, why it rarely resembles what people imagine, and how a judge with friendly history sometimes overcorrects against the lawyer she knows.Then the stakes: McCaslin controls how much of Murdaugh's financial-crimes evidence the next jury hears, after the Supreme Court ruled the first trial went miles too far. Faddis breaks down what the State must prove without that crutch — and which side should genuinely fear this judge.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #DebraMcCaslin #HiddenKillers #MurdaughRetrial #EricFaddis #TrueCrime #DickHarpootlian #SouthCarolina #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh

For everyone who has followed the Murdaugh case with their heart in their throat — waiting, again, for a verdict that finally holds for Maggie and Paul — here is what we actually know about the woman now in charge.Judge Debra McCaslin was handed the entire Alex Murdaugh case by the South Carolina Supreme Court: every motion, every ruling, and the retrial itself. And while the internet fixates on her reported history with defense attorney Dick Harpootlian — the office she once rented from him, the praise she reportedly offered during her rise to the bench — her record tells a different story. This is a judge described as tough, fair, and impossible to rattle. A judge who has reportedly handed down life sentences in murder cases and stood with law enforcement when defense teams alleged foul play.Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis joins us to make honest sense of both halves. He explains what one judge can truly decide in a case this size, whether the Harpootlian connection is a genuine problem or a headline, and the ruling that matters most to anyone who wants this retrial done right: how much of Murdaugh's financial-crimes evidence the next jury will hear, after the Supreme Court found the first trial crossed the line.Because the first verdict was lost to a court official's misconduct — not to doubt about the evidence. The families connected to this tragedy, and everyone who grieved with them, deserve a second trial that no court can ever take apart. Faddis lays out exactly what that requires, starting with the judge.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #DebraMcCaslin #MurdaughRetrial #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #TrueCrime #EricFaddis #SouthCarolina #HiddenKillers #JusticeForMaggieAndPaul

The single biggest unknown in the Alex Murdaugh retrial isn't a witness, a weapon, or a verdict — it's a ruling that hasn't happened yet. The first jury sat through hours upon hours of testimony about Murdaugh's financial crimes, the stolen client money, the gathering storm the State built its motive on. The South Carolina Supreme Court said that went too far, and ordered any retrial to sharply limit it. The person who decides where that limit falls: newly assigned Judge Debra McCaslin.Eric Faddis — former felony prosecutor, longtime defense attorney, and our sharpest guide to courtroom power dynamics — joins us live to map what's really at stake in that one decision. Strip the financial avalanche out of the State's case and what remains is a circumstantial murder prosecution; leave too much in and the defense has its next appeal pre-written. McCaslin's line-drawing may decide this case before a single juror is sworn.Faddis also takes on the question burning through this story: McCaslin's reported history with Murdaugh's lead lawyer, Dick Harpootlian — the office she once rented from him, the career-shaping praise she reportedly offered on her way to the bench. He explains how lawyers actually read a judge's history with counsel, whether a recusal motion has legs, and how her reportedly tough, law-enforcement-friendly record complicates the easy narrative that Murdaugh caught a break.One judge. One evidentiary line. Two families still waiting for a verdict that holds. We take your questions live — bring the hard ones.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #DebraMcCaslin #HiddenKillersLive #MurdaughRetrial #EricFaddis #TrueCrime #FinancialCrimes #DickHarpootlian #SouthCarolina #MaggieMurdaugh

The South Carolina Supreme Court's ruling sharply limits the financial crimes testimony that consumed twelve and a half hours of the original trial. The prosecution's evidentiary framework for retrial must compensate for that loss. One category of evidence that received limited examination the first time — granular household testimony from the person with the most sustained access to the Murdaugh home — may carry substantially greater weight in a second proceeding.Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson served as the Murdaugh family's housekeeper for approximately twenty years. She testified for three hours at the original trial. Prosecutors examined her on specific items — a shirt, a towel, pajamas. In this exclusive interview, Simpson identifies observations from the morning after the murders that were never raised during her testimony: the condition of the house when she entered approximately twelve hours after the killings, items that had been moved or cleaned, and domestic details inconsistent with the normal state of the household — details a forensic team would likely overlook but a daily presence in the home would recognize immediately.Simpson distinguishes between indicators of grief and indicators of scene management. She addresses the defendant's subsequent attempt to alter the shirt narrative months after the murders. She also identifies the evidentiary loss created by the sale and alteration of the Moselle property — and the irreplaceable role her twenty years of spatial memory plays for a jury that can no longer walk the scene as it existed.Simpson also presents a specific theory of the crime that directly addresses the defense team's third-party suspect strategy. She posits that the defendant maintained a Plan A involving another individual's presence at Moselle the night of the killings, and when that arrangement collapsed, executed the plan independently and constructed a narrative around the boat crash families. Her basis is two decades of observing the defendant's operational pattern — the consistent use of intermediaries in financial transactions, including Curtis Eddie Smith's documented role in cashing approximately four hundred thirty-seven checks totaling roughly $2.4 million. Simpson argues that the defendant's established pattern of using others as instruments makes an independently executed crime inconsistent with his documented behavioral history.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BlancaSimpson #MurdaughRetrial #MaggieMurdaugh #Moselle #PaulMurdaugh #CurtisSmith #MurdaughEvidence #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The South Carolina Supreme Court stripped away twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony. What fills that gap at retrial may depend on the kind of evidence that didn't get its full day in court the first time — and Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson has had three years to sit with what she saw versus what prosecutors actually asked her about.She testified for three hours in 2023. The jury heard about the shirt, the towel, the pajamas. But Blanca knew that household in a way no investigator could replicate. Which cabinets Maggie used. Where the towels went. What the morning routine looked like. When she walked into the house twelve hours after the murders, she saw things that didn't fit — small domestic details a forensic team would walk past but a woman who'd been there every day for twenty years would catch immediately.In this exclusive, Blanca reveals what she noticed that nobody asked about on the stand. She walks through the morning after — Alex's phone call, the condition of the house, the things that were moved, cleaned, or wrong — and draws the line between grief and scene management. She confronts the moment Alex returned months later to rewrite the shirt story. And she addresses what a jury loses now that Moselle has been sold and broken apart — what her memory of that property can give a second jury that photographs alone cannot.Blanca also presents her own theory of the crime — and it directly challenges the defense team's "other suspects" strategy. She believes Alex had a Plan A involving someone else at Moselle that night. When that plan collapsed, he executed Plan B himself and constructed a narrative around the boat crash families. Her basis isn't speculation. It's twenty years of watching Alex Murdaugh operate — how he moved money through other people's hands, how he used relationships as cover, how Curtis Eddie Smith cashed four hundred thirty-seven checks totaling roughly $2.4 million. Alex built an infrastructure of people who did things for him. If he never operated alone in any other part of his life, Blanca asks, why would the murders be the one exception?Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BlancaSimpson #MurdaughRetrial #MaggieMurdaugh #Moselle #PaulMurdaugh #MurdaughEvidence #CurtisSmith #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The South Carolina Supreme Court's unanimous reversal of Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions reset the legal record — and with it, the evidentiary question that a second jury will have to answer without twelve hours of financial crimes testimony supporting the prosecution's narrative. Retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer approaches that question as a clean-slate exercise: strip the name from the file and evaluate what the physical evidence actually supports.Two victims were shot at the dog kennels on a remote hunting property. Two distinct firearms were used — a shotgun and a rifle. Neither weapon has been recovered. No blood was found on the defendant. The defense has consistently argued that no single shooter could have executed the crime as the state described it. Paul Murdaugh's prior legal entanglements — including a boating incident that resulted in a young woman's death — generated a documented set of unresolved grievances that investigators never fully pursued. Coffindaffer evaluates the two-weapon theory, examines where the physical scene points absent the financial motive framework, and assesses whether the prosecution's case survives substantive scrutiny under the evidentiary limitations the Supreme Court has imposed for retrial.The human dimension of the reversal is addressed through an exclusive interview with Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson — the Murdaugh family's housekeeper of twenty years and a key prosecution witness at the original trial. Simpson's testimony included her recollection of the shirt Alex Murdaugh wore the morning of June 7th, 2021, a wet towel found by the shower the following day, and her observations of Maggie Murdaugh's emotional state as Alex's financial situation deteriorated. The jury that heard her testimony convicted in under three hours.Upon learning of the Supreme Court's reversal, Simpson drove directly to Maggie Murdaugh's gravesite. In her first interview since the ruling, she addresses whether she remains the same witness she was in 2023, what Becky Hill's conduct cost the people closest to the case, and whether three years of reflection have altered what she is prepared to testify to at a second trial. The retrial's outcome may depend significantly on whether witnesses like Simpson present more forcefully under fair conditions than they did under compromised ones.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #BlancaSimpson #JenniferCoffindaffe

Dr. Phil sits down with Jim Griffin, attorney for disgraced South Carolina lawyer Alex Murdaugh, after a shocking court decision overturned Murdaugh's double murder conviction in the killings of his wife Maggie and son Paul. The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled Murdaugh did not receive a fair trial, citing improper jury influence and misconduct involving former court clerk Becky Hill — a dramatic development that has reignited national debate over one of America's most notorious murder cases. Now, Griffin joins Dr. Phil to break down the stunning reversal, the allegations of jury tampering, and why the defense believes the original verdict was deeply flawed. Dr. Phil presses Griffin on the evidence against Murdaugh, the public outrage surrounding the case, and what comes next as prosecutors prepare for a possible retrial. Could Alex Murdaugh really get another chance in court? And after everything the public has heard, is a fair trial even possible anymore?This episode is brought to you by TempraMed: Dr. Phil uncovers the hidden dangers tied to today's explosion of at-home injections — from insulin and GLP-1s to life-saving emergency medications. To learn more about TempraMed, visit : https://tempramed.com/This episode is brought to you by: Get up to $20,000 in FREE Gold & Silver with a qualified purchase. Text ASKPHIL to 50505 or visit https://DrPhilgold.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In 2023, a jury convicted former attorney Alex Murdaugh of the murders of his wife Maggie and his son Paul at the family's Moselle hunting lodge in Colleton County, South Carolina. In 2026, Murdaugh had his convictions overturned by the South Carolina Supreme Court over jury tampering concerns. Now, Murdaugh is suing Becky Hill, the former clerk of court accused of swaying jurors in the case.Check out our upcoming book events and get links to buy tickets here: https://murdersheetpodcast.com/eventsPre-order our book on Delphi here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/shadow-of-the-bridge-the-delphi-murders-and-the-dark-side-of-the-american-heartland-aine-cain/21866881?ean=9781639369232Or here: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Shadow-of-the-Bridge/Aine-Cain/9781639369232Or here: https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Bridge-Murders-American-Heartland/dp/1639369236Join our Patreon here! https://www.patreon.com/c/murdersheetSupport The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/Check out more inclusive sizing and t-shirt and merchandising options here: https://themurdersheet.dashery.com/Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com.The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Alex Murdaugh murder case has been reset to zero, and the reason is a lesson in how fragile a conviction can be. On a unanimous vote, the South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Murdaugh's double-murder convictions and ordered a new trial, finding that the Colleton County clerk of court improperly influenced the jury — in the court's words, placing her fingers on the scales of justice. Murdaugh is not going home; he remains in prison on a separate 27-year state sentence and a 40-year federal sentence for financial crimes. But on the murders, the state is back to square one.Former FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer joins Tony Brueski for a precise look at what this ruling means. The attorney general has vowed to retry the case as soon as possible. That raises real procedural questions: what changes the second time around, how much of Murdaugh's financial wrongdoing a new jury will be allowed to hear, and whether the original investigation's focus on a single suspect can withstand a fresh defense built on reasonable doubt.Coffindaffer explains how an external-influence finding unwinds a verdict, what a remand for a new trial actually triggers, and how prosecutors rebuild a case they thought they'd already won. This is the segment for listeners who want the legal mechanics laid out cleanly.A jury convicted Alex Murdaugh once. A court has now said that verdict can't stand. Listen for what happens when one of the most-watched murder cases in the country has to be tried all over again.Footer Links:Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimer:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags: #AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughMurders #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina #NewTrial #BeckyHill #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #TrueCrimeCommunity #LegalAnalysis

The South Carolina Supreme Court erased Alex Murdaugh's murder conviction, and Blanca Simpson didn't pick up her phone. She drove to Maggie's grave and sat in silence.For twenty years, Blanca wasn't just cleaning the Murdaugh house — she was holding its secrets. She was the person Maggie trusted enough to pull into a room and shut the door. The person who heard Maggie say she'd give everything she had to make the thirty-million-dollar lawsuit disappear. The person who knew, just by looking at a pair of folded pajamas, that something was deeply wrong the morning after the murders.Blanca testified for three hours in 2023. She told the jury what she saw. What she noticed. What Alex tried to get her to un-see months later when he brought up a shirt she knew he wasn't wearing. That testimony helped put him away for life. And now it exists in legal limbo — not because it was wrong, but because a court clerk named Becky Hill decided to put her thumb on the scale while writing a book about the trial.In this exclusive sit-down, Blanca opens up about what it felt like to hear the ruling. What she said to Maggie at the grave. How she holds two competing truths — that Alex is guilty and that the process was broken. And whether she's ready to do it all again in a courtroom.Part 1 of a three-part Hidden Killers exclusive with the woman who knew the Murdaugh family from the inside.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BlancaSimpson #MurdaughRetrial #MaggieMurdaugh #MurdaughOverturned #PaulMurdaugh #BeckyHill #JuryTampering #SouthCarolina #HiddenKillers

Here's a fact in the Alex Murdaugh case that never stops being strange: the two guns used to kill Maggie and Paul Murdaugh were never recovered. Not the shotgun. Not the rifle. Two weapons, two victims at the family's dog kennels, and to this day neither one has been found. With the South Carolina Supreme Court having overturned Murdaugh's convictions and ordered a new trial, every piece of physical evidence is about to get a second look — and the missing weapons are near the top of the list.Former FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer joins Tony Brueski for the evidence-level conversation. The two guns don't match each other, and they don't match in origin: the rifle that killed Maggie reportedly traces back to a Murdaugh family firearm, while the shotgun that killed Paul has been tied to nothing on that property at all. The defense built a theory around the physics of it — that whoever fired the first weapon at close range couldn't have calmly turned and used the second. And there was no blood on Alex.Coffindaffer walks through what missing weapons do to a case, how investigators trace a gun's origin, and what it means when one weapon points inward and the other points nowhere. This is the segment for listeners who want the forensics, not the soap opera.A wife and a son were killed at the kennels years ago. The guns are still gone, and now a new trial is coming. Listen for what the evidence can still prove.Footer Links:Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimer:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags: #AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughMurders #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina #Forensics #TrueCrimeCommunity #Lowcountry #Evidence

Blanca Simpson has said it publicly: she believes Alex Murdaugh killed Maggie and Paul. She wrote it in her book. She said it on camera. She reached that conclusion after years of processing what she saw inside that house — the wet towel, the folded pajamas, the shirt that vanished, the moment Alex tried to rewrite her memory months after the murders.And when the South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously threw out the conviction that her testimony helped secure, she said something that most people on either side of this case would never say: she respects the decision.That tension is the entire story. Blanca isn't a legal commentator trying to thread a needle for the cameras. She's a woman who lost her closest friend, who watched the man she believes is responsible get convicted in three hours, and who now has to reconcile the fact that a court clerk's misconduct was enough to undo all of it. Not the evidence. Not the testimony. One person's behavior behind closed doors.Blanca talks about the moment she heard the ruling and drove to Maggie's grave. The silence she sat in. The fear she wrote about in her book — that a retrial might come — that has now become real. And whether the Blanca Simpson who takes the stand in round two will be the same cautious, still-in-shock housekeeper the jury saw in 2023, or someone who has spent three years getting clearer about what she knows and what she's ready to say.Part 1 of a three-part exclusive on the Alex Murdaugh channel.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BlancaSimpson #MurdaughRetrial #MaggieMurdaugh #MurdaughOverturned #PaulMurdaugh #BeckyHill #JuryTampering #SouthCarolina #HiddenKillers

For years, the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh seemed like a closed case. Alex Murdaugh, once part of one of South Carolina's most powerful legal families, was convicted of killing his wife and son after jurors heard evidence prosecutors said they could not ignore, including the now infamous kennel video placing him near the crime scene minutes before the murders. But now, everything has changed. Alex Murdaugh's murder conviction has officially been overturned after shocking allegations involving jury influence by former court clerk Becky Hill. The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that comments allegedly made to jurors during the trial may have compromised the fairness of the proceedings, throwing one of the most high-profile murder convictions in recent history into chaos. In today's recap, we break down the original murders, the financial crimes, the kennel video that changed everything, the misconduct allegations that overturned the conviction, and whether Alex Murdaugh could actually win a retrial. Because despite years of headlines, documentaries, and courtroom drama… the Murdaugh story may be far from over. #TrueCrimeRecaps AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughMurders #MurdaughTrial Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From the Patreon Archives:By now, you've probably heard that Alex Murdaugh has been granted a new trial. We're bringing you a full breakdown of the South Carolina Supreme Court decision later this week, as well as a look into the civil lawsuit he filed against the woman responsible for depriving him of his constitutional right. But first, we want to set the scene with this True Crime Headlines segment from the Patreon archives. It was recorded back when the first Murdaugh verdict came in. A peak back into what we thought would happen in 2023 -- and what we didn't know was happening behind the scenes.Before we bring you our appeal coverage later this week, dig into this. For a real treat, you can also head back to episodes 151-153 to hear our early EARLY coverage when we weren't even sure Alex was the one who did it. And now with his murder conviction vacated and his attorneys claiming new evidence points to a third party, we're left with the questions - did he? And will the low country ever see justice served for these heinous crimes?Click here for this week's show notes.Click here to sign up for our Patreon and receive hundreds of hours of bonus content.Please click here to leave a review and tell us what you think of the show.CRIMEWAVE AT SEA 2027 is happening Feb. 8-12, 2027!Tickets on Sale: Feb. 13, 2026Get $100 off your stateroom and a private meet and greet with us!Go to http://crimewaveatsea.com/SINISTERPlease consider supporting the companies that support us!-To explore pet coverage, visit ASPCApetinsurance.com/CREEPY. 

The South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously reversed Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions on the grounds that former Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill corrupted the jury process. The guilty verdicts have been vacated. The life sentences have been set aside. The legal record reflects that no individual stands convicted of the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh.The constitutional framework is clear. The State charged Murdaugh with double murder. The Supreme Court determined the trial was unfair. The State's obligation to prosecute has not been extinguished — it has been reset. If the evidence is sufficient to secure a conviction under fair conditions, a second jury will deliver a verdict that withstands appellate scrutiny. If it is not, the public and the victims' families are entitled to that determination.Five days after the reversal, Murdaugh's defense team filed a Section 1983 federal civil rights complaint against Hill. The seventeen-page filing seeks six hundred thousand dollars in damages — directed entirely to the receivership — and is structured to access civil discovery mechanisms: depositions, document subpoenas, and sworn testimony. Defense counsel Jim Griffin stated publicly that the purpose is investigative, not financial.Eric Faddis examines the legal requirements of the Section 1983 claim — the elements Murdaugh's team must establish, the unusual posture of targeting a court clerk rather than law enforcement, and the strategic value of civil discovery running parallel to criminal retrial preparation. He addresses the state prosecutor's prior determination that insufficient evidence existed to charge Hill with jury tampering — a conclusion reached four months before the Supreme Court found her conduct warranted reversal.The Attorney General has reportedly indicated the death penalty is under consideration. Individuals personally harmed by Murdaugh's financial crimes have expressed willingness to testify again. Murdaugh is serving 40 years on federal financial crimes convictions and will not be released regardless of the retrial's outcome. The retrial's purpose is accountability for the deaths of two people — not the adjustment of a sentence already being served.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #BeckyHill #Section1983 #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SCSupremeCourt #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

Five days after the South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously overturned Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions, his defense team filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Becky Hill. Seventeen pages. Section 1983. Six hundred thousand dollars in damages directed to the receivership. Jim Griffin said publicly the money isn't the point — the subpoena power is. Depositions. Sworn testimony. The ability to ask questions under oath that the state never bothered to ask.The Supreme Court ruled Hill put "her fingers on the scales of justice." The state prosecutor who handled Hill's criminal case said there wasn't enough evidence to charge her with jury tampering — four months before the Supreme Court ruled that's exactly what happened. The defense argues the state never treated Hill's conduct as the constitutional violation it was. This federal suit is designed to go where the state wouldn't.Eric Faddis breaks down what a Section 1983 claim requires — why it's typically aimed at law enforcement rather than a court clerk, what Murdaugh's team has to prove, and what civil discovery opens up that the criminal process never did. He explains why Griffin emphasized that no recovered funds go to Murdaugh personally — everything flows to the receivership.The broader question is why the retrial matters at all. Murdaugh is 57 and serving 40 years federal — he's never leaving prison regardless. But Maggie Murdaugh was 52 and Paul Murdaugh was 22. They were shot to death on their family's property, and as of the Supreme Court's ruling, nobody stands convicted of killing them. The guilty verdicts are erased. The life sentences are vacated. A financial crimes sentence is not a murder conviction by proxy. The constitutional obligation to answer who killed them hasn't been extinguished — it's been reset.People personally harmed by Murdaugh's financial crimes have said they'll go through the process again. The Attorney General is reportedly considering the death penalty.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #Section1983 #JuryTampering #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The state prosecutor who handled Becky Hill's criminal case said there wasn't enough evidence to charge her with jury tampering. Four months later, the South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously ruled that's exactly what she did. The state never treated her conduct as the constitutional violation the Supreme Court found it to be. It never followed the evidence wherever it led.So who's investigating? Alex Murdaugh's defense team. Five days after the reversal, they filed a seventeen-page federal civil rights lawsuit against Hill. Section 1983. Six hundred thousand dollars in damages directed to the receivership. Jim Griffin said publicly the money isn't the point — the subpoena power is. Depositions. Sworn testimony. The ability to ask questions under oath that the state never bothered to ask.Eric Faddis explains the mechanics — what Section 1983 requires, why it's unusual to aim it at a court clerk rather than law enforcement, and what civil discovery opens up that the criminal process never provided. He addresses why Griffin went out of his way to distance Murdaugh personally from the damages, and what the discovery process could reveal about whether Hill acted alone.The retrial question sits behind all of it. Murdaugh is 57 and serving 40 years federal — he's never leaving prison regardless. But Maggie was 52 and Paul was 22. They were killed on their own family's property, and the legal record currently says nobody has been convicted of doing it. The guilty verdicts are gone. The life sentences are vacated. A thief's sentence is not a murderer's accountability. The obligation to answer who killed them hasn't disappeared — it's been reset.The Attorney General is reportedly considering the death penalty. Financial crimes victims have said they'll testify again. The question of who killed Maggie and Paul Murdaugh deserves an answer that can't be challenged.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #Section1983 #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #EricFaddis #SCSupremeCourt #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

