Murdaugh Murders Podcast - MMP #84: The Latest on Stephen Smith, SLED’s Investigation into the Murders and Russell Laffitte’s Future

Episode Date: March 16, 2023

Thank you for your patience as this episode is publishing later than usual. As I said on social media, our team is in adjustment mode after the adrenaline and the chaos of the trial slowed down and we’re all still trying to all recenter our focus.  Now that Alex Murdaugh has been convicted in the murders of his wife and son, it’s time to take a look back on all the pieces that had to come together for the jury to deliver that guilty verdict. In the short time since Alex Murdaugh was convicted of murdering his wife and son, a lot has happened in the wake of his sentencing. This week on Murdaugh Murders Podcast, co-hosts Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell take a look at the latest criticism of the murder investigation and South Carolina Law Enforcement Division — as well as Jim Griffin’s strange post-trial social media presence and Russell Laffitte’s defeats in the courtroom. They also talk with Sandy Smith about the next steps in finding justice for her son, Stephen Smith. To learn more about the planned Independent Exhumation and Autopsy for Stephen, click here: http://bit.ly/3JGacec A private medical examiner must be present from the start of the exhumation through the examination period at a cost of approximately $750 per hour. It is a huge expense, but we are hoping that with your support we can make this happen and finally get the answers we need. If you can give, we thank you for your generosity. If you cannot give, we would appreciate you sharing and praying for justice for Stephen. We believe 2023 is Stephen's year. Thank you all again for the love and support. We all want to drink from the same Cup Of Justice — and it starts with learning about our legal system. By popular demand, Cup of Justice has launched as its own weekly show. Go to cupofjusticepod.com to learn more or click the link in the episode description to get a hot cup of justice wherever you get your podcasts! Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cup-of-justice/id1668668400 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3Itp67SQTZEHQGgrX0TYTl?si=39ff6a0cc34140f3 Consider joining our MMP Premium Membership community to help us SHINE THE SUNLIGHT! CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE SUNscribe to our free email list to get alerts on bonus episodes, calls to action, new shows and updates. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3KBMJcP And a special thank you to our sponsors: Microdose.com, PELOTON, Simplisafe, and others. Use promo code "MANDY" for a special offer! Find us on social media: Facebook.com/MurdaughPod/ Instagram.com/murdaughmurderspod/ Twitter.com/mandymatney Twitter.com/elizfarrell YouTube.com/c/MurdaughMurders Support Our Podcast at: https://murdaughmurderspodcast.com/support-the-show Please consider sharing your support by leaving a review for MMP on Apple at the following link: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/murdaugh-murders-podcast/id1573560247 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The justice system can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be. Join us to hold public agencies accountable because we all want to drink from the same cup of justice, and it starts with learning about our legal system. With tales from the newsroom and the courtroom, Liz Farrell, Eric Bland and I invite you to gain knowledge, insight, and tools to hold public agencies and officials accountable. If you liked our Cup of Justice bonus episodes, you will love Cup of Justice shows on the new feed. Together, our hosts create the perfect trifecta of legal experience, journalistic integrity,

and a fire lit to expose the truth wherever it leads. Search for Cup of Justice wherever you get your podcast, or visit cupofjusticepod.com. I don't know why there seems to still be the system of people supporting Alec Murdoch and giving him the benefit of the doubt after all of the lies have been exposed and evidence against him has come to light. But I do know that our team is still fighting for justice for so many who have been hurt by this system, and we will continue to expose those who protect it. My name is Mandy Matney.

I have been covering the Murdoch family for more than four years now. This is the Murdoch Murders podcast. MMP is produced by my husband David Moses and is written by journalist Liz Farrell. Hello again and thank you for your patience as this episode is publishing later than usual. As I said on social media, our team is now in adjustment mode. After the adrenaline and the chaos of the trial slowed down, we're all still trying to recenter our focus. I've learned a whole lot in this four-year journey, and one of those things that I want

to tell you is to prioritize your mental health above everything else because the hard work just can't get done if you're not in the right headspace. I simply couldn't have done this work with a nine to five job. I work weird hours and require a lot of time off. Working for myself, I have the ability to say, this is just too much for me today, or I'm not ready to do that yet, which is something I wish I learned earlier in life. This story has changed me in so many ways. I'm just not the same person who I was when I found out about the boat crash.

I had no idea that this level of evil existed in the world, and I had no idea there would be so many people who are either willing to protect it or ignore it. It makes me depressed and angry seeing it play out on social media. You always hear people say that changing a system is difficult. I learned that firsthand, but it is possible, and you, our listeners, are making it possible. Please stay pesky. We need you. I say this because there is a lot to be done, and that's the feeling that I'm wrestling

with right now. While the verdict was validating, it wasn't conclusive in the way I wanted it to feel. It was a huge momentum, but not at all the penali. We still need justice for Steven Smith. We still need conclusions to Alex's co-conspirators. We still need justice for the Beach family. We still need answers about public officials with close ties to the Mardocks, including Police Chief Greg Alexander, Judge Carmen Mullen, and Solicitor Duffy Stone.

As you all know, the first two and a half months of 2023 have been one wild ride here in the Low Country. The world finally got to meet the Mardock family and hear for themselves how someone like Ellick Mardock could get away with so much evil for so long, and that has been vindicating for so many people here, including us. This week, we wanted to slow down this ride a little to update y'all on a few things in the world of Ellick Mardock, and let's start with a big story that ran over the weekend.

First, I want to remind you about an important fact here. Ellick Mardock murdered his wife Maggie and his son Paul. He was judged by a jury of his peers in a county that answered to the Mardocks for generations, and still he was found guilty, something none of us expected to see despite believing the evidence was clear. Why did he kill Maggie and Paul? We will never fully understand the answer to that question, but we don't have to understand it.

How could he do it? Well, how could he have done all of the things that he's admitted to doing? Yes, murder and stealing are two different things, but they can also go hand in hand, especially when the latter crime was so prolific, inexpensive, and at the time of the murders just one subpoena away from being discovered. The way we see it is this. A man who can override his moral compass to operate the way Ellick Mardock has been operating for most of his adult life is capable of doing that very thing when faced with a scenario

where it was either him or them. Ellick was in a full existential crisis on June 7th, 2021, and he chose himself. He eliminated the two biggest financial dependence and was posed to re-enter society as a burden-free widower and grieving father with buster by his side. The thing is that the Mardock is innocent, crowd seems to forget that Ellick Mardock was Ellick Mardock. He viewed himself as untouchable because at the time of the murders, he was untouchable. As was his father, as was his grandfather, as was his great grandfather.

But Ellick's financial crimes, crimes he committed against the law firm, the very foundation of his family name, went a step too far. Had his lawyer and partner Danny Henderson obtained his bank records, Ellick's long game would have likely ended right then and there, and even his allies at the firm would have been hard pressed to protect him to that bold and dangerous degree. There were too many victims, and the problem would have been too large to contain. To protect Ellick would have put every partner there in jeopardy of losing his license. So that wasn't going to happen.

His financial crimes represented the only aspect of his life that wouldn't have been untouchable if he were found out, especially now that his father was dying. And then there's this, Ellick Mardock wasn't just the son, grandson, and great-grandson of the 14 circuit's most powerful men, he himself was a badge-carrying prosecutor. And that badge gave him the position of deputy solicitor, the number two guy in that office. He carried that badge everywhere. Let me repeat that, a plaintiff's attorney who prosecuted exactly one case of his own in more than 15 years and who assisted a handful of other cases handled by his father was allowed

to have a badge and blue lights as if he were a sworn police officer, which he was not. And speaking of sworn, he never actually swore an oath of office for the privilege of carrying that badge. No, he was just allowed to have it. And the thing is, the person who gave him all of that unchecked power, who is solicitor Duffy Stone, is still a public official. Will anyone with authority investigate him? Or are we all just going to pretend that that big problem wasn't exposed for the world

to see? So all of that said, it's been really hard to understand what exactly it is that people don't get about what that badge meant and how that badge alone would have been able to influence the outcome of just about every entanglement Elik found himself in. Elik's lineage, that badge and his position at PMPD made for the trifecta of Teflon and everyone around him was trained well. They knew what they were up against. Just look at how many times a single question from the people around him, even just the

single one word question of why would have stopped his crimes in their tracks. But no one asked any questions. No one challenged him on his answers until June 7th, 2021. So we want you to keep all of that in mind as we tell you about this post and courier story. On Saturday, the post and courier published a piece calling out Sled's investigation into the murders of Maggie and Paul. I'll have David read a key paragraph from the story written by reporters Thadmore, Avery

Wilkes and Jocelyn Greschek. The agency lost crucial GPS data from Murdoch's wife's phone, which could have conclusively tied the disgraced attorney to the crime. Agents let Murdoch's friends and family clean up his home before they searched it for evidence and they let the group stay inside while they conducted their search. They didn't check Murdoch's parents' house, a cornerstone of his alibi, for evidence for three months. And defense attorneys accused Sled's lead investigator of twice giving incorrect information

to the grand jury that indicted Murdoch on murder charges. Sled chief Mark Heel commented to the paper that this criticism was being lodged without much needed context. Now, as you all know, we are all about context here at the Murdoch Murders podcast. It is at the core of what we believe good journalism should be. This story lacked key information and instead presented itself as if Dick and Jim had ordered it off of the post and courier lunch menu. It was cooked perfectly to their liking, so the context.

Well, this story is exactly what we have been talking about for years. It is why the podcast was created. Because this story was too complicated and too much to consume in basically any other medium. It is what we worried about from day one in the Boat Crash case. It is why we believe that Steven Smith's case remains unsolved. It is why no one knows exactly what happened to Gloria Satterfield. It is the absolute why of everything.

Law enforcement treated the Murdochs differently from the rest of us. This cannot be denied. It is the thing that needs to change. I'll have David read this part of the post and courier story where they say it themselves. Here's David. The scion of a family that ran the local solicitor's office for more than eight decades, Murdoch had a cozy relationship with local law enforcement. And yet, it's like we are in crazy town and we're nothing we know to be true about

Elik Murdoch, along with everything that came out in the trial, including his colossal lies, gets completely reset to zero in favor of criticizing those who have worked hard to bring those lies to light despite the odds. Now, before we get further here, we think it was absolutely fair game to write a story examining the sled investigation. The journalists who reported this story are all respectable reporters. All three reported on every step of the trial, but gosh, it is frustrating that a legitimate story like this gets presented as if sled's missteps were the result of incompetence without

accounting for the Murdoch's influence over the investigation. And quite frankly, it is dangerous for the media to push this pro-defense narrative in a time when the tides are changing in South Carolina. And it's clear that the press favoring the good ol' boys played a huge role in emboldening the Murdoch's unchecked power. I need to say that we think that sled worked hard on this case, and that, by and large, their agents gave a great showing on the witness stand. The post and courier's position seems to be that Elik Murdoch was found guilty in spite

of sled. But let's look at the paper's main criticisms of sled, starting with the GPS data that got overwritten on Maggie's phone. Remember the reason 14th Circuit solicitor Duffy Stone said his investigators were on the scene on the night of the murders in the days following them? His office had an investigator who specialized in the extraction of data from cell phones. They were there to help, Duffy said, despite it being highly unorthodox for the prosecutor's investigators team to be there on the scene of the murder.

These were Elik's co-workers, and this wasn't remotely their job. Duffy refused to recuse himself for two whole months during which critical information was lost from Maggie's phone. The post and courier's story does not mention this, but that doesn't surprise us. After Duffy was initially criticized for his involvement in the case and refusal to recuse himself, the post and courier ran a story that publicly exonerated or attempted to Duffy's stone of his bizarre and dubious decision, a decision that Duffy himself as the National Director of the Association of District Attorneys had recently warned prosecutors against making.

In fact, I have to point this out, in a 2021 story breaking the news of Duffy's recusal, the post and courier defended his position by quoting, checks notes, University of South Carolina Law Dean Robert Wilcox, who we still have questions about considering the whole buster readmission scandal and everything that we learned on the jailhouse phone calls. He was quoted in the piece. I want David to read this part now because it's so crazy given what the post and courier is saying now about the evidence in the murder case. Without arrests and a clear suspect, the prosecutor's role in the case was limited at that point.

Former University of South Carolina Law Dean Robert Wilcox told the newspaper at the time, the solicitor's office should primarily be working in an advisory role, he said, making sure that law enforcement handles the case constitutionally and avoids missteps that could taint evidence or testimony. So anything involving Maggie's phone and questions about the data extraction needs to mention who put himself in charge of that aspect of the investigation. Duffy, who recused himself on the same day, Elick had his third and final interview with Sled when it was clear that he was a suspect.

I have to wonder if someone called Duffy's office after that interview. The story also criticized Sled for allowing Murdoch's friends and family to hang out on the scene and clean up the family's house before agents got to search it. But not mentioned in the story is how the scenario blatantly contradicts the defense's assertion that Sled targeted Elick from the beginning. Do we think Sled should have kicked every Murdoch and every PMPD attorney off of the property that night? Of course we do.

But again, this is what this entire podcast has been about. The deference that gets paid to Elick Murdoch and his family by law enforcement. A Sled agent even offered to take her badge off to make Elick's family and friends more comfortable as she searched the house. Which what is that? Does she do that for everyone? We hope every law enforcement officer in the state is looking at this and reminding themselves to treat everyone that they encounter at crime scenes with the same amount of respect.

Another criticism of the story is that Sled didn't immediately search Almeida. Were Elick said that he had gone that night? Do we think they should have searched Almeida? Again, of course we do. Elick murdered his family and likely stored the weapons and closed their temporarily. And that is the place where he told police he was when the murders happened. That would have been super helpful to the case if they did that at the time. But again, Elick was not a suspect that night.

