Watch Live: Alex Murdaugh's attorneys speak about case after double murder conviction overturned

追加: 2026-05-25

[00:00:00]where Alan Wilson plays politics as opposed to playing prosecutor.

[00:00:06]He's got great lawyers.

[00:00:08]Great lawyers on his staff. He should listen to them, defer to their judgment.

[00:00:13]Um coincidentally, he has not looked into the attempted jury tampering of Becky Hill. We're going to talk about a civil suit in a minute, but clearly the statute says he whoever tampers with the jury or attempts to tamper with the jury is guilty of a crime.

[00:00:33]Judge Toll's fact findings were clear.

[00:00:36]Becky Hill attempted the Supreme Court this week last week. Becky Hill attempted, so please, Alan, focus on your job and not the politics. Now, having gotten that out of my system, um let me turn this over to Jim Griffin, who's going to talk about the lawsuit that was filed this morning, and then Phil Barber and he and I will answer questions.

[00:00:59]Jim. Yeah, good morning.

[00:01:01]Today in United States District Court uh Federal Court, the Charleston division, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of Richard Alexander Murdaugh Sr. versus Rebecca Hill. In this lawsuit we we filed it under the Federal Civil Rights Statute 42 United States Code 1983 um to redress constitutional deprivation of rights.

[00:01:31]Those rights were Alex's right to a fair trial, a right um that him be tried before an untampered, untainted jury. With the South Carolina Supreme Court's ruling, it has been adjudged as a matter of state law that she deprived Alec of his constitutional rights, deprived him of a right to a fair trial, and as a result, we've got to do it all over again, which nobody wants to do.

[00:02:00]The damages that we've alleged include the over $600,000 that was spent to try the first case and other compensatory damages. Now, let me be clear.

[00:02:12]Alex Murdaugh owes a lot of people a lot of money.

[00:02:15]None of this money that is recovered will go to him personally.

[00:02:20]And the purpose of this lawsuit is to hold Becky Hill accountable for what she did.

[00:02:30]She has not been held account at all for her conduct.

[00:02:34]And to to is to investigate exactly what she did, which we'll be able to do through the course of civil litigation. We have subpoena power. We can take depositions. And so we're we're going to be able to understand the entire scope of her her conduct.

[00:02:53]She's yet to be thoroughly investigated by the state.

[00:02:57]And she's not been held accountable by the state. And that's what we hope to do. That's what we intend to do. And that's what we will do with this lawsuit.

[00:03:07]Thank you. Bill, what you got?

[00:03:09]I'll just [clears throat] amplify that and say that you know, Can you hold it till the plane goes over, please? Yeah.

[00:03:16]Move it this way a little Yeah, get it in the center.

[00:03:20]Good.

[00:03:21]Yep.

[00:03:22]The the jury process of the integrity of the jury process was violated by somebody sworn to uphold it. And that's why we're here today. And that cannot go unanswered, as Jim said. And that's what we're going to do with this lawsuit.

[00:03:36]Um beyond that, we've alleged the $600,000 uh in damages. That's a public number, by the way. There was a receivership.

[00:03:44]That money was allocated from receivership uh for the defense. That was a waste because of what Becky Hill did, plus other damages alleged. Um and beyond that, we are going to find out exactly what happened. Uh there will be depositions, there will be subpoenas, and you know, she will be held to account for her actions.

[00:04:05]Um any questions?

[00:04:09]None? Okay.

[00:04:11]No?

[00:04:11]>> guys have any new evidence to present to the case moving Well, we have Where'd you go, Phil? Right here. Okay.

[00:04:20]Um we have received a number of pieces of information post-trial.

[00:04:26]Some of them came just to us. Some of that came just to us. Some of that went to SLED, too. And we don't know what they did with it. You know, once the trial was over, we don't have the power to subpoena. We don't have the power to really investigate it all. Uh all we did was, after the trial was look into the jury misconduct, and we went around, rode around Colleton County for a couple months uh through the swamps, on the dirt roads to find these jurors and ask them questions. But um once a judge is appointed, and I think we got an order on Friday that the chief justice has said, once once the remittitur is issued, which means it's go Right now, the Supreme Court has the case. They got to remit it to a trial court, and he'll do that, we think, in the next couple weeks. So, at that point, then we will have subpoena power. Then we will have uh the ability to investigate.

[00:05:19]Um you know, with the new murder trial, how hard do you think it is for you to find impartial jurors?