OnJune 7, 2021, Alex Murdaugh murdered his wife Maggie and his son Paul at the family's Moselle hunting lodge in Colleton County, South Carolina. In 2023, a jury convicted him of that crime. The state introduced evidence of Murdaugh's many financial crimes at the trial. After overturning Murdaugh's conviction based on jury tampering concerns, the South Carolina Supreme Court also weighed in on the trial court's decision to allow the jury to hear evidence of Murdaugh's financial crimes.Check out our upcoming book events and get links to buy tickets here: https://murdersheetpodcast.com/eventsPre-order our book on Delphi here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/shadow-of-the-bridge-the-delphi-murders-and-the-dark-side-of-the-american-heartland-aine-cain/21866881?ean=9781639369232Or here: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Shadow-of-the-Bridge/Aine-Cain/9781639369232Or here: https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Bridge-Murders-American-Heartland/dp/1639369236Join our Patreon here! https://www.patreon.com/c/murdersheetSupport The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/Check out more inclusive sizing and t-shirt and merchandising options here: https://themurdersheet.dashery.com/Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com.The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC.This message is sponsored by Greenlight.It's always scary when somebody tries to scam your family. We had scammers hack into a relative's email and send all his email contacts junk. Thank goodness, we were all able to fix it and it didn't go beyond that.But the problem is huge, and growing. Families lost $12.5 billion to fraud last year. With Greenlight Family Shield, you can keep your family from becoming a statistic. Greenlight Family Shield is an app that helps keep your whole family safe from scams and fraud. Not just one person. Your grandparents. Your kids. You. Everybody. Greenlight Family Shield protects with financial account monitoring, credit locking, and real-time alerts when potential fraud is detected. They offer up to a million dollars of identity theft coverage.They let you take charge of your family's safety, financial security, and peace of mind. Unfortunately, as true crime podcasters, we know that fraudsters and scammers are trying to rip you off all the time. Greenlight Family Shield puts the power back in your hands, and it takes minutes to set up. We love their identity protection. We know they're monitoring our financial accounts and that they'll lock our credit in an instant if something goes wrong. We use Greenlight and you should too. Scammers aren't waiting. Neither should you. Go to Greenlight.com/msheet right now to get started. That's GREENLIGHT dot com slash msheet. GREENLIGHT dot com slash msheet.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The South Carolina Supreme Court's reversal eliminated the prosecution's ability to present twelve hours of financial crimes testimony at retrial. The evidentiary framework that carried the first conviction — theft as motive, financial desperation as context — must now be significantly narrowed. What remains is the physical evidence collected by SLED, and its integrity is about to face scrutiny it largely avoided at trial one.The crime scene was exposed to rain. Family members walked through it before it was fully processed. No weapon was recovered. No DNA evidence connected the defendant to the killings. Blanca Simpson, the Murdaugh housekeeper, reported a suspicious white vehicle near the property — parked close to where Paul Murdaugh kept firearms — on the day of the killings. She reportedly provided more specific details in subsequent private interviews than she offered during sworn testimony. Jennifer Coffindaffer, who spent nearly three decades running federal investigations, examines that discrepancy alongside SLED's decision not to pursue the vehicle lead. She and Robin Dreeke also address the two-shooter theory SLED was unable to eliminate and the question of whether the kennel video evidence maintains its probative force absent the financial crimes testimony that contextualized it for the first jury.Defense attorney Dick Harpootlian has reportedly signaled an aggressive posture heading into the retrial, stating that the reversal will bring reluctant witnesses forward and that subpoenas will follow if necessary.On the prosecutorial side, Attorney General Alan Wilson has reportedly indicated that all sentencing options remain available — including the death penalty, which was not pursued at the original trial. Wilson is concurrently a candidate for governor. Every declared candidate for attorney general has reportedly committed to retrying the case. Dreeke examines the behavioral implications of prosecutorial decision-making that intersects with electoral politics — particularly the impact on jury selection in a jurisdiction where the case has achieved unprecedented public saturation.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #SLED #AlanWilson #DeathPenalty #DickHarpootlian #JenniferCoffindaffer #RobinDreeke #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The defense team for Alex Murdaugh filed a federal civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill, alleging she deprived the defendant of his constitutional right to a fair trial before an untampered jury. The South Carolina Supreme Court's reversal already found her conduct warranted a new trial. The federal complaint is designed to use civil discovery mechanisms — depositions, document subpoenas, interrogatories, sworn testimony — to investigate the full scope of Hill's actions and determine whether she acted independently.The complaint highlights the removal of juror Myra Crosby during deliberations as a critical incident requiring deeper examination. Defense counsel Jim Griffin stated publicly that the central question is whether Hill was a lone actor or whether others had knowledge of her conduct. The suit seeks damages exceeding six hundred thousand dollars representing the cost of the original trial, with all recovered funds directed to the receivership — not the defendant.The defense has argued that the state's investigation of Hill's conduct was inadequate — that it never treated the interference as the constitutional violation the Supreme Court subsequently determined it to be, and never pursued the evidence to its conclusion. The federal action is structured to reach what state-level proceedings did not.Criminal defense attorney Bob Motta and retired FBI behavioral analyst Robin Dreeke examine the lawsuit's discovery strategy and its implications for the retrial.Separately, the defense's retrial strategy is coming into focus. The Supreme Court's published skepticism about twelve hours of financial crimes testimony creates a significant evidentiary constraint for the prosecution. The defense will invoke the court's own language to challenge every financial witness. The physical evidence stands on its own for the first time: no DNA connecting the defendant to the killings, no blood, both weapons unrecovered, no eyewitnesses, and a crime scene compromised by weather and foot traffic. Whether Murdaugh testifies again — likely compelled by the kennel video recording — becomes a fundamentally different calculation without weeks of financial testimony preceding it.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #Section1983 #JuryTampering #CivilDiscovery #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The defense team didn't file this lawsuit just to hold Becky Hill accountable. They filed it to investigate her. Civil discovery gives them tools the state never used — subpoenas, depositions, sworn testimony under penalty of perjury — and the complaint makes clear they intend to use every one of them.The Section 1983 claim alleges Hill deprived Alex Murdaugh of his constitutional right to a fair trial before an untampered jury. The South Carolina Supreme Court already found her conduct warranted reversal. Jim Griffin raised the central question at the press conference: was Becky Hill a lone wolf? Or did someone else know what was happening during those deliberations? The complaint highlights the suspicious removal of juror Myra Crosby as a critical incident the defense believes has never been adequately examined. The suit seeks more than six hundred thousand dollars in damages tied to the original trial's cost, all flowing to the receivership — none to Murdaugh personally.The defense argues the state never thoroughly investigated Hill's conduct, never treated it as the constitutional violation the Supreme Court subsequently found it to be, and never followed the evidence to its logical end. This federal action is designed to reach what the state wouldn't touch.The lawsuit sits alongside the broader defense strategy for trial two. The Supreme Court's ruling created an evidentiary firewall around the financial testimony — clear skepticism about the twelve-hour presentation and instructions to sharply limit it at retrial. The defense will challenge every financial witness armed with the court's own published language. Behind that firewall, the physical case stands exposed: no DNA on the defendant, no blood, both weapons still missing, no eyewitnesses, and a crime scene compromised from the start. The question of whether Murdaugh takes the stand again looms — the kennel video recording likely forces his hand, but the calculation shifts dramatically without weeks of financial crimes testimony preceding it.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #Section1983 #JuryTampering #JimGriffin #DickHarpootlian #SCSupremeCourt #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

