Murdaugh Murders Podcast - Community Caretaker Carmen? Judge Mullen Takes The Stand in ODC Hearing (168pt1)

Episode Date: October 8, 2026

Nearly four years after first reporting that South Carolina Circuit Court Judge Carmen Mullen was caught on video trying to find probable cause to arrest a mentally ill man in her gated neighborhood, Investigative journalists Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell are finally seeing justice start to take shape. But will there be consequences?  On Sept. 29, 2026, Judge Mullen appeared before the Commission on Judicial Conduct to answer for her actions on Dec. 7, 2017, on Hilton Head Island, when she inserted herself into a landlord-tenant dispute with sheriff’s deputies at the scene.  Judge Mullen says she was duty-bound to protect the man and get him medical help. Does the evidence show that? Not at all — in Mandy's and Liz's opinions, anyway. However, good ole’ legacy media, as always, seems to have her back.  On Part One, we share hearing testimony — including from the deputy on the scene that night — and go back to the receipts, comparing Judge Mullen's sworn story against what she actually said and did while suggesting ways to get the man charged and jailed — a man deputies said had committed no crime. Let's Dive In… 🥽 🦈 Share the LUNASHARK® Premium Community now on Patreon - Together we go further ☀️ 🩷🩷By Popular Demand, You Can “Help Journalist Mandy Matney Fight $176,500 Contempt Order” GoFundMe 🩷🩷 Lawyers & judges: email your insights or offer your expertise to [e-mail] Episode References “The law of the heart vs the law: SC Judge defends herself at discipline hearing” - The State, Oct 1, 2026 📰 “SC Circuit Judge Carmen Mullen to face rare disciplinary hearing for alleged abuse of power in 2017” - The Post and Courier, Sept 29, 2026 📰 Premium Links REPLAY: Judge Carmen Mullen Faces Formal Charges From SC ODC, 9-29-2026 on Patreon 🎞️ Stay Tuned, Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight...☀️ Learn more about ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LUNASHARK Premium Membership on Patreon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠lunashark.supercast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to get bonus episodes like our Premium Dives, Wherever It Leads..., Girl Talk, and Soundbites that help you Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight. Plus BTS content from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Murdaugh: Death in the Family⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ AND Mandy's book Blood On Their Hands. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Support Our Show, Sponsors and Mission: https://lunasharkmedia.com/support/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Quince⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Hungry Root⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Bombas⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://amzn.to/4cJ0eVn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ *** ALERT: If you ever notice audio errors in the pod, email ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[e-mail]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and we'll send fun merch to the first listener that finds something that needs to be adjusted! *** For current & accurate updates: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠lunashark.supercast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/mandy_matney⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   |   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/elizfarrell⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠bsky.app/profile/mandy-matney.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠bsky.app/profile/elizfarrell.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TrueSunlight.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tiktok.com/@lunasharkmedia⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You know me, I dig until I find the truth, and it turns out that same instinct that drives my investigative journalism, it makes for a different but pretty amazing new kind of travel show. Wherever it leads is Luna Shark's brand new podcast, and it's nothing like the travel content that you've heard before. We go deeper, we talk to locals, reporters, and people who actually live where you want to visit, not just the ones who want your tourist dollars. We cover the food and landmarks, sure, but we also ask the harder questions. What is the real history here?

The often sad and traumatic history. What new challenge is this place facing? And how can you show up as a visitor who actually makes things better? My co-host, David Moses and I, along with a team of journalists, are hitting destinations around the world to expose the truth, give voice to victims throughout history, and get the story straight. with new destinations and episodes every other week. Wherever It Leeds from Luna Shark. Find it wherever you listen to your podcast

or visit wherever it leads, pod.com. Hey y'all, it's Mandy. You know, we spend a lot of time on this show talking about hard things. So today, I want to point you towards something that genuinely makes me smile. It's called Amy Poller's Smart Girls. Yeah, that Amy Poehler.

She co-founded it with producer Meredith Walker, and the whole idea is helping young people, especially girls, grow into their authentic, weird, wonderful selves. Their motto is changed the world by being yourself. And honestly, I love that. Smart Girls celebrates curiosity over gossip, imagination overfitting in, and they do it with humor first. It's the internet the way it should feel. Funny, kind, and encouraging girls to speak up and get involved in their communities. I really believe in this mission.

If you've got a young person in your life or you just need a little sunshine today, go check them out at amesmartgirls.com. I don't know if Judge Carmen Mullen will ever be held accountable for the 2017 Ernie incident. But for the first time in her career, Mullen had to face the music at a disciplinary hearing, where ODC attorneys exposed her contradicting story of what happened that night in our Hilton Head Island neighbor. That is a big deal. My name is Mandy Matney. This is True Sunlight. A podcast exposing crime and corruption, previously known as the Murdoch Murders podcast.

True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production written with journalist Liz Ferrell. Two weeks ago, we told y'all the big news that Judge Carmen Mullen was finally formally charged by the ODC for alleged misconduct during the two years. 2017 earning the attorney incident. Liz Farrell was the first journalist to break that story on the 2017 incident in 2022, nearly five years after it happened on the Murdoch Murders podcast. It all came to light after Liz, Eric, and I had pieced together what we believed Molin did wrong after she approved the infamous Satterfield settlement, which paved the way for Ehrlich Murdoch to steal millions of from Gloria Satterfield's family.

We took a deep dive into our background. In our opinion, we found a pattern of troubling decisions that she made in her two-decade career as a judge, where it appeared to us like she used her position of power as a judge to help the good old boys of South Carolina, like in the Quinn case, or like that time that she sentenced a privileged Hilton Head man to college for a fatal DUI.