[00:05:25]Well, let me say this to you.

[00:05:28]This has gotten extraordinary notoriety, unlike most other cases I've ever tried.

[00:05:33]But in its time, a case I prosecuted 40 years ago, Pee Wee Gaskins, Mark was there. Um Pee Wee Gaskins, uh we had to go through 400 jurors to get 14.

[00:05:44]It's important that we have what we want as individual voir dire. That means we individually question the jurors, which is not usually allowed in anything but a death penalty case. So, we think we can get them. Now, can we get it in Colleton County?

[00:05:59]That's debatable, but um we need to we are just we and I think the state has the same interest should have the same interest we have in finding a 12 or 14 with alternate impartial fair jurors. The state should want an unsullied uninfluenced jury as much as we do.

[00:06:20]And have you talked to Alex recently?

[00:06:22]How does he feel about the overturn?

[00:06:25]Jim Jim talked to him this morning.

[00:06:27]Yeah, yeah, we we've talked to Alex a lot lately uh about many topics including retrial and what that might look like, but to your specific question um frankly when we reported back to him after our argument in the South Carolina Supreme Court, we we told him it went as well as we could have hoped and that we were very optimistic that we would get a favorable result.

[00:06:53]And he appreciated our assessment, but he he he was incredulous. He's his um experience has been since he has been on the back end of civil lawsuits and criminal indictments that that he's lost every significant legal ruling along the way.

[00:07:12]And and that occurred almost daily during the trial.

[00:07:16]And when he got the order he took and after he when I spoke with him, he had already read the opinion in the Supreme Court and he says "I'm reading it. I see it. It says reverse, but I still have a hard time believing it. It's really just sinking in."

[00:07:33]And but he was very grateful, very thankful, and he he thanked all of us uh here that are on this side of the podium um and and and I I mean he got somewhat emotional. He was so and and I don't think he'll mind for me telling you this. I mean I mean he has always said and he told me very early that he deserves to be in jail, prison for the financial crimes that he committed. But he says, "Being in jail for something you didn't do is a hard thing to swallow even though I'm here doing time for what I did do."

[00:08:11]But then he said, "What I was convicted of is so reprehensible. It's something that is so um um heinous.

[00:08:23]And to be wrongfully convicted of that um is almost unbearable," he says. "And so he is very thankful that he is no longer a convicted murderer of his wife and son." And and he he and he he's appreciative to the court for applying the rule of law um regardless of of outcome. They did their job and we're all uh very appreciative of that. The rule of law won out last week. Have you spoken to Buster? How does he feel about what happened last week?

[00:08:57]So yeah, I think thanks for asking that question and and I want to say this.

[00:09:01]Buster Murdaugh is hopefully we can all agree is entitled to his privacy.

[00:09:09]That kid has been through so much.

[00:09:12]And that's all he wants is his privacy.

[00:09:14]And so we're not going to ask answer questions about Buster other than to say and I can say it with 100% confidence that Buster supports his dad Alec.

[00:09:27]With the civil suit, are you hoping to get your hands on this one investigation into the dirty cop allegation prior to you knowing? Sure. Now, we were given some information through the discovery during the motion for new trial stage.

[00:09:42]Have they is that all they've done? We don't know but if that is all they've done that really wasn't much of an investigation and we really don't think they've done much of an investigation but we certainly plan to let me let me say this.

[00:10:02]There's also was a freedom of information that served on sweat to get additional information. We've seen that too.

[00:10:10]Does it make sense to have the agency who has an inherent conflict? They want the conviction sustained investigating whether it was valid or not. I mean it just seems ridiculous and again I think the attorney general's fault is not asking for some independent. He could have gotten a sheriff's department. We unlocked folks or the the sheriff up in Spartanburg Spartanburg Greenville have a very sophisticated sheriff's department. Charleston also use them but sweat is invested in affirming the conviction. They don't want to find any fault.

[00:10:47]I mean that's just human nature. So we think there's going to be plenty of things that weren't looked into and we want to look into those and the question is and Jim and and Phil and I have been talking about this. Did she do it alone?

[00:11:00]Did she have somebody help her with this? And if if you were sitting in the judges chambers like we were when she brought in information on the jury you would call the egg lady. We call Myra Crosby.

[00:11:16]Um And listen to what she had to say. One time it was totally made up about some Facebook page. The second time inexplicably inexplicably a a a anonymous uh email came to the judge.

