Murdaugh Murders Podcast - TSP #25 - The Reckoning: Lead Prosecutor Calls Out Corruption With Receipts + The Absurdity Of Alex Murdaugh’s Latest Move

Episode Date: November 16, 2023

True Sunlight Co-hosts Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell sort through the receipts that South Carolina Solicitor David Pascoe brought with him to the Statehouse this week as he went through a Who’s Who of Lawyer-Legislators getting preferential treatment. Plus, Alex Murdaugh’s legal team files a motion to get Alex’s financial crimes trial delayed and moved to a new county, saying they can’t get an impartial jury because of all the publicity surrounding their client … then Dick Harpootlian goes on Jim Griffin’s podcast to talk about Alex Murdaugh and give the case more publicity. 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. And please consider buying your copy of Blood On Their Hands this week - rave reviews so far!! 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

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

or visit cupofjusticepod.com. I don't know why it has taken this long, but I'll say it because I have seen it. South Carolina is finally having a reckoning when it comes to its judicial system. It is risen to a point where lawmakers can no longer ignore it and that is a big deal. This Friday, we could see that reckoning finally hit Team Murdoch. 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. Oh, hey!

Does my voice sound different today? It should, because I am different from the last time we talked. I am now a published author. And y'all, that is a big deal. I feel like I just gave birth to my book, and it's finally out there for the world, and all the stress and panicking about my book launch has finally left my body. I can finally breathe again. I've already received dozens of messages from fans saying things like, your book is inspiring me to be more open about my mental health, or thank you for being so honest about sexism in the workplace.

And you know what? That is what makes this a success at the end of the day. I wrote this book as the book I needed a decade ago when I began my career in journalism. I wanted to inspire people with this book, and that is already happening. Nothing that a critic could say or do about my book could take away from that achievement. Now, that said, I still want to mention that that big crazy pesky dream of mine to get on the New York Times bestseller list, and that dream is still in reach. And if I've learned anything from the hours that I have been obsessing over Travis Kelsey

and Taylor Swift's relationship in the last few days, it is that we always need to say our dreams out loud and shoot our shot no matter how absurdly low our chances are. I'm really not sure of the chances I have right now, but I know that my best chance is getting on next week's list, which means that all book sales through Saturday evening will mean the most. If you are considering buying the book, or even better, if you're considering buying a few books for your friends and family for Christmas, now through Saturday, November 18th is the time to do it. A lot of y'all have asked, where can I order that helps you the most?

This is a tricky thing, because I know for a fact that the New York Times bestseller list considers diversity of sales, meaning you won't likely make it if 99.999% of your sales are from Amazon. They want to encourage people to buy from independent bookstores, which I understand. But Amazon numbers do help too, and have to mention, the book is conveniently on sale on Amazon right now. The New York Times nonfiction book list

is incredibly intimidating right now. Britney Spears, Matthew Perry, and Dolly Parton are just a few of the greats taking up much-deserved space on that list. But still, I have hope for this crazy dream of mine. I know the numbers, and I would be willing to bet that if every single person who is listening to this show right now buys a book before Saturday night, I could actually achieve this wild dream of mine of becoming a New York Times bestselling author.

And that would lead to inspiring a whole lot more young journalist. True sunlight is an army, and I want to show mainstream media, especially the many outlets that ignored my book launch that independent journalism is the future of news with power and numbers. So one last time, I will say this while I still have a shot. Please click the link in the description or visit BloodOnTheHandsBook.com to order where it counts and when it counts before Saturday. If you have purchased the book, thank you. And you can still help me by posting about the book onto social media and by writing a positive review on Amazon.

Every post, purchase and positive review matters so much right now, as I have this little window of opportunity to get on that crazy list. Thank you for getting my confidence high enough to even say this dream of mine out loud and go for it. In the last few weeks, I have been lucky to meet hundreds of true sunlight fans at different events in Charleston, Columbia, and Hilton Head. All of the events so far have been a whole lot better than I ever hoped for, and they've given me a unique opportunity to spend time with our listeners. After having a few hundred conversations with a few hundred fans, I feel more confident than ever that things are changing for the better in South Carolina. So many of you told me how you've been fed up with the justice system for a long time.

So many of you thanked our team for what we do and told us that they don't want to know where this story would have gone if we didn't make the podcast. And also, wow. So many of you mentioned your disgust for Dick Harpuitland, especially in his hometown of Columbia. So many of you made comments about change that sent chills down my spine. Comments, like you're making a big difference with your work. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Times are changing and you are a part of this. Those comments made all of this chaos worth it. Systems stay the same for so long because change is hard.

It is tough by design. And you know what, lawyer lawmakers, who have gotten filthy rich off of this system are going to try their best to protect the status quo. But there is power in numbers. And I saw that in action on Monday night at the University of South Carolina. You know that we had so many true sunlight fans sign up

to attend the event that was hosted by the University of South Carolina School of Journalism. They actually had to move the event to the School of Law Building. You know, South Carolina School of Law, where Ellic Murdoch, Cory Fleming, Dick Arputlian, Carmen Mullin, Chris Wilson, Duffy Stone, and so many others who have been wrapped up in the wrong side of the saga attended school. Do y'all understand how big of a deal that is that they hosted an event centered on me? The pesky girl from Kansas who was exposed several of its graduates, it was symbolic and

moving to be there. The school went out of its way to make sure I felt safe there. At the end of the night, the uniformed officer at the USC Law School even made it a point to walk us to our car, and he told me that he was instructed to protect me after the event and make sure that I felt safe on USC's campus. Now, I am more confident than ever that things are changing, but unfortunately, change is not only slow, but it is often non-linear, which brings us to Bowen Turner. Thrice accused Rapist Bowen Turner was released from prison on Wednesday after serving over a year