Sled did not treat him as a suspect and they did not have probable cause at that point to believe they needed to search Almeida. And does anyone really think that Randolph Murdoch, the long admired chief prosecutor of the 14th Circuit who was lying in a hospital bed with pneumonia and lung cancer, was going to allow Sled to search the house? Who would have signed that search warrant? Let's say a Sled agent actually had the nerve that night to push the issue and ask for that permission or who somehow was able to articulate why Elick was a suspect beyond

he found them. And why Almeida needed to be searched immediately and who somehow was able to find a judge in Murdoch country willing to sign that search warrant? Does anyone? Think that guy's chain of command would have supported that? Does anyone think that agent would still have their job today? Does anyone think that Sled chief Mark Keel wouldn't have had an onslaught of good old boys screaming into his phone and threatening his job?

This is how this stuff happens. It is the reality of life in the low country that so many reporting on this story still do not understand and it is the context that helps us understand why Sled didn't search the house that night. Again, this is what we've been talking about. We'll be right back. The justice system can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be. Join us to hold public agencies accountable because we all want to drink from the same

cup of justice and it starts with learning about our legal system. With tales from the newsroom and the courtroom, Liz Farrell, Eric Bland and I invite you to gain knowledge, insight, and tools to hold public agencies and officials accountable. If you liked our Cup of Justice bonus episodes, you will love Cup of Justice shows on the new feed. Together, our hosts create the perfect trifecta of legal experience, journalistic integrity, and a fire lit to expose the truth wherever it leads. Search for Cup of Justice wherever you get your podcast or visit cupofjusticepod.com.

Now there are two other aspects of this story that we want to cover quickly because we've talked about them before at length both here and on Cup of Justice. One is the grand jury testimony of Agent David Owen. The defense and their online supporters, whether real or robotic, claimed for a while that sled had lied to the grand jury. And that's not quite what happened. There were two issues here. The first is that sled incorrectly told the state grand jury that the Murdoch family's

guns were all loaded with the same two types of ammo that were in the shotgun that was used to kill Paul. That's a pretty big deal and certainly a very significant clue and God how we wish sled had gotten this right so that we wouldn't have to have this conversation now. But the explanation for this was that Owen had simply misstated the situation. The family's guns were loaded with two different brands of the same ammo. Now that might not be a great explanation, but this is a case with more than 700 pieces of evidence that got entered onto the court record.

And from what we understand, Owen wasn't alone in believing that the family loaded their guns in that very specific way. The second issue is the high velocity impacts batter on the shirt. The state elected not to introduce that evidence as an exhibit in this trial. Why? Because it was too complicated to explain and it opened way too many doors for the defense to easily mislead the jury. Here's the Cliff's Notes version from our reporting.

There were two tests for blood done on the shirt. The first test for presumptive blood came back positive. Photos from that staining were sent to Thomas Bevel, a bloodstain expert in Oklahoma. Those photos, though, were not at high enough resolution for Bevel to see the misting that sled believes came from when Alex stood atop Maggie and shot her in the head. Bevel asked for the raw files of the photos and once he had those, he could see the pattern at the top of the shirt, which could have, quote, only come from one thing. Unfortunately for the state, Bevel's draft report accurately reflected what he saw in

that first set of photos, which was nothing. His final report included his findings after looking at the higher resolution photos. This is very explainable, but could lead to confusion. And there's another problem. The second test, a test called hematrace, that tests for human blood, was also done for some unknown reason. I say unknown reason because investigators we've spoken to have told us that this test was not necessary in this instance.

After that first test, the stains were tested for DNA and they came back belonging to Maggie. And that should have been the end of the testing there because the DNA test alone showed that those were blood stains. But the hematrace was applied to the shirt nonetheless. Now because those stains were such a fine mist, sled had doused this shirt in the chemicals from that first blood test for presumptive blood. That dousing seemed to cause a false negative in the hematrace test, meaning now the shirt tested negative for human blood on the record.

That was problematic because even though it's explainable, it's confusing. Beyond that, Owen, Bevel, and the Attorney General's office didn't know about this hematrace test and it's not clear why. The defense maintains that Owen had lied to the grand jury about the presence of blood on the shirt, but he wasn't lying. He was stating the facts as he knew them to be at the time of the testimony, which we think is important to note. Also important to note is that the shirt had Maggie's DNA on it in the areas where that

misting was. The results of this mysterious hematrace test, by the way, were found by the defense. No one seemed to know about it until Dick Harputley and brought it to Sled's attention. And that discovery ended the high velocity impact spatter evidence. In episode 20 of Cup of Justice, Eric Bland told us that he wouldn't be surprised if state legislators used the Murdoch trial as a reason to open an investigation into Sled. That seemed over the top to us, even knowing what we know about how the state works. But then this story came out and it seemed like a bit of a precursor.