Two threads on the Murdaugh case worth examining — the legal architecture of a potential retrial, and the behavioral context the original prosecution couldn't formally introduce.The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled the prosecution exceeded permissible bounds at the original trial. Twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony was deemed disproportionate, and any retrial must be significantly narrowed. Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis examines the evidentiary boundary lines. The court explicitly flagged testimony concerning individual theft victims as lacking probative value on motive — prejudicial without sufficient legal justification. The State's motive theory survives in narrowed form: the firm's CFO allegedly confronting Alex Murdaugh about missing fees the morning of June 7, 2021, and an opposing attorney's hearing scheduled three days later that would have compelled financial disclosure. The exposure timeline remains admissible. The emotional cascade of theft victims likely does not.Faddis also addresses the unresolved evidentiary questions — the firearm analysis testimony, the blue raincoat, the gunshot residue evidence, and the iPhone demonstration — identifying which gives the defense its strongest argument under appellate scrutiny. Plus the foundational strategic decision the defense has to make: contest admission of the financial evidence entirely, or permit it and attack the causal link between alleged theft and alleged homicide.On the human side, psychotherapist Shavaun Scott analyzes the months preceding June 7 through the lens of separation danger. Maggie Murdaugh had reportedly retained divorce counsel and was living apart from Alex. Two witnesses testified she did not want to go to Moselle that day. Scott explains why the window between decision and departure is statistically the most dangerous period in a controlling relationship — and what makes compliance override instinct.FOOTER LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#AlexMurdaugh #MaggieMurdaugh #MurdaughTrial #MurdaughRetrial #SCSupremeCourt #EricFaddis #ShavaunScott #Moselle #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions on procedural grounds — finding the trial judge misapplied the burden of proof, violated Rule 606(b) by probing jurors' mental processes, and credited testimony the court deemed inadmissible. A retrial has been ordered under significantly narrowed evidentiary parameters. The central unknown heading into that proceeding is Buster Murdaugh.Buster testified for the defense at the original trial. He has since reportedly distanced himself from Alex — minimal prison contact, a quiet marriage, and according to sources, open anger about the retrial. He has allegedly characterized his father as a "selfish old man." Jennifer Coffindaffer and retired FBI behavioral analyst Robin Dreeke examine whether the prosecution can leverage that fracture and what legal mechanisms exist to compel testimony about private conversations between father and son after the killings. Coffindaffer also identifies a structural weakness in the State's family annihilation theory: if Alex allegedly killed to eliminate exposure, the survival of Buster undermines the logic of the motive as constructed.Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis provides the comprehensive legal breakdown. The Supreme Court ruled twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony was excessive and ordered sharp limitations at retrial. Faddis maps what survives — the CFO confrontation and the opposing attorney's hearing that form the motive timeline — and what gets excluded. He addresses the unresolved evidentiary challenges carried forward from the direct appeal: the firearm analysis, the blue raincoat, the gunshot residue testimony, and the iPhone demonstration. He also examines the retrial complications — Alex Murdaugh's locked-in testimony, Becky Hill's perjury conviction as a defense weapon, and the venue and jury selection challenges both sides face in a case with this level of public saturation.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BusterMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #SCSupremeCourt #JenniferCoffindaffer #RobinDreeke #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

Two threads of the Murdaugh case worth pulling on — what was already in motion before June 7, 2021, and what the prosecution may not get to use at a second trial.Maggie Murdaugh had reportedly retained a divorce attorney. She was living apart from Alex. June 7 was a day she did not want to spend at Moselle, and two witnesses testified to exactly that. She went anyway. Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott — who writes about separation danger on her Substack, Spotlight on Psychology — walks through the behavioral mechanics. What shifts inside a controlling partner who senses he's losing his grip. Why compliance becomes automatic after years of keeping the peace. What someone in that window needs to recognize before it's too late.On the legal track, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled the prosecution overreached at the original trial. Twelve and a half hours on financial crimes testimony was deemed excessive, and any retrial must be significantly trimmed. Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis maps the evidentiary terrain. The court specifically flagged testimony about individual theft victims as having no probative value on motive — emotionally damaging to Alex Murdaugh, legally irrelevant. What survives is the narrow exposure window: the firm's CFO allegedly confronting Murdaugh about missing fees the morning of the killings, and an opposing attorney's hearing scheduled three days later that would have forced financial disclosure.Faddis also examines the open evidentiary questions the court left unsettled — the firearm analysis, the blue raincoat, the gunshot residue testimony, and the iPhone demonstration — and identifies which one gives the defense its strongest opening. Plus the strategic decision the defense has to make before anything else.FOOTER LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#AlexMurdaugh #MaggieMurdaugh #MurdaughTrial #MurdaughRetrial #SCSupremeCourt #EricFaddis #ShavaunScott #Moselle #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

 Buster Murdaugh testified for the defense at his father's murder trial and told a jury Alex wasn't capable of killing Maggie and Paul. Then Alex was convicted, and Buster disappeared. Three years of near-silence. Barely any prison calls. A quiet marriage. A life built at distance. Now the South Carolina Supreme Court has reversed the convictions, the retrial is approaching, and sources say Buster isn't relieved — he's reportedly angry, allegedly calling Alex a "selfish old man."Jennifer Coffindaffer and retired FBI behavioral analyst Robin Dreeke dig into what that anger signals and whether the prosecution can use it. If Buster's loyalty has fractured, everything shifts. He knows what Alex told him privately after the killings. The question is whether any legal mechanism can force those conversations into the open. Coffindaffer also raises a problem embedded in the State's own motive theory: if the case is family annihilation, why is Buster alive? Maggie wouldn't have believed a story about Paul's death if Buster were dead too. That gap sits at the center of the State's narrative before opening statements begin.Defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis addresses the legal architecture of the retrial itself. The Supreme Court found the original trial judge placed the burden on Murdaugh instead of the State and violated Rule 606(b) by probing jurors' mental processes. Twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony was deemed excessive. Faddis identifies what survives in a second trial — the narrow exposure timeline anchoring the motive theory — and what gets stripped out. He also examines Alex Murdaugh's locked-in testimony, the unresolved evidentiary challenges from the direct appeal, and the strategic nightmare of venue and jury selection with Becky Hill's criminal conviction now on the record.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BusterMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #JenniferCoffindaffer #RobinDreeke #EricFaddis #SCSupremeCourt #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #MurdaughTrial

The South Carolina Supreme Court has reversed Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions and ordered a new trial, but this decision does not declare Murdaugh innocent, and it doesn't erase the evidence presented at trial. What it does say is that the jury process was contaminated by improper influence from Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill. What a horrible consequence of bad choices. Let's break down the Court's ruling point by point as I look at what Hill allegedly said to jurors, why the Court applied the Remmer presumption of prejudice, why the State failed to overcome that presumption, and what the Court said about using Murdaugh's financial crimes as motive evidence in a second trial. This is still a case about murder, money, power, courtroom procedure, and public trust. But more than anything, this ruling is a reminder that even the most hated defendant is still entitled to a fair trial.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughTrial #MurdaughMurders #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #RebeccaHill #SouthCarolinaSupremeCourt #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #JuryTampering #NewTrial #LegalAnalysis #CriminalBehavior #ProfilingEvil #CrimeNews #TrialWatch #JusticeSystem #Moselle #Lowcountry #TrueCrimeCommunity========================================20% OFF Newspapers.comhttps://www.newspapers.com/go/podcast/?ref=profilingevil?xid=8877&utm_source=ProfilingEvilPodcast&utm_medium=podcst&utm_campaign=ProfilingEvil26========================================Discounts on eBikes: https://aipasbike.com/?ref=PROFILINGEVILReferral Coupon Code: PROFILINGEVIL========================================Email your questions to: ProfilingEvil@gmail.com========================================

