Murdaugh Murders Podcast - Judge Scolds Team Murdaugh for Courtroom Shenanigans Over Murder Weapon ‘Rumor’ (TSP161.1)

Starting point is 00:00:02 I don't know where the court will ultimately decide to hold the Murdoch murders retrial next April. But wherever it will be, we know it will be full of drama, bluster, and trickery, especially after what went down during the second hearing last Friday. 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 Farrell. Okay, so first things first today.

Starting point is 00:00:47 We have the opportunity to do something really exciting next year, but we need your help. Can y'all do us a huge favor and click the link in the description to show South by Southwest that my brilliant friend Laura Richards, aka crime analyst, and I, are the best candidate. to host a panel on creator economies. Hear that, maybe? Creator economies. Ha. But it's not about money.

Starting point is 00:01:15 We are pitching a panel called Beyond the Story, how true crime podcasting is changing laws, and we both want to share how investigative journalism and criminal behavior analysis can drive accountability, influence public policy, and help protect victims. Voting just takes a quick login in a few minutes. Positive comments help too. comments help too. Personally, I want to get back into public speaking next year and getting voted

Starting point is 00:01:41 in to speak at South by Southwest, that would be a dream and a big deal. Honestly, y'all know how badly I have needed a win recently. So please, take a minute to vote for Laura and me. Today, we need to talk about what really went down during Friday's Murdoch Murders retrial hearing. You know, the stuff that most of the media is either ignoring entirely or intentionally spreading false information about. Since 2021, T. Murdoch has consistently stuck to one strategy in this case. Muddy the water to make it look deep. They toss all the spaghetti to the wall hoping that something sticks.

Starting point is 00:02:23 And sometimes they throw SpaghettiOs at the wall too, knowing that they aren't real spaghetti, and knowing also that 99% of the media covering this case won't bother to point out the difference. We've always been among a few voices in the media willing to push back against Dick and Jim and call them out when we catch them in lies. Isn't it interesting that we are also the only journalists covering the Murdoch mess who have been viciously attacked by other South Carolina defense attorneys in the last year in a way that was specifically aimed to discredit our work and silence our voices?

Starting point is 00:03:03 Huh. Speaking of that, we have so much to talk about in the Beach conspiracy case and my unconstitutional content proceedings, but we're saving that for part two of this week. Maybe it's not all connected, maybe it's all a coincidence. But after watching Friday's hearing and reading dozens of articles and lazy social media posts covering that hearing, I remembered why our voices are so important and essential in this case. And I am proud that we are still here to cover this retrial, thanks again to our premium members and our advertisers who has supported us throughout this crazy journey. But let's get into it. Let's talk about Friday's messy Murdoch hearing, starting with the Fitznews fumble. Like all Murdoch-related events, Friday's hearing

Starting point is 00:03:56 immediately got weird soon after it started. Before Elyke Murdoch even entered the court room, Dick Harputlian just had to set the spark to light their little Fitznews fire for later in the hearing. Here is what he said. While we're waiting for Mr. Murdo, could I address one administrative thing? I've already talked to the court from Collison County. When you file an order, on some occasions, you copy us when you file it on some occasions if we don't get it, the order allowing him to be pressed without shackles. We read about it in Fitz News before we were aware there was an order.

Starting point is 00:04:36 I didn't catch this at first, but I really don't think that Dick raised this issue to complain about Fitz News, being aware of an order being signed in the case before they were. I think that they wanted to tell the media and Judge McCaslin that Fitznews was credible, that they have insiders on this case that sometimes know things even before they do. And why would he do that? Well, because Jim Griffin was planning on dropping a Fitznews bomb in that hearing, and they needed people to take that real seriously. 12 minutes in, while Jim Griffin was attempting to argue that he believed the prosecution was failing to disclose discovery materials in the case, he said this.

Starting point is 00:05:21 And so, you know, that's some Giglio material, some braiding material that we have, I think we're entitled to, and as you know, Your Honor, Brady is evidence that could be exculpatory. We have learned through reporting from Fitz News that there was a recent murder, we believe, in Allendale County. And what has come out of that investigation and what has been leaked to the press is that Murdoch murder weapons were connected to the Allendale County murder. Now, how could that be?

Starting point is 00:05:58 And so we would like to know were Murdoch murder weapons connected to this Allendown murder. Now, if Your Honor, we'll get into this, you'll learn that the sled agent ballistic forensic lab did an analysis of just the shell casings on the 350 blackout that was used to murder Maggie Murdoch. And the ballistics expert testified that the extraction marks on those shell casings found at the murder scene matched extraction marks found on shell casings around the Moselle home and at a shooting range. And their analysis was, in his opinion, it was the same gun that injected the shell casings of the 300 blackout at the house. at the driver range and at the murder scene. Which leads us to, we don't know if it was the same murder weapon in Allendale, but if they did an analysis of the shell casings in the Allendale murder case,

Starting point is 00:07:09 and they're saying it matches the shell casings for the Murdoch murders, either their test is bad or someone's out there using the gun to murder other people. And so we would like that information. And then there's, Generally, we are aware that SLED has received tips because we've received tips. We've not been provided any information about tips of, you know, whether it's reliable or not identifying anyone else other than Alec Murdoch participating in the murders. We've not received any information.

Starting point is 00:07:50 You know, have they found the murder weapons? Have they found the murder weapons since the last trauma? and and there's related information underlying all of those. And so we don't think the state is taking their obligation seriously enough to find out what Brady materials out there has been developed and what Giglio material out there has been developed. And this is what we are aware of today, but we don't have the benefit. But we don't have the ability to contact law enforcement and get this information. So those are our concerns. Okay.

Starting point is 00:08:32 I'm sorry. Excuse me. What? One of the biggest holes in the prosecution's case against Elyke Murdoch is that they never found the two weapons that killed Maggie and Paul Murdoch. Remember, SLED did connect the shell casings used in the murder to the weapons owned by the Murdoch family. But if one of the guns was actually used in another, murder? That would be a major development that would flip this case on its head. It would not absolve Alec Murdoch, but it could point to others being involved in the murders, or even the disposal of the weapons. Our live Lunashark Premium chat erupted with confusion when Jim Griffin

Starting point is 00:09:15 said that. We all raced to Google to find this alleged Fitznews article that supposedly connected a recent Allendale murder to the Murdoch murders, and not a single article could be found with those accusations. The only thing that we could find was a single tweet from Fitznews made a minute after Jim's mention of them in court. It said, quote, Ehrlich Murdoch's attorney Jim Griffin just dropped a bombshell. Again, referencing fitsnews.com. He cited a 2026 murder that occurred in Allendale County, one some sources.

Starting point is 00:09:52 have indicated is connected to the Moselle crime scene. Instead of linking to a story, though, Fitznews linked to its own homepage, as if this were some kind of ambush marketing stunt in the middle of a murder hearing. Real weird, right? Creighton explained to Judge McCaslin that the AG's office is constantly doing discovery checks and audits

Starting point is 00:10:15 and that they take their duty to turn over relevant material seriously. At first, he didn't even specifically, acknowledged the Allendale accusation, but just said that the defense can always call him if they hear about something not being shared with them. And then Judge McCaslin, interestingly, was like, wait a minute. What about that bombshell? Well, tell me about the Allendale with the murder weapons. That's the first I've heard of that. I have never heard of that. I have never heard the first thing about that. If somebody told me that they had matched that to the murder weapon, not only the first call again, I would be making would be to them.

Starting point is 00:10:54 And the second call I'd be making would be to Your Honor. That is the first I've heard of that. I've never read the Fitz article. Certainly nobody had sled who I communicate with on a daily basis. They said, hey, Creighton, by the way, X, X happened. So I will certainly look into that. But I would be flabbergasted to find out that that actually had happened. And no one had advised this office of that.

Starting point is 00:11:16 Okay. I hope that answers your questions. He's going to get back with you. He's going to double check on Agent Kelly. But to his understanding, there was no dishonesty, but he's going to, that would raise the bar to Giglio. But he's going to get back with you. As far as the murder in Allendell with the murder weapons,

Starting point is 00:11:39 you certainly raised my eyebrows on that. Your Honor, throughout this case, this news has been breaking, stories that we were unaware of. And we can go through a long litany of that. But there was a podcast, there was a reference to what I just said to you. Maybe you could forward that to Mr. Waters and let him look at it and see if there's anything to it.

Starting point is 00:12:07 But we would ask that they look into that. And I'll be the first to say, Your Honor, is that I don't watch the podcast and I don't read the blogs. I try to base what I'm doing on the evidence and not on speculation that's out there in the media. But certainly I've never heard of that thing and I will make inquiries. But it would blow my mind if something like that had happened in Slet and that called me. I communicate them daily. There are general counsels sitting here in the gallery here today.

Starting point is 00:12:33 Notice again, Jim Griffin going weirdly out of his way to give Fitznews credit, only to be met with BCE, who reminded him that this is a courtroom, where blogs aren't evidence, especially blogs that don't exist, and we need evidence before we make claims in court. Liz and I had the same reaction that Creighton did. We have sources who would have alerted us to this bombshell if it was true. We didn't immediately say that it wasn't true, but considering the fact that Creighton had never heard of this, and there was no story point to it, we were highly skeptical. So we did what real journalists do, and we read, out to our best Murdoch sources.

Starting point is 00:13:17 Within minutes, two of our sources said no. Jim and Fitznews have their facts wrong. We were able to report that to our audience, watching in real time with us, before Creighton said this later on in the hearing. Very briefly, Your Honor. First of all, just, because I just got this from a general counsel, it's led,

Starting point is 00:13:40 that there was a 300 blackout that was used in Allendale, used in Allendale, however, it was entered into Ibis, and there have been no leads or no matches on that. So that's what I was just informed. Is that going back to... Going back to the prior motion, yes. To the prior where the blackout was... And I'll find out more, but it... It had to have been used in another murder in Allendale or somewhere.

Starting point is 00:14:01 You understand that? Hmm. So that's all weird. After the hearing, we got more details about this murder from Sled, a 32-year-old man named Frank Alexander Brown III from Islandon, South Carolina. Yes, the same tiny, tiny town where Moselle is located, was murdered in Allendale on April 25th. SLEDD is in charge of the homicide investigation,

Starting point is 00:14:26 which is typical when murders occur in small towns and local law enforcement agencies with much fewer resources ask for their help. Allendale County borders both Hampton and Colleton counties. It is about 30 minutes from Moselle. According to SLED, The same type of ammo for a 300 blackout that killed Maggie Murdoch in 2021 was used in Frank Brown's murder in April. Again, that's type of ammo, not ammo, not the same weapon. What's weird here, kind of, is that apparently six days before this hearing fits news where Mandy and I, unfortunately, used to work,

Starting point is 00:15:05 released a podcast in which they discussed rumors of a weapon being used in another crime that was tied to the Murdoch Murdoch. That small mention that apparently no one else knew about is what Jim Griffin was using to make his accusation in court, in open court, rumors. Apparently these rumors reached SLED last week. On the day before the hearing, SLED appears to have had the casings entered into the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network database, or Nibben, on August 13, 2026, where they were compared within a national database, which included the Murdoch murders casings. And as a result of these actions, no investigative leads were developed to any previously entered evidence. Now, some might wonder why were these entered the day before the hearing. SLED is notoriously backed up in their forensics department.

Starting point is 00:15:56 So it is not an unusual span of time from April until August for these to get analyzed. However, I can imagine, and I have no confirmation of this, that this is what prompted them to move it up in the line. So, same type of ammo used on a man from the same tiny town where Mozel is, population, less than 70, but not the same weapon. By the way, there is a lot of wild hog hunting, as we learned in the first trial, in that part of the state, which is why it is not unusual to us that a 300 blackout would be used in another murder there. Anyway, it seems like something that Jim Griffin should have maybe fact-checked before mentioning in front of the judge and God and people around the world watching the hearing. But again, that was never the point, right? Don't worry. Judge McCaslin

Starting point is 00:16:41 did give Jim a good scolding. Mr. Griffin. Okay. You know, sometimes a real novel idea is to pick up the phone and call each other and talk. That's what we used to do when we were younger. Just call and ask if you've got a question and then if you have a problem with it, I'm more than happy to settle it for you. I hate that we have to do this. court. I do. It's easier just to, now we can email you. If you don't want to talk to each other, you just email each other and say, hey, you heard about this. I've never not taken a call from these gentlemen. I love talking to. Ooh, Creighton's got jokes in Murdoch 2.0, and we are here for it. But, uh, really? What the frick was that, Jim Griffin? And more on that after a quick break.

Starting point is 00:17:40 Your summer travels deserve an upgrade. With select Chevrolete, Buick, GMC, and Cadillac vehicles connected by OnStar, you can stream, game, and more on the go. Whether you're headed to a music festival or a cottage getaway, you can access hundreds of apps on Google Play right from your center display. Explore OnStar Tech today at OnStar.ca and discover how to take your summer to the next level. OnStar. Better never stops. So why would Jim Griffin drop a bombshell like that? and risk his credibility with both the court and the media,

Starting point is 00:18:20 without apparently doing a shred of fact-checking. Oh, because this is Murdoch, and the truth has never mattered to these people. We could do a whole podcast episode on the number of times that Dick and Jim have misled the media with bad facts. And the media, largely, has treated the prosecution and the defense with the same amount of credibility. Despite all of those times that the defense made them low, look foolish. And when we pointed out those foolish lies, we were shunned by the media too. The sad thing is that Dick and Jim will keep serving up nonsense sandwiches as long as the media keeps on eating it. And just listen to this Fox News headline that was posted after the hearing,

Starting point is 00:19:05 after Creighton corrected the record and said that there was no evidence to back up what they were claiming. And after SLED put out a press release discrediting the claim. The headline said, quote, ELEC Murdoch defense says murder weapon may be tied to separate killing as judge seeks answers. And that, my friends, is exactly why they keep playing this game of spaghetti toss. Headlines. Misleading headlines. And it keeps on working for them. Even after backchecking proves them wrong. It's incredible the number of posts and comments we've seen from the pro-Elek content creators specifically Jim Seidel from Crime and Cask, Seton Tucker and Matt Harris from Impact Influence, and Willfolks and Jen Wood from Fitznews that still treat these allegations as being

Starting point is 00:19:57 foundationally legitimate. As if Jim were being 100% earnest in bringing this up in court knowing that he could have pursued this behind the scenes. But again, why do anything behind the scenes when it's all about the headlines, which all of those creators are providing them with? It is wild that the creators don't see the self-feeding monster that's controlling them here. I hate mentioning the creator's names, by the way, but in this case, they are part of the point I'm trying to make. After Sled and Crichton discredited Jim Griffin's claims that the weapons might be connected, the content creators could not accept that the profitable, salacious rumor was put to bed so quickly. So they began to accuse SLED of entering the Allendale casings into Nibbin,

Starting point is 00:20:38 but maybe never having entered the Murdoch murder casings to Nibben. Meaning, the creators seem to be trying to say, sure, they entered the Allendale case and compared it to everything but the Murdoch casings. Give me a break. This is such a time-waster. But we need to clear it up because we've seen some comments out there. So in the first trial, the media was able to get copies of unsealed evidence in the case. I feel like I have to make that distinction because of what Fitz News did by taking photos of sealed evidence. In that unsealed evidence, which we have all of still, is the Ballistics Report, and it shows that four representative casings, including one from the 300 blackout used to kill Maggie,

Starting point is 00:21:20 were submitted to Ibis, which is the software connected to Nibben. Any one of those content creators could have looked at the records to see that. And then they could have contacted SLED to ask them the question, where the casings from Maggie's murder submitted to Nibben. And the answer would have been, yes, yes, of course. It's part of the process. It was done in the investigation of the Murdog murders, and it's pretty much always done. In fact, it turns out SLED is number one in terms of how many casings it submits annually to the national database.

Starting point is 00:21:50 But even absent that, those content creators could have turned to the testimony from the first trial, which is everywhere. Because guess what? We can't find anywhere that Dick or Jim asked SLED investigator David Owen or SLED ballistics analyst Paul Greer about whether they had submitted the casings to Ibis or Nibin. which means Dick and Jim knew they had. So there would be nothing to be gained by asking the question. And yet, the content creators who tell their listeners and themselves that they're just asking questions and trying to present all sides aren't biased at all.

Starting point is 00:22:23 When in truth, the questions they're asking are food for the self-feeding monster. Ask the questions. I mean, by all means, ask the questions. But ask the right people. And have answers for your listeners. Anything else is just perpetuating false information in service of the monster. I honestly don't get why they do what they do.

Starting point is 00:22:43 The reporting was already done for them. It was in the evidence from the first trial. The unsealed evidence. Maybe they just have a thing for sealed evidence and stolen text messages. But I digress. Moving on, though, like we told you in the last true sunlight episode,

Starting point is 00:22:59 the most anticipated argument at the hearing was Team Murdoch's motion to change venue from Colleton County to Charleston. Not because they request to move the trial out of the 14th Circuit was a ridiculous one, but rather because they were so ridiculous about the trial being held in Charleston, only in Charleston, and nowhere but Charleston. Again, it totally makes sense to us why this trial should be held outside of the 14th. We don't want the trial to be held in the 14th, which is why it confuses us a little why Dick and Jim

Starting point is 00:23:29 didn't want to stay in Colleton. I mean, think about it. According to the Supreme Court of South Carolina, Eleg Murdoch was wronged in Colleton County. According to the justices, he didn't get a fair trial. And everyone is mad at former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill for either causing him not to have a fair trial or putting herself in a position where her actions could be exploited for the benefit of getting a new trial. That's a situation that's ripe for overcorrection.

Starting point is 00:23:57 No? From all involved, if the second trial were held in Walterborough, you know the ghost of Becky and her book would surely be haunting that courtroom, like moaning Myrtle in the bathroom at Hogwarts, she'd be unavoidable. She'd be present in that room for every day of that trial, and Ehrlich Murdoch's granddaddy's portrait, he'd be only too happy to be back in that storage closet,

Starting point is 00:24:20 outside the courtroom, sexually harassing brooms and making himself Windex martinis. There's no doubt Dick and Jim are going to be Becky booing their way through the next trial, no matter where it's held, because they're going to want to remind the jury that Ehrlich was wronged, and so now he needs to be rioted. Despite her national infamy, though, Becky Hill is still a local horror story.

Starting point is 00:24:45 Tell me that's not the perfect scenario for a Colleton County jury from their perspective. Because to our minds, they're more likely to give Eleg the extra benefit of the doubt in Walterboro to show that they aren't being influenced by anyone. Add to that, the Murdocks are still Murdoching in the Low Country. There's a significant number of people still unwilling to cross them. And add to that, according to Team Murdoch and the Egg Lady, they almost had a mistrial in Colton County, were it not for Becky and her decision to follow the, quote, siren call of celebrity, as former Chief Justice Jean Toll called it, a mistrial. And really, that's the very best Ellick could hope for because nowhere in this world, in our opinions, is he going to get 12 people to look up evidence and think, oh, I'm sure this has all been a big misunderstanding. I hope they find those.

Starting point is 00:25:35 two short kings who did it. They only need one person on Elix's side, and I am no statistician, but I would think Elix's best bet would be a smaller, yokely, generally less educated, egg ladyish county, a county where there are dupable jurors who require three post-trial affidavits to sort out the alphabet soup in their brains. And I understand how elitist that sounds with me. I have checked my privilege. I am very aware of how my access to good education, having my basic needs met as a child, and growing up in an urban and diverse environment in a two-parent household

Starting point is 00:26:08 has put me in the position I'm in now. But it's not going to stop me from exercising my right to judge those two hot messes of jurors in Ehrlich's first trial and the chaos that their involvement continues to cause. Stick a pin in that for part two of this episode. Okay, so Team Murdoch submitted their memo in support of a motion to change venue. Last Wednesday, the state filed their response to that,

Starting point is 00:26:32 Then Team Murdoch, with their apparent bottomless fund for filing motions for their allegedly broke client and their ex-husband-like need to have the last word, filed a reply on top of that. I will summarize those real quick. Team Murdoch's memo was like, only Charleston, it's great in all the ways. The state's response to that was essentially, well, because you're being like only Charleston, our position is going to be only not Charleston. Also, it's expensive and it floods and its peak tourist season. Team Murdoch's response to that, well, let me start by saying this. Remember last week how we told you all, wow, Dick and Jim didn't even insult us or use us in a demeaning and tabloid way to make their point about all the publicity in this case? What's that all about?

