Murdaugh Murders Podcast - TSP #24 - Alex Murdaugh’s Judicial Terrorism Fools The Media Again: The Latest In The New Trial Motion

Episode Date: November 9, 2023

Once again, the prosecution is proving that Alex Murdaugh is nothing more than a judicial terrorist; and his lawyers will stop at nothing to carry out his orders. True Sunlight Co-hosts Mandy Matney��and Liz Farrell discuss the South Carolina Attorney General’s response to Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin’s motion for Alex to get a new murder trial. For the past two months, the headlines have all but celebrated Dick and Jim’s claims of jury-tampering. Now, a fiery response to that motion — filled with Big Creighton Energy — shows just how wrong the accusations are. A lot of you have asked how you can get signed copies of Blood on their hands and now we have answers. There is a very limited supply of signed copies available at Mandy's event at USC in Columbia, SC presented by the School of Information & Communications this Monday at 7pm.  This will be the ONLY opportunity to buy a book a day early and get it signed after the show. And for Premium Members only, we'll be at the Roasting Room in Bluffton, SC for a special Premium Member appreciation event Thursday November 16th at 7pm. Click the link to learn more: https://lunasharkmedia.com/event/stayperkyandpesky/ Visit our new events page Lunasharkmedia.com/events where you can learn about the upcoming in-person and virtual appearances from hosts! And check out Mandy's new article in Newsweek where she talks about her journey and what's next. Phew... that's a lot we know... so enjoy the show and stay in the sunlight! Join Luna Shark Premium today at Lunashark.Supercast.com. Premium Members also get access to searchable case files, written articles with documents, case photos, episode videos and exclusive live experiences with our hosts on lunasharkmedia.com all in one place. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE. And for those just wanting ad-free listening without all the other great content, we now offer ad-free listening on Apple Podcast through a subscription to Luna Shark Plus on the Apple Podcasts App. 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, and VUORI. Use promo code "MANDY" for a special offer! For current & accurate updates: TrueSunlight.com facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/ Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod Twitter.com/mandymatney Twitter.com/elizfarrell youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Thank you for supporting our mission to expose the truth wherever it leads by listening to Luna Shark podcasts Cup of Justice in True Sunlight. I get messages all the time from people asking how they can help us with our mission And now there is a great way to do that if you want to go the extra step We invite you to learn more about Luna Shark Plus for ad-free listening on Apple podcast or even better Join Luna Shark Premium a membership community for all Luna Shark content powered by Supercast. Join Luna Shark Premium at lunasharkmedia.com slash membership. And I am so excited for the next bit. Are you ready for it? Our higher soak up the Sun members will soon get access tolists, audio and videos that match chapters in my new book Blood on Their Hands, which releases November 14th. Visit lunasharkmedia.com-membership

to learn the best way you can stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight. I don't know what the next step is in this Murdoch mess, but now that we have seen the state's response to Dick and Jim's wild accusations made about Clerk of Court Becky Hill, it is past time that the South Carolina Supreme Court steps in to put a lid on Team Murdoch's judicial terrorism. My name is Mani Matney. This is True Sunlight, a podcast exposing crime and corruption previously known as the Murdoch Murders podcast. True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production written with Journalist Liz Farrell. So, this is a special episode for me.

It is the last episode before my book blood on their hands publishes, and we have a few exciting events next week to celebrate the launch on Tuesday. Please check out lunasharkmedia.com slash events for details. But on Monday, I will be speaking at the University of South Carolina Columbia campus. Tuesday, I will be at Barnes and Noble Hilton Head Design Books. And Thursday, I am so excited I will be in Bluffton, South Carolina at the Roasting Room, for a special evening with premium members only. Be sure to register online for that event. Remember, if you buy my book, blood on their hands, before November 14th, and that's when it helps me the most, you will get one month of Lunashek Premium Membership for free.

Just go to bloodonneurhandsbook.com and upload your receipt for proof of purchase. This is my way of thanking those of you who have continued to support me on this crazy journey these past few years. Y'all are the best. Thank you. Something I absolutely love about the audience and the fan base that we have built here is that y'all not only tolerate my openness and honesty when it comes to mental health, but you encourage it and embrace it.

Like a proud mom, sometimes I check the Luna Shark Premium Discord and I beam with pride seeing members being open about their mental health struggles and I get tear-eyed, seeing so many other members being abrasive and supportive. We have been on this journey together for more than two years, and at the end of the day, I am so proud that we have made good things, like normalizing openness when it comes to mental health, happen in spite of all the madness. That said, y'all, I haven't been doing great recently. I had an anxiety attack on Tuesday night, I felt so overwhelmed with my book release in less than a week, it all just hit me. My chest was suddenly heavy, my head spinning, I couldn't breathe.

I have dealt with anxiety all my life, but rarely has it ever peaked to physical form like it did this week. After I calmed down, thanks to my amazing and supportive family, happy late birthday to my mom, by the way, I started to think about what was really bothering me. And truthfully, I am terrified by the powers that are still at play here. We have come so far, we have exposed so much, but so few people have been held to account. Even after all of the blood, sweat, and tears, so many have put into this case for so long. Tuesday was an eventful day in the Murdock world. Finally, two months after Dick and Jim launched their attack

on Collagen County Clerk of Court, Becky Hill, the state fought back with a fire emotion. We will talk about this response later in the episode because wow, there's a lot there. But after reading all 48 pages, I started to feel a lump in my throat that I could not shake. I sobbed, thinking about what Dick and Jim did to Becky's reputation, based on such flimsy, terrible evidence, I thought about all of the dozens of horrible headlines. I have read about Becky Hill in the last two months. Exclusive, Becky Hill, biased court clerk

in Alex Murdock trial admits in new book she worried jury would acquit legal Zion of murdering wife and son, the Daily Mail. Alex Murtak trial clerk appears to have done something very wrong. Legal experts warn there's no smoke without fire, and believe Rebecca Hill's book deal could be a step over the line as murderer launches appeal, Daily Mail. Murder court clerk hinted at personal relationships during murder trial prior to tampering allegations. Fox News. Alex Mertek lawyers claim fame hungry clerk

Rebecca Hill tainted jury, Daily Beast. It makes me sick how dick and gym threw Becky under a bus in the media just ran her over, again and again. I sobbed thinking if they are that evil, incapable of burning someone's reputation to the ground just in a pathetic attempt to save Ellic Murdoch the murderer. Who else will they ruin? What else will they do? And what is stopping them?