[00:11:37]We weren't told about it. Was investigated by the Attorney General's office and SLED without us being involved.

[00:11:43]No guardrails on that, but I mean and call us naive cuz we were. We didn't press that and I I I I look back on it. We should have with 20/20 hindsight we maybe should have taken a little more aggressive but we still couldn't appeal that onion back then.

[00:12:02]But we will now. I got a question about the retrial.

[00:12:06]Some have suggested that it may have been a mistake to put Alex on the stand.

[00:12:10]Any thoughts to whether you're going to put him on the stand in the retrial? Two things. One, the client makes that decision. Two, that'll be a game day call.

[00:12:19]So you'll know when we know.

[00:12:22]When will the any retrial take place?

[00:12:25]I I would suspect within a year of now, but not by the end of the year. No, no, no. And why is that? Why can't you go right to trial?

[00:12:32]>> Well, I'll give you a couple simple examples. One we assume the same witnesses will testify in the retrial as the trial.

[00:12:40]We have a I don't know, 8,000-page transcript.

[00:12:43]We've got to break out each witness.

[00:12:45]We've got to read it, whoever's going to handle that person outline it and they can be used to impeach them.

[00:12:52]So this is like a civil case where you've taken a deposition.

[00:12:57]Um unlike any other criminal case you'll ever defend or prosecute. So that's that takes time. We've got to go back and see if they've given us all the discovery.

[00:13:07]There's some inference that we didn't get everything from from the prosecution. We go back and scrub that real hard. We've got to hire experts.

[00:13:14]They've got to look at all the information, new experts, and then give us an opinion.

[00:13:21]Do you have enough money to hire new experts?

[00:13:25]Jim, why don't you explain financially how this >> They've got a much better explanation for this than than I do. Go ahead. I mean, there is no new money, no found money, and and I've said previously, you know, we got paid to do a job when you do criminal defense work.

[00:13:42]I mean, one way you do, you you charge by the job. Sometimes you come out ahead, and sometimes you come out behind, but you know, right now, we're in the hole, but we we got paid to do a job, and we're going to see it all the way through.

[00:13:56]>> You're saying the job isn't finished yet. Job is not finished yet, and we we're not we're not walking away from it. So, we're we're going to see it through.

[00:14:04]Um the um I mean, that's where we are.

[00:14:09]Is there any chance a retrial could happen in Richland County instead of Colleton?

[00:14:14]You know, one of the things that we're looking at is a motion to transfer venue to a different county. Um It would have to be if if that takes place and it's transferred, it'd have to be in a county that has a very similar demographics as Colleton County. So, that would probably exclude Richland County, Charleston County, which I know all of y'all want to go to Charleston. Um But, it is it is Charleston is contiguous to Colleton, and one of the factors to be considered.

[00:14:44]Just saying.

[00:14:45]Charleston.

[00:14:47]And so, but you know, it's not our pick, but that'll be looked at very closely, for sure. Jim, can we talk about new evidence here? Last week, you mentioned DNA evidence under Maggie's fingernails, essentially Right.

[00:15:00]>> connected to a male. Can we go into that a little bit more and how that will play a factor in this retrial?

[00:15:05]Well, we pointed it out during the last trial that that they did find a male unknown male DNA who's not related to any Murdaugh or or any of Maggie's family under her fingernail.

[00:15:20]That was you know, not really followed up on. We asked that they follow up on that before the last trial. We don't have possession of that DNA, so we can't do anything with it. We can perhaps with a new case back to square one, go and seek an order from the court to compel them to send it off to CODIS. CODIS is the national uh DNA database.

[00:15:44]So, I mean if we were in charge and we had the facilities, the the forensic lab, the evidence lab, and we had search warrant abilities, we would we would have done things a lot differently um and more timely.

[00:16:00]A lot of that opportunity is lost, and so that's unfortunate.

[00:16:04]What are the odds of getting that sent to CODIS do you think this time around?

[00:16:09]Well, it it will be Judge Chief Justice Kittredge issued an order last week saying he's going to appoint a new judge once the remittitur goes down. That'll be one of the things that that we will present to a new judge asking for that relief.

[00:16:25]Whether he or she will do it remains to be seen. Jimmy, you said those lawsuits about holding Becky Hill accountable and also investigating what you say the state didn't do enough job of investigating her.

[00:16:37]What do you hope that investigation could yield?