Starting point is 00:27:20 Well, they're using gas station billionaire Greg Parker and his nasty team of attorneys and Judge R. Keith Kelly to do that for them. Because in their reply, they included Judge R. Keith Kelly's recent order moving the Beach v. Parker civil conspiracy case from Hampton County to Spartanburg County, in order that explicitly blames us by name for their supposed inability to get a fair trial in Hampton County where we have few listeners and why they need to move to Spartanburg where we have 20 times the listeners. We'll talk more about that in part two of this episode because let's just say everything is exactly what we've been thinking it was this and entire time. Back to the hearing last Friday. It got a silly. And once again, if we had written this scene into a novel or a TV show, we'd be made fun of for how implausibly over the top we are, because in what world? So let's just cut right to the meat of what happened. So I'd like to call witness, please. Sure. Bill Barber to the stand, please.

Starting point is 00:28:26 You want us to swear in Mr. Barber, the lawyer, and Your side? He probably would tell the truth anyway, but that's probably the safe process. I can't. You solemnly swear our affirmative testimony, give the words of truth. The whole truth is not the truth. I do. And your honor, as he takes a stand. Their allegations are so ludicrous, I have to respond with my own ludicrous. Y'all, Dick Harpoo-in called his own associate to the stand to answer questions about what It's like living outside of Charleston as evidence to support their assertion that Charleston is where it's at for the second murder trial. Phil Barber, the guy who Mark Tinsley all but taxidermied right in front of our faces and the entire nation during Ellick's first trial. Phil Barber, a guy who looks like he wears special loafers when he drives his car and like he drives around with leather cleaner to wipe down the passenger seat of his car after every use.

Starting point is 00:29:27 And like he finds ways to drop phrases like, when we were in Tuscany into conversations. That's who Dick called to the stand to defend their assertion that Charleston is not. The expensive place the state says it is. And by the way, that's what Dick meant by allegations when he told the judge he was forced to do this ludicrous thing because the state's allegations were so ludicrous.

Starting point is 00:29:48 The state's allegations, April is tour season in Charleston. April is when the city is particularly prone to flooding, which shuts down the courthouse. There's never any parking at the courthouse. Hotels are expensive. Parking is expensive. All of this is going to cost the state in Colleton County more money than it probably needs to. Phil's testimony had the tone and tenor of a tenacious 14-year-old girl's slide presentation to her parents and her entire family titled, Why I Deserve a Horse. Slide one, horses are easy to take care of. Slide two, when you really think about it, it's really not that.

Starting point is 00:30:26 expensive to have a horse. I mean, listen to this. Now, also, before you get on the bridge to come over the Cooper River Bridge, are there any accommodations that someone was in a trial and Charleston could stay in? Yes. And just give us a sample of what those facilities would be. There are, I believe, at least nine budget who's... at the base of the Rapinal Bridge on the both north and south of 17. And you can get a room there at a reasonable price?

Starting point is 00:31:05 Yes, there's a there's a comfort in, a Holiday Inn, Hampton Inn, there's an Indigo Inn. There are various, you know, economy, you know, extended stays suite. There's nine of them total. There's everything you could imagine. And there are more in the vicinity, correct? Yes, and I pass those every day going to the office. Now, when we tried this case in Colleton County, do you know where the state folks stayed, they rented a big chunk of a Hampton Inn, did they not? They stayed at a Hampton Inn, I believe it was at the Interstate 95 Interchange.

Starting point is 00:31:36 Okay, and do you know how, and if you Google, how long it takes to travel from that, Hampton Inn to the Calton County Courthouse? I have not. I know that it took, at least, I've driven it before, the Cracker Barrel was there when we went to there. It was a good, it was a comparable 15-minute drive. Yeah, it's about 15 minutes, right? About the same time it would take you to drive from one of those Mount Pleasant hotels, budget hotels, to the courthouse. Yes, if you wanted to get in early, there's a lot of the hotels north of 17 have a highway on-ramp

Starting point is 00:32:12 that's right there at the hotels without even having to stop late. Okay, let's take a mental health break. Close your eyes, if you can. I want you to breathe in. Breathe out. Picture this. Team Murdoch is hungry. There are four sedans, at least one a Mercedes and one a BMW, pulling up separately to a cracker barrel in Walterborough. Because what is carpooling? Picture Dick Harpoolian, making a joke about not qualifying for the senior discount even though everyone at the cracker barrel can see that he does. Picture him picking up the cracker barrel menu.

Starting point is 00:32:56 Picture his face as he reads the offerings. Broccoli cheddar chicken. Sugar, ham dinner. Breakfast burger. Double chocolate fudge, Coca-Cola cake. Because yeah, freaking right. Did you hear those two trying to be casual about the cracker barrel in the name of making it sound like they're the right to guys to assess Charleston's accessibility and affordability? Who are they going to call this stand when it's time for Alex trial?