in prison under the Useful Offenders Act. For a reminder, Turner allegedly raped three different teenage girls in three different South Carolina counties between 2018 and 2019. But he didn't end up serving any time in prison for any of those alleged crimes because his state senator attorney, Brad Hutto, somehow convinced solicitor David Miller, you know, the guy is trying to be a judge right now,

to give Bowen a sweetheart deal that carried a sentence of just probation for assaulting Chloe Bess, even after violating his bond conditions dozens of times. The system ultimately rewarded him for his bad behavior. As we said in the last episode, rewarded behavior is repeated behavior. Thankfully, the victims in the Bowen Turner case did not accept this miscarriage of justice. Instead, they made noise about it, so much noise that Bowen's story made headlines around the world, and soon after the story went viral, as predicted, Bowen Turner almost immediately violated his probation and was charged with public disorderly

conduct. He was sentenced under the Useful of Finder's Act, which is a type of sentencing for defendants under 25. Essentially, Bowen was sent to a YOA institution and was assigned an intensive supervision officer. Before a YOA inmate is released, a three-person team reviews the inmate's behavior, participation and programs, and record. Here is a statement that was sent to us on Wednesday from the Department of Corrections. Inmate Bowen Turner's case was reviewed for conditional community release three times during

his incarceration, May 11, July 17, and September 14, 2023. He was denied release during the first review because he needed additional necessary programming. The second denial was because the ISA are a board considered community opposition. On September 14, 2023, his case was reviewed and his case was approved. He is scheduled to be released to Community Supervision on November 15, 2023. Community Supervision is a function of the Youthful Offender Act. Any person sentenced under the Act must complete at least one year of community supervision. Offenders are required to meet

with their intensive supervision officer weekly to ensure they remain in compliance with agreed upon conditions of release. Beth Brayden checked Bowen's inmate record and noticed that he completed 24 programs while he was incarcerated, including individual therapy, anger management, impact of crime, and financial empowerment. He is also officially now on the sex offender registry.

Now, I hope that Bowen is a changed man after his time in prison, and I hope that these rehabilitation programs taught him to change his ways and face his demons. I hope he never endangers another woman ever again. Before she died, Dallas Dollars said that she wanted Bowen to go to therapy and to get help. She didn't want him to be miserable. She wanted him to change. I hope that he did change for everyone's sake. However, I just want to warn the women of South Carolina to be aware that Bowen has been released and to keep your guard up around him, especially if you see him drinking or at a party, which have been the common ground for his previous crimes. Bowen is out this week because the system failed to protect our girls.

In the system, chose to give a good ol' boy an easy out instead of forcing him to face accountability. The two-year anniversary of Dallas' death was Tuesday. The day before Bowen was released. While Dallas's family has suffered the unimaginable in the last two years on their quest to get justice for Dallas, they have not stopped fighting for change and advocating for judicial reform, which is why it was so symbolic and special that a meeting was held in the South Carolina State House on Tuesday, the day of Dallas' death anniversary, and the fight for Judicial Reform was at the forefront. Before we get into it, let's talk about what went down this week in front of the ad-hoc committee

to examine the Judicial selection and retention process in South Carolina. I know it sounds like Derek Zoolander named that committee, but nope, he did not. The official mission of the committee is to take a look at how the General Assembly can improve the judicial selection process. What lawmakers can do to quote, enhance the, quote, practice of being a judge and enhance the public's confidence in judges,

and finally, to quote pay special attention to the magistrate system in the state. If that mission statement were your co-worker at McDonald's, he'd be the guy walking around at closing time, mindlessly pushing a broom with one hand and watching TikToks with the other. He's technically doing the thing, but barely. In other words, here's the actual mission, at least how we see it. It's either to A, get the critics off lawyer legislators backs by making it look like members of the legislature

are actually taking seriously the calls for change and how we elect our judges. B, to give a platform to people like Supreme Court Justice John Kitchwich, i.e. the people who all seem to belong to a community acapella group called Everything is Fine just the way it is. Who have shown up for every rehearsal of their one terrible song, lawyer legislators don't get preferential treatment la la la. And who can't stop singing it every chance they get? Or see, maybe they are actually taking this seriously and there will in fact be some change.

Some change, not necessarily meaningful change. I'm not trying to be a cynic right out of the gate with this committee, but I'm not getting my hopes up here and that's based on a singular disturbing observation and it's this. Our lawmakers seem to require a whole lot of curses, downward cast eyes, and over-the-top ego-stroking from the people who stand before them, and suggest that, hey, maybe we should make some minor changes, so there's one justice system for everyone,

instead of the two justice systems that you continue to protect. First, Circuits list, and our David Pasco, has been a consistent leading voice in our state against public corruption and for judicial reform. His name is practically synonymous with calls to do the right thing. If anyone has credibility in this game, it's him. You might remember his name from a few weeks ago when we told you about the letter

that nine of our 16 chief prosecutors signed, asking our Senate and House leaders to remove representative Todd Rutherford from the Judicial Marit's Election Commission, which is the small group of lawyer legislators and civilians who, for all intents and purposes, choose our judges for us. Here's an example of how he had to couch everything that he said to this committee on Tuesday. Here's an example of how he had to couch everything that he said to this committee on Tuesday. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. I'm honored to be here. I am the solicitor for the first judicial circuit, which is Catalina Orangeburg and

Deutsche Starr counties, home of three of the finest legislators who just happen to be my constituents and can vote for me. Representative Cobb Hunter, Russell, and Representative Robbