Murdaugh Murders Podcast - TSP #144 - Mandy Faces Cruel Courtroom Ambush by Billionaire Greg Parker’s Legal Team in Conspiracy Case

Episode Date: April 16, 2026

Last week, investigative journalist Mandy Matney showed up in Cherokee County Courthouse in Gaffney, South Carolina, for a hearing related to her request that her deposition in the Mallory Beach civil conspiracy case be held in the offices of her lawyers or Beaufort County Courthouse — somewhere secure.  But when the hearing began, the attorneys of billionaire gas station owner Greg Parker — who is a defendant in the case — AMBUSHED Mandy, a non-party in the  case. Instead of the court hearing arguments in favor of each side’s motions, Debbie Barbier immediately called Mandy to the stand in a highly unusual and confusing move that was clearly meant to intimidate, silence and berate a journalist whose opinions Greg Parker doesn’t like. Debbie, by the way, is not only one of Greg Parker’s many attorneys in this case but also the attorney for Alex Murdaugh co-conspirator Cory Fleming. Interesting how that came around, right?  On today's episode, investigative journalist (and Mandy’s co-host of True Sunlight) ⁠Liz Farrell⁠ gives a rundown of what happened in the courtroom and shares her thoughts about Debbie’s invasive and dishonest questioning of Mandy and Greg Parker’s continued retaliatory use of the court system, which … South Carolina just allows it, if you’re rich enough.  Let's Dive in… 🥽 🦈 Episode Links Mandy discusses being brave through depression - FB, April 3, 2026 Liz highlights Mandy's courage during hearing - FB, April 7, 2026Previous Episodes: COJ 175 & TSP 142 🎧 Stay Tuned, Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight...☀️ Learn more about LUNASHARK Premium Membership at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠lunashark.supercast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to get bonus episodes like our Premium Dives, Wherever It Leads..., Girl Talk, and Soundbites that help you Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight. Plus BTS content from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Murdaugh: Death in the Family⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ AND Mandy's book Blood On Their Hands. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Support Our Show, Sponsors and Mission: https://lunasharkmedia.com/support/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Quince⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Hungry Root⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Bombas⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://amzn.to/4cJ0eVn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ *** ALERT: If you ever notice audio errors in the pod, email ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[e-mail]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and we'll send fun merch to the first listener that finds something that needs to be adjusted! *** This episode was edited for typographical error near 45:00 thanks to amazing listener Lauren L. - thanks Lauren!!   For current & accurate updates: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠lunashark.supercast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/mandy_matney⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   |   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/elizfarrell⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠bsky.app/profile/mandy-matney.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠bsky.app/profile/elizfarrell.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TrueSunlight.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tiktok.com/@lunasharkmedia⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

My co-host, David Moses and I, along with a team of journalists, are hitting destinations around the world to expose the truth, give voice to victims throughout history, and get the story straight. with new destinations and episodes every other week. Wherever It Leeds from Luna Shark. Find it wherever you listen to your podcast or visit wherever it leadspod.com. When I look back at my younger self,

I remember the feeling of being bullied and disrespected. I remember hating that feeling. And I remember the day that I resolved that it would never happen again. When I founded Blan Richter with my partner, Ronnie Richter, we committed to build a firm that demand and of respect that would fight for the powerful on behalf of the clients who felt powerless. Since forming Blan Richter, we've stood tall against the largest law firms in the state,

in the country, and in the world, and we've remained true to the commitment not to be pushed around to give tenacious representation with proven results. Tenacious representation, proven results, Blan Richter. Learn more about what we do and who we are by visiting Blan-Richter.com. That's B-L-A-N-D-R-T-E-R dot com. Hey, everyone. It's Liz. Here to lighten the mood with some righteous anger. There will be sassy jokes today, I promise. Mostly anger, though. Or I think it's anger that I'm feeling. What's more than anger? Rage? I'm honestly not sure what the right word is to describe what I'm

about to share with y'all. And it's not going to take you long to understand why I'm at a loss. So, where to begin? I will start with the obvious. As you all know, it is usually Mandy who introduces our episodes. Today, it's me. This is my gift to her, not only because I adore her, which I do on a regular day, but because of how over-the-top proud I am of her for enduring the worst courtroom ambushing.

I have witnessed in my life. I'm including TV series and movies in that. Literally fiction is less shocking than what billionaire gastisie. owner Greg Parker's attorney, Debbie Barbier, did to Mandy on the stand. Yes, on the stand. Stick a pin in that, though. I've worked with Mandy for over 10 years now, and I think I've seen how she handles herself in pretty much every possible scenario you can find yourself in as a journalist. I mean, guys, one time she and I covered a Bravo event in Charleston and hung out with the cast of Southern Charm. And I know that doesn't sound too harrowing of an assignment for a journalist, but you try

talking to that group of middle-aged weirdos. I'm literally calling them that because I wanted to do the Parker Posey Voice from White Lotus, so they were actually really nice. Anyway, there's a statistic out there that something like 85 to 90 percent of police officers will retire, never having had to fire their gun on the job, which is an odd statistic to talk about so casually, knowing what we know about police shootings. But bear with me. It's interesting, too, because when your kid and you're playing cops and robbers, That statistic is like completely flipped on its head, right? It's like 100% of the time you have to fire your finger guns, which is to say it's sort of assumed that that is something that is part of the everyday job of being a cop.

There's a similar statistic with journalists. Most of us, in the United States anyway, I need to make that distinction, and also say, as of now, we'll never face the actual threat of jail or court sanctions for the work we do. Our forefathers, and I want to note their wives who get less credit, often called founding mothers. They were critical to the American Revolution and early nation, managing estates, advising leaders, and shaping society. Among those pillars were some of my favorites. Abigail Adams, Martha Washington, Dolly Madison, and Eliza Hamilton, who provided essential support, political council, and social leadership.

And all of that will come on a premium dive series soon. But those four fathers and four mothers were so incredibly forward-thinking that they made free speech and freedom of the press their very first order of business and hammering out that bill of rights. This constitutional guarantee is higher up on that list than our right to own a firearm. It's higher up than our right to due process in a fair trial. So rock paper, scissors, shut up Elyke Murdoch. My point is this. We as journalists can say, I go to jail before we. revealing my sources or I'm not sitting for that deposition all we want. There are so few of us

presented with those actual scenarios, thank the Lordus. And you know, the way kids are today. Just kidding. The next generations are always better. But still, I'd say there are far fewer of us these days willing to fight for our vocational values with bloody knuckles. Mandy did that on Tuesday. And the best way for me to explain what happened to her, sorry, what they did to her, is to simply let you listen. But of course, I have to give you a tiny bit of background first for those who don't know what this is all about or those who want to hear the refresher. If you already know, and you don't want to hear it, skip ahead about five or six minutes or so. This all started with Paul Murdoch and Mallory Beach, the 19-year-old Hampton woman. He killed on February 24, 2019, in a boat crash. Paul was drunk.