Starting point is 00:33:26 Attorney Jack Swirling, you've defended murderers before, right? Is Elek Murdoch a murderer? Oh, God. I hope we didn't just give them an idea. So Judge McCaslin ruled that, yes, the trial needs to be moved out of the 14th Circuit, but she said that she needed time to assess where the trial should be held. The hearing ended with Team Murdoch not getting their way on that, or at least for now. We'll see where Judge McCaslin decides to have the trial.

Starting point is 00:34:05 Guess what happened after the hearing? Dick metaphorically lit some candles, put in his monocle, and got his quill wet. David, will you read Dick's letter to Judge McCaslin? August 17, 2006, via email, dear Judge McCaslin, given the court's concern about costs imposed on Collettent County, the defense would first recommend Richland County as a venue. Oh, really? After all that, you're okay with another county. I thought it had to be Charleston. Go ahead, David. The size of the potential jury, Vinayor, is on a scale comparable to Charleston, thus giving a much greater opportunity to find an impartial jury. Further, although not an absolute requirement, the racial demographics,

Starting point is 00:35:07 are similar to Colleton. Neither the defense nor the state would need to book hotel rooms for its attorneys, staff, or sled witnesses. The state objected that the Masters Golf Tournament during the first trial week might make Richland County accommodations unavailable, but it is unlikely witnesses will need hotel rooms during the first trial week because that week will be mostly or entire. consumed by jury selection. Hang on. Where have I heard this before? Oh, right, from Bill Barber, the travel expert.

Starting point is 00:35:46 And in the affidavit, their investigator says that there are no inexpensive hotels within a walking distance of the courthouse, correct? That's correct. I don't know all the hotels within walking distance at the courthouse are certainly expensive ones. I never really thought of that because, after all, when we were at Walterboro, no one's. Walterboro, no one stayed at a hotel at a walking distance in the courthouse. There are no hotels. If we had a trial in, say, Richland County, I would imagine that the Columbia area of prosecutors would stay at home and not rent a downtown hotel. So I was,

Starting point is 00:36:22 when I looked at hotels, I immediately thought of the nine affordable extended state hotels I passed going into work every day to the courthouse. Which are within 15 minutes of the court. Yes. Quote, in say, Richland County, end quote. Y'all did we just get tricked by the coconut shells shifting around. Stick a pen in that. David, will you keep reading from Dick's letter to Judge McCaslin? Finally, defendant respectfully requests that when attempting to minimize costs created by the venue transfer, the court give at least equal consideration to costs imposed upon the defense, which lacks the state's nearly limitless, resources. Ah, leave it to a former legislator to refer to the state's resources as nearly

Starting point is 00:37:13 limitless. In a state that checks notes, ranks in the bottom ten for education, women's health care, and crime. That should tell you everything you need to know about how the guys at the state house regard the public's money. It's limitless, y'all, when considering a good old boy needs a good old boy trial. F them kids in their educations. We got limitless funds to spin on an ex-lawyer's murder trial, even though he will be spending the rest of his life in prison for other crimes he committed against the good people of this state. Also, the whiplash. The whiplash, y'all. He went from only Charleston, the most expensive city in South Carolina, to, now please, your honor, consider my client's poverty.

Starting point is 00:38:04 Sorry, is there more, David? It was defendants' constitutional rights, not the states, which were violated by the intentional conduct of Becky Hill, an elected state official. Ugh, you have got to be kidding. Dick is basically like the DJ Khalid of legal filings at this point, instead yelling out Becky Hill's name and everything he produced. It is appropriate that the court act to protect the people of Collington County from costs created by their own elected officials' unexpected criminal conduct.

Starting point is 00:38:45 But it would be inappropriate to do so by imposing excessive and avoidable costs on the victims of her conduct. Seriously, could they sound any more like children? As an aside, we discussed with Mr. Waters an attempt to resolve this issue when court adjourned last Friday, but did not receive a response. And the answer is yes. This could sound more childish. Imagine starting off a hearing for a double murder retrial of the state's most notorious criminal good old boy who is supposedly not paying you and using a report that no one knew. about in Fitz News to make the prosecution look like they're up to no good, getting proven wrong in real time, and then getting scolded by the judge for playing games and not handling this in a professional or logical manner, and then sending that letter to her the next business day. I hope Dick's old man knees allow him to duck.

Starting point is 00:39:49 Did you notice how he phrases things to heighten the drama when court adjourned last Friday? Your letter to the judge was clocked at 1231 p.m. Monday, Dick. You can just say Friday. The hearing ended Friday afternoon, and you're complaining about not hearing from Creighton by Monday morning? And come on. Okay, so bottom line, the raid trial is going to be somewhere in one of the 41 counties that aren't in the 14th Circuit.