But the fact of the fact that she was, of the Satterfield case and the others were not as clear cut in violation of the canons as they needed to be for the ODC to take action. There was no audio recording on how exactly the Satterfield Settlement with no caption was approved by Judge Carmen Mullen. The Satterfield settlement gave Mullen a lot of wiggle room, unfortunately, to claim that she never violated any of the judicial canons. The Ernie the Attorney incident, however, was different. Judge Mullen was caught on police videos suggesting that Ernie, who was experiencing a mental health crisis, should be charged for a crime that he didn't commit. Mullen's own words on recordings reveal, in our opinions, a judge who was inserting her power into a situation she had no business being a part of, a situation that she should have stayed far away from.

Given Mullen's history of approving sketchy settlements from Elyke Murdoch, who she went to law school with and she admitted to having a long-standing relationship with his family, like I said, we've seen what we believe is a concerning pattern with Mullen. She appears to misuse her position of power as a judge to help certain people aligned with her people, aka the Goodell Boys. The Ernie the Attorney incident was not an anomaly. So, this hearing was a long time coming for us. The facts seemed plain and simple, which the ODC pointed out,

and yet, old John Monk of the state newspaper found a way to strip the hearing of actual meaning and fully endorsed Judge Mullen's defense, which literally has nothing to support it except her word. David, will you read John Monk's headline for this event? The law of the heart versus the law. S.C. Judge defends herself at discipline hearing. Law of the heart. What is that? Funny how the law, when it came to my deposition, never had any gray area at all for old John Monk,

whose son was just charged this summer with child sexual abuse material. And apparently McClatchie is still cool with him writing about the law. By the way, the meta headline that comes up in Google for that same Carmen article is, quote, Judge Mullen testifies she did nothing wrong. In comparison, his headline for covering my contempt hearing? You know, the one for an independent journalist facing heat from a legal system that I exposed because I advocated for my own safety? Well, that headline said SC Murdoch podcaster, Mani Matney, colon, reckless with facts. Well, John, I also testified that I did nothing wrong.

But old junk, sorry, John Monk, had to make up that I was reckless with facts, which nobody ever said, including me. And he did this so he could purposely damage my online reputation. And if you're a lawyer interested in suing John Monk in the state newspaper in McClatchy, please reach out to us or suggest someone who might be good for it. Okay, sorry, that was a rant. Go on with junk. Sorry, John Monk's lead. South Carolina State Judge Carmen Mullen told a judicial discipline panel on Tuesday

that she was compelled to intervene in a rapidly evolving neighborhood situation to help a mentally troubled man. Because it was a matter of potential life and death, she said she did not violate the ethical rules requiring judges to be independent in testimony to the Commission on Judicial Conduct. Quote, he clearly was having a psychotic incident. We needed to take care of him and protect him, end quote. Mullen testified, referring to a 57-year-old man who was screaming and threatening people in a normally to-date Hilton Head neighborhood on the chilly, rainy night of December 7, 2017.

Her greatest concern was making sure the man quickly got to a proper place, such as a hospital, where he could be evaluated and treated. testified Mullen, 58, who has been on the bench 19 years. Wait, am I having a psychotic incident? Because that is not at all what the tape said or what happened. This is why the good old boys always double down when it comes to time for consequences. They have no incentive to actually fear the repercussions because they know dang well that mainstream media stalwarts, and I believe that's what the establishment calls John Monk, will protect them by totally rewriting the truth in their favor.

It is beyond confusing, because we both now watch this hearing multiple times, and even after just one time, it was clear that nowhere on the recording is Carmen Mullen ever heard trying to get medical help for Ernie, despite her insistence otherwise. Nowhere, but stick a pen in that. She literally says you gotta get rid of him on the recording.

And this was played during the hearing that John Monk was at, right there, front and center. And the most annoying part of all of this were always the bad guys for pointing this out. For acknowledging that South Carolina's golden boy reporter is a man in his 70s who has selective hearing and horse blinders on when it comes to the corruption that has happened right in front of him for decades. And he's a reporter who painfully inserts his old man, old school bias into his reporting without labeling it as opinion. If you're a judge with good old boy connections facing a disciplinary hearing for some very serious charges stemming from audio recordings, John Monk will make up excuses for you and defend your position all day long. It's not the real law. It's the law of the heart.

John Monk, all you've done from what we have seen, your entire career is protect institutions and practices that give the powerful, a more gentle system of justice than the rest of us. And we're in the year 2006, so, sir, sit down. That said, I want y'all to keep old junk's version of this hearing in mind as we share with you the facts that are right there on the table for him. solid facts that he fully ignored in favor of presenting Judge Mullen's side as if it were irrefutable. Let's start with a little reminder of what this was all about. In October 2022, we reported on an incident that occurred on Hilton Head Island in December 2017,

involving Judge Mullen and a man that goes by the nickname Ernie, the attorney. Ernie was renting a room from a homeowner in Judge Mullen's high-end, Oceanfront, gated community and was having what seemed like a manic episode. Reagan, the homeowner, had called her neighborhood's private security for help, and they called the Beaufort County Sheriff's Office for assistance. When deputies arrived at the scene, they found Ernie, quote, acting weird, but not in any suicidal distress. He wasn't threatening violence to anyone. According to police reports, he was just talking nonsense. Understandably, Reagan wanted him out of the house, but law enforcement had no grounds to arrest Ernie because he had a formal rental agreement with her,