And before getting in his father's boat with Mallory and his friends that night, he bought beer and White Claws from a local chain of convenience stores called Parker's Kitchen, which is owned by billionaire Greg Parker. Paul was 19 and using his older brother's ID. In 2023, after a long and, in our opinion's unnecessarily ruthless battle, Parker's kitchen settled a wrongful death case with Mallory's estate for $15 million. What's brought us to this very low point today is the second case that came from the boat crash case. In November 2021, photos of Mallory's dead body appeared. in a sizzle reel for Discovery ID for a Discovery ID docu-series that was produced in part by a man who had worked on Parker's litigation mitigation team. And that's what we'll call it, his litigation mitigation team.

That man's name is Greg Roman. He has currently marked safe from being deposed because, according to his lawyer, he moved to Israel. And though he be a middle-aged weirdo, for real, he's a waiting word from the Israeli military, whether he's needed for war or not. So obviously there was a big question, such as how the F did Greg Roman get those photos of Mallory? Wait a minute. Greg Parker's legal team had the photos and they hired Greg Roman to help out on the litigation mitigation team. Huh. In December 2021, the Beach family filed a civil conspiracy case accusing Greg Parker of giving Greg Roman and others confidential court documents to include images of Mallory's body.

Greg Parker denies doing this. But also, he admits to hiring Greg Roman. Or at least through his spokeswoman, he has admitted to it, to the Wall Street Journal. He said he hired Greg Roman for his journalism, which is not a thing. Also, Greg Roman is a political operative. In August 2022, the Wall Street Journal reported this. Quote, Mr. Parker hired people he described as investigative journalists because he was shocked at the incestuousness of the South Carolina legal system, including the scope of the

Murdoch family's influence. Quote, when I look back on this investigation, do I think, oh gosh, I wish I hadn't have done that? Mr. Parker said, absolutely not. I'm proud of the work we did. When asked whether he conducted a stealth investigation in what specifically it entailed, Mr. Parker paused. Quote, here's a better question, he said. So what? Of course I did. Anybody in my situation would have done exactly the same thing. So in this same story, Parker said, quote, a large team has been employed on his behalf by his lawyers. The team has included private investigators, investigative journalists, social media strategists, opposition researchers, and crisis managers. At least 18 lawyers have been listed in court filings as representing Mr. Parker or

his company. Again, Greg Parker denies any wrongdoing and instead says the Beach family did this, that they release photos of their dead loved one for a docu-series. to gain advantage in the boat crash case. I'll leave it to y'all to discuss the merits of that theory and jump to the relevant part of this. If you want a more complete refresher on the civil case, check out our last episodes of Cup of Justice and episode 142 of True Sunlight.

The relevant part is this. Greg Parker's legal team is, to quote Mandy's fabulous attorney Becky Lindahl, Beyond the Pale. I am specifically referring to the House of Horrors duo, Debbie Barbier and Mark Moore, who came up together as federal prosecutors and now make up the front and back halves of a metaphorical jackass costume that they wear while he-hawing their way through court proceedings. In defending Greg against these accusations, Debbie and Mark and Coe have decided that Mandy and me, because we cover the facts of this court case and offer our opinions on it, must somehow have been paid by the Beach family or their attorney Mark Tinsley. We have not only denied this publicly, a million times, we've denied it on the court record,

because this did not happen by any stretch of any jackass's imagination. We also did not see images of Mallory's body until that sizzle reel. And we've never had photos of Mallory's body in our possession. We are not Greg Roman, and we are not Greg Roman's co-producer on the documentary, Vicki Ward, who is testified under oath that she got the photos from Roman, who again was hired to be part of it. of Parker's, so what? Of course I did. Litigation mitigation team. There is no other way for us to deny this, but Parker's attorneys refuse to hear it. And in our opinions, I've used this case

as a cover to settle some scores. On behalf of Greg Parker, who definitely doesn't appreciate our opinions on this case and what his team has done, on behalf of Corey Fleming, who is Elek Murdoch's co-conspirator and former best friend, as well as the former law school classmate and client of Debbie Barbier. And on behalf of Russell La Dufus Lafitte, who was represented by the back half of the jackass costume, Mark Moore. And on behalf of themselves, because on Tuesday, Debbie acted like a ghost monster version of the worst 1980s popular girl in a sorority movie who is blaming Mandy for spiking her slim fast with laxative. Wait, a 1980s popular girl would like that, wouldn't she? Let me rephrase, who is blaming Mandy for putting super glue in her can of rave. Actually, that would explain some things. As you all know, I sat for an eight-hour deposition that was one hour of me confirming that their dishonest theory that I was involved in any way in Mallory Beach's photos getting released to Greg Roman wasn't going to come together for them, and then seven hours of big, ear-crumbling he-haws. And then they made personal details that

they got during that deposition public. Yay! They also subpoenaed Mandy. And because of what I went getting pickled and screamed out by Jay Edgar Badger Juice himself, and because of the invasive and out-of-scope questions they asked me and then made public, and because Mandy was a journalist the entire timing question, whereas I had taken a hiatus, Mandy decided to fight the subpoena, like a baller, like a journalist. To know, avail, though, because South Carolina is for the boys. Judge R. Keith Kelly denied Mandy's motion to quash,

and then her motion to reconsider. Which brings us to the March 27th standoff when Mandy, after filing an emergency motion, seeking the court's permission to do so, appeared for her deposition at a place where she felt safe, which was her attorney Meredith Bannon's office where she also had hired private security on her own dime, just 2,000 feet from where the back half of the jackass costume sat, refusing to accommodate Mandy's security concerns by coming over to where she was. Now, to answer any questions about why Mandy didn't go to Mark Moore where his team was waiting for her. One, she was waiting to hear from the judge on her emergency motion.

Two, Greg Parker's legal team have no interest in having professional and mature conversations and refused to budge an inch in addressing Mandy's very real and scary security concerns, which have increased over the past few weeks because of them, because of Parker's attorneys, in our opinions. Mark and Debbie were demeaning and rude to Mandy's legal team, and there was no reasoning with them. They say Mandy's deposition is critical to their case, but when presented with the opportunity to get that deposition, they instead chose to triple down on the real reasons they were doing this. Again, in our opinions, obviously the deposition didn't happen on March 27th, and motions were filed by Parker's team and Mandy, who again is a non-party to this case,

and on Friday, Judge Kelly ordered that Mandy and her legal, team appear in Gaffney, South Carolina, home of the giant peach that President Frank Underwood made famous in House of Cards, which feels appropriate. You know, 266 miles away from Mandy's home and 37 miles from where Jim Seidel lives. The felon, whose escalating fixation on Mandy, has had all of us worried for quite some time. Greg Parker's attorneys were asking the court to sanction Mandy and hold her in contempt for not coming to the office that they were at on March 27th, meaning they wanted Mandy to be fined and put in jail. Also, and this is the grossest part, they want the court to order Mandy to pay Greg Parker's court fees and costs.

I did tell you how these jackasses stayed at one of Baltimore's most expensive hotels when they came to see me right, and how they ate at a restaurant that has a $315 wagyu dish on the menu. Anyway, I think that brings us up to speed. Mandy, the incredible woman that she is, fearlessly, Wait, no, not fearlessly, y'all. Mandy was scared. She was really, really scared and really, really upset. She did not trust what these guys were going to do. And me?