Five days after the South Carolina Supreme Court's unanimous ruling overturning Alex Murdaugh's double murder convictions, his defense team filed a seventeen-page Section 1983 civil rights complaint against former Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in Charleston.The complaint alleges Hill, acting under color of state law in her capacity as elected clerk, deprived Murdaugh of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights through deliberate jury interference — conduct the Supreme Court characterized as "shocking" and described as Hill placing "her fingers on the scales of justice."Eric Faddis examines the legal architecture of the federal civil action, including the evidentiary standard Murdaugh must meet, the scope of civil discovery available under federal rules, and the strategic implications of Jim Griffin's public statement that none of the six hundred thousand dollars in requested damages would go to Murdaugh personally.He addresses the prosecutorial gap — Hill's guilty pleas to misconduct, obstruction, and perjury alongside the absence of a jury tampering charge from state prosecutors, followed by the Supreme Court's effective finding of exactly that conduct. He evaluates Attorney General Alan Wilson's public consideration of the death penalty for the retrial and the potential legal friction created by vindictive prosecution doctrine.Footer Links:Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimer:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags:#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughTrial #SouthCarolina #JuryTampering #Section1983 #TrueCrime #DeathPenalty #MurdaughRetrial #HiddenKillers

Alex Murdaugh's defense team filed a seventeen-page Section 1983 civil rights complaint against former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill in federal court in Charleston — five days after the South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously overturned his murder convictions based on what the justices called "shocking jury interference." The complaint seeks six hundred thousand dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, but Jim Griffin told reporters none of it would go to Murdaugh personally.Eric Faddis explains the legal mechanics — what Section 1983 requires, what civil discovery gives the defense that the criminal process never did, and what "peeling the onion" actually looks like when you have subpoena power and deposition authority aimed at a government official who's already pleaded guilty to misconduct, obstruction, and perjury.He addresses the gap between the state prosecutor telling the court there wasn't enough evidence to charge Hill with jury tampering and the Supreme Court ruling four months later that tampering is exactly what happened. He examines Dick Harpootlian's public question about whether Hill was a "lone wolf" and what that signal means on day one of a federal lawsuit.And he connects the civil case to the criminal retrial — where the AG is openly considering the death penalty and depositions from the federal suit could reshape the landscape before a single juror is seated.Footer Links:Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimer:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags:#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughTrial #SouthCarolina #JuryTampering #Section1983 #TrueCrime #DeathPenalty #MurdaughRetrial #HiddenKillers

Becky Hill pled guilty to misconduct in office, obstruction of justice, and perjury. The South Carolina Supreme Court said she engaged in shocking jury interference that forced them to overturn Alex Murdaugh's double murder conviction unanimously. Her sentence was probation and community service. Let that math sit for a second.The Murdaugh defense held a press conference to announce a federal lawsuit against Hill — because in their view, the state has failed to hold her accountable for what she did. And the facts make that argument hard to dismiss. A clerk of court who pled guilty to lying under oath, who the state's highest court found corrupted a murder trial for personal financial gain, who allegedly told jurors not to believe the defense and to watch the defendant's body language — and she walked away with community service. The lawsuit seeks damages and discovery. The defense wants to know if she acted alone. They want depositions. They want subpoenas. They want answers the state never pursued.Meanwhile, the AG is now considering the death penalty for the man whose trial his own office failed to protect from a corrupt clerk. He called Hill's conduct “ultimately harmless.” The Supreme Court disagreed so strongly they threw out the entire conviction. The defense says the AG is running for governor and making decisions accordingly. Whether that's fair or strategic framing, the gap between calling jury interference harmless and seeking execution for the defendant it harmed is difficult to bridge.Alex Murdaugh is not a sympathetic figure. He's a convicted financial criminal who stole millions from vulnerable people. But the system that tried him for murder failed on multiple levels, and the people responsible for that failure have barely been held to account. This episode asks why.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughTrial #MurdaughRetrial #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina #DeathPenalty #HiddenKillers #JuryTampering #MurdaughCase

Just when it seemed like the Murdaugh saga might finally be slowing down, the case exploded again. Alex Murdaugh’s murder conviction has been overturned, but investigative journalist Mandy Matney says that does not change what she believes: Alex killed Maggie and Paul. Mandy joins Elisa Donovan to break down the shocking South Carolina Supreme Court ruling, the Becky Hill jury controversy, why she believes the kennel video and Alex’s lies still point straight to guilt, and why this retrial may force witnesses, victims, and South Carolina itself to relive the trauma all over again.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The One With Alec/Alex/Elic Murdow/Murdock/Murdick, Becky with the Okay Hair, and Poot! AKA IN THE MATTER OF ALEX MURDAUGH!   Official Description from Peacock:Alex Murdaugh's double murder conviction was overturned by the South Carolina Supreme Court due to the clerk of court's "outrageous" behavior. Craig Melvin reports.    Check out our merch at https://adatewithdateline.dashery.com/! We donate all of our proceeds to a different charity every month, including those benefitting human rights, LGBTQIA support, solving cold cases, homeless and shelter animals, domestic violence survivors, disaster relief, cancer research, and more.      Check out our Patreon or Supercast and get instant access to over 80 bonus full length true crime episodes, our monthly livestreams, ad free episodes, Karen Read All About It episodes, and MORE! patreon.com/datedateline datedateline.supercast.com Or gift a Patreon subscription to a friend! https://www.patreon.com/datedateline/gift Kimberly's Etsy Shop: www.etsy.com/shop/StitchesBeKrazy   Shopping with our sponsors is an easy way to support our show!   Snack smarter with IQBar! Right now, IQBAR is offering our special podcast listeners twenty percent off all IQBAR products—including the Ultimate sampler pack—plus FREE shipping. To get your twenty percent off, text DATELINE to sixty-four thousand. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details.   Go to newspapers.com/truecrime and use promo code DATEWITHDATELINE for 20% off a subscription. Newspapers.com: Because the past always leaves a paper trail.   Let your hair be one less thing to worry about. See visibly thicker, stronger, faster growing hair in 3–6 months with Nutrafol. For a limited time, Nutrafol is offering our listeners $10 off your first month's subscription and free shipping when you visit nutrafol.com and enter promo code DATEDATELINE! Upgrade your summer wardrobe with Postmark! Download the Poshmark app and use code datedateline when you sign up to get $10 off your first purchase. Or shop now at poshmark.com/datedateline and get $10 off your first purchase.   To advertise on this podcast please email: ad-sales@libsyn.com   Or go to:  https://advertising.libsyn.com/ADatewithDateline