It took my breath away. Today, I'm still angry as I think about this, especially as I think about how much work the media is still doing for dick and gem, even after every lie that they have been caught in. I see people online, usually, in reaction to pro-defense stories about Becky Hill allegations with very pro-defense headlines. I see people saying things like, wouldn't you want a fair trial if you were an Alec Murdoch

shoes? Everyone deserves a fair trial if you were an Alec Murdoch shoes? Everyone deserves a fair trial. But the vast majority of human beings should never worry about being in or anywhere near Alec Murdoch's shoes. Could you imagine being a guy who has given everything? Wealth, money, power, privilege, a multi-million dollar job and a high-powered law firm built by your own grandfather, then to take that life that was given to you, and to choose to

steal from grieving families who desperately needed that money, and who deserved that money. And then, you murder your wife and son in a desperate attempt to get out of the messes you already made. Oh, and then you lie about where you were moments before they were murdered, and you refused to cooperate with police. These aren't actions made by human beings. That other human beings can relate to and say, oh, I can see how that happened.

These are actions made by a monster who doesn't deserve an ounce of empathy or grace, but he is currently being given it still by the media. And where is that same grace and empathy given for Becky Hill? Can't most of us relate to her more than we can relate to, Alec, shouldn't most of us fear what happened to her could happen to others. If the system does nothing to stop Dick and Jim from their persecution of Becky Hill, who will be next in their line of fire?

How many good names will they destroy in the media on their crazy quest to get Alec Murdoch, the murderer and liar, into federal prison. In speaking of our skewed and corrupt justice system in South Carolina, I quickly want to mention that prosecutor David Miller, the guy who gave Thrice Acquist rapist bow and turner a sweetheart deal, appeared before the Judicial Marit selection committee on Wednesday in his quest to become a judge, the JMSC unfortunately chose not to allow streaming of this event which made it difficult to cover, but we will be getting the transcripts and providing a full rundown of what happened. I was told Wednesday that the hearing was fiery and let's hope that the JMSC chooses wisely, as the spotlight

is on them and it won't be moving anytime soon. Also, by the way, Bowen Turner will be released from prison next week. Speaking of the JMSC and how arrogant they are and how opposed they seem to be to changing anything that might affect their own lucrative, in demand status as lawyer legislators. Remember the letter that nine of our 16 chief prosecutors in the state sent to Speaker of the House Murlsmith and Senate Majority Leader Luke Rankin a few weeks ago. The unprecedented one that implored them to remove lawyer legislator Todd Rutherford from the JMSC along with other lawyer legislators.

Surely, because they're not just elected officials, but the elected leaders of our elected lawmakers, they had enough time by now to acknowledge said letter and fashion up some sort of respectful response, right? Surely they're not ignoring issues with the JMSC sort of respectful response, right? Surely they're not ignoring issues with the JMSC like they always do, right? Surely they understand that this is an a mirror inconvenience to wait out, right? That is a big fat no to all of it. From what we're told, the solicitors have been given no response. To double check that, reporter Beth Brady called both Senator Rankins and Representative Murls offices to find out what if any letter they've sent

back to the solicitors and she was referred to the public information officer. She is not yet gotten a response to that inquiry. Okay, one more update before we fully indulge our anger and burn down this village of lies that Dick and Jim have been building ever since the summer. The South Carolina Court of Appeals has decided that Corey Fleming, Alex Best Co-Conspirator, can go forward with his appeal. Remember, that after he pleaded guilty to 21 state charges, wrongly thinking that he could trick the system and get the court to bend to his will and sentence him to

basically nothing. He appealed the 13-year 10-month sentence Judge Newman had given him claiming that Judge Newman was biased. Obviously, someone who pleases guilty to their crimes doesn't typically get to appeal their sentence because they're pleading guilty with the understanding that even if the prosecution recommends a light sentence, it's ultimately up to the judge. So first, the Court of Appeals had to decide if Cory was even permitted to appeal his sentence in these circumstances. On Monday, they told him, sure, fine, go ahead. Which means that if you thought we weren't going to have to hear about Cory Fleming until at least 10 years from now, when he emerged from the South Carolina Department of Corrections, squinting at the sun and sporting an ankle-length

beard, you are unfortunately wrong. It's like a genetic disease. Good old boys cannot accept anything, except things going exactly the way they want them to go. They inherited this from their grand good old boys and their great-grand good old boys. The only cure for it is actual accountability. Dear Corey has 30 days to file his initial brief and designation of matter, so we'll check in again when that gets filed. Okay, it's time to burn down Dick and Jim's village.

On Tuesday morning, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and his team came out with the biggest of big craten energy and filed a 12 alarm fire of a response to team Murdoch's motion for a new trial. It wasn't just a no-Alex accusations don't merit an evidentiary hearing never mind a new trial. It was hell no. This team of legal who against doesn't deserve one more second of this court's consideration. So here's the thing we want to say from the get-go for those of you who are new to the Murdoch story. And by new, we're including everyone who didn't know the name Alec Murdoch before the

murders, but even more specifically didn't know who he was before the trial of this century. And even more specifically than that, doesn't or hasn't ever lived in South Carolina and witnessed the system from the inside. From the outside looking in, and by applying all the knowledge you have about general human behavior

and how the justice system typically works elsewhere, we can someone understand how people might look at the headlines and the accusations Team Murdoch has made against Callatin County Clerk of Court, Becky Hill, and how they might read some seemingly fair points about Judge Clifton Newman going on the Today Show after the trial to quote, talk about the case,

and think to themselves, there's gotta be something to this. Ilek deserves a fair trial, he deserves an impartial trial, I believe he's guilty, but this seems very messed up. Okay, if this is you, you need to stop and just take a breath because there is a false equivalency happening here, and it is a trap door that we wanna nail shot once and for all.

Eleg Murdoch is a judicial terrorist. His claims have been very carefully designed to be misleading. The accusations that this legal bandit has been making were crafted for the headlines. They were written in such a way that even generally reasonable people who are familiar with South Carolina's justice system and who know Elik is a murderer and a thief and a liar, and who know that his legal team is prone to hyperbole and misdirection, and will stop at nothing, could find themselves momentarily fooled by the antics. During cup of justice this week, Eric Blander reminded us of an article written about

Dick in the November 2013 issue of a publication called Whistleblower Laws. In it, Dick shared his philosophies on defending a client and shared his tips for winning a case. We've spoken about this article a lot because in it, Dick shares some of his more dastardly tricks of the trade. One of those tricks is him saying he gravitates toward picking unattractive people to be on his juries because they don't feel threatened by him and aren't disdainful like attractive people. I think we need to revisit the elements of your case. The jury wants a narrative, a story, an entertaining yarn full of conflict, emotion, sex, violence,

yelling, weeping, etc. You get the idea. That means you have to have a general idea of what you want but let the examination flow naturally. Set the witness up to confirm fact A and fact C then box them in to B. The jury will understand where you are going. Remember, these are unattractive people who watch a lot of TV and read most of their evenings. They have lots of imagination. I'll say that again. To get the narrative, the drama, the entertaining yarn full of conflict and emotion,

to get those sitting in judgment of his client to use their imaginations, because that's where he wants them, right smack dab in the middle of his imaginary world. Dick suggests getting the witness to confirm fact A and fact C and then box them into B. Here's how that looks, fact A, Becky Hill and unusually gargareous and media-friendly clerk of court, who made

an impression on everyone by welcoming the world into the Coloting County courtroom with open arms, wrote a book talking about her experiences during the Murdoch trial, and included her observations about the jury that found him guilty. Fact C. Becky Hill admits in the book that she believes the evidence has shown that Eleg Murdoch killed his wife and son. B. Not fact B. You got that right? Dictant say fact B. He said box them in to B. B. Becky must have used her access to the jury to guide them toward a guilty verdict so she could write this book and continue to be in the spotlight. That is what team Murdoch has been doing. Fact day, then fact-se, then offering the wrong conclusion of B, and most of the media has been like,

ooh, B sounds reasonable. Wow, this is serious. We've said it over and over. It's smoke and mirrors. And now we have the South Carolina Attorney General's Office and Becky Hill herself, and most of the jurors to show you just how smoky and how mirror-filled Dick Harputley's House of Horrors has been. When it comes to team Murdoch, B invariably stands for bullshit, and no one should forget that. So there are two major things that happened this past week One is that Dick and Jim filed a writ of prohibition with the Supreme Court asking the justices to step in and remove Judge Clifton Newman from all of Alex's cases

alleging that Judge Newman is a witness to Becky Hills character and is too that Judge Newman is a witness to Becky Hill's character, and is too personally biased to perform his judicial duties. This is a 265-page document. There are a lot of layers to peel back on it, and we'll be doing that over the next few weeks. Here are the things you need to know for now. One is that Dick and Jim did not file a motion with the circuit court to ask Judge Newman to recuse himself. Instead, they sent Judge Newman a letter. According to them, that letter was sent to October 18th. We don't actually know when Judge Newman received this letter. I'm sure Dick and Jim would argue that this letter serves as the motion, but from what we're told, they need to formally

move the court for a recusal. In South Carolina, it's up to judges to recuse themselves from a case, meaning they don't have to do it if they don't think it's necessary, but they should do it if there's a reason to do so. For instance, if the judge has a business interest in the matter at hand, and it is exceptionally rare everywhere in this country for a judge to be disqualified from a case by state- Supreme Court. If the judicial system has a backbone that holds the whole thing upright, one could argue that it's composed of two things. The system's prevention of lawyers being able to go judge-shopping and the system's protection of what goes on during jury deliberation. Dick and Jim are taking baseball bats to every single vertebra in that backbone. There are a lot of deceptive

elements in this writ, such as partial quotes that were they to be finished, would add contacts that hurt Dick and Jim's case, and like references to Judge Newman's appearances on the Today Show and at his alma mater in Cleveland, Dick and Jim have totally mischaracterized the nature of his comments in those interviews, but we'll get to that in a future episode.

The other main thing to know is that it's not clear what's going to happen here, especially now that the state has eviscerated Dick and Jim's claims of jury tampering in response to their motion for a new trial. It is, however, very clear that Dick and Jim think nothing of twisting fact-day and fact-seed to lead people and headline writers to be. All in the name of publicly maligning Judge Clifton Newman, a man who was not just seen as, but is, in every fiber of his being, a true guardian of justice. He is America's judge, he earned that distinction and Dick and Jim

are out to destroy that all for a lying, thieving murder. Another thing that is very clear from the read is that Team Murdoch's immediate goal is to delay Alex November 27 trial in the Satterfield case. They do not want Alex to get a second and third conviction before he is sentenced in his federal case. Unless the Supreme Court shuts them down or comes up with another fast solution, this filing will likely get Team Murdoch what they want,

at least in the short term. A lawyer friend of mine said something important about Dick and Jim this past week. He said anything is a win for Dick and Jim at this point and rewarded behavior is repeated behavior, meaning, Dick and Jim are just trying to get to that next foothold on the mountain side. And every minute they continue not

to fall off the mountain is a successful minute for them, and meaning that the continued tolerance of their behavior from the ODC and from the Supreme Court is just permission to keep on climbing. What is South Carolina afraid of when it comes to Dick Harpothian? And why is Dick Harpothian using his considerable power over the legal system to do this kind of wet work for this kind of client? Dick told interviewer Eva Partridge at CrimeCon this past September that Elik Murdoch is the only innocent client he's ever had. He can't possibly believe that. And frankly, if he does, he needs to apologize to every other client he's had because he just outed them as guilty but off the hook for their crimes. We'll be right back. Years before the name Elik 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 new book, Blood on Their Hands, a propulsive true crime saga, an empathetic work of investigative journalism, and an excoration of the good old boy systems that enabled a network of criminals. Click the link in the description to preorder today.

Visit any retailers near you when it releases November 14, 2023, or visit lunasharkmedia.com slash book to learn the best way you can stay pesky and stay in the sunlight. Okay, the other big thing that happened is the state's response to Dick and Jim's motion for a new trial. Let's start by talking about Becky Hill's three-page affidavit. In it, she unequivocally denies ever telling the jury not to be fooled by evidence presented by Ellic Murdoch's attorney. She denies instructing the jury to look at his actions.

She denies instructing the jury to look at his movements. She denies saying to the jury, this shouldn't take us long. She denies having private conversations with the four person in a bathroom. She denies having any conversation with the four person that involved the discussion of evidence, witnesses, or the substance of the trial. She denies talking to the four person out of earshot of the bay lift. She denies telling members of the person out of earshot of the bay lift. She denies telling members of the jury that the media would want to interview them at the end of the trial.

She denies handing out business cards of the media personnel. She denies telling jurors, y'all are going to hear things that will throw you off. Don't let that distract or mislead you. She denies asking the egg lady juror whether she was inclined to vote guilty or not guilty. She denies telling the egg lady juror that sled and the Collatin County Sheriff's Office personnel went to her ex-husband's house. She denies telling the egg lady juror that she would reinstate a restraining order against her ex-husband. She denies telling the egg lady juror that the Murdox probably got to her ex-husband. She denies asking the egg lady juror about her opinions regarding the Alex guilt.

She denies asking the egg lady juror whether you think he is guilty. She denies discussing the evidence presented at trial with the egg lady juror. She denies telling the egg lady juror to forget about the guns they will never be seen again. She denies asking the egg lady jur about the views of the rest of the jury. She denies telling the egg lady jur that if the 4 person would just go in and ask for a raise in hands this would be over and done with. She denies informing the egg lady jur that everyone needs to be on the same page. She denies fabricating or creating any Facebook post related to the egg lady jur and she denies telling jurors that they were prohibited from taking a smoking break during deliberations.