I tried to convince her that it would all be okay. That truth wins the day, that good guys prevail, that no court would send a high-profile journalist to jail for asking that her security be considered in a deposition that shouldn't even be happening in the first place. Mandy wasn't fearless, but she went to that court anyway to face, those fears. And she got ambushed. See, here's how things normally go. The judge gets all the

filings and reads them, or someone reads them and gives them notes, however they do that. Then the moving party makes their arguments, the responding party makes theirs, and then the judge either rules or takes it under consideration. What happened on Tuesday is that Mandy immediately, and to the surprise of all of us, including her legal counsel, got called to the stand by Debbie Barbier, the front half of the jackass costume. And I will talk more about that after a very quick commercial break. Together, Campside and Lunaschart

present Pursuing Justice, launching later this year to shine a light on active and cold cases through the eyes of the world's best investigative experts. Pursuing justice delivers expertise and real-world experience to families and advocates falling through the cracks of the justice system.

Each episode tackles a different angle of the most intriguing, most frustrating and most heartbreaking cases submitted from you, our audience, with expert analysis from around the country and the globe. How do you interact with law enforcement during the height of tragedy to get them to care as much as you do? How do families navigate media relationships during their struggle for answers? What's the threshold necessary to cross over from mild suspicion into actionable evidence?

If you know the answers or want to submit a case to us, please email info at linnasharkmedia.com. And if you want the answers and education, stay tuned. Pursuing Justice premieres in 2026, wherever you get your podcast. Now, let's talk about what happens. I am going to mostly play clips of Debbie Barbier and of Mandy's attorney Becky Lindahl, who was a champ. She was given no time to prepare for what happened on Tuesday,

but she got right in the ring and was quick on her feet. And it was her birthday on Tuesday, y'all. Stick a pin in that. Let's do this. I have PTSD having to relisten, but I want y'all to hear this. Here's how it basically started. You're aware that Judge Kelly, who's presiding today, has been assigned this case by the South Carolina Supreme Court, and that he's the presiding judge on all of the issues related to this litigation.

And you have, in fact, referred to him a number of times as Judge R. Kelly in your social media post. Is that right? So this is when it became obvious that Greg Parker's team knew what was going to go down on Tuesday. They weren't prepared for this scenario, for this abnormal scenario, as we're told, in which Mandy would be subjected to their questioning publicly. While this was sold as Debbie Barbier just putting facts on the record for the court, it was more like a full-on woodshedding. They had exhibits that they had not shared with Mandy's team.

And they had a question list crafted as if Mandy had murdered her family, Oh, wait, no, no. Alec Murdoch was actually treated with more respect when he was on the stand. Have you referred to him as Ara Kelly? And are you familiar with a man named Arr Kelly who's been, he's a convicted sex trafficker? Yeah. You're familiar with that? Then Debbie berated Mandy for more than 10 minutes with unnecessarily aggressive questioning about basic facts, such as,

can you confirm that you received this subpoena? And did you read the judge's order when he denied your motion to court? denied your motion to quash. Questions that could be asked any neutral tone of voice and not the voice of a D-List actress auditioning for the part of old-timey prosecutor. Ms. Matney. Do you know what a subpoena is? Are you aware that a subpoena is a court order? No. Okay. How long have you been practicing law in this state?

Zero years. Okay. And so you're not familiar with the South Carolina. rules of civil procedure are you? I think no. Okay. Did you have discussions within to receive counsel about what a subpoena is and what the requirements were for you to be

at a subpoena? Your Honor, objection to the extent that she's asking for any conversations that Ms. Matney had with me or Ms. Bannan, those are protected by a street with my privilege. Your Honor, I would say if this witness is going to contend that she did not appear at this location on this date

because her attorneys told her she didn't have to, then she would be using an advice of counsel defense, she would be waiving any attorney-client privilege that exists, and if she's not going to do that, that's fine. But if she's going to try to say that her attorneys told her she didn't have to be there, then we'll have to go into the waiver issue. Your Honor, we have set forth in our filings

that are on the public record, why we appeared where we did when we did. And I think it's fine from Ms. Barbiard out. to those questions, but specific conversations that Ms. Matney or Ms. Bannon had that I had with Ms. Bannon had with Ms. Matney are not appropriate questions for examination of Ms. Matney because of attorney-line privilege. I'm obviously not a lawyer, but this seemed like Debbie was trying to unlock a gate for a new line of questioning. Again, just to be a jerk. There was no need for this. So, Ms. Matney, is it your testimony that you didn't believe that the

rules of this court and the rules in this state of civil procedure don't apply to you? Is that what you're saying? Objection. I think that Ms. Farrear is asking Ms. Matney to make any legal conclusions. Ms. Matney is not a lawyer. She's already testified to that. Do you think the rules apply to you, Ms. Matany? Yes.

I mean, it's confused with the situation. So let's just let's make sure we understand that too. You weren't hospitalized in March 27th of 2026. were you? Okay. And you were not physically unable to travel to this location on March 27, 2026, were you? Was your very physically unable to? No, it was not physically unable. But I felt physically unsafe to travel and where your Chinese want to be to travel. And we're going to talk about your fear in just a moment, Ms. Matney. So that part right there, that we're going to talk about your fear in just a moment.

It's a phrasing that Mark Moore used 7,000 times in my deposition, this threat of, oh, we're going to talk about your curfew, young lady. It's meant to be demeaning and menacing, right? To flatten a witness with fear of what's to come. But it actually comes off incredibly unsurious and cheap, stinking up the room like an expired bottle of aerosol clone. Now, throughout this process, Parker's attorneys have been utterly immature about counsel that is not them.

During my deposition, Mark Moore routinely referred to Beach Family Attorney Tabor Vox as Mr. Vaux, despite being corrected every single time. And in their dealings with Mandy's attorneys, they've done the same with Meredith Bannon, who many of you will recognize as one half of the Bannon Law Group, along with her husband, Jim, who were the very first sponsors of Murdoch Murders podcast. According to court records, Parker's attorneys have refused to address or acknowledge Meredith, and like they've done with Becky Lindahl, have dressed her down and yelled at her

during what are supposed to be professional conversations. Their disregard for Meredith continued Tuesday when they gave Becky a stack of printouts of Mandy's social media posts. I've listened to this clip so many times because Debbie's no is just so stupid. Also, do we have an additional set of copies for Ms. Bannon? No.

I remember being to have the break. This is a lot of, um, many pages of that we have to ask. I don't have any problem taking a break. These are her clients' social media postsings about her deposition. I would think she'd already review them. Was that necessary for Debbie to say that? No.

But that's Debbie, proving to everyone in the courtroom, that everything we've ever said about her behavior and Mark Moore's is true. Becky, again, who was not told that her client would be called to the stand, called Debbie out for. her nonsense. Your Honor, I find to be heard, I had not to community to review these exhibits, and I apologize, the copies that were handed to me were not numbered with exhibit number, so I'm not able to tell you the exhibit number that I'm referring to. We are not sure how these were grouped together or why they were grouped in the way that they were. Also, many of them

contain comments from people who are not Ms. Natney, which would be out-of-court statements offered for their truth, I assume, so they would be hearsay statements. One of these is apparently screenshoted from a Delta flight, and we don't know when that occurred, or not sure of the provenance of that. There appear to be screenshots from different social media platforms stapled together within the same exhibit, and we just are not, candidly, not quite sure how these got grouped together the way that they are. So far, we've not heard any foundation for them. Ms. Barbier may try to lay foundation,

but we do have a hearsay objection, and we also have a relevance objection to any statements that Ms. Matten may post her deposition start time of March 27th at 9 a.m., because that would not be relevant to what it is that Ms. Barbier is trying to prove with respect to what she'll cost of the border, Your Honor. Your Honor, they are all directly relevant

for a number of reasons, but primarily, particularly on the day of the deposition, Ms. Matney flaunted her contempt for this court and her mockery of our judicial system by saying that she had security concern that she couldn't show up with her deposition for, but then going to an outdoor restaurant to eat and drink her way through Savannah, as she claims, with her lawyers, with, you know, an open air, open streets, taking selfies, and smiling and laughing and drinking about how she didn't show up for her deposition that day. So it's absolutely relevant to her contempt for this fort, her mockery of the rules here, and her belief that they don't apply to her.