[00:16:41]The truth. Yeah. How about that? Yeah, just you know, we we don't have a result in mind, but we have a lot of questions that we would like answered. Um you know, was she a lone wolf?

[00:16:53]Was she doing it just for the you know, siren of celebrity, which she definitely was?

[00:17:00]And and then and then I'll I'll tell you this, removal of the egg lady juror is very suspicious, and that really wasn't a part of the case. Uh we do make it a part of our complaint. We point out all of the inconsistencies of what she said reporting to Judge Newman that the egg lady, Miss Crosby's ex-husband, had posted something on Facebook, which we now know was a bald-faced lie, or someone lied to her. I mean, it makes no sense. And if you have questions, and I would encourage all of you to follow up with Joe McCullough, who represents Myra Crosby, who can who who is investigating this as um strenuously as we intend to do so. And he's been working on it for quite some time. I mean, the way she was targeted, um it just is very curious, and we hope to get to the bottom of that.

[00:17:59]Is there any possibility of taking a plea deal for what happened?

[00:18:04]Say again. Is there any possibility of taking a plea deal for what happened?

[00:18:07]No. No. No plea deal. No never will plea deal.

[00:18:12]Off the table. We want a trial. They can dismiss it. Yeah, they can dismiss these charges.

[00:18:18]You know, he's um but he'll never enter to a plea which required some admission that he did something he didn't do. And that's murdering his wife and son. I mean, that's not going to happen. Who do you think did kill Maggie and Paul?

[00:18:36]We wish we knew. We think we could we could have found out if we were had the tools available. I mean, that opportunity was lost when they failed to follow the tire tracks in the grass leading away from the murders of Maggie and Paul.

[00:18:50]Um that opportunity was lost when they failed to um maintain the integrity of the GPS data on Maggie's phone. Instead, it was at SLED downloading uh GPS coordinates at SLED that that ultimately overrode her ac- where her phone was and when it was on the night of the murders. And when they finally get in the Maggie's phone and able to access the GPS data, you know where it said that phone had been last?

[00:19:19]Broad River Road, SLED allowed.

[00:19:22]I mean, that is outrageous that that was allowed to happen so.

[00:19:27]You know, John, we've gotten a lot of information. People are out there working on behalf of Alec for free, kind of like we are, and and they've unearthed some really interesting stuff, and they've turned a significant amount over that to SLED.

[00:19:41]We'll be curious to see if SLED has done anything with it or will do anything with it.

[00:19:46]If any of that investigation now goes back to the house and to the property, Um, there's nothing that I'm aware of um that's of evidentiary value on the property. Let me just jump in and say that the actual scene the actual scene has been you know, destroyed, right?

[00:20:06]It's been torn down, the property's been sold, the kennels, all of that are gone.

[00:20:10]All right, so that's no longer in existence.

[00:20:13]But, our experts So, in preparing for the first trial, did all kinds of forensic tests on the the crime scene.

[00:20:24]Um, you know, a number of and we put in evidence that if somebody could be in the house and shots fired down at the dog kennel, he'd never hear them.

[00:20:35]I mean, we proved that without any contradiction whatsoever. So, the story that he was up at the house and he was oh, he should he had have heard the shotgun and the AR, not. We had an expert run test. Can't do that anymore. So, the uncontradicted evidence is going to be if he was in the house, he wouldn't have heard the shots.

[00:20:53]So, I mean, it's those kinds of things, and we've got measurements. I mean, very very very specific measurements on where everything was, which by the way, SLED did not do.

[00:21:03]You know, the night of the of the murders, as they processed and not be SLED, maybe local law enforcement.

[00:21:10]They didn't dust for fingerprints in the feed Not dust, they don't do that anymore, but they did not process the feed room for fingerprints. They didn't look for DNA. Was it there a hair? Let's pick it up and get it tested. There was a bloody footprint right next to Paul's body. It was a Colleton County Sheriff's Deputy's foot.

[00:21:29]I mean, I'm not a big CIS CSI fan, but this looks to me like they violated every basic rule. And we had a witness testify that. So, um they got a lot of explaining to do. What do you think the odds are of Alex getting an acquittal in the retrial?

[00:21:46]You, John Monk, are playing those internet betting sites too much. I have no idea what his chances are.

[00:21:52]>> playing them at all. Well, you ought to try.

[00:21:55]What do you think the odds are?