A step one to the potential of a bigger plan, if you will. Like we said, we totally support the paper's decision to take a look at how the state's law enforcement division handled one of, if not the most expensive cases in its history. But we believe the scaffolding here should have been the lie Eric told about his alibi and the influence of his family name and how that played out at the crime scene. That is the underlying problem with this case. Eric did not cooperate with the investigation. He met with Sled three times because he wanted to look innocent and he wanted to spy on the

enemy. He wanted to know what they had on him so he could adjust and head it off at the pass. By all accounts, Eric did not make a meaningful effort to find the quote real killers. And instead lied about almost every aspect of that night, right up until he needed to reverse course and take the stand. Eric was found guilty. For all the obstacles Sled had with this case, they came through. The kennel video was obviously the most important evidence in this case and Eric's decision

to testify definitely helped swaggerers toward their guilty votes. But we cannot ignore the fact that Eric took that stand because Sled's investigation had painted him into that corner. Just about every assertion made by the defense and the lead up to and during the trial has proven to be false. At what point does that matter? We just have one last thing to say about that story and again, we are not criticizing these reporters but rather pointing out that we can't lose sight of the bigger issue.

For law enforcement to do their jobs, the people at the very top of South Carolina's various power structures, whether it's legislators, agency leaders or good old boys in far flung counties need to respect the rule of law and when they don't, they need to be held accountable for that. When it comes to the good old boys, no law enforcement officer should feel like they're going to lose their job as a result of doing their job. Speaking of people doing their jobs, Alex attorney Jim Griffin appears to still be working overtime defending his client with the intensity of a scorned woman who punches the mistress

instead of the terrible husband. But we'll get to that. First, last Thursday, Dick Harputtley infiled notice of Alex's intent to appeal his conviction. This is the first step in what will likely be a years long process, possibly up to eight years, according to some sources. Dick and Jim have already indicated their intention to take this to the US Supreme Court. In a press conference after Alex sentencing, after making a point to tell the media that they weren't going to make a statement, Dick and Jim said they believed the strongest

grounds for Alex's appeal was the judge's decision to have allowed in testimony about Alex's financial crimes because they think that testimony did more harm to Alex's character than it did to provide explanation of the motive, which they said was ludicrous and illogical. Here's Dick on whether they would have done anything differently. No. No. I mean, look, once the judge, first of all, we believe if the judge was going to let that

stuff in, it should have been limited to the Ferris case, which is what they were asking him about on Monday on the fee. Number two, Tinsley, the person that made the motion to compel to be heard on Thursday, Dawes Cook, Alex's lawyer, both agreed there wasn't going to be any storm or Armageddon or anything that was going to happen that Thursday. The judge might have issued an order, which months down the line might have posed a problem. So once they got that character, character information is, he's a thief, he's a liar, then it dictated this jury had to think he was a despicable human being and not to be

believed. So it was about character. It wasn't about motives. So as a result, our options were limited. Should he take the stand? Well, you know, we debated that. He always wanted to take the stand. But once that information was in, I mean, he had to take the stand to explain the kennel

video, the lie, if you will. But his credibility had been stripped away by the financial mysteries. Here's Jim on the family's continued support of Ellick and why Buster didn't speak on his father's behalf during sentencing. We could have had Mother Teresa up there speaking on behalf of Alec at sentencing. I mean, he was getting a double life sentence that that was that was expected. I mean, this is Judge Newman. He has he's a very stringent punisher when it comes to crimes and sentences.

I mean, that that was never in dispute. And so Buster to get up and and speak on his dad's behalf would not have made a difference. And why do you want to? Why do you want to put that kid through more trauma than than anybody that we can imagine has ever been through? What's that? You know, I can't speak to Buster's feelings. I can tell you this.

There was a lot of effort by the state to convince the family that Alec is the murderer. The family came to trial every day for six weeks, expecting to hear proof positive that he killed Maggie and Paul, something that they had not heard before. After six weeks of trial, they came away more convinced that he did not do this and they stand fastly in his camp and support him. And that's that's that's where they stand. Alec was not optimistic that with with all of the scrutiny and press and all this bad acts being out in the public in the world, you know, media domain that he could get,

you know, a jury to put out all the noise and and just focus on the murder. And so coming in, he was somewhat pessimistic. He became optimistic as we got through the process, but but I got to tell you and all you reporters, you know, you know the whole story, I'm sure. And if you're sitting on that jury, they heard everything that would be in an HBO documentary or a Netflix documentary about the Murdoch family dynasty downfall, except the Susan, the Stephen Smith map. I mean, so we were hoping to get a jury to put all, you know, that could ignore the

noise, focus on the murder and went up trying to case that that they could have watched on Netflix. I guess Jim didn't get the memo on Randy Murdoch's interview with The New York Times where he all but said he believed his brother was guilty, even though it should not have been surprising in any way that Alex defense team would still be defending him now that the trial is over. It still kind of is. Especially given Jim Griffin's loosey goosey closing arguments when it seemed like he was

finally done in, conquered by all of his clients lies and having to explain how every piece of evidence against Elick was either a coincidence or a misunderstanding. So many people online and in messages to us have expressed concern for Jim because of how personally he seemed to take this case and that outcome. Someone sort of hoped he'd take some time off and reset his jets, but that's not what he's done. Instead, Jim is somehow still standing and punching at the air in defense of Elick on social media.