She not only unequivocally denies all of this, she, an officer of the court who understands the severity of perjury more than most, she has sworn to it under oath. This affidavit is attached to the state's response, which ultimately asks the court to not only deny Dick and Jim an evidentiary hearing to see if a new trial is warranted, but to skip to the good part and deny them a new trial all together. Also attached to the response are voluntary written statements from jurors. Now, first we need to do a little jury math here because it can get confusing. There were originally 12 jurors in 6 alternates. That's 18 people.

By the time the verdict was read, there was 12 jurors in six alternates. That's 18 people. By the time the verdict was read, there was 12 jurors and one alternate left. The egg-lady juror was dismissed by Judge Newman days before the verdict, meaning she was not a part of the deliberation. Additionally, the remaining alternate juror was not a part of the deliberation. Ultimately, Dick and Jim have one affidavit from one jurr who actually deliberated.

And that is jurr number 630. If you are going to remember any jurr name in this, 630 is the one. She's the first exhibit in Dick and Jim's motion. She's the one with, for lack of better terms, the most amount of apparent authority in Dick and Jim's claims. Obviously, her story starts to fall apart real quickly, but we'll get into that in a minute. Dick and Jim have another affidavit, and that is from Egg Lady Jurer. Again, she did not take part in the deliberations. She was juror 785.

They also have affidavits with what they say to other jurors told them. Those jurors did not sign affidavits containing their own words. Those jurors were number 741 and 326. Of those, only 326 deliberated. Jur 741 was an alternate juror. She did not weigh in on Alex guilt. Okay, the state has 10 written statements from jurors attached to its response.

That means the three are missing, right? One of those three is Jur 578, who declined to discuss the case or deliberations was led. According to R-Notes, Jur 578 is a white male contractor who said he had never heard of the Ellic Murdock case before the trial. The only other one who doesn't have a written statement is Juror 630, who like the egg lady juror is represented by Dick's friend and consistent murder trial attendee Joe McCola. Again, Juror 741, one of the two jurors who didn't sign an affidavit for Dick and Jim but whose statements were contained in an affidavit from Dick's assistant was it alternate, so there isn't even a written statement from her in the state filing.

Jur741, however, did speak to Sled. The other juror who didn't sign an affidavit for Dick and Jim, jur326, spoke to Sled and also provided a written statement to Sled. Okay, that's a lot. But basically the things to know are that 10 jurors spoke to sled, 9 signed written statements. One of the ones who didn't speak to sled is Joe McColle's client, and the other one is someone appears to not want anything to do with any of this nonsense. That is the only one who signed an affidavit for Dick and Jim. So bottom

line, this issue involves a leaven of the deliberating jurors, one of the alternators, and one juror who was dismissed. As you can see, that adds up to 13, which confuses matters a little, and lends itself to the minor illusion that dick and gym have more jurors on their side than they do. What is this matter? Because one of the core questions the court will have to consider is whether the allegation of Becky's statements is enough to warrant an evidentiary hearing on its face as Dick and Jim contend. Or whether the allegations of Becky's statements only matter if jurors say those alleged statements influenced their verdicts. Obviously, the egg lady didn't get to give her verdict, so whether or not her allegations

have any way to them will be determined by what the court decides on the evidentiary hearing. Now, let's talk about Dick and Jim's churres and what we now know about them. court decides on the evidentiary hearing. Now, let's talk about Dick and Jim's jurors and what we now know about them. Let's start with juror 630. She is purported to be a tenant of the egg lady juror and according to sources, they at least sometimes drove to court together. Again, both women are for some reason

represented by attorney Joe McCullough. Juror 630 is who said that Becky told jurors not to be fooled by Alec and to watch him closely and to look at his movements and watch his body language. The state points out that all of these phrases are ones that were used by the state in their opening statements and closing arguments. Here's Crate and Waters on January 25th.

You're gonna see a video statements of Alec Morgan. waters on January 25th. says about that night. You're going to hear three recorded statements on video that he gave a call to for him and you're going to hear how things progress about what he says, what he says he did that night. Watch those closely. Watch his expressions. Listen to what he's saying. Listen to what he's not saying. Use that comment. Does this seem right? Just something seem a little wrong. Something seem a little wrong.

And here is Craton at the end of the state's initial closing argument on March 1st. This is what he did. This is what he did. This is what he did. Drag him. Disdependent. On the other hand, has fooled everyone, Disdependent. On the other hand has fooled everyone, everyone.

Everyone who thought they were close to him. Everyone who thought they knew he was, who he was. He's fooled them all. And he fooled Maggie and Paul too. And they paid for it with their lives. Don't let him fool you too. Additionally, John Meadows in the state's final closing argument said this. I'm so corny, huh? Part of my own stupidity is talking about this incident. All of our body language is shaleys. Another thing to know about juror 630.

She never says that Becky's alleged words influenced her verdict. Instead, she says that she felt pressured by other jurors. Here's what the state has to say about that. Even assuming for the sake of argument that juror 630's recollection is accurate and that he or she are not misremembering arguments expressly made by the state, juror 630 does not attribute their verdict to the statements of clerk Hill, but rather a verse that he or she voted guilty, despite some questions. Quote, because juror 630 felt pressured by other jurors, that a juror felt pressured by other jurors is not a valid basis to impeach a verdict, nor does juror 630's complaint of feeling pressured

by other jurors constitute evidence that he or she or any other juror voted to convict because they were influenced by commons they allegedly heard from Claire Kill. So the only deliberating juror who signed an affidavit for Dick and Jim, the juror who's affidavit was so important that Dick and Jim put it up front and center of all their other so-called evidence, the juror who makes the most headline-grabbing allegations against Becky. Not only has a potential relationship involving a power differential with the egg lady juror, she appears to be misattributing statements she heard, and she says that her verdict came as the result of pressure from the other jurors and does not say

it came from Becky. Also, she apparently didn't speak to Sled, which is weird because she's not accused of committing a crime. What is there to lose here? It's okay for her to launch these criminal allegations against Becky, but when it comes time to put her money or her mouth is to get accountability for the person she thinks broke the law, she's silent. But that's silent when it comes to eating a convicted murderer. In our opinion, juror 630's affidavits should now be shredded and used as packing material because it's that full of fluff. Okay, let's talk about alternate juror 741 now. She spoke with sled, but does not appear to have given them a written statement. According to the state's filing, juror 741 would quote,

not sign an affidavit as requested by Murdoch's councils, and was evidently reluctant to do so. Juror 741 told sled investigators that clerk Hill told the jurors that the defense is about to do their side and don't let them confuse or convince you. They may say things to confuse you. Remember, juror 741 was not a part of the deliberations. Additionally, no other juror, other than McCola's client juror 630, i.e. egg lady's apparent tenant, cooperates what Jur 741 says that she heard. By the way, there was quite the little bombshell about 741 in the state's filing. According to the state's response, Jur 741 told Sled she was aware that clerk Hill

wrote critically about her attentiveness during the trial, and additionally noted Clerk Hill told her after the trial that no members of the media wished to speak to her. Isn't that interesting? Here's an excerpt from Becky Hill's book Behind the Doors of Justice, The Murdoch Murders. While most of the jurors were focused and engaged during the Murdoch trial, we did have one juror who was an alternate at one point, who was not. She was more focused on the crowd, who was watching, who was, or wasn't following Judge Newman's rules, and so on.