Before the deposition, the post that took place, they show knowledge and notice that she knew that you had ruled against her. She's complaining about our judicial system. She's complaining about your rulings. She's complaining about the evil in our court system. her contempt for it. And those are directly relevant to her knowledge of whether or not she knew she had to be in attendance for her deposition, and which is the intent we have to show to find her in contempt. Your Honor, Ms. Barbier is free to ask questions of Ms. Matany, and we're free to ask our follow-up questions of Ms. Matney. But these exhibits, quite frankly, just make no sense. It is a

mishmash of social media that I'm not sure where they think of it from or how I decided to staple of these particular things together, but it just doesn't make any sense. And if she wants to ask those questions, she can ask them. And I think as Ms. Magin has shown in her affidavit, and as we argued in our motion, Ms. Maddie can explain how she keeps herself safe and is able to live her life in public without having to stay sheltered at home at all times. Ms. Barbier can ask those questions, But these exhibits, which have not, there's no foundation for them. I can't really have no idea why these are stable together. So I would ask that Ms. Barbier, D.G.

to ask Ms. Mandy their questions instead of admitting these exhibits. We'll find that they are relevant and the court does not have a jury over here in this regard to here. Okay. So Debbie clearly doesn't know what having friends and being really like by people who want to be around you looks like. She really wanted the court to believe that Mandy was out there parting it up and mocking the court and exposing herself to danger. But security measures were in place. They're always in place. And I'm not going to go into them because they're still in place. But let me just say this. Mandy isn't standing in an inch of bathwater, worried she's going to drown and

asking for a lifeguard. She has put up with years of creepy behavior from dozens of unknown people. And we don't know when one of those creepy people will decide today's the day. Parker's attorneys know this. I want you to hear it from Mandy, though. That is not what I was celebrating. It was celebrating breathing for the first time in a really long time because I have undergone so much stress throughout this entire deposition. And I was silly enough to think that I thought that the court was going to decide with me on Friday.

And I thought this old was madness. be over. And I thought that this was the end. I was celebrating what I thought would be the end, because I thought in my mind that common sense was on my side. And what I think on social media, I am confused by what has relevance to do is what is what we're trying to talk about, which is in this case involving the beach family. You understand that I also have to say. I have to say that I am a journalist and I am an influencer on social media. I mostly played that to hear Mandy tell Debbie, I am a journalist. Because one of Debbie's first questions for Mandy was, do you consider yourself a journalist?

Which is like asking your physician, do you consider yourself a doctor? It's insulting and meant to be that way. But also, social media is part of Mandy's job. Communicating what we do is part of the job. And it's fun. We really like interacting with you guys. but Debbie wanted to turn that into something nefarious, as if this were some sort of stunt

and not Mandy reacting to what has been an unrelenting attack from Parker's attorneys on her, me, David, and the company they built from nothing. You filed an affidavit actually today, with this court, indicating that social media was your primary source of income, correct? It's not a objection. That's not the affidavit. Can we just stay to the affidavit?

And she was right. That was not what Mandy said in her affidavit. David. But again, what in the world? Who cares? The only reason to mislead the court and belabor this point was for Debbie to batter Mandy on the stand further, to wear her down. That's it. And that's what this was about. Can you turn to the exhibit that is the first page of which is a picture of you and Mr. Tinsley and then you and your attorneys and then a pound cake and then a picture of you having a drink. Ha! If the pound cake fits Debbie. Parker's attorneys balked at my safety concern. that they contributed to escalating and never deposed me.

So we ate at my mama's lemon pound cake and made the most of it. And then my team of amazing attorneys, R.K. Lindel and not in New York City, went to Savannah to celebrate and stand our ground for my safety. Stay pesky. Did you write that? Yes, because I believe I was silly enough to believe that we had won at that point and that because your side would not come down the street to depose me where I was ready, willing, and able to be deposed as long as you wanted me to in a place where I felt safe,

and again could not find any case law in referring to. Silly me, I thought that I was celebrating that it was over, but of course it was not. So, Ms. Matty, could you turn to the fifth page of that? please? I don't know if there's no page numbers on this. There's not a page number, but it's the fifth page. So if you count to five... It's a picture, I believe, of you and your husband and your lawyers standing on the street taking a selfie. You see that?

Yeah. Okay. Is that you and your lawyers in Savannah? Yes, it is. And is that after before you went to eat and drink caviar? First of all, if you know Meredith Bannon, you know that her love language is Seafood Tower. And second, this is why people hate lawyers like Debbie. They will turn everything you do, every normal thing you do, into a caricature to suit their not-so-noble needs. And they will actually make you fear expressing yourself in any way or living your life openly and publicly. And again, this is something I really admire about Mandy. She has not let that fear get in the way of still living.

living her life the way that makes sense to her. And again, Mandy was protected when she was in Savannah, and those photos were not posted real time. It's kind of hard to hear Mandy in this next part, but I'll catch you up after a listen. Oh, and fun fact. In the clip I'm about to play, Debbie is going to try to make it look like there was already security at the law firm where Greg Parker's attorneys insisted they wanted to hold the deposition. Debbie asks Mandy whether she knows that sled provides security for legislators. She doesn't say there was a sled agent there, or West Newton, whose law firm it is, is currently being protected by a sled detail.

Instead, Debbie just states this as a discordant fact in what I would say is a very dishonest way. Not only because, as far as we know, there was not a sled agent protecting West Newton at the time. Because according to a story in the state, in January, sled doesn't just provide, security to legislators. In fact, SLED providing a security detail to an elected official is a rather rare thing. In addition to the governor, his wife and lieutenant governor, there are only three constitutional officers receiving SLED security right now, and that is South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, who is running for governor. His campaign will have to reimburse the state for some of that security detail. The other two are Congressman Jim Clyburn

and Senator Tim Scott. SLED provides extra security for them when they are in the state, and as of January, according to this story, Sled was working out a reimbursement agreement with the U.S. Capitol Police. It is not SLED's job to be the Secret Service for the South Carolina House of Representatives, as Debbie would make it seem. Oh, but look, around the same time that this case got assigned to Judge Kelly, Greg Parker added Attorney Jim Bannister to his team. I'm guessing because Jim Bannister practices law in Judge Kelly's home circuit. Also, though, Jim's brother is Bruce Bannister, who is Jim's law partner and also a longtime legislator. That said, old Bruce, the House Ways and Means Committee chairman, requested that SLED provides security to any constitutional officer who wanted a detail.