On Monday, Jim, whose Twitter bio now says, even my haters got haters, commented on a court TV reporters retweet of a clip of an interview with Stephen Smith's mother, Sandy, who you will hear from later in this episode. In it, Sandy doesn't mention Buster's name a single time. Most of the clip is about wanting to find answers and how the damage to Stephen's body did not align with the medical examiner's claim that Stephen had been hit by a car. At the end of the one minute clip, Sandy tells the reporter how and when she and her family heard that quote, the Murdoch boys might have been involved with her son's murder.

She said she told Steven's twin sister not to believe everything she heard because people are going to talk. Sandy even told the reporter that she herself didn't believe it. A woman who clearly didn't watch the clip commented on that post and said, why are you continuing to give this legs rumor? It's all rumor. Don't you ghouls think Buster Murdoch lost enough? Shame on you.

A quick look at this woman's account shows that she's not likely connected to the Murdochs, but rather basing her opinions on reading on-source stories online and watching documentaries. Another person who clearly didn't watch the clip is Jim Griffin, who commented on this woman's post to say, I couldn't agree more. At Chanley Court TV and at Court TV, she'd know better than to exploit Mrs. Smith and denigrate Buster. Disgusted. Now, no one is faulting Jim for defending Buster, and it's nice that he seemed to care

about Sandy, at least for his purposes here, but the issue is this. Jim Griffin, plus the Alec Murdoch case, plus Twitter, equals what is this man doing? At the time of the roadside shooting incident, Jim made a spectacle of himself, tweeting at Mandy and betting her bottles of rum that his client had too been shot in the head. It was bizarre behavior from a lawyer, especially one of Jim's caliber. During the trial, Jim also got called out on national television by Judge Clifton Newman for tweeting out a link to a Kathleen Parker column in the Washington Post with his own comment.

Alec Murdoch's trial reveals a sloppy investigation. On the Saturday after the trial was over, Jim posted a photo of himself sticking his face in the hole of a painting that made it look like he was a little cowboy riding a giant chicken. At the cowboy's head, someone had taped a piece of paper that said, I was at the Murdoch trial. With that photo, Jim posted the message, Walter, bro, you were a gracious host, happy trails. The comments on that post were really varied, but many people pointed out that the post

itself was tacky because Paul's nickname was rooster and obviously because of the chicken aspect of the kennel video. About a week after the trial, Jim posted a story about Robert Blake's death and made it a point to give a shout out to one of the talking heads on TV who had devoted almost two months of her life to praising Dick and Jim and helping spread their talking points. Over this past week, and he unsurprisingly posted this post and career story about Sled and then got shredded in hundreds of comments, many of which said a variation of your client is still guilty and if Sled misstepped, it was because of your client.

Jim also got told to move on, which maybe he should. This can't be healthy for him. We'll be right back. Okay, there's one more thing we want to talk about today. Russell Lafitte. So the second Elex trial was over, it seems Russell Lafitte re-entered the scene and it has been nonstop since then. First, on the Monday after the trial was over, federal judge Richard Gergel issued a 42 page

order, denying Russell's motion for a new trial. Not only did Judge Gergel deny that motion, he made an effort to let Russell know that he's being really extra right now and not in a good way. The problem with Russell, who still has two ankle monitors, by the way, is that he hired a second defense team purportedly to help him prepare for his appellate case. That in and of itself isn't the problem, obviously he can hire as many lawyers as he wants to. Here's the thing.

The second defense team is being led by an attorney named Mark Moore from Nexon Pruitt. You might remember Mark's name because he is also one of Greg Parker's attorneys in the Beach family's civil conspiracy case in which Parker and his attorneys stand accused of releasing confidential court documents related to the boat crash case, which included photos of Mallory Beach's body. Those photos got published in a promo for a documentary about the Murdochs in December 2021. Mark, who is a former federal prosecutor, is known for being bullish in his approach.

As such, he filed a supplemental motion to Bart Daniels and Matt Austin's motion for a new trial. In the motion, Mark made the same arguments that Bart and Matt had already made, but then threw both Bart and Matt under the bus and preemptively claimed ineffective counsel as a basis for a mistrial. Impressive counsel is usually something that comes up after the sentencing because otherwise it can create a conflict of interest before the attorney's job is done. Judge Gurgle obviously was not a fan of this approach.