For example, she caught a new visitor to the courtroom, who was sitting directly across from her, who looked like she may have been taking a picture of the jury, and that wasn't going to fly with her. So, Dick and Jim's other juror, juror 741, was an alternate. I.E., she didn't even render a verdict in the case. In wooden sign, Dick and Jim's affidavit. She says that she heard something that none of the other jurors can clearly corroborate,

not even juror 630. And she was called out in Becky's book for being unfocused and annoying. And therein lies the slim avenue of truth when Dick and Jim say that Becky's book was the final straw for jurors. It seems like what they meant to say was juror, one juror, an alternate who got called out in Becky's book for not paying attention to the trial and one juror who didn't even participate in the verdict. Okay, the third juror and Dick and Jim's jury tampering claim.

Juror 326. He did not sign in affidavit either. According to Dick's assistant Holley's affidavit, Dick and Jim met with Juror 326 and his mother at her home. Here's David with what they say, he said. During the meeting, Juror 326 related the following information to us. Juror 326 was asked if Ms. Hill told the jurors not to let the defense mislead them. He did not specifically recall this statement, but he did recall that Ms. Hill commented to

him and other jurors about the photos that would be admitted into evidence, indicating that the, quote, images would be disturbing. Juror 326 also stated that the jurors were stationed in two separate rooms when they were not in the courtroom, and that he was in a room with mostly other male jurors. He was not in the same room as Jur jurors 630741 and 785. Juror 326 stated that Ms. Hill would visit the other room more often, and that he could not hear what she was telling jurors in the other room. During the trial, Juror 326 and others discussed the case prior to deliberations. He did not discuss the case with anyone outside of the jurors.

He further commented that some of the jurors were going into their office because of financial reasons, and that, quote, people were talking to co-workers because co-workers wanted info. End quote. Before deliberations, juror 326 indicated that, quote, minor conversation led him to know who was a yes, and who was a no. His vote changed with new evidence, as the jury was deliberating the bailiff, and Miss Hill told the jurors that they could not take a smoke break during deliberations.

There were six smokers on the jury. When asked if he thought the clerk of Court Becky Hill was inserting herself in the process of the trial, juror 326 responded, quote, I can see this." Not I saw that, but I can see this. This isn't even a fact A, facts C, then boxed them in with B situation. This is paper stacking. This affidavit includes nothing that speaks to the jury being tampered with. Here's the insight we got about juror 326 from the states filing.

This juror didn't hear Becky say anything other than the generic warning that the photos they were going to see would be graphic. The photos of something that Dick himself described thusly during the opening statements long before the jury even saw these photos. The second shot ended up and there's going to be some question about the direction of that shot. But ended up entering his skull cavity and the gases from that shot literally exploded his head like a watermelon hit with a sledgehammer. All that was left was the front of his face.

Everything else was gone. His brain exploded out of his head, hit the ceiling in the shed, and dropped to his feet. Horrendous, horrible, butchering. In its filing, the state said this about what juror 326 said Becky had told the jurors, quote, What juror 326 did recall was a warning that the jurors would witness disturbing images which is a neutral trigger warning and not one that puts a thumb on the scales of justice. To be sure, the jurors did review disturbing images. So if the defense has any issue with Becky

giving the jury a generic warning that the photos of this butchering that dick so vividly described throughout the trial, then the defense has a problem with itself. Because saying that the photos were graphic could have very easily helped the defense's weak case since they so badly wanted the jury to see the damage done to Maggie's and Paul's bodies and think to themselves, my goodness, sweet old Ellic Murdoch could never have done something like that.

Other than the generic warning about the photos, Jurrrr 326 says he saw Becky Hill speak with another jurr 1-on-1. That jurrr is Jurrrr 729 who was having financial issues that could have affected his continued service on the jury. Sled asked juror 326 if he had any other concerns. He said no. Here is what juror 326 wrote in his statement to Sled. I believe that my interaction with Mrs. Hill, the court clerk, was limited to information from the judge or about important events such as graphic material, or how long of a break

we would get. I do not believe she acted outside her role as court clerk and acted in a very professional manner. What's so frustrating about this is that for two months now Becky Hill has had to endure headlines that refer to her as being hungry and it's having done something very wrong. She's had to endure tabloid journalists referring to her not just as a clerk of court but the biased clerk of court. She's had to sit silently while hundreds of chatterboxes on social media treat her like she's some low down, dirty criminal like El Mardock, giving her far less benefit of the doubt and no presumption of innocence.

And she hasn't even been charged with any crimes. And now, thanks to the state, here we are, finally getting to see inside of Dick and Jim's jury tampering pinata. And it's absolutely empty. And we'll be right back. Okay, let's talk about the star of Dick and Jim's show, Jure 785, the egg lady Jure. From the get go, we've told you about how this entire set

of accusations coming from the egg lady juror was a waste of time. She did not render a verdict in Alex's case, and she was not removed from the jury as a result of anything Becky said or did. In her affidavit to Dick and Jim, she accused Becky of having inappropriate conversation with her about the opinions on Alex Gilt. She also says that her tenants, not Jürg 630, but the ones who signed Affidavits in late February, telling the court that she had spoken to them about the trial, have since denied

saying what they said and that they felt pressure to do so by sled. The state's filing on Tuesday gives us so much insight into what went down during the hours leading up to the Aglades dismissal. Here are some of the highlights. The state says that the court thoroughly investigated the allegations against the Aglady. They reiterate that the court gave no way to the supposed Facebook post reported to the court by Becky. The Facebook element of this is irritating. We've spoken about it at nauseam, so we're going to do you a favor by not giving you a whole breakdown on it other than to say this stupid Facebook post has been used by Dick and Jim since September as a misdirector.

The Facebook issue accounts for 75% of their accusations against Becky, and accounts for 0% of the reason that this juror was removed by Judge Newman. Additionally, this Facebook issue is at the heart of Dick and Jim's argument about why Judge Newman needs to be disqualified from Alex's cases. They say that he's a witness to Becky reporting this to him and therefore needs to serve as a witness in their case for a new trial.

Bottom line, there is no substance to the argument and they're simply using it to pad their filings and heighten the dramas surrounding Becky Hill. It is the one thing they can prove that the apology Facebook post from a man named Tim Stone was not the A. Gladi's husband. And they're using that one piece of evidence as a shield so people who only read the headlines and who only read other people's comments on social media to form their opinions about this won't see that everything else is boxing them in with B with the non facts.

