South Carolina Mother and Son Murdered

[TN-peach]

The South Carolina Supreme Court has granted the requested to hold Alex's appeal of his conviction in abeyance.  Now, the issue of jury tampering is returned to the circuit court.  We will have to see what happens from here.  I really think there will have to be a hearing.  The jurors will have to be under oath about what they saw and heard.  The first question though will be - Is Judge Newman a witness though? Will they have to get a different judge to hear the motions?

[marmalade]

I thought Judge Newman retired? At any rate, I think he's on the witness list. 

[TN-peach]

11 hours ago, marmalade said:

I thought Judge Newman retired? At any rate, I think he's on the witness list. 

He hasn’t retired yet. The defense wants to call him as a witness but as of right now he is the judge of record.

[TN-peach]

Hoo-boy has Becky Hill making the news lately.  FITS news is reporting two ethics violations that are now being referred to SLED and the State grand jury. 

I think at this point if the Murdaugh jury issue makes it to hearing that Becky Hill won't testify because she will have to plead the 5th because her credibility will be slim to none. 

[TN-peach]

And now her co-author of their self-published book is pulling the publication of the book because Becky plagiarized parts of the Forward.  This was revealed in a FOIA email dump around Christmas.  Along with other tidbits which have seemed to surprised Mandy Matney and her podcast group.  Apparently one of the emails, Ms. Becky didn't deny that Mandy and Liz were booted from the courtroom for revealing juror identifying information.  Now, Mandy and Liz are upset that Ms. Becky plagerized and did not stop the rumor that they were booted from the courtroom.  Y'all the personalities in this are CRAZY!

(It looks like what happened from my best guess, Judge Newman received an email with Liz's tweet and he said "this violates the court order." Rather than be booted or removed from the courtroom, they decided not to return.  Whether they were told not to return, I don't know.  But they seem to be very firm that they were not banned from the courtroom so I think that maybe it was about to be ban and it didn't happen because they said "we won't come back" or something like that.)

As for the Murdaugh trial, a preliminary motions hearing is set for January 15 in Columbia and the hearing is set to begin on January 29.  As of right now, the media on Twitter are assuming that the hearings will be televised just like the other hearings.    

[clueliss]

Guess who was denied a new trial?

[TN-peach]

Yep.  My honest opinion is that after several years of appeals, he will get a new trial.  Either the South Carolina Supreme Court will adopt the federal standard court in Remmer (which basically establishes a presumption of prejudice from unauthorized contact with jurors and it is the state's burden to prove that it is harmless) or Murdaugh will appeal to federal court and it will be granted.  Justice Toal seemed to concede at the bench that she must follow SC law but higher courts than her can consider the other standard.  I have no idea how long it takes for the SC appellate process to work but I wouldn't be surpised if about 5 years he has a new trial granted because of Becky shenanigans. 

This case will never end on appeals because they will also appeal all the financial evidence that came into evidence.  IMO, some was ok but too much was admitted. This issue will also be appealed (currently stayed) and South Carolina criminal defense attorneys will be watching this appeal closely (well both actually because they will set new SC case law) because all of that financial evidence set a bad precedent for future criminal trials especially if it is held up on appeal. 

IMO, the best politically savvy judicial decision would be to adopt the federal standard which is basically "no court officials can talk to the jurors about anything other than 'what is for lunch and is it too cold/hot, do you need to go the bathroom, are you sick.'"  This way the SC Supreme Court does not even have to touch the financial crimes and determine how much is too much. 

 

BUT MY GOD BECKY.... she was awful on the stand.  Just awful.  She was not credible AT ALL. 

 

[ifosterkittens]

@TN-peachthanks for your insight. You always express yourself clearly and in a way that is easy for me to understand. I enjoy seeing the legal process play out, but don't understand much of it. 

I didn't watch the live coverage, but I wanted to share this video by Kurt aka Uncivil Law a lawyer on YouTube who does legal commentary. I thought Kurt's position was interesting and he made it easy to understand, and frankly his video was shorter than others. I don't know that @TN-peachyou'd find it interesting since you understand so much of this, but for me it was helpful. If you watch it and have any thoughts (good or bad) I'd love to hear them! 

I would love to know Dick's payment agreement. Dick isn't working for free. Has a family member of Alex's agreed to cover Dick's costs? I could see Jim giving Alex a discount and doing a lot pro bono because of their personal friendship, but I don't see Dick taking that approach. Maybe I'm wrong and Dick would stay on at a reduced rate thinking he could see this going to the federal supreme court, and he wants to be a part of it? 

[TN-peach]

I like Kurt.  I watch some of Lawtube.  There are some people I can watch and others I just can't.  I like Kurt, Emily D Baker, Law and Lumber, Natalie the Lawyer Chick, the Lawyer You Know, Runckle of the Bailey, Black Belt Barrister (for UK law)*.  I don't always agree with their takes but I don't find them super obnoxious or annoying.  One thing a good lawyer should be able to do is to see both sides of the argument and argue both sides.  Lawyers who can't (say Nancy Grace) I can't watch. 

*disclaimer - not a complete or full list and is subject to change at any time 😉

 

As far as how Alex is paying Poot and Jim.  Honestly, I don't think they are really getting paid any more.  If they are, it is pennies.  Maybe they are but Alex can't access those funds from prison so it would have to be Buster or the middle brother (I'm blanking on his name).  I don't think Randy would do it because those funds are probably hidden and illegal and Randy has already had to pay out of pocket for Alex's financial crimes from the law firm.  And in that one interview Randy gave post murder trial, Randy seemed very torn about Alex's guilt. 

[TN-peach]

Well, this week Becky Hill resigned "so she could spend more time with her grandchildren."  She will not run reelection this year.  Color me shocked.  Her resignation has nothing to do with any investigations by the AG office or nothing 😉. She just wants to spend time with her grandkids.

[clueliss]

Guess who failed a lie detector test that was apparently tied to a plea agreement?