Here's what he wrote in a footnote in his order. Representing a criminal defendant is not like tag team wrestling where a new member of the team comes into the ring after the first member of the team suffers reverses and needs relief. There is only one client, the defendant, and he is bound by the actions of his counsel acting on his behalf at that time. Defendant does not get a do-over by replacing his first trial team with a new set of lawyers when he was not able to obtain the results he desired. Russell's defeat really, really needed to be told this because from the beginning of

his trial, it seemed clear to us that much like Dick and Jim's client, Russell and his family thought they knew better than his attorneys. Even during his bond reconsideration hearing, when he testified on his own behalf, Russell had the air of a man who was accustomed to being able to talk his way out of things much like Ellick. It didn't work in that hearing though. It didn't work when his cousin, in what has to be one of the most bizarre moves in all of the Murdoch-related cases, released Russell TV on YouTube during the trial.

And it didn't work when the jury came back with their guilty verdicts. A few days after Judge Gergel issued his order, Bart Daniel and Matt Austin filed a motion to withdraw as Russell's counsel due to the, quote, client's substantial failure to fulfill his financial obligations to counsel for representation at trial and for post-trial relief. The judge granted their motion the very next day. That's right. Russell's appeal has not been paying his bills apparently. Raise your ankle monitor if you were shocked by that.

Let me summarize this real quick. Russell lost his trial despite all his best efforts to all shucks the jury and the public into thinking he was wrongfully accused. And when he lost, he hired an aggressive appellate team that instead of focusing on the appeal, interfered in the post-trial conviction relief phase of the trial and stepped all over Russell's trial team to the point of irritating the judge, the one who will be sentencing Russell. And then Russell was unceremoniously dumped by his trial team before his sentencing because he, quote, substantially failed to pay his bills.

And he's apparently still wearing those two ankle monitors. This guy is so messy to the point that I'm almost able to believe he was just a useful idiot to Alec, almost able to believe. The jury is still out on that front. Speaking of that, on the same day that Russell's counsel threw him to the curb, Russell's appellate team, the one's Judge Gurgle, seemed to take particular delight in referring to as defense team number two, filed a second motion for a new trial on the basis of, quote, newly discovered evidence of Mr. Lafitte's innocence.

What is this newly discovered evidence? Alec Murdoch's testimony. The motion reads, Mr. Murdoch took full responsibility for his own actions and testified that Mr. Lafitte did nothing wrong and did not have any knowledge of Mr. Murdoch's criminal activity. Okay. And who was that? That was Russell Lafitte. That Palmyra State Bank?

Yes, sir. And after that, did you get Russell Lafitte to start loaning you money from the power girls account that he was conservative for? He loaned me money from the Plylar account. I don't know if I got him to do that. Oh, you didn't talk to him about it? Y'all didn't talk about that at all? No, we did talk about it.

I mean, there's emails to that effect. Are you disputing that to this jury? Mr. Waters, I'm not disputing. I'm just telling you that Russell Lafitte gave me a loan from the Plylars. Your question was, did I get him to do that? And I don't necessarily believe that to be accurate. Well, who came up with the idea? I don't know that it was come up with an idea.

That was, I think Russell felt like that it was a sound investment for those girls to charge me a higher interest rate when they weren't getting but so much interest somewhere else. Okay. Which part of what I just asked you about the Plylars do you take issue with? You take issue that y'all didn't conspire to do that? You and Russell? Yes.

You take issue with that? You take issue with that? Okay. I can tell you that Russell Lafitte never conspired with me to do anything. Whatever was done was done by me. Okay. No, I don't dispute that. What I dispute is if you're insinuating in any way, this was stuff that I did.

Okay. I mean, this stuff, I did these things wrong. Russell Lafitte didn't do anything. I'm not here to talk about that. I'm just talking about what went on. And I know, but you keep talking about what I did with Russell Lafitte and what I want to let you know is that I did this and I'm the one that took people's money that I shouldn't have taken and that Russell Lafitte was not involved in helping me do that knowingly.

If he did it, he did it without knowing it. This is like the Hamburglar testifying that Ronald McDonald didn't know he was stealing hamburgers. Why would anyone ever believe what the Hamburglar has to say about the clown who claims he didn't know his hamburgers were being burgled by someone named the Hamburglar? And yet, defense team number two is like, in light of Mr. Murdoch's undisputed sworn testimony that Mr. Lafitte did not participate in a conspiracy and was not knowingly involved in any criminal activity, Mr. Lafitte respectfully requested a new trial.

Jokes aside, this will be interesting. The challenge that the government had in getting a conviction on all six of Russell's charges was that a key element of those charges was Russell knowing about the scheme. He had to know he was participating in a conspiracy to steal that money. Russell has always maintained that he did everything he is accused of doing and that even though those things weren't proper, they weren't criminal to him because he didn't know there was a crime taking place. Russell's legal strategy to force the government into a shortened timeline to trial backfired

when Elex's legal strategy to force the state into a shortened timeline to trial ended up with Elex on the stand months before Russell's sentencing date, finally saying the thing Russell needed him to say in November. It's kind of funny to think about this. Elex refused to testify in Russell's trial because he didn't want to incriminate himself in the financial crimes, which makes sense. But then when it came to saving his own bacon, Elex readily engaged in a prolonged self-incrimination in the financial crimes.