Okay, so the judge gets an email from a woman who says her co-worker told her that their landlady was a juror on the case and was talking about it with them the other night and saying that she didn't think Ellic was guilty. Dick and Jim visited this woman and she recorded the interaction. Dick seemed to be intent on two things. One, he was trying to suss out if there was any connection between this woman and Becky Hill. He seemed to believe or seemed to be hoping that there were some nefarious happening going on there, that this person was perhaps making up or encouraged to do this. Additionally, he was focused on the wording of what this woman heard from her coworker. He seemed to have wanted egg lady to have said that the evidence doesn't support his

conviction as opposed to him just simply being not guilty. Anyway, the CML prompts Judge Newman to take action. According to the state's filing, Dick and Jim scoffed at this. Here's David. Murdoch's counsels advised the court to disregard the email as mere doys in a high profile case. But the state expressed concern about the allegation of a clear violation of the court's instructions to the jury, and noted there were still alternate jurors. to the jury and noted there were still alternate jurors. Council Griffins speculated without support that the email was an orchestrated effort to

get the juror removed. Isn't that rich? The men who were there to hold the state accountable to the evidence they said they had against Ellic. His duty in life is to make sure that allegations against their clients are backed up by evidence had no problem throwing around an accusation despite having no evidence lending itself to that conclusion.

Why wouldn't Dick and Jim want that juror examined? Well, obviously, because it seemed the juror felt their client wasn't guilty. It always struck us as odd that Dick and Jim didn't seem to put up much of a public fight when it came to juror 78-5s removal. To the outside viewer, it would seem that maybe they wanted to exhaust the balance of alternates, who were dropping like flies, so that the path to a mistrial would be a little easier.

But to those of us who had sources behind the scenes, we knew that word on the street was that this juror was potentially leaning toward a not guilty vote for Alex, so it made no sense to us. Why wouldn't they have fought harder for 785? There's so many questions about her and her potential connections, as well as how she came to Hyron tourney and for what purpose. During this conversation with 785, the court learned that Becky had spoken to her about a Facebook post in which someone purporting to be her ex-husband had said she was talking about the case with other people. After she said that, the court quotes specifically followed up

and asked 785 whether Becky had discussed anything about the case with anyone on that jury. Here's what juror 785, aka the egg lady juror said, in her final moments as a juror by the way. She said, not that I'm aware of. Hmm, notice she didn't say, yes, in fact, she's spoken to me about whether I think he's guilty and told me that I shouldn't worry about his guns. After this, Jim quote, then satisfied, accepted juror 785's explanations

and argued she remained a competent juror. But the state wasn't done. They wanted to know more about who she had spoken with. So the court called back 785 and asked her for the names of her tenants. That night, Sled visited them and interviewed them separately. You'll remember that they signed affidavits confirming that egg lady had spoken to them about the case, and those affidavits were sealed by the court. And the egg lady was removed because Judge Newman had told the jury multiple times a day, not to talk about the case with anyone, including other jurors. In fact, he said it so many times

that a partial listing of every time he had said it during the trial in the transcript took up almost a single page in the state's filing. Now remember, Eglady is saying that the tenants are denying what sleds says they said the court. But according to the state's filing. Now remember, Eglady is saying that the tenants are denying what sled says they said, the court. But according to the state's filing, the state reviewed their affidavits, lined by line with them, and the tenants affirmed their statements. In fact, Dick Harp-Hoolien even asked the male tenant to elaborate on what he meant. In line 9 of the affidavit that Dick is now insinuating was forced out of the tenants. Let's pause there, okay?

One of the accusations made in the writ of prohibition against Judge Newman is that Judge Newman is biased because he commented during elixentencing that law enforcement has been maligned for the past 5 or 6 weeks. This is what that looks like, okay? Dick sat in that in-camera hearing with the tenants who testified that against a court order, your 785 had spoken about the case. Not only that, Dick questioned one of the tenants and asked for clarification about what he meant

in his affidavit, and not only that, Dick watched a video of their interviews with Sled. Then, months later, in arguing that the clerk of court engaged in jury tampering, he takes the position that these affidavits were coerced and that the tenants denied saying these things. This is the kind of thing that Dick specifically seems to do. He marines law enforcement so casually and without thought and then he holds it against anyone who calls that out. Anyway, that male tenant that said that the egg lady stated she didn't believe there was any evidence to make her think that a fendant was guilty at that time.

He said he took that demean she had it made up her mind. In the female tenet said the egg lady told her she didn't believe there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Ellic murdered his family. Additionally, the egg lady's husband, her husband, was there during that conversation. And yes, she talked about the trial, but nobody was saying whether Ellic was guilty or innocent. Oh, also, she apparently talked about the case

with him every night, but not in detail. According to the state's filing, the court noted that typically this juror would have been removed without a discussion, but now that they've had this discussion, they can see that she was talking about the case despite the court order not to discuss it. Now, another fun fact, and it is about that Facebook post, Judge Newman asked if anyone, if Dick or Jim or the state wanted to bring in the ex-husband for questioning. Here is what the state says happen next. Council Harputlian very clearly declined. Quote, I think not Judge, I think if you would just accommodate me,

bring your 785 in, ask her about the specifics of the conversation. If she says yes, all have no complaints whatsoever. The A.E.G.L.A.D. was brought back in and acknowledged that the tenets had expressed opinions to her about the trial, but denied saying any of the Jur' thoughts to them. During this conversation, Dick quote, a stu-tly observed that jurors 785 placed their spouse at the scene of the conversation. Meaning, the reason they knew her husband witnessed this conversation is because jurors 785 told them, and because Dick pointed it out to the court. Now, the court allowed Dick to confront the egg lady

with the affidavits from the tenants, and she told the court that they weren't accurate. After egg lady was excused, Dick told the court, I'm not gonna argue anymore about this. I'm going to defer. It's your call, your judgment, your honor. I'm not going to argue with whatever you do, okay? Quote Council Harputlian, a