[00:21:56]>> We We have no idea. I mean, we don't predict football, basketball, or trials.

[00:22:03]What Just following up on what Dick said about the failures.

[00:22:08]Um during the trial, you'll remember SLED explained how they do murder investigations. And they do, you know, they draw an imaginary circle, and then the imaginary circle that they drew here, Alec was in the middle of it.

[00:22:24]And he was in the middle of it from the night of the murders. And they knew that Alec left Moselle and went to his mother's house at Almeda.

[00:22:34]And then came back to the to Moselle and found his wife and son murdered brutally.

[00:22:42]And do you think for 1 minute that they should have gone to Moselle I'm Excuse me, Almeda to see if there's anything of evidence evidentiary value?

[00:22:54]Did he Were there murder weapons at Almeda, which they want to intimate, you know, during the trial? Oh, he parked over here, so he must have got rid of the guns over there. I mean, they had the opportunity to exclude Alec from that circle, but they didn't do it because they just failed so miserably in what they were what their jobs were. Let me say one other thing that brings to mind is most of y'all know I was a prosecutor for 12 years, and this is 40 years ago.

[00:23:26]If a body was found and they wanted to determine time of death, the coroner or medical examiner would take an anal thermometer and get a body core body temperature. Then take a thermometer and get the ambient temperature. And in this case, alleged an hour and a half prior they'd been killed, sort of. The The coroner showed up and he did something just amazed me.

[00:23:51]He took his hand and he stuck it under Paul's armpit.

[00:23:55]And then that same hand took it under Maggie's stuck it under Maggie's armpit, and he could calculate the time of death based on that. I mean, that's what we're dealing with here, folks.

[00:24:04]Stuck his hand under the armpit? Really?

[00:24:08]And yet, then they said, "Oh, well, we know but when when Maggie stopped using her phone and Paul stopped using his phone, that's the time of death."

[00:24:16]They ignore the fact that cell phone service down there was spotty at best.

[00:24:20]Number of people testified there was no cell phone service. So, simply because they weren't using their phone doesn't mean they were dead.

[00:24:26]I mean, this this thing has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

[00:24:30]In your opinion, what holds more weight?

[00:24:34]I think 2 and 1/2 weeks of that of widows and orphans and mentally disabled kids testifying not that he stole their money, but how just maliciously he stole the money, how he lied to them. Um he I mean, when they finish with that, they're not going to believe forensic evidence, they're not going to believe him, they're not going to believe anything because he was so vilified.

[00:24:56]>> And when he testified that the jury was programmed not to believe him by the clerk of court. And so, you know, no matter what he said, I mean, he got on the stand to answer, you know, questions about where he was and what he did that night. And we know now that as the Supreme Court accurately described, she sought to undermine his credibility before he even testified. Understand, she's the number second highest ranked court official in the trial. And she has closest contact with the jury. Develops close relationships with them over 6 weeks.

[00:25:34]And you know, she is the one that they see more.

[00:25:40]You know, she's the elected official.

[00:25:42]She summoned them all in. Her name's on the summons. Her name's on the check that they get, the payment every week for serving on the jury. I mean, and this person is back there in the jury room telling them, in so many words, don't believe Alec when he testifies. Don't believe the defense. Don't let them confuse you.

[00:26:00]All of that happened at the end of the trial right before we put up our case.

[00:26:04]So, that is one reason he got convicted, I promise you.

[00:26:08]You mentioned new evidence. If you already addressed this at public, but you mentioned new evidence that you're going to bring out.

[00:26:14]You mentioned DNA found on the Maggie's fingernails as well. Is there other new evidence? Well, let me say this. If there is, we tell you, you're going to I know you're not doing this intentionally, but you'll be telling them.

[00:26:29]So, I don't think we tell you. How about that?

[00:26:31]Fair enough.

[00:26:34]Maybe I Maybe not unintentionally, but never mind.

[00:26:37]Anything else? Do Do you think that Becky's done this with other trials before down in Colleton County? How many How many do you think?

[00:26:44]>> Well, you don't You don't know, do you?

[00:26:46]Um That's That's why this lawsuit is so important because it's It's to allow us to peel the onion on her and what she's done on this case with the other people involved. Was she a lone wolf? Um has she done it on other cases? But certainly, um it was a despicable act and the and the Supreme Court found it to be such.

[00:27:06]Anything else?

[00:27:08]Thank you very much for coming today.

[00:29:54]>> Mhm.