And if SLED needed more resources to be able to do that, then they should just put it in their budget. According to the story, SLED has asked for two more agents. But here's what Bruce wrote in a letter to Sled Chief Mark Kiel in September. Quote, The heightened political climate and increased public attention on statewide officials make it imperative that we ensure their safety and allow them to carry out their constitutional duties without distraction or risk. I guess that only applies to people spending the public's money.

And not Mandy, whom Bruce Bannister's brother's team, mocked and harassed for expressing concerns about her safety, when she has way more name recognition than 100% of the House representatives in South Carolina. Anyway, here's Debbie misleading the court in her effort to make Mandy, again, who is a non-party in this case, look like she's been ridiculous for having serious safety concerns. So, Ms. Matney, I want to make sure that we understand you have made a claim that you had security at the deposition location that you went to, right? Ms. Patton, yes or no? Did you make a claim that you had a security guard with you?

Yes, I did. Okay. And was that your husband or someone else? Somebody else. Okay. And what's the name of that security company? What was the name of the security guard? Do you have any invoices or receipts from paying him to be there?

Yes, no. Okay. But you haven't provided that to this corridor or to the Parker defendant's having. Okay. And you didn't in any of the filings that you made list any specific safety concerns that were present at the Jones Newton law firm, did you? Objection I was characterized as the out of the deputy deputy. Did you list one specific safety concern that you had about the Jones Newton law firm? Yes or no? insert purpose in did you list one specific safety concerns

Ms. Matney, did you list one specific or any specific safety concerns that you had about, that were present at the GENZUTA law firm that compromised your security on March 27, 2026? Now, Ms. Matney, my question is, did you

list anything specific about that particular location got presented and safety concern for you. And did you, do you acknowledge that the security person that you say that you hired could have very well come with you to set in plantation? Well, couldn't he have? I was aware, and I could tell you security concerns, you know, that I state representatives is in that office, and I also know that the bathroom is not private,

And it's not a secure premise in the way that the Panama group is where we have a actual safety plan. We have an entry and exit and knowledge of all of those things. And again, I'm not a party to this lawsuit, and I felt like I had the right to feel safe. And an office was very, very close to the one they knew all wanted to go to. And again, I did not understand why you guys couldn't just think out. Ms. Matney, you mentioned that West of Bootian is state representative, correct?

Is that right? Yes. And you cover our legislator and stories emanating from that, correct? Kind of. Okay. So are you aware that SLED provides security for state representatives? No. Okay.

So his location would have been even more secure in the location that you chose at Ms. Bannon's firm. isn't that right? Objection. I don't expectation. No. So Debbie was being ridiculous, either on purpose or because she has no self-control when it comes to being a jerk. Yes, Mandy hired security. Yes, she has receipts.

And yes, she had listed reasons why the law firm, owned by Representative Weston Newton, wasn't ideal security-wise. One, Parker's team told Mandy's team that they anticipated having 16 people with them, including Greg Parker. in what would be, I believe, his first appearance in person at a deposition. West's conference room is not big enough for that. Plus, there was one bathroom that the entire office building shared in the hallway. Two, when a woman with a history, a documented history, of expressing fear for her safety over the course of years, of not driving for more than a year, of not leaving the house without her husband by her side, and a security plan in place, a woman who has been incredibly

open about her struggles with anxiety and mental health so that others won't feel so alone in their struggles, says she would prefer to meet in a location with her private security for a deposition that, by the way, does nothing to help her. This isn't for Mandy. This is for billionaire Greg Parker to defend himself against accusations of causing photos of Mallory Beach's dead body to be published. It would seem to me like an easy and humane accommodation for Parker and his attorneys to have made for her, but instead they were doing this. Why don't you trust that? Because I, again, with the things that I've gone through in the last few years,

they have a very hyper sensitivity when I come to any sort of trust. Ms. Matney, isn't it a fact that you can't articulate one specific safety concern that existed at seven plantation park drive and Bluffington? in South Carolina on March 27th and 226, can you? Objection, Your Honor. She submitted multiple affidavits about this. At this point, I think we're badgering her a little bit. That's all of her own.

Live on. You can't name one specific safety concern that existed at that location, can you? I know again, and you refer to my affidavit or all. I am referring to your affidavit. There is no specific safety concern with that location. So beyond your affidavit, do you have any specific safety concern about that location? I was scared of going there because I don't trust a lot of people. And I also ask Ms. Barbier to not interrupt me.

Debbie went on to ask Mandy again, like again, again, again, about not coming to the office where Greg Parker's team was on deposition day. And is there any dispute by you that you did not. attend the location of seven plantation park, Bluffton Drive on March 27th of 2026. Is there any dispute by you by that? That they did not. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

This is defendant to give at 15th. It's a transcript of the deposition for which you did not appear. Your Honor, I have jack to this exhibit because we have requested this transcript from the court reporter and have not, they have not given it to us. I requested it several times

and have no response. So we have not had an opportunity to review it. So I object to this being admitted. Your Honor, it's a record of her non-appearance. I don't know that that is seriously in dispute by Ms. Lendell, so I'm not sure why she objects to it. We will stipulate that Ms. Matney and Ms. Bannon and I were not at the location, the notice location,

and that we were at a different location. We will stipulate. He stipulates. Unfortunately, this stipulation did not stop Debbie from asking those questions again and again. And haven't your post, some of your posts receives millions of views? Okay. Have your podcast received millions of views? Okay. And you told all your viewers and your followers that you chose not to attend your deposition

at the location of the deposition subpoena, didn't you do that? Actually, no, Debbie. She told her followers why she showed up for her deposition after filing an emergency motion, which she and the others were all waiting for a response on and waited at the location that she felt safer at. We have so much to tell you after a quick break. We'll be right back.

I know we've said this before, but it is strange to not just us, to everyone we talk to, it seems, that Parker's attorneys were so sad on this particular office. It's not that I think they were setting up some booby trap or something, but it does seem highly unusual that the party that wants and needs something can't make a simple adjustment for the party they want and need that thing from, right? And I talked to a lot of lawyers about this, and every other lawyer that I talked to said that if they were in your shoes, they would have come to me. So this is just a very weird situation. What lawyers are you referencing that you spent to?

Yeah, I would ask that to the extent that Ms. Matney, um, got any legal advice from anyone, and not a lawyer that that is subjected by, she's not made it view, she said, I'm not aware. Excuse me? I'm not aware. You aren't aware of who you spoke to?

Yeah. You just said you spoke to a lot of lawyers who told you that they wouldn't have, they would have done just what you did. Who you're talking about? I'm really trying to think. Yeah. She's talking about sources, Sources, people who offer their free, unsolicited, but very much appreciated thoughts to us on a daily basis, who are shocked at what they've been seeing here.