Firmatively declined to take any exception to the ruling. Until now. Okay, so real quick, let's go over what the jurors say about Becky Hill. As for the remarks they heard or say, well, most say they didn't hear anything. Jurur 193 said Becky might have reminded them to generally pay attention. Jururur 254 said Becky mentioned that they should watch Alex Body Language. Jururur 544 said Becky told them to generally pay attention, look at Body Language, and be observant. Jururur 729 said Becky told them to generally pay attention, look at body language, and be observant. Juror 729 said Becky told them to generally pay attention, but never heard any comments

about body language. Everyone else said they didn't hear her say anything. As for witnessing Becky have any discussions with Juror's one-on-one, one juror says he saw her talk to another juror about financial issues that he was having with child support. The juror she was talking to about child support issues says he saw her chat with others. What's interesting here is that the egg lady said that Becky had spoken with jurors one in one so frequently that this juror, the one with the child support issues, would refer to it as A and D time. This juror denies that he ever called

it that or ever said that. Additionally, this jurd told Sled that he was uncomfortable when Dick waved the gun around the courtroom. Okay, now other concerns the jurors had. Jurr 193 noted to Sled that if anything, people were overly cautious around the jury. Jurr 544 told Sled that jurr 630 is a tenant of the egg lady juror and that the egg lady was upset. She also told Sled that she was warned by Dick Harpothian that if she didn't talk, that she'd get a subpoena. Likewise, juror 589 says his wife was told by Dick that if they didn't talk, they'd be getting a subpoena. And juror 864 told Sled that it wasn't Becky who told them to watch out for body language. That came from Craton during his quote, court argument. The state noted in its filing that, perhaps most importantly, none of the jurors who willingly

interviewed with Sled reported feeling any pressure or influence to reach their verdict. Additionally, the state's filing includes voluntary statements from court employees, including the bailiff who served as liaison to the jury. All of whom said they didn't hear Becky say any of the things Dick and Jim claim she said to the jury. Nor did they see her do any of the things they said she did. Now, as for the smoke breaks, the bailiff wrote that he didn't take the jurors out to smoke once deliberation started, and that they said it always been the policy. Imagine that, a courthouse in Murdoch country in which juries haven't been allowed to take smoke breaks

during deliberation. Okay, now let's talk about the core arguments the state is making. Dick and Jim want an evidentiary hearing. They want something tangible they can put in front of the cameras so they can set up their smoke machines and pretend that smoke is coming from a fire. The state is arguing that this type of hearing isn't needed. Dick and Jim say they don't need to show that Becky's words affected the jury to get this hearing. The state says they do and they haven't even remotely

proven this with their arguments. The state's position is that juries have always been protected by the court, and that the law doesn't allow for, quote, highly motivated convicts to put their own jury on trial. They argue that courts have always proceeded with caution when it comes to emotions like this, because, quote, it would have a mischievous effect. Basically saying that it opens the door to perjury and it allows confederates of the accused to procure unprincipled witnesses to now contradict evidence that a jury had already considered

and had already concluded warranted a guilty verdict. The state argues that even if we're to believe that Becky said to watch Elix body language, not one juror is saying that this is what led them to a guilty verdict for Elix and that this alone is enough to deny Dick and Jim's motion. They also point out that Dick Harp Hoatley in himself asks the judge to pull the jury, and that pulling the jury is the mechanism that is in place to sus out any

undue influence that might have been put on individual members. Each juror said they found Elic guilty on their own. Repeatedly, the jurors were told to use only the evidence and only the testimony heard in court to form their opinion. The state points out that asking a juror now, after months of publicity and documentaries, whether they still believe Ella is guilty, has no value.

Meaning no weight can be put on that if a juror has since changed his or her mind since they were only supposed to use the evidence and testimony presented to them in court as the basis for their decision. Judge Newman also told the jurors before they deliberated, you are also the judges, the sole judges of credibility, that is the believability of the witnesses who have testified and of the evidence offered. He told them over and over and over again, you get to decide based on what you saw in the courtroom. In addition to asking the court to deny Dick and Jim's motion, they are asking the court to strike. Some of Dick and Jim's arguments for a new trial.

Dick and Jim's arguments for a new trial. Now, I wanna talk about the state's motions to strike because it is my favorite part of this response. The motion to strike means that the state is asking the court one not to consider these arguments during a hearing, but also not to consider these arguments in deciding whether or not there should be a new trial. The state is saying, look, even if we have a hearing on this motion, or if the court just decides now on a new trial, we need to take out the

parts that they included just for media hype and fluff. because guess what? They don't need the rules of evidence. First, the state moved to strike as in admissible hearsay, the affidavits of paralegal Holly Miller. Here, the state is asking to remove the affidavits from Dick's paralegal, where she recalled conversations with two jurors. Juror 741, the alternate who he spoke about earlier,

in juror 326, the juror who ultimately spoke to sled and said essentially that they didn't hear anything from Becky that influenced their decision of guilt. The state is saying, as we have said, you can include these affidavits about these jurors because they didn't sign it, and that is hearsay. Which, by the way, is a statement other than made by the declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered an evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted, which is not admissible.

This is funny, because do you remember the hearsay part of the Murdock murder trial? You would think that Dick and Jim would have learned the definition of hearsay by now. Did you say that you had a conversation with Mr. Griffin? That day that we found out that LA had been shot, we did have a conversation with Mr. Griffin. And he's the one. Griffin told you that he had been fired and that he had been caught stealing money. Correct. That's his your say. Well, that's a little bit too.

What kind of quantity does that drink you in? You're going to be a witness as well? The whole courtroom, enveers around the world, laughed at Jim's inability to understand what hearsay is. Yet months later, Team Murdock still apparently does not get it. Next, the state moved to strike as inadmissible, all such material as regards internal functions and deliberations of the jury. This is pretty self-explanatory, but due to rule 606b, the state is asking to remove lines from four affidavits, which include information about jurors' thoughts and interactions with each other. Finally, my favorite section of my favorite part, the state moves to strike all such material,

as regards Murdoch's claims regarding the Facebook post, Book Deal, and Post-Trial Media interactions as immaterial, impertinent, and scandalous. Here is David reading this gem. The greater part of Murdoch's motion is dedicated to an outlandish theory that Clirke Hill deliberately fabricated the existence of a Facebook post implicating juror 785 in order to get them removed from the jury, force an outcome, and thereby profit from fame and fortune.

To be clear, in an attached affidavit clerk Hill affirmed she made no such deliberate fabrication, and she denies fabricating any Facebook post. See Exhibit A, affidavit of Mary Rebecca Hill. Indeed, the machinations alleged do not even begin to make sense. Under Murdoch's theory, Clark Hill heard the court had received an email, which implicated a specific juror. And then in immediate response on the fly reported a fictitious Facebook post to implicate that same juror. And then in immediate response, on the fly reported a fictitious Facebook post to implicate that same juror. Then conspired with another staffer to quickly and by sheer

coincidence be lucky enough to find an apologetic post by somebody with the same name as the juror's spouse, which she then reported to the court in an effort to get an uncertain juror removed, so as to ensure some outcome that would support a book deal she did not at the time. Ev, only Alex Murdock could conceive of such a confounded gambit as even remotely plausible, and he is projecting his own calculating, manipulative psyche onto a dedicated public servant in an effort to save himself. Oh wow! So this part right here is the heart of everything that is wrong with Dick and Jim's motion for a new trial. Reporter Drew Trip of ABC News 4, one of the only journalists I've seen who is doing his job

to effectively communicate to his audience what is going on in the Murdoch Mass. He brilliantly commented on Twitter Tuesday how, quote, logically starved the underlying premise of the entire motion is. That being, that Becky Hill, on a fame-hungry quest to secure a book deal, broke her promises to ethically serve the people of Callatin County by concocting a plan in which she would tamper with the jury in order to secure a guilty verdict. That is in sanity. In only a defense team, ran by an ego maniac psychopath such as Elik Murdoch could muster up the odacity to make these absurd claims in the media.