Starting point is 00:40:13 But the question is this. Is Richland County where Dick and Jim wanted this to be the whole time? Was this whole Charleston nonsense, including the clownish decision to put Phil Barber on the stand, meant to be, well, clownish? to push Judge McCaslin toward the actual place they wanted it to be held. Who knows with these guys? I hate to give them credit for being successfully crafty,

Starting point is 00:40:37 but we already know there's trickery afoot here with the mention of Judge R. Keith Kelly's transfer of venue order in the Beach v. Parker case, which Dick referred to as a work of art. Again, we'll talk more about Judge McCaslin's decision to transfer venue and how that came into play in part two of this episode. First, we have to talk about Ehrlich and his decision to tell. testify in the first trial, and whether that testimony will come into play during the second trial. As we shared last week, the state wants the ability to use that testimony if they need to, and

Starting point is 00:41:09 Team Murdoch doesn't want it used. We'll get into the arguments in a second but first. Remember this from the first trial? Mr. Murdoch, is that you on the Kennel video at 8.44 p.m. on June 7th, the night Maddie, Maggie and Paul were murdered. It is. were you in fact at the kennels at 844 p.m. on the night Maggie and Paul were murdered? I was. Did you lie to sled Agent Owen and Deputy Laura Rutland on the night of June 7th and told them that you stayed at the house after dinner? I did lie to them.

Starting point is 00:41:47 Did you lie to Agent Owen and Agent Croft on a follow-up interview on June 10th that the last time you saw Maggie and Paul was that dinner? I did lie to them. And in the interview of August 11th, did you tell Agent Owen and Agent Crawth, did you lie to them by telling them that you were not down at the kennels on that night? Yes.

Starting point is 00:42:18 Alec, why did you lie to Agent Owen, Agent Crawf, and Deputy Rutland about the last time you saw Maggie and Paul? As my addiction evolved over time, I would get in these situations or circumstances where I would get paranoid thinking. And remember this? I wasn't thinking clearly. I don't think I was capable of reason. And I lied about being down there. And I'm so sorry that I did. I'm sorry to my son Buster. I'm sorry to grandma, Papa T. I'm sorry to both of our families. Most of all, I'm sorry to Mags and Poppa. I would never intentionally do anything to hurt either one of them, ever, ever.

Starting point is 00:43:56 Did you continue lying after that night? Did you not? Once I lied, I continued to lie, yes, sir. Why? You know, oh, what a tangled web we weave. but once I told the lie, I mean, I told my family, I had to keep the line. I imagine these are among many moments that the state might want to use in the second trial, or at least at the ready, in a case that Eleg testifies again with a different story.

Starting point is 00:44:38 Now, the defense contended that the state did not have a right to use this testimony, because the retrial is a whole other trial. It is not the same as the first. Clean slate and all. Actually, David, T. Murdoch wrote something pretty impressive and convincing in their response to the state's motion to use the testimony. Will you read that? A new trial is new.

Starting point is 00:45:02 Did you know that it wasn't until 1982 that South Carolina elected its first woman judge? To family court, by the way. And it was another six years before a woman was elected to. the circuit judge judicial seat. That said, uh, duh. A new trial is a new trial. But a new trial doesn't mean it's a new case. Here is what went down on Friday, starting with Creighton. The issue, of course, boils down to the statute. And of course, the statute says that the testimony of a defendant in a criminal case shall not be afterwards used against the defendant in any other criminal case except upon an indictment for perjury. And of course, our position,

Starting point is 00:45:47 in that is that this is the same criminal case. This is not an other criminal case. It's the same indictment. It's the same allegations. It's the same case that we are doing. There's no question that we are starting the evidentiary presentation again from new, but that doesn't change the fact in the plain language of the statute that this is the same criminal case. This is where Judge McCaslin stopped Creighton to point out that the critical distinction, the element she needed to determine, was whether Alex Rachel is considered a new criminal case or the same criminal case. Here's Phil Barber with the rebuttal to Creighton's argument.

Starting point is 00:46:21 Let's call this work of oratory art. But he said, I want you to go into this picturing Phil quickly grabbing a pen and noting the time for his big gutcha moment. So we're concerned on what is the same cases versus another case. At 1023 a.m. in this hearing, Mr. Waters, standing at this podium said, quote, this is a new case. That was his statement on behalf of the state on a different motion.

Starting point is 00:46:54 He said, quote, this is a new case. Now for the purposes of this motion, it becomes, again, the same case. The defense's position is that a trial de novo is another case, that that is the logical, rational conclusion from the statute, that the purpose of the statute is to protect the ability of a defendant, to testify in one criminal case without a broad, irrevocable waiver of his Fifth Amendment rights. The state, as far as I can tell, takes the position that the indictment number controls, whether this is another case or not. Not anything substantive happening in a case. And I would point out that there's not a single case in which,

Starting point is 00:47:37 with a trial de novo, because of an error by a state actor, not to prosecution, but certainly a state actor, that that constitutes irrevocable waiver of the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights. For me, it's the pause, Phil takes, thinking he just had his legally blonde moment after he quotes Creighton as saying, this is a new case. All right. Well, I've read the case law. I've read the statute in this case, and I think it's pretty clear. A criminal defendant's testimony from a first trial is admissible at a retrial in the same case, and that is from 191150. The testimony of a defendant in a criminal case shall not afterwards be used against the defendant