meaning he was home. That same day, though, Reagan had gone to the magistrate's office twice, according to police reports, to see what could be done about evicting Ernie and getting a restraining order. Judge Mullen drove past Reagan's house on the way to her own, saw that law enforcement was there, drove to her home a short distance away, and she dropped off her 10-year-old daughter, grabbed her husband, George Mullen, a well-known wealthy attorney who made his fortune representing developers and went back to the scene. Ernie used to work for George back in the 1990s when Ernie's mental health became such an issue that it prevented him from working as an attorney. Sources have told us over the years that Ernie is known as being super smart and having a very

witty sense of humor. At some point, decades ago, Ernie's South Carolina law license was suspended for medical reasons. Ernie was also renting a room from Reagan because her boss, Robert Moose Rini, a friend of Carmen and George Mullen, had asked her to, according to testimony and police records. That's an important fact in our opinions because it points to this being more than just a case of Judge Mullen, as she claims, feeling duty-bound. Judicial canons be damned to help a mentally ill man in danger of freezing to death in the infamous harsh Hilton Head Island South Carolina winters. To sum it up, Judge Mullen, according to the audio of the deputy's dashboard cameras, wanted deputies to arrest Ernie.

When they told her they didn't have probable cause, again, according to the audio, she tried to help them find probable cause, even noting that she can sign warrants. As part of this, she offered a suggestion. that would involve someone driving Ernie to a place where she knew he was legally trespassed from being, and then she would call deputies to come pick him up. After he was arrested, she would then call the magistrate to tell the magistrate to deny him bond, and as she put it, deal with him on Monday. This didn't happen, though, because deputies determined doing so would be entrapment, and they wanted no part of it. So while the state and the Post and Courier newspapers characterized this hearing as a case of a judge confronted with a choice between having a heart and following the rules, we see that differently.

Is that because we're among the so-called political enemies of Judge Mullen or critics of how she overlooked glaring red flags in the Satterfield settlement because of her, by her own admission, recusible relationship with Ehrlich Murdoch? No, it's because of the evidence. Judge Mullins' hearing was held on September 29th in an appellate courtroom in Columbia, South Carolina, and this is where I can only laugh. For the first time in pretty much everyone's memory, the commission on judicial conduct was holding a disciplinary hearing for a sitting circuit court judge. South Carolina is famous for not holding its judges accountable, and to the extent they do, it's behind closed doors.

So it's a pretty serious deal, right? David, will you read John Monk's paragraph about where this rare public hearing was held? Mullen sworn testimony. She had to raise her hand and take an oath to tell the truth was only one highlight in a hearing lasting more than four hours in the South Carolina Court of Appeals courtroom with its Italian black marble panels streaked with white and rounded podiums

where the six members of the discipline panel sat. See, this bothers me, and I'll tell you why. 50 years from now, if South Carolina and journalism still exist, I feel really bad for the reporters and researchers who are looking for context and information about how the state held its judges accountable back in the day. We run into this issue all the time in our research. We might have the transcript of the shocking things that happened in courtrooms or the dramatic filings from prosecutors in the defense, but then the news reports from back in the day are

benign representations of what actually seemed to happen. And in those benign representations, we get a description of a courtroom that means nothing. Oh, that courtroom had black Italian marble walls with white, streaks and white podiums. Is that supposed to be irony? Judge Mullen getting called to the ornate halls, I guess, of South Carolina's rare judicial reckoning? Was this supposed to put the public there? Because we are so past room descriptions, John? Please use your word counts to tell us whether Judge Mullins' law of the heart story was contradicted by testimony and evidence presented that day. far more valuable for the public to know that than room decor.

Anyway, the panel was made up of six people who will ultimately determine whether Judge Mullen violated the judicial canons and, if so, recommend the degree to which she gets reprimanded. The panel was led by Judge William Keesley and included a family court judge, attorneys, and publicly appointed members of the commission. There was a smattering of media in the room, including a cameraman for Luna Shark. Also, in the audience, our friend and former co-host of Cup of Justice, Eric Bland, who you will hear from in part two of this episode. As you know, Eric submitted one of the three complaints the ODC received about this incident. He represented the Satterfield family, and it's because of him and his partner Ronnie Richter that the extent of Ellick's financial crimes are known today. As it stands, Judge Mullen has recused herself from all court matters involving Eric and Ronnie and their firm,

because in exposing Ehrlich, they also exposed her role in signing off on the Satterfield family settlement, despite glaring red flags that should have prompted a judge, her, to ask Elic and Corey questions, in a lot of people's opinions anyway. Apparently, not in the opinion of the CJC, though, because they dismiss complaints regarding Judge Moll. in that case. We'll be right back after a quick commercial break. You know me, I dig until I find the truth, and it turns out that same instinct that drives my investigative journalism, it makes for a different but pretty amazing new kind

of travel show. Wherever it leads is Luna Sharks brand new podcast, and it's nothing like the travel content that you've heard before. We go deeper, we talk to locals, reporters, and people who actually live. live where you want to visit, not just the ones who want your tourist dollars. We cover the food and landmarks, sure, but we also ask the harder questions. What is the real history here? The often sad and traumatic history.

What new challenge is this place facing? And how can you show up as a visitor who actually makes things better? My co-host David Moses and I, along with a team of journalists, are hitting destinations around the world to expose the truth, give voice to victims throughout history. and get the story straight, with new destinations and episodes every other week. Wherever It Leeds from Luna Shark. Find it wherever you listen to your podcast or visit wherever it leads, pod.com. Hey y'all, it's Mandy.

You know, we spend a lot of time on this show talking about hard things. So today, I want to point you towards something that genuinely makes me smile. It's called Amy Poehler's Smart Girls. Yeah, that Amy Poehler. She co-founded it with producer Meredith Walker, and the whole idea is helping young people, especially girls, grow into their authentic, weird, wonderful selves. Their motto is change the world by being yourself. And honestly, I love that. Smart Girls celebrates curiosity over gossip, imagination overfitting in, and they do it with humor first.