Russell gently applying talc powder to his ankle calluses in preparation for a day spent howling his land when he got that call. Elex just said you're innocent. We don't expect Russell's sentencing to be until at least May, possibly June, but we'll be keeping a close eye on that case as it heats up again. So there is a lot going on. As we speak, the MMP research team is focused on getting answers to the long list of questions surrounding these cases.

But our main priority right now is to help Sandy Smith get justice for her son's murder. And we do have some news on that front. The Smith family has launched a GoFundMe to support their new goal as a step to obtain justice for Steven by funding an independent exhumation in autopsy. While Sled's investigation is still ongoing and active, and we still hope to have a full update for y'all in that front soon, the family has decided that this is the best course of action. Because if Sled funded an autopsy, it would likely go to MUSC, where Dr. Aaron Presnoe.

Dr. Presnoe, if you remember, is the pathologist who mysteriously ruled that Steven's death was a hit and run. Even though there was no physical evidence to match that conclusion. Highway Patrolman Thomas Moore, who oddly enough ended up being a financial victim of Ellick Murdoch's, had a heated conversation with Presnoe about this conclusion. His report said that she concluded that it was a hit and run because Steven's body was found in the roadway and because he didn't have a bullet hole. In Moore's report, he said something that was one of the strangest things I've ever

read in a public document. Quote, I then asked her why she was ruling it as a motor vehicle accident and what she thought caused the injury. She told me that it was not her job to figure that out. It was mine. End quote. We will unpack all of this in later episodes. But I'm saying this to tell you that Sandy is completely justified in not trusting the

Medical University of South Carolina to complete Steven's autopsy because of what happened in 2015. I spoke with Sandy about this on Tuesday afternoon. If Sled does it, his body will have to go back to MUSC. So I didn't want that chance again. And something else I would like to clear up. Sandy Smith just wants answers about who killed Steven and who helped cover it up. Anyone pushing this absurd narrative that Sandy only wants to believe that certain people

did this should be ashamed of themselves. I have known Sandy for four years now. She had the right to not trust her former lawyer and to fire him when he spoke to the media about her case before speaking to her. I asked Sandy about this. I could care less what the person's name is, if they come for money or if they're poor like my family. But I want to know because I think Steven deserves justice and it doesn't matter to

me if your name is Tom, Dick or Harry, I could care less. It is that simple. She just wants justice. The link to the GoFundMe is in the description and I have shared it on all of my social media pages. By the time we talked to Sandy on Wednesday afternoon, the fundraiser had already hit $11,000. I'm truly amazed.

When I got that text at work that it was $10,000, I just had tears in my eyes and I told my co-worker, I said, I just want to cry right now. Sandy told me that she does trust that Sled is working on Steven's case. But this is something the family can do independently from Sled's investigation to help find out who killed Steven. I asked Sandy if she feels momentum in the investigation from this. But it's slow progress. I know they're doing their job, but there's some answers that a mother needs that Sled

can't help with. We didn't get answers to first go round. So if we try to do it a second time, we might can actually see a different ruling in his case, not a vehicle versus pedestrian. This is a strict murder, not hit by a car. Both Sled and Allen Wilson's office have vowed to leave no stones unturned related to the Murdoch case. We are begging them to dedicate as many resources to Steven's case as they did to the double

homicide to remind South Carolina that justice isn't just for the privileged and the powerful. As someone who donated to the GoFundMe wrote on the page earlier today, everybody counts or nobody counts. That is what this is about. There are so many threads to pull in the Steven Smith case and we will continue to do that. We want more than anything for 2023 to be the year where the Smith family can finally get answers. As a part of our mission to help keep Steven's story in the spotlight, we will be chatting

with Sandy Smith soon for a happy hour YouTube with MMP Premium subscribers. Stay tuned for an announcement on that. Stay pesky and stay in the sunlight. The Murdoch Murders podcast is created and hosted by me, Mandy Matney, produced by my husband, David Moses, and Liz Farrell is our executive editor from Luna Shark Productions. The justice system can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be. Join us to hold public agencies accountable because we all want to drink from the same cup of justice and it starts with learning about our legal system.

With tales from the newsroom and the courtroom, Liz Farrell, Eric Blanda, and I invite you to gain knowledge, insight, and tools to hold public agencies and officials accountable. If you liked our Cup of Justice bonus episodes, you will love Cup of Justice shows on the new feed. Together, our hosts create the perfect trifecta of legal experience, journalistic integrity, and a fire lit to expose the truth wherever it leads. Search for Cup of Justice wherever you get your podcast or visit cupofjusticepod.com.