You express through all these followers that you have, Ms. Matney, your defiance and your refusal, and you said you were standing your ground in not attending this deposition. Didn't you say that? I felt there. I felt unsafe at a location. You told these followers of yours, though, that you were standing your ground and you were. you weren't going to appear, right? After that, I didn't say it before that. You glorified your content for this court

and your refusal to comply with court orders, didn't you? Objection, Your Honor. There's a lot based into that question that is not admissible. She has not been found in contempt. Glorified is a harassing term. And if Ms. Barbier wants to ask her a specific question about specific social media posts that she made,

or specific podcast that she recorded, I think that's appropriate, but that question is, in my view, over the one. The judge told Debbie to rephrase her question. Debbie then asked Mandy about a post in which Mandy pointed out that she is not the journalist in this case who was hired by Greg Parker and who gave photos of Mallory's body to Vicki Ward. Well, let me ask you this.

Do you recall posting to all your followers, I hate, in all caps, our legal system? Yeah. Thank you. Okay. And you were described, you have subpoenaed for a deposition as being punished by the South Carolina judicial system. You remember that? Yes. And you said you will never stop working to expose the evil at our system. Isn't that right? Yes. And you have, in fact, described this court and attorneys working on this case for the Parker defendant as corrupt, haven't you? Your Honor, I object to this line of question. We are going outside of what the court should be looking at with respect to whether Ms. Matney, whether there's in order to show cause that's appropriate to be issued or whether she should be held in contempt.

Ms. Matney, as a journalist and as an American who has free speech, is allowed to have opinions about the legal system. She's allowed to have opinions about anyone in this courtroom. And those opinions are not sufficient to hold her in contempt. So there's no relevance of those opinions to this proceeding. Your Honor, these opinions and the statements that she makes about this court system and this process and her record of not complying with court orders is highly relevant to whether or not she has acted in contempt of this court, whether or not she has consciously and intentionally disregarded court orders, and whether or not she's making an attempting to make a mockery of this system by not only criticizing, Your Honor and this court and the attorneys who are officers of this court, but by encouraging her followers to do the same, which is detrimental to our system of justice. And so it's highly relevant for all those reasons. It's relevant. We're not here on the contempt day. We're here making the record

question of whether or not everyone could she'll call should be. Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. Oh, see? We're not here on contempt today. You heard it from the judge. They were supposed to be putting facts on the record. That's it. Oh, and facts. Did you hear when Debbie referred to it as Mandy's record of not complying with court orders? What record? This is what we mean when we refer to Parker's attorney's dishonest narratives. There is no record of Mandy disobeying court orders. Mandy said multiple times in court records through her attorneys, to Parker's attorneys and on the stand Tuesday to the judge that had Judge Kelly ordered her to go down to the office where Parker's team was waiting, she would have. But Judge Kelly did not release his order till Monday. Even though it looks like he signed the order Friday morning, no one, not even Parker's attorneys, knew that. She was waiting for the judge to weigh in and where would she have gone? Parker's attorneys up and left at 11 that morning after berating Mandy and her team over Zoom. You're at Ms. Matney also in your social media post.

you indicate that the court doesn't care about your safety. Do you recall that? Do you recall that? Do you recall describing the people involved in this case as dumb old men? Sorry. You got to laugh, though, right? And if you turn to page, Dumb old men is an indict over and my follower.

Well, which dumb old men were you referring to in this page? Your Honor, I'm going to renew my objection. We are at this point just, we're agitating what is clearly some personal animus between Parker's Defendants Council and Ms. Matney, and that is not relevant to the order to show cause. Her affidavit clearly stated that she was ready, thrilling, and able to give deposition testimony, regardless of how she feels about the attorneys or the parties in this case. And at this point, I think all that they're doing is highlighting the harassment of Ms. Matney and the purpose of taking her deposition to harass her.

Okay, get ready for this giant lie that's about to come your way. Your Honor, no one on behalf of the Parker's defendants has any animus towards Ms. Matany. Now, let's go back to your security concerns, alleged conservative care of Ms. Matney. you would agree with me that you were in public the rest of the day on March 27th, 2026, correct, without security. With my husband, who was... But you didn't have a security guard with you, did you?

I did. Injection asked an answer. She's going to ask this already. Now, Ms. I'll move on. Ms. Madden, you claim that someone on the defendant's side has been providing information to Mr. Seidel. that correct? Yes.

And you didn't identify a single specific person who you plain did that, did you? Okay. And you have no firsthand knowledge of any communication between any defendant or any defense attorney and Mr. Seidel, do you? No. You don't have an email, do you? And you don't have a text message, do you? And you've never heard yourself any firsthand communication of anybody communicating to who you say

is your harasser and your stopper, Mr. Seidel. I was watching this from home, y'all, and I was texting with Beth Braden during it, and it was like, um, did partners just tell on themselves? No one said anything about emails or text messages between them and Jim Seidel. I would have thought phone calls and maybe signal chats or something, but interesting. It's in my name to David. I think to stick to that. Okay. I will. Do you want your sources, Ms. Battening? I'm going to object to that question. I'm going to object to that question. I'm going to have to be a question. I'll be a question. to identify her sources for her journalism. Your Honor, the reason that we're here is because she claims that there's a security issue that we have exacerbated by feeding information to somebody who's stalking and harassing her. And the fact of the matter is that's completely meritless, has zero truth to it.

And so she's the one who made these claims, and we'd like to understand what the source of that information is. Your Honor, Ms. Matney is a journalist. There is a reporter's privilege available to her under South Carolina law that requires her not to be required to reveal her sources. So to the extent that she is going to be asked any questions about sources, they need to be in the camera, if at all, but they should not be asked at all. Ms. Matney, I think, can give testimony about the timeline,

which is what she was about to say before I stood up and interrupted. of circumstantial evidence, but any testimony about sources should be shielded by the court's privilege. And we would ask that it be not allowed to be talked about it in this courtroom. Your Honor, you can't have it both ways. If she says that her securities compromise because we're feeding information to her stalker and her harasser, she can't then claim a shield and a privilege from disclosing how she knows that or what facts she bases that upon. So basically the solution here was for Mandy to go back into Judge's Chambers so he could hear arguments in camera about whether Mandy should be forced to reveal our sources. But Debbie didn't want to do that. She moved on, which is great.

But also interesting because it again demonstrates how all of this was for show, for Bluster. You know what, Debbie? You can't have it both ways. Sometimes middle-aged weirdos have fleas, and we can see them jumping off of you. Your Honor, I'd like to move exhibits one through six. 16 in the evidence? The objection. We'll renew our objection to the social media staple exhibits for lack of foundation.

Anything that's been filed with the court, we have no objection to. Okay. Now, Ms. Mattena, just so we have a clear record, you were ordered to appear for your deposition on March 27, 2026 pursuant to the subpoena.

That's in evidence, correct? Oh, God, not again. Like I said, she kept asking the same thing over and over. Let's skip ahead. I'll summarize what you're missing, basically. Jim Seidel had posted a photo of a Welcome to Bluffton sign, among other posts, on the day of Mandy's deposition indicating that he knew where it was being held. And Debbie wanted to blame that on Mandy's team, saying that Becky had included the location and a filing.

But misleading, Missileading as always, Debbie was referring to an old filing from last year in reference to the first time Parker's subpoenaed Mandy. before security of this level felt necessary. Let's skip ahead to the part where Becky got to cross-examine Mandy. Becky began by asking Mandy basic questions about her career and how she started Lunashark, and you could see the weight of what Debbie had done for an hour and a half just sitting on top of Mandy,

who, one, didn't know that day she'd be taking the stands. So she hadn't done any preparation mentally or otherwise, and she put up with rapid fire and repetitive and aggressive questioning in a case that she has nothing to do with. And she got repeatedly mocked for feeling unsafe. And she sat in that witness box the entire time Debbie was questioning, wondering what this was about. Was this to determine whether she should go to jail?