First of all, Becky has a self-published book. Not that that makes much of a difference because I've learned that book deals really aren't the life-changing money that people think they are. Now that I know way too much about the book industry and the money made, I can tell you for a fact that Becky is not raking in fat loads of cash from her book. Even with the boost in sales she got from Team Murdoch's insanity, I promise. Her half of the self-published book money isn't by a house and change your life money. It's go on vacation money.

It's pay for a semester of a kid's school money or renovate your living room money. It is not quit your job and buy a yacht money. After reading Becky's book, I can tell you that she loves her job as clerk of court, and to think that she would compromise everything she has worked for, and the reputation she has built in her hometown that she loves so much, just for a little book money and a little book attention is absurd. Maybe Dick Harp-Pootleon and Jim Griffin would blow up their reputations and careers for Ellic Mardock in the 15 minutes will now stretch to 30 minutes of fame that comes with defending

a monster. But Becky is not like them, which is where they are mistaken. Most of us aren't like them actually, which is where they are mistaken. Most of us aren't like them, actually, which is why there are arguments for those of us with basic knowledge of human behavior who pay attention to what Dick and Jim say and not what the media spends in their favor, typically fall so flat. Finally, in this favorite section of mine, the state again says what we have been saying all along that the Facebook post and all the documents surrounding it were purely rubbish. Cooked up for sensational headlines.

Strategically, Murdoch's inclusion of the Facebook post narrative appears to be a desperate effort by Murdoch to preemptively impeach Clerk Hill, to bring into dispute irrelevant facts in order to support his petition for a writ of prohibition pending in the Supreme Court of South Carolina. And to beef up what would otherwise be a thin, blandly legal filing, not likely to draw attention to the various media efforts of his legal team. Phew, is it getting hot in here because those words are fire?

Notice the state is pointing out the motion was filled with smoke and mirrors, written for the sake of publicity and media spend. The sad part of this is that the media was fooled by the smoke and mirrors in that Becky Hills reputation suffered because of their inability to do their jobs correctly. And still, the media isn't changing or attempting to reverse the damage done. Look at these headlines from this week. Bookwriting Murdock Murdock's clerks submits sworn affidavit to nying serious jury tampering

claims as prosecutors highlight bizarre details to combat new trial bid, law and crime. Court clerk and Alex Murdock trial breaks silence on jury tampering allegations. Fox News. Alex Murtak court clerk hits back at murderers sensational appeal as she denies telling jurors quote, not to be fooled by his attorneys and advising them to quote, look at his movements on the stand, Daily Mail. Notice how those headlines don't at all capture what is really happening here? Notice how those headlines still manage to make Becky look bad, saying things like bookwriting

Murdoch Murders clerk. The news is not that Becky, who has been framed as an attention seeker, is now breaking her silence and denying the claims. The news is that Sled's investigation has not found a shred of evidence to back up with Dick and Jim erroneously claimed that Becky tampered with the jury to the extent that would warrant a new trial for Eric Murdoch. Becky denying the claim is important, but it is not the most important thing here. What is important is the absolutely absurd and insane position Dick and Jim have forced the clerk to be in right now, and there is no telling what happens next.

I mean seriously, legal scholars, question for you. What happens when a sociopath murderer manipulates his defense team into accusing a clerk of court of tampering with the jury based on very, very little evidence and accuses the judge of being a witness in this mess all in attempt to delay a trial for crimes the sociopath murderer has already admitted to. I'm sure your question is what happens now. It's a great question, because this is a huge mess. Ordinarily, Judge Newman would have a hearing on Dick and Jim's motion for a new trial. First he would decide whether there needs to be

an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a new trial is necessary. But Dick and Jim have mocked that up with their nonsense writ of prohibition. So it is not clear at all what the trajectory of this motion is. Dick and Jim are asking the Supreme Court to remove Judge Newman based on arguments and information

that the state just obliterated in their filing about this request for a new trial. It's so backward. Not only that, Dick and Jim haven't done this in the right order, so it is possible that the Supreme Court will send them back to Circuit Court to make a formal motion for Judge Newman to recuse himself. The state's filing puts so much sunlight on just how weak Dick and Jim's case is and how absolutely wrong they are about jury tampering. It was a manufactured issue from the start that was given a big old boost by the media, by the very people who valued their relationship with Dick Arputlian and his legal buddies more

than they valued the truth. I don't know what it's going to take to get this to change because I feel like we keep calling it out over and over again. This filing from the state should really cause a lot of journalists to take a moment and ask themselves if they were fooled by Dick's Dizzledazzle. Because we saw a whole lot of reprinting their accusations and not a whole lot of critical thinking or questions getting asked.

Whether or not you agree with the state's arguments, they are giving you the facts of what happened and they do not add up to Dick and Jim's map. Elik Murdoch is a judicial terrorist and Dick and Jim are carrying out his orders and they don't seem to care who gets hurt. As long as Elic is happy, then who cares of a small town clerk is suffering? As long as Elic is happy, then who cares if our state's most trustworthy judge and one of our state's most admirable people has his reputation dragged through the mud? It is disgusting.

Rewarded behavior is repeated behavior. If the state's revelations do not inspire the Supreme Court to finally put a hammer on dick and gym for their reckless claims and unsupported accusations and just the overall chaos they have created in this case, then I hope there are lawyers out there right now paying very close attention. Because Becky Hill does not deserve this. Those jurors do not deserve this. The judicial terrorism will continue as long as the Supreme Court allows it. We will have to wait and see. One last plug for two great events next week, and you can register for each at lunasharkmedia.com slash events,

or click the links in the description. I will be at the University of South Carolina in Columbia on Monday, November 13, for a special evening presented by the School of Information and Communications and hosted by Nina Brook. We only have 300 seats and the room is filling up fast. Our cup of Justice co-host Eric Blan will join for a special segment

and Liz will be in the premium chat with our amazing Luna Shark Premium members as we broadcast it live. Plus, our friends at all good books will have copies of blood on their hands available for sale one day early, and I will be signing them after the show. Then on November 16th, Luna Shark Premium members can join me at the roasting room in Bluffton, South Carolina for an intimate gathering so we can share

our appreciation for all of you. The first round is on us for everyone in person, and we will be broadcasting this event live to all premium members. Again, visit lunasharkmedia.com slash events to get details or click links in the description. We hope to see you at one of our upcoming events, but if not, you will hear me next week for the first time as a publish author. Stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight. True Sunlight is created by me, Manny Manny, co-hosted by journalist Liz Farrell and produced by my husband, David Moses. True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production. AHHHHH!