Starting point is 00:48:28 in any other criminal case. That is our Supreme Court interpreted 191150 narrowly, and it limited its protection to the use in a different criminal case. criminal case, not the same case. So I believe that his testimony may come in under 804. I've got B1 or A1, I think it's B1, or for impeachment purposes. The court does not find the defendant's argument prevailing. I think you rely heavily on Harrison versus US, where the defendant was forced to testify

Starting point is 00:49:12 as a result of the prosecution using illegally obtained confessions by the defendant. Here, the defense argues that the evidentiary decision of the trial judge to allow evidence of the financial crimes coerced the defendant into testifying. However, you know, I went and looked at the ruling again from our Supreme Court. The court ruled that the evidence of the financial financial crimes in this case is admissible in the new trial, so long as it is probative to the murders. Accordingly, this is inherently different as an evidentiary issue versus illegal conduct. Well, isn't that something? First, Dick and Jim lost again. Sorry, boys.

Starting point is 00:50:03 But also, this is the judge clarifying what the financial ruling actually was. We see so many comments online and media commentary from people who should know better, who continue to wrongly frame the Supreme Court's finding that Judge Newman had allowed too much testimony in the first trial about Ellick's financial crimes to the point that it was wholly prejudicial and not probative. The commenters act like this was a wholesale indictment against the state's theory of motive, that the pressure Ehrlich was facing at the time of Maggie's and Paul's deaths as a result of his personal criminal empire starting to fall apart, led him to kill his wife and son, to rid himself of the burden they represented to him at the time, get sympathy, and to get his coworkers and Mark Tinsley off his back.

Starting point is 00:50:46 But it wasn't. The Supreme Court's instruction was to do better next time. You only want the jury to see him as guilty or not guilty of murder and not guilty of stealing. Back to Dick and Jim, losing again. You can practically hear Dick's ears go flat against his head after the judge told him there were consequences to Alex's decision to testify in the first trial. I do think, you know, there's a, when you testify in a case, there's consequences.

Starting point is 00:51:20 Testifying and not testifying, there's consequences. You don't get to tell your story, but then you're also at the peril of cross-examination, and it's sworn testimony. So I'm going to allow it in subject to what is being testified to in the trial. Okay? Your Honor, for the record, we would respectfully disagree. Disagree. Are you going to issue a formal written order or is that your ruling?

Starting point is 00:51:52 That was going to be my ruling. Of course, we would renew it when it becomes relevant, but I just want to make sure we're not perceived of waived an objection to that. Sure. I'm not going to let you waive any. objections, you can take objections to all my rulings at the end if you'd like, and we'll put it on, it'll be on the record. We'll revisit it again at trial. Did you know that Dick Harpoolian spent the first 14 years of his legal career without a single

Starting point is 00:52:22 woman being on the bench in the circuit court? That is 27% of his professional life. Anyway, I say that Dick and Jim lost again because that was a theme from the first trial, which was annoying because even though they lost so much and it became predictable, it did not stop them from hosting the clown show over and over again. And we all had to sit by while they metaphorically twirled their batons, mud wrestled, walk through the courtroom bashing symbols together, pole danced, clogged, and sang an a cappella version of What a Man by Salt and Papa. Just like attorney Noah Pines said in Cap of Justice 192, who, they waste a lot of time. While the defense did get a win on Friday, which we will talk about more in part two of

Starting point is 00:53:12 this episode, what we saw on Friday was the same old good old boys playing the same old games in just a different courtroom. Think about the big things that the defense spent most of their time talking about. The Fitznews fumble that ended up being an embarrassing nothing burger. The Charleston-erbust argument that they pretty much retracted by Monday. The Becky Hill comments and the jury tampering that has nothing to do with this trial. Oh, and they claimed that they wanted to be able to use cousin Eddie Smith's failed polygraph in court. Again, they know polygraphs aren't admissible in court, but they wanted to plant those seeds of doubt. Dick was so happy to remind the court that Cousin Eddie is the one who failed.

Starting point is 00:54:00 a polygraph in a test where he was asked if he killed Maggie and Paul Murdoch. Also in court, Dick absurdly claimed that Ehrlich Murdoch passed a polygraph test from the same polygrapher who tested Eddie Smith. But on Wednesday, Creighton Waters filed a scathing correction to the record that essentially said, girl, you are lying about that. No, he didn't. We'll talk more about that in part two. But this whole polygraph argument was never meant to go anywhere.

Starting point is 00:54:33 It was meant to inject points of confusion into a trial that should not be confusing. Three people went down to the kennels on June 7, 2021. Two of them died and one of them lied about being there. Those are the facts of this case that the defense is going to have to overcome. And while the rest of the media seems to be suiting up in clown costumes for the second act of Dick and Jim's Murdoch Circus, we will still be right here, in reality,

Starting point is 00:55:07 reminding y'all of the facts that matter in this case. Be on the lookout for part two of this week's True Sunlight. You won't want to miss it. Until next time, stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight.

Starting point is 00:55:27 True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production created by me, Mandy Matney, 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.

Murdaugh Murders Podcast - Judge Scolds Team Murdaugh for Courtroom Shenanigans Over Murder Weapon ‘Rumor’ (TSP161.1)

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.