Was this for Parker to get his ultra-lavish legal team fees and costs paid for by Mandy and David? Or was it just to get the facts on the record? It definitely seemed way more adversarial than just getting the facts on the record. So by the time Becky got to her client, Mandy had been battered. was like watching Mandy get pushed into a room blindfolded and then hit over and over and over again. And when she took the mask off, she finally saw a friendly face. When Becky asked Mandy about the harassment she received, Mandy crumpled.

And I, at home, 500 miles away, lost it too. It might be one of those things that's hard to understand. So I will have Mandy explain it as she did on the stand. Do you ever receive any emails from people who consume your content either on social media or through your podcasts? Yes. And can you describe the tone and tenor of those emails would work? Again, most are very nice. And then every once in a while, it's a horrifying one.

I had one a couple years ago, and somebody said they hope that I have hurt and I have to call cops and the cops won't come. People have emailed me and said that I should get a bullet through the best. One time, a couple years ago, and this was really sick for me to email. They can't even say it about you. Can you ask me about it? Yes, I can ask you about it. Can I lead her on this question, Your Honor?

Yeah. Did you have a sibling who passed away as a child? Yeah. And did somebody email you in person? your sibling? Yeah. And do you believe that that was as a result of your journalism work? And did that affect your mental health negatively?

Yeah, I love to die. And do you recall being asked questions by Ms. Barbie or about your journalism about the legal system in South Carolina? And as a result of your journalism work about, the legal system in South Carolina. Have you ever had any attorneys in any cases make any comments about you? Yes. Can you tell the court about those? And you don't have to name the attorney, but can you just tell generally about those comments? The attorney forever had been extremely sex remark about me in 2021. I see the report would laugh with them and it was really gross and sick.

And how did that make you feel? Disgusted. Do you, as a part of your employment at Luna Shark, your self-employment at Luna Sharf, do you ever have to make public appearances? Yes. Do you have any security protocols that you employ at your public appearances? Most of the time, we don't do any appearances that aren't just what's our Luna Shrip for members only. And so we only put the location in Maine with the people who opened and put it in their system and give those.

And as far as security, it's always there kind of aside. Becky asked Mandy about posts that Jim Seidel had made specifically about Mandy's deposition before and after that indicated he was getting inside information from someone on Parker's team, specifically Jim made references to a new sticker on a water bottle Mandy had showing in the Zoom frame. I'm not going to play those parts because I don't want to refer to Seidel more than we have to. And also, we've explained to y'all what's happening there. In her questioning, Becky cleaned up all of Debbie's misleading questions and helped provide context so the court could understand that many things can be true at once. Mandy can speak out loudly about how she feels about South Carolina's justice and legal systems

and a billionaire businessman's ability to purchase this type of legal team that fights its fights, not in the facts, but in the self-created fury. no matter who gets hurt or whose career gets pummeled. And Mandy can also fight what she sees as a frivolous subpoena based on nothing more than Parker's attorney's hunches, cultivated from fringe commentators online, by the way. And Mandy can also respect a court's order, which is what she was waiting for during the deposition standoff. Then Debbie got back up for redirect.

I'm going to play what that sounded like in one solid swoop for the most part, starting with Debbie complaining about that morning's episode of Cup of Justice that Mandy was not on. We mentioned the court hearing in the podcast because it's a public proceeding and hello, it's in a courthouse with lots of security. And we knew Mandy would have her own private security with her. By the way, Mandy offered to have her deposition at Beaufort County Courthouse for that very reason. Parker's attorneys were not open to that. Ultimately, Mandy decided to pull the episode and delete that part because it didn't make her feel safe and that's fair. And because she knew Parker's attorneys would do exactly what Debbie did.

Okay, I'm going to let it play for a bit. Ms. Matney, despite your alleged security concerns, your podcast posted the date and the time of this hearing today. Isn't that right? Excuse me? I don't believe you did. Well, are you denying that the transcript of that podcast has in it the fact that you all are coming to Gaffney today, 237 miles away, according to you, from your town? And there was a lot of complaining about that. and that you talked all about, or your colleagues talked all about the fact that this hearing was taking place today in Gatney. Do you deny that?

What happened? You must have had a transcript from early this morning because I listened to it first thing in the morning and all the way here my husband. And I have been literally changed the record and changed it from Gatney because we were blessed at that. So we didn't want that security concern. And I believe we didn't say, I don't know if it was Gatney. a little bit more specific, not specific. It wasn't, but regardless,

we made a redaction of that podcast and changed it because I was concerned. Oh, you did it after the fact, but you agreed that your podcast announced the date and the time of this hearing. It was a did for a couple hours, that was at stake, and we changed it

in a few hours, and also, I feel a lot safer at a courthouse, and I've asked for your party to, I would love to be posted at a courthouse because I feel safe for here. Okay. Now, you also posted a picture of yourself. Yeah, just a few days ago, you posted a picture of yourself in your bathing suit, right? Oh, yeah.

Okay. And that, were you on the beach? Were you on the beach in your bathing suit? Your Honor, objection. This is not relevant and harassing. Your Honor, if she has security concerns, at the last thing a female with security concerns does is supposed a bathing suit shot of themselves for their stalker to see. So I'm curious as to whether she acknowledged as she did that.

This is beyond the pale, Your Honor. Women are allowed to be in public in a bathing suit. That's not the point. It's not the point. Go ahead. It's over the kitchen. That was in my backyard if you really want to know. Okay, but you posted a bathing shoot shot.

With my husband right next to me, and it wasn't a revealing bathing soup shot. you can look at it. But you posted a picture of yourself in your bathing suit. So, yeah, if you haven't seen what Debbie calls Mandy's bathing suit photo, I want you to go do that. It's on Mandy's social media, and it's a picture of Mandy with barely any bathing suit showing, by the way, because she's faced down on a float in her backyard. And it's a post about how depression can also look like this, trying to still find joy. And then I want you to look at the expression on Mandy's face in that photo.

It is clear that she is in pain. say that I have zero respect for Debbie Barbier, I need you to understand that that zero is buried deep, like below the bells of hell deep. But I also thank her for showing her jackass to the court, because the judge looked horrified when she said that, and it could be made no more clear to everyone what this was really about this whole time, what Greg Parker's attorneys were using this courtroom to do. I can't express to you how angry and frustrated it makes me that Mandy was subjected to that line of questioning from Debbie Barbier and have been told that the clips of Debbie asking this have been shown many times in many offices by many attorneys who are rightfully disgusted and

horrified that Debbie Barbier, a woman, roles like that for money. Never forget that she's performing for an audience of one, Greg Parker, which brings me to what I think our collective response should be here because we can't let this go. It's 2026 and an office of the court, so desperate to please her benefactor Greg, an officer of the court who is a former prosecutor. Debbie used to be a state and federal prosecutor, y'all, meaning she knows what victims go through, saw no issue suggesting that Mandy must be lying about being worried about her safety, because Mandy, a woman who lives in the low country where bathing suits are everyday wear, had the audacity to post a photo from her pool about her depression, which Debbie and co were

contributing to. And what's worse, Debbie was dishonest. Again, she didn't share the context of the post with the judge, and she made it seem like Mandy's bathing suit was scandalous, which, even if it were, it does not grant anyone permission to fixate on Mandy or fixate on ruining Mandy's career. So Debbie Barbier needs to understand how deeply offensive her question was to Mandy, but to all women. And she needs to understand that bathing suits are not inherently sexual, and they aren't an invitation for opinion, comment, or stalking, or committing any crime against us. How about that, Debbie? Women are human. And humans wear bathing suits when they want to.