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/aBJJaSNLrg0  Following the May 13, 2026, unanimous decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court to overturn Alex Murdaugh's double murder conviction due to improper jury influence by former clerk of court Rebecca "Becky" Hill, the legal battle has intensified with both a pending retrial and a new federal civil rights lawsuit. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson announced on May 18, 2026, that his office will "aggressively seek to retry" Murdaugh and that all legal options, including the death penalty, are currently being considered. Simultaneously, Murdaugh's defense team filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Hill's actions deprived Murdaugh of his constitutional right to a fair trial for her own personal financial gain, seeking at least $600,000 in compensatory damages to cover the costs of the original defense. While the defense remains optimistic about a future acquittal and intends to explore unexamined evidence—such as unknown male DNA found under Maggie Murdaugh's fingernails—they have clarified that a retrial is unlikely to occur before the end of 2025. RESOURCES Alex Murdaugh Trial - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gK8GOeWkGfi7acMnT-D0zaw Karen Read Civil Lawsuits - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKVEoBmOhzUprvqi3-_6JoZ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Alex Murdaugh's defense team didn't just get a second chance — they got a court-issued roadmap showing exactly where the prosecution went wrong and how far the next trial judge should limit the state's evidence. True Crime Today examines how Harpootlian and Griffin turn the Supreme Court's ruling into a defense strategy that could produce an acquittal.The financial evidence firewall is built directly from the court's language. Every financial witness the prosecution calls faces a defense objection citing the Supreme Court's explicit finding that the state went too deep into Murdaugh's financial history. The defense doesn't need to exclude everything. They need to exclude enough to prevent the emotional buildup that turned the first jury against Murdaugh before they ever weighed the murder evidence.Whether Murdaugh takes the stand is the strategic decision both sides are already gaming. A recording captured his voice at the scene minutes before the alleged killings, contradicting everything he'd told investigators. He'll likely have to explain that lie again. But this time the jury hasn't spent weeks absorbing his financial crimes before he sits in the witness chair. His credibility starts from a different baseline.The defense's strongest argument may be the simplest: reasonable doubt. No DNA on Murdaugh despite two close-range shootings. No blood. Both weapons still missing after years. No eyewitnesses. A crime scene contaminated within hours. These gaps were present in Trial 1 but got overshadowed by the financial narrative. In Trial 2, with that narrative constrained by the Supreme Court, the physical evidence gaps become the defense's centerpiece. The bar isn't innocence. It's uncertainty. And the defense has three years of preparation aimed at creating exactly that.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#AlexMurdaugh #DickHarpootlian #MurdaughDefense #MurdaughRetrial #SCSupremeCourt #TrueCrime #ReasonableDoubt #MurderTrial #SouthCarolina #HiddenKillers

This week on Love Murder Current Affairs, Jessie and Andie cover two major updates in cases of love gone fatally wrong: Kouri Richins is sentenced to life without parole for the fentanyl poisoning murder of her husband Eric, and the South Carolina Supreme Court overturns Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions after finding his trial was tainted by the court clerk's improper comments to jurors.Current Affairs is Love Murder's shorter show about the cases of love gone fatally wrong that are in the news right now.Sources:https://apnews.com/article/fa8c4b159827eef080cfa104a316454chttps://www.ksl.com/article/51496745/watch-live-kouri-richins-sentenced-for-murdering-husband-her-sons-say-they-fear-herhttps://www.wvtm13.com/article/kouri-richins-eric-richins-sentencing/71291050https://www.sccourts.org/media/opinions/HTMLFiles/SC/28329.pdfhttps://www.reuters.com/legal/government/south-carolina-lawyers-murder-conviction-overturned-2026-05-13/https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/alex-murdaughs-murder-convictions-overturned-in-south-carolina-supreme-court-rulingFind LOVE MURDER online:Website: lovemurder.loveInstagram: @lovemurderpodTwitter: @lovemurderpodFacebook: LoveMrdrPodTikTok: @LoveMurderPodPatreon: /LoveMurderPodCredits: Love Murder is hosted by Jessie Pray and Andie Cassette, researched by Sarah Lynn Robinson and researched and written by Jessie Pray, produced by Nathaniel Whittemore and edited by Kyle Barbour-HoffmanSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/OJsFepBhw5E  The South Carolina Supreme Court has officially overturned the murder convictions of Richard Alexander "Alex" Murdaugh and ordered a new trial. This decision stems from findings of egregious jury tampering by Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill during the 2023 trial. Despite this reversal, Murdaugh remains in prison serving a 40-year federal sentence and a 27-year state sentence for financial crimes. Stay informed on the latest developments in the Murdaugh case and other major legal battles. RESOURCES Murdaugh Trial - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gK8GOeWkGfi7acMnT-D0zaw Courthouse Becky Testimony - https://youtu.be/vnUX0njyq4I Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It happened on a Wednesday… Investigative journalists Mandy Matney and ⁠Liz Farrell⁠ break down the 27-page Alex Murdaugh murder conviction reversal that essentially boils down to two words: Blame Becky. They wrestle with the uncomfortable truth that money seems to help a defendant's chances at the state's highest court — while sticking to their belief that the evidence still points to one person who went down to the kennels and lied about it. In a unanimous 5-0 decision, the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed Alex Murdaugh's double-murder conviction, ruling that Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill "placed her fingers on the scales of justice."  They also unpack the court's new guardrails on financial-crimes testimony at retrial, including the gutting decision to call Tony Satterfield's words unfairly prejudicial.  Plus: reactions from Eric Bland, Mark Tinsley, AG Alan Wilson, and AG candidate David Pascoe.  Same case. Same evidence. Same liar. Round Two starts now. Let's Dive in…

In a unanimous decision, the South Carolina Supreme Court has overturned Alex Murdaugh’s 2023 convictions of murdering his wife and son and ordered a new trial. The justices wrote they had no choice but to make their ruling because the county clerk of court, Rebecca Hill improperly influenced the jury at trial, by suggesting they could not trust Murdaugh’s testimony. South Carolina’s attorney general has vowed to aggressively seek to retry Murdaugh as soon as possible. Murdaugh will not be getting out of prison in the meantime, as he is currently serving 40 years for state and federal financial crimes. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.