It's the internet, the way it should feel. Funny, kind, and encouraging girls to speak up and get involved in their communities. really believe in this mission. If you've got a young person in your life, or you just need a little sunshine today, go check them out at amesmartgirls.com. If you listen to episode 166 of True Sunlight two weeks ago, then you pretty much know what the Office of Disciplinary Counsel's arguments to the panel were, with a few differences. The big one is that the ODC accepted Judge Mullen's explanation as to what she was trying to achieve by talking to deputies at the scene. Their position can be summed up with one word, and that's nevertheless.

She wanted to help Ernie, but nevertheless violated the canons in doing so. Our position is obviously that Judge Mullen was intervening on behalf of a friend, and that friend was not necessarily Ernie. It was Moose Reney, a well-known realtor on Hilton Head Island, and instead of letting Moose, deal with Moose's problem, since he's the one who arranged for Ernie's accommodations per police records, Judge Mullen decided to use her positional power to get Ernie out of Moose's employee's hair. Of course, that's not how Judge Mullen's attorney, Dawes Cook, described the judge's motives that evening in 2017. Your Honor, we respectfully submit that the charges in this case

are based upon a hyper-literal reading of the canon, which says that, that a judge will not lend the prestige of judicial office to aid the private interests of him or herself or another person. And when you read the interview of, if you had read the interview of Judge Mullen with the Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, he was very straightforward. And he said, said, you were using your office as a judge

to help and help. Don't you agree that that violates the letter of the law? We respectfully disagree. Hang on one second there. Did he just say that Mullen's defense is that the ODC is taking the canons and interpreting them to literally? A hyper-literal reading of the canon? What are laws if we don't read them for their literal meaning? What exactly are.

are we doing here? The standard is and should be higher when it comes to judicial conduct. There should be less wiggle room there. It should be hyper-literal. Okay, so this is absolutely wild. Let's listen to the rest of his opening statement. The canons also say that a judge is a member of the community, and just because you're a judge doesn't mean that you don't have responsibilities to the community. She was faced with what she was. believed was truly a life or death crisis for this person whom she knew indirectly and her husband had known for years. He was making a scene.

He had gotten into a gated community where the homeowner didn't think he belonged. She made it very clear. She said if he gets into my house, I'm going to shoot him. Judge Mullen learned that he had been going around knocking on other. doors in a gated community, which is another way of getting shot. It was 37 degrees out that night, and he announced his attentions to sleep in his fort in the backyard of the homeowner's home. Judge Mullen wasn't analyzing the canons of judicial conduct. She was looking for a way to save this man's life. Oh, wait. So this was a life or death situation? How come Judge Mullen,

literally, never once said that to the deputies that evening, according to the recordings. How come we never heard her say that she was worried that Reagan was going to shoot Ernie? How come, in the audio from that night, Judge Mullen said that Ernie threatened Reagan, not the other way around? And from someone who lived on Hilton Head for 10 years, girl, please. Quit being dramatic about hypothermia. I can't find any reports of anyone ever freezing to death on Hilton Head Island. And remember, Ernie wasn't taken away that night, and he survived.

So we know the outcome if she never intervened. Nobody was going to die. Respectfully submit, and I don't mean to make this a closing argument, but if a doctor comes across an accident scene, he's expected to render aid. If an off-duty police officer encounters somebody who's attacking somebody else, nobody criticizes him for intervening, lifeguards see somebody drowning,

they're supposed to go try to save him. So is it really the law in South Carolina that of all the professions, a judge is required to turn her back on somebody whose life is in danger? And with that in mind, if you really read the canon as literally, as the disciplinary counsel does, every judge violates it every day because in court they use the prestige of their office to aid other people. So I appreciate your being here and I would just ask that as you listen to these claims that you ask yourself the question, what would have happened if she had turned her back and walked away? We're concerned about the appearance,

that would create in reasonable minds, perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired. Imagine if she had walked on this scene and says, I'm a judge, I can't help, walked away, and the worst had happened that this gentleman had been shot or frozen to death that night. imagine how that would bear on a reasonable person's perception of her competence as a judge. Again, I have to repeat this. This was not a life or death situation. If it was, you would think Judge Mullen would have mentioned it to the cops that evening. And please, girl, she's a judge, not a doctor, not a lifeguard. The comparison there is absurd.

Finally, we know what would have happened because Judge Mullen's intervention did nothing that evening. Ernie survived. I know this because he's still posting on Facebook on the reg, tagging his buddy moose in puppy pics. After opening statements, the ODC moved to enter the audio from Judge Mullen's interactions with the deputy that night into evidence and played the recording for the panel to hear. It's the same recording that we have played for you on Murdoch Murder's podcast and True Sunlight. We get why the ODC decided to play the audio in its entirety, but we also wish that they would have broken the audio into excerpts and then played them for the witnesses. That's not just to help reporters like John Monk, who are apparently hard of hearing and seem to miss key elements at Judge Mullins' contradictions, because we worry, was that panel

paying attention? The first witness called to the stand was Beaufort County Deputy Jeremy Dickman, who was one of the deputies who responded to the scene that night in December 2017. He is still a deputy and did not equivocate one bit on the stand. He was well-versed in both what his report said and what he remembered from a very memorable interaction. And I know the temptation for Judge Mullen's supporters might be like, oh, this is the political part. They obviously don't like her at the sheriff's office. Well, that's not the case. Deputies who have been in her courtroom do generally like and respect Judge Mullen.

The Beaufort County Sheriff's Office did not try to cover this up, but they also made sure to have her back by noting that she was polite and did not technically order them to do anything. Which is true. She didn't. But she sure did make a lot of suggestions. Anyways, let's hear what Deputy Dickman had to say. He is being examined here by Daniel Hayes of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. already familiar with Mr. Latito before you got to the incident? Yes. How are you familiar with him? He lived at another residence on a hill-dead department on a Southport speech and responded to his residence multiple times. He's a, you know, we say 10 I-6, which is a mental subject, so we knew that he wasn't right and his mom. I knew one from previous encounter. Okay.

And during the incident, in your experience as a law enforcement officer, did you assess that Mr. Latito presented any sort of threat of harm to himself or others? No, I didn't. Okay. And what was your conclusion as to the nature of the dispute between Mr. Renaud and Mr. Latito? It was the civil matter. She allowed him to resign at her residence. So she was on young or married.

She would have followed him and she buses. Okay. So one of Judge Mullen's defenses is that she wanted to protect Ernie from deputies who might not know about Ernie and his illness, which fine. We all should worry about law enforcement officers and how they interact with people who are dealing with the symptoms from mental illnesses. Not only is Deputy Dickman saying it here that he was well aware of Ernie, he told Judge Mullen.

same thing the night of December 7, 2017. Her response? I mean, I'm going to say he's bipolar and schizophrenic. Yeah, I'm not very well. You know, you know. Again, this audio was played for the panel and the court, and bringing this up because this happened within minutes of Judge Mullen speaking to the deputy. In her answer to her misconduct charges, she said that her fear, the reason she came to

the scene, was that deputies might not know Ernie or how to handle him. That fear was almost immediately dispelled, though. And yet she remained on the scene, which if there are two columns here of evidence, the panel and, I don't know, reporters covering the hearing should consider, they would be evidence that supports Judge Mullen's defense and evidence that doesn't support Judge Mullen's defense. To us, this goes firmly in the latter column. And while you were there, were you approached by any third parties?

when I was talking to this right and I'll secure the game of the inside the knock on the door. I have to mention this. Notice how you can hear the prosecuting attorney very clearly, but the witnesses' responses are muffled. This is one of those things where it's like, is this a sign of the panel being clueless

or were they doing this on purpose? Because this was a simple fix. The microphone was pulled way away from the witnesses. They just need to pull it back about six inches closer. But no, why do that? Why create a clear and indisputable record of witness testimony against a judge? I hate being the suspicious of everything. But it's a question on my mind and frankly, these people earned it. As you'll hear in a bit, one of Judge Mullins' defenses is inaudibility, meaning she says the evidence that supports her narrative, all of it pretty much, isn't heard on deputies' recordings,

not because she didn't say the things she's saying that she said that evening, of course, but because the recording didn't pick those parts up, which is sus. What the deputy said in response to any third parties being on the scene is that while he was talking to the homeowner, the Port Royal Security Officer interrupted him to tell him that Judge Mullen was outside and wanted to speak with him. And this is caught on the dashboard camera audio. You heard me, right? Judge, as in Judge Mullen. One of Judge Mullen's defenses is that she was not there as Judge Mullen, but rather there as community caretaker Carmen, that she didn't introduce herself to anyone as Judge Mullen. Now, the odds of a security officer knowing Carmen Mullen as

Judge Mullen? I mean, I don't know, 50-50. I have no idea. There's no recording of Judge Mullen talking to security, so we don't know how she introduced herself to them or what she said. What we do know is that a security officer was sent in to tell a deputy that Judge Mullen was there and wanted to talk to him, regardless of whether Judge Mullen wanted her positional power to be known. And here's where I hope at least one member of this panel is listening today. This is why judges should not do what she did. No matter what she says her intent was, her power was inherent and assumed, and it made it possible for her to send for a deputy without being accused of trying to obstruct justice or interfere with an investigation. It is her power that put this deputy

in a situation that without her presence would not have existed. And again, that's there whether are not the judge intended it to be. And that is why the canons exist and why they're important. Let's go back to the deputy. After he told the panel that he knew who Judge Mullen was because he had testified in her court, as well as had once sat in on her proceedings just to observe, Daniel Hayes of the ODC asked him this. What did Judge Mullen do when she got to the scene? She was trying to help out Mr. Reagan residents there and try to figure out a way to all those from earning from residents. At any point, did Judge Mullen suggest that you take Mr. Littito to the hospital or anything

like that? I don't know. Did she suggest then that you arrest Mr. Littito for some criminal offense? Yes. So, stick a pin in that. The deputy said that he does not. recall Judge Mullen asking him to take Ernie to the hospital. His report from that night does not reflect Judge Mullen asking him to take Ernie to the hospital. And the recording does not reflect

that she asked the deputy to take Ernie to the hospital. This is a big deal because it directly contradicts Judge Mullen's main defense, that she was there to encourage law enforcement to get medical help for Ernie, and it is not reflected anywhere in the state or the posting couriers versions of what happened during the hearing. Let's keep listening after a quick break, and we'll be right back. Okay, so back to the Carmen Mullen hearing with Daniel Hayes of the ODC questioning the Beaufort County deputy who was on the scene that night. Do you recall what criminal offense is, Judge Mullen tried to have you arrest Mr. Latito for? initially trust passing

breach of trust and you can be said okay to work on did Judge Mullen at any point suggest to you that she would contact a magistrate to deny bond from Mr. Latito after he was arrested so that she could then deal with him

she said something that there's something that that audio we just heard I don't know how she was since I'm establishing that. Again, I know that it's muffled. The last thing the deputy said there was, quote, I don't know how she was establishing that.

That meaning the grounds for arresting Ernie. Daniel Hayes asked Deputy Dickman whether Judge Mullen was at the scene when he arrived there. Obviously, she was not. So she came to the scene after you had already initiated your investigation. Yes. And after you had arrived at a conclusion as to the nature of the incident to which you responded? Did she arrive after you had already decided that this was a civil matter that needed to go through the eviction process in match strets court?

Yes. Did you feel, did you contact your supervisor while you were at the scene? Yes. What prompted you to contact your supervisor while you were at the scene? A surrogue judge was on scene. and suggestion and things that I didn't feel comfortable with or I didn't have a figure of my number a little more than me. So I just called my supervisor and make sure that I was going to run.

Okay. But you felt compelled to reach out to your supervisor based on her presence there? Do you believe that Judge Mullen intended to influence how you resolve the situation. I think she was trying to help her neighbor, and she was trying to find any avenue that could assist her. This is also important for a few reasons.

First, again, nowhere on the deputy's recordings from that night do we hear Judge Mullen deferring to law enforcement. It wasn't, oh, okay, so you already did your thing. I'll leave this in your capable hands. just wanted to make sure you knew that Ernie needs medical attention, in my opinion. Instead, it was, you can't find a reason to bring him into jail? Let's try to find one. What bothers me most about what Dickman just testified there

is that he was probably making about $50,000 a year back then. I don't know for sure, but I think that's a decent estimate based on what we know about deputy salaries at the time. The last thing he needed that any deputy needed is a job. judge intervening in an investigation and putting him on the spot. Again, regardless of what Carmen Mullen thinks as Carmen Mullen, she was and is Judge Mullen to local law enforcement. Even if she were to have said, pretend I'm not a judge,

or I'm not here as Judge Mullen, this is a power differential that wasn't and isn't fair. Any normal person in a right-to-work state serving at the pleasure of the sheriff of an elected official is going to feel a little dodgy about their future employment when they're not picking up what a judge is trying to put down. And that is why it's important to know that Dickman called a supervisor because he was at an impasse with Judge Mullen and needed someone in his chain of command to absolve him of potential consequence for following the law. Again, was this in the states or the post-incurrier's

accounts of this hearing or this case? No. Black marble, white streaks, though, we got that. Second, notice that the deputy has twice now said that his impression then and now of Judge Mullen's purpose for being at the scene was to help, not Ernie, but a neighbor. Shouldn't that matter? The first-hand impression of the person who was there that evening. Again, we said this in previous episodes, but nowhere on the recording, do we hear the whole? owner asking Judge Mullen for help or to intervene. We do, however, hear Judge Mullen referring to Moose Reney. And I'm going to be really clear about that, so there's no mistaking her meaning there.

Ain't no hospital called the Moose Reney Medical Center. After Daniel Hayes was done with his direct examination of Dickman, it was time to hear from old Dawes Cook, who, by the way, is a friend and former classmate of George Mullen, a.k.a. Mr. Judge Carmen Mullen. Good morning. I'm Dawes Cook. We haven't met, have we? And I'm representing Judge Mullen in this matter. When Judge Mullen introduced herself that night, she introduced herself as Carmen Mullen, correct?

She didn't call herself a judge. Did she ever during the night refer to herself as a judge? but you knew she was a judge. Okay. Did she order you to do anything? Yes. She was giving you suggestions of ways that Mr. Latito could be removed from the property. Yes.

Okay. Was she aware that you were calling your supervisor? Maybe not the first time that it was. second time. Did she ask to speak to your supervisor? But she didn't try to go over your head with regard to your decisions. Okay.

I noticed from the recording that you seem to be under the impression that Ms. Renaud was a friend of Judge Mullins. I think you said that in the recording, didn't you? I assume that when she showed up with residents. Okay. children and under her own cousins. Okay. Would it surprise you to know that Judge Mullen had never met Ms. Renaud before, but she did know

Mr. Littito? She did not know Ms. Rogen, if she knew Mr. Littito. Correct. But that's surprising that she did not know Ms. Rennon. Right. Well, it feels like Old Daz is making our point for us, doesn't it? Would it surprise the deputy to find out that Judge Mullen didn't know the homeowner? He said yes, it would surprise him.

Again, this is important. The reason it might surprise this deputy that Judge Mullen didn't know the homeowner is because she sure appeared to be going to bat for her that night. And what we do know from police reports, Judge Mullen's October 22 email to the press and court records that this was always a Moose Rini problem. Judge Mullen might not have known the homeowner. But she knew the homeowner's boss, Moose, who apparently hooked Ernie up with the homeowner,

didn't she? Because it seemed like your orientation, and both in your testimony here and speaking to your supervisors, was that you thought Judge Mullen was trying to help her neighbor get rid of Mr. Lottito. So did it not occur to you that she was concerned about Mr. Lottito? The Lottos safety. Maybe I don't remember saying that she was 100%. The phrasing of this question is wild. Did it not occur to you that Judge Mullen was concerned about Mr. Lottito's safety?

As if this is all just a big misunderstanding due to the deputy being a doofus, right? I mean, how dare Daws cook? Can we talk about how this deputy didn't seem to want to be on the stand in the first place? You think this is what he wanted to be doing? Again, he's being put in a weird position because of the actions of Judge Mullen. But also, again, this is our point. It didn't occur to the deputy that Judge Mullen was there because she was concerned about Ernie's safety because of her words, demeanor, and actions that evening.

They didn't align with that. So, thank you, Daws, and do not be tricked, panel people. More on that, after a quick commercial break. We'll be right back. I stared at screens and court documents for years through the same beat-up pair of glasses because replacing them always felt like a car payment-sized decision. And then, Zinni changed my life for the better. Zinni is an online eyewear shop with stylish prescription glasses, sunglasses,

and customizable lens options, all starting at under $30, and they ship right to your door. And with a virtual try-on, you can see exactly how a frame looks on your face before you order. got a pair of tortoiseshell frames for recording day. And at these prices, I finally stopped rationing. There's a backup pair in my bag right now. That scratched up pair has done its job. Upgrade today with Zennie. Go to Zennie.com slash podcast and use code podcast 15 for 15% off your first order, plus free shipping on all orders over $65. This style sell out, so don't sit on it. That's ZENNNI.com slash podcast. promo code podcast, Hey there, E.B. here. Your faithful Cup of Justice co-host. I am so excited to tell you about my book,

Anything But Blant. In this memoir, I share stories about my childhood, marked by bullying, my father's job loss, and the indomitable spirit that propelled me into the law and ultimately international recognition during the Alex Murdole murder trial. I believe in certain life principles that have helped me and helped others achieve success. From the power of organization and a sense of urgency to the importance of truth, with vivid recollection from challenges and triumphs framing each chapter, success isn't about luck. It's earned through skill and hard work.

Anything but Bland is not just a book. It's a manifesto for those seeking triumph over adversity and a guide for anyone aspiring to reach their full potential. Please visit theericblan.com to learn more about the book, leadership, and resilience. And I want you to hear this slick move from Dawes. He asked the deputy whether it was 37 degrees that evening. Here's what the deputy said and how Dawes manipulated his answer for the benefit of the panel.

Okay. This was December 7th, correct? Yes. And did you hear Mr. Lutito say that he was going to sleep in a fort that he had built in the backyard? Do you recall that the temperature was going to be about 37 degrees that night? Do you remember that? that? I don't remember the temperature.

I don't understand. Okay. It was cold, though, right? I was a long short, sure. Okay. So you were cold. The deputy's like,

I don't remember the temperature, but I know that I was wearing short sleeves. I'm assuming he knew this from the video. And Dawes was like, okay, so you were cold. Which is probably the opposite point the deputy was trying to make, right? He's saying I was in my short-sleeved uniform

and I would have been in my long-sleeved uniform, shirt if it was cold. Huh, attorneys, man. And again, this isn't us being like, he's saying something I didn't want to hear. It's that he's saying something counter to the testimony in the evidence. While the low that night was actually 43 and not 37,

according to weatherarchive.com, it was nowhere near freezing. And again, nobody freezes to death on Hiltonet Island. There is nothing in the deputy's notes or on the recording that we can hear anyway where Judge Mullen expresses her concern about Ernie being cold in the weather. It's actually a male voice that notes

that it's supposed to get cold that evening. And y'all, Hilton Head Cold is in the 40s. It's not dangerous. It's just uncomfortable. What Judge Mullen actually said about the idea of Ernie staying in the homeowner's backyard is this. What did they lose, man? In the yard?

Again, to be kind of thinking to sit me back of my head. It would be like, what? So he doesn't be in the night? That's just so. Again, to be clear, we are not arguing that it wasn't concerning

that this man in a mental health crisis appears to have had nowhere to go because he had outstayed as welcome with the woman he was renting from. We are saying this wasn't taxpayer's problem to solve. It certainly wasn't Judge Mullin's problem to solve. It was, however,

her friend Moose Rini's problem to solve. And we're saying she was there on his behalf, not Ernie's. Last thing about Dawes' cross-examination of the deputy. Okay. This is a gated community, correct? Did you hear that night that Mr. Lottito had been going around knocking on other people's doors as well? I don't know. Oh. Did you hear Ms. Renaud say that she was going to shoot Mr. Latito if he got into her house? Was I a president when she said that? Did you, did you, was it, did you, well, first, did you hear her say that? I can, I don't want to do it.

Okay. Did you hear that she had said that? You could say the question again? Did you hear that evening that Ms. Renaud had said she was going to shoot Mr. Latito if he came into her house? She, she may have said that. In Judge Mullins' answers to the charges, she said that she intervened in this situation because Reagan said she was going to shoot. Ernie. In episode 166, we said we didn't hear anywhere on the recording where Reagan had said this. That's because we were looking for it in other parts where Judge Malin and Reagan spoke to each other.

When the deputy said he sort of remembered Reagan saying something to him in her foyer, we went back to the recording and we can hear her say he's not coming in my house. If you want to arrest me then, but he's not coming in my house. But she seems to ask if he breaks into my house and the last part of that question is inaudible. So did she say, am I allowed to shoot him or I will shoot him? Maybe. If she does, we still can't hear it. But it's important to note this. She does not say this in Judge Mullen's presence as far as we can tell. She says it to the deputy right after he arrives. And in Judge Mullen's email to the press on October 2022, she does not mention her fear of the homeowner shooting Ernie. Again, these are not nitpicky things we're pointing out. It's evidence that goes in

the column of things that do not support Judge Mullen's claims. Speaking of Judge Mullen's claims, let's hear from her now, and, who, boy, she was not happy to be answering questions from the ODC. It started off heated, but ODC attorney Erica Williams was able to trap Judge Mullen in her own story. First, Williams established how Judge Mullen made herself know. And in the video, contained an exhibit one, which is dash cam video one and two, how do you identify yourself? I introduced myself as Tomlin to both the officers and to an advocate, as I can many others.

Okay. And do you recall how the others in that video refer to you? I couldn't think any of them called me Judge Mollon. I think it was reporting about Judge Mollins, but I don't recall him referring to me. He may have referred to me as Judge Mollon. I'm talking to what I believe is a supervisor, Bob Romich, but I don't think he'd call me the judge more over there.

Okay, and based on your conversations with the officers, do you believe that they knew you were a judge? Well, I didn't get it as a transcript if you'd be longing to, but... I don't need you to go through the transcript, and my question is, based on your interactions with the officers, do you believe that the officers knew that you were a judge?

I don't know, I'm going to make a little bit of a super bosser because I don't recall, didn't remember being in my courtroom testify before, and certainly he was just observing. I didn't do this 19 years, but I can't be in all the decades. Okay. All right, so I'll just call your attention to a couple of things that would be in the transcript. You did have a conversation with the officers about him being in your courtroom. Isn't that correct?

No. Oh, we've got money being in my court. Right. In your courtroom? Yes. As a judge? Yes. Okay.

So again, I'll ask my questions. Based on the conversation of that evening, do you think it's reasonable that the officers knew that you were a judge? I think possibly based on that. I can't assume they know that. Y'all, she knew that they knew she was a judge. And if they didn't know, we believe that she wanted them to know. Otherwise, she wouldn't have said my courtroom so many times.

Erica Williams then asked Mullen why she was at the scene on the night of December 7, 2017. Okay. And why did you go to the location? I took my husband back there if something was going on. I wanted to make sure early was okay. You took your husband. Was your husband not capable of going to this home? On his own? It's capable of a lot of things, but I also have information and knowledge with early having been in my program in the last month.

and he was not down confident. And my concern was, because the officers or the homeowner or someone else, he was going to hurt him in some way. Okay, and to your knowledge, what familiarity did your husband have about Ernie Bertito's mental status? My husband's never earned him for five years.

He worked for George. He knew him from the time that he got. First, I had him to his, disability status where he couldn't practice law anymore. My husband has talked to and friends with Lenny Latita for years. Uh, can we talk about this for a minute? Why was Ernie ever in Carmen's courtroom? Why was she ever, his judge, if her husband had such a close personal relationship with him? At one point in the hearing, it was established that Carmen Mullen's husband had given Ernie money before. So like, she should have recused herself from all cases involving Ernie,

including this one. In South Carolina, judges are obligated to step away from any case where their impartiality might be reasonably questioned. I would say that Mullen's impartiality when it comes to Ernie absolutely should be questioned. And not just for this case. What about the lawsuit against Ernie that she dismissed just a few months before this incident, where he was accused of harassing workers. What about the time that he was charged with threatening a public official in 2016 in Mullen claimed that she presided over that matter, even though there is no record of that in the public index? How come those charges were suddenly dismissed? How far has Judge Mullen really gone to protect Ernie beyond this incident? Again, this goes way beyond.

earned Ernie. Okay, back to Erica Williams, questioning Mullen. So what prompted you then to go to the home, just Mr. Rotito's mental condition and his concern for his safety? Because he was surrounded by deputies and security, and he looked and appeared to be in a psychotic state, and I was concerned for him. I wanted to make sure the officers knew he had a mental health condition, and then he wasn't in danger to others. I was just afraid of how he acted and if they would respond. Again, Deputy Dickman told Judge Mullen immediately after she introduced herself to him that he was well aware of Ernie and his medical condition.

But hold on to Judge Mullen's insistence that Ernie was not a danger to others when the panties are brought up. And yes, you heard me right. Panties. Tell me again, Judge Mullen. Why would you say that you would be comfortable with Ernie around your children when you just testified that you knew that Ernie was accused of masturbating to a teenage girl's panties. How does that make any sense at all? In our opinion, what we saw in this hearing was a dangerous pattern of behavior from a sitting judge who made reckless and appropriate decisions, and instead of recognizing that those decisions were improper, she doubled down and made up excuses that

were completely contradictory to the facts of the case shown on video. Every other media outlet covering this story unfortunately failed to point those contradictions out to the public. So, to make up for that disservice, we are dedicating two episodes this week to just this. We need the public and the Supreme Court and the Commission on Judicial Conduct to see the truth through the lies. We will share more of Judge Mullen's testimony in part two of this episode, where you'll also get to hear from our friend and yours,

attorney Eric Bland, who will tell you what it was like in the courtroom, seeing Judge Mullen on the stand after all these years later. Until next time, stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight. True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production

created by me, Mandy Matinee, co-hosted and reported by journalist Liz Pharrell, research support provided by Beth Braden, Audio production support provided by Jamie Hoffman and Grace Hills. Case file management by Kate Thomas. Learn more about our mission and membership at LunaSharkmedia.com. Interruptions provided by Luna and Joe Pesky. Thank you for supporting our mission to expose the truth wherever it leads by following Lunas Shark podcast, true sunlight, coerce, and Cup of Justice.

I get asked all the time how folks can help us with our mission, and we invite them to Lunas Shark Premium on Patreon. our ad-free listening platform and membership community for all Lunasherk content. Soak up the Sun members on Patreon get ad-free extended episodes, bonus drops, exclusive case files, live streams to chat with us during court hearings, access to our exclusive members-only shows like Liz and Mandy's Girl Talk, Beth Raiden Soundbites, and Premium Dives from Kate Thomas and the team. We're also sharing behind-the-scenes content like timelines and original source material from my book, blood on their hands in Hulu's original series Murdoch death in the family. Join our mission and become a member today at patreon.com slash lunashark.

Or for just ad-free listening, subscribe to Lunasherk plus on Apple Podcast app or get ad-free listening at lunashark.com. Our members are helping us fund new journalists, explore more investigations, and expand our reach. Click the link in the description to learn the best way you can stay tuned. Stay pesky and stay in the sunlight with Luna Shark premium on Patreon and Supercast.