Which brings me to this. We would like to invite all of you to post your favorite so-called bathing suit photos, however you define that, on True Sunlight's social media posts about this episode. Let us know what the photo means to you and what it doesn't mean. We want to hear about your triumphs and about your moments of strength, about your struggles, about the times you are misjudged and how you overcame that, about the things that bring you joy and, I don't know, the people who make you angry, literally anything. Tell us any story about your so-called bathing suit photo. Let's make sure Debbie learns something about being a person. And please, please. Use the hashtag disgusted with Debbie.

Use the hashtag dishonest Debbie. And there's another hashtag you should use. Disgusted with Greg Parker. Anyway, sorry, I digress. Here is what happened after Debbie disgusted everyone on behalf of Greg Parker. I feel unsafe. I feel like that's, again, this feels like harassment. It feels very intentional. Like you want me to be miserable and you want me to go back to that time in my life where I feel so unsafe. And if you want that, I can find it.

I would like to be heard on this, Your Honor. We have been very intentional to protect Ms. Matney's security. And hosting specific threats that she's gotten, hosting very specific security, steps that she's taken to keep herself safe harms her security. If they really want to see those documents, we can find them. I don't see how they're at all relevant to this case. But if the court wants to be upset about those not being posted, that's on me. Because I would advise my client, I would advise any client not to post specific threats they've gotten like that.

Would you also agree, Ms. Matney, that in the... course of your posts, you have said that Mr. Parker, Greg Parker, is corrupt, that he's dishonest, that he's committed illegal conduct, that he's a buffoon, that he's morally bankrupt, that he's a loser, that he's a harasser, and that he plays dirty. Have you said all those things about Greg Parker? Objection irrelevant, although this makes my point that this is about personal animus against Ms. Matney and not about any rights. relevant testimony that she can actually give in a double testimony. This is in response, Your Honor. She testified

when her lawyer asked her about whether she had made statements, published statements regarding the Parker defendants. And I want to follow up with that. Have you said those things about Greg Parker? Yes. And you have also said that his lawyers are corrupt and dishonest, haven't you? Yes. And you've said that to multiple people, haven't you? You've in fact defamed Mr. Parker and his attorneys, haven't you?

Objection to the extent that it calls for illegal religion. Thank you. I don't know when you've named it. Can I be heard a little more? Ask her if she knows the definition. Do you know what defamation is, Mrs. Maddie? You've been sued for it several times.

You know what it is? Objection. She, I can't. I don't know what defamation is, but I know that the, the best defense against defamation of the truth and I believe that everything that I've said against great partner is true and that is the basis of this case and what is accused of. I'm willing to be each family in this case which is what we should be talking about today. So would it be fair to say Ms. Matney that these

conclusions that you have drawn from Mr. Seidel's postings are your interpretation of what they mean and nothing more than that? I feel my interpretation is and how I feel and I feel like ask that right, but in reality, Ms. Matney, you actually manufactured this fear and this concern for your personal safety because you didn't want to be deposed, you didn't want to be asked about your sources, you didn't want to be asked about your finances, and you didn't want to be asked about your involvement in this case, isn't that right? Your Honor, at this point, I mean, Ms. Matting can yell that and harassed she can answer the question but i think this has to come to a

stop at this one point let's wrap it up go ahead and ask you guys i'm having i would love to answer that Debbie we have suggested we suggested this week that we go to the beford county courthouse and get all this done you guys have said no i have suggested eric plan's office in columbia i have been ready will enable i want my life to go on from this i want to be deposed i want you to ask questions. I have nothing to hide. I just want to feel safe during my deposition, and I don't feel like that that's that much to ask. Well, Ms. Matney, I think that your wish will come true because tomorrow you will be deposed in a very secure location. Thank you for your time. Thank you. In real time, when I was watching Debbie in the courtroom live feed, that felt menacing and like

a threat, and very much like she was mocking Mandy for no other reason than to be cruel. I'm going to you with Becky's words to the court, and I want to wish Becky a very happy birthday. I guarantee this is one you'll remember for a long time. Becky had plans for her birthday that night, but ended up having to stay behind and drive to another part of South Carolina for Mandy's deposition, which the judge ordered. She missed her birthday plans. And I just need to say one more thing before we end, so you can understand why those of us who love Mandy are so protective and get so upset. Tuesday left us all reeling because we couldn't believe the viciousness from Parker's even though we have seen a lot of it from them.

Mandy was obviously upset and exhausted and confused and angry, but she didn't want Becky's birthday to be ruined because of her. That was Mandy's concern. She had just endured Barker's attorney's grand attempt to scare and humiliate and scold her like she was a child, knowing that trolls were on the live feed watching her, that a podcaster had been taking pictures of her laptop showing that she was watching Mandy while she was on spring break as if this is some kind of joke. A podcaster was contributed to this notion that we've done something wrong when we

haven't. But it was important to Mandy that the woman who stood up for her and advocated for her in the courtroom felt loved, supported, and celebrated on her day. As Mandy always says, stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight. Here is Becky Lindahl. The other thing that I just want to say before I conclude, we did file August, two things. I'll rest on our motion with respect to our other arguments, but I do think that today's hearing hopefully put in sharp relief for your honor the tone and tenor of what Ms.

Matney has been going through. She was yelled at on the stand. I have been yelled at on the phone. I was yelled at in a deposition. Ms. Bannon was yelled at in a deposition. I have never encountered anything like this in 20 years of practicing law. I'm on the general counsel team of my firm. I've never heard anybody come to me with a complaint about lawyers acting like this. So I hope that that came through today in the questioning of Ms. Matney. And otherwise, we did as best as we could to put together our arguments in our motion papers, and I won't reiterate those here.

Thank you, Your Honor. 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 provided by Kate Thomas. Learn more about our mission and membership at LunaSharkmedia.com. Interruptions provided by Luna and Joe Pesky. Years before, the name Ehrlich Murdoch was splashed across every major media outlet.

I was a local South Carolina journalist and I had an instinct that something wasn't right in the low country. The powerful Murdoch dynasty dominated rural South Carolina for generations. Few dared to publicly utter a harsh word against them. From the newsroom to the courtroom to the kitchen table where we recorded the number one global hit, the Murdoch Murders podcast, I invite you to learn more about my book, Blood on Their Hands. Blood on their hands is a harrowing first-person narrative of battles against systemic subversions of the truth, overcoming institutional sexism, corrupt,

and threats to my personal safety to expose a network of horrific crimes and give voice to victims. Click the link in the description to order today. Visit any retailers near you or visit lunasharkmedia.com slash book to learn the best way you can stay pesky and stay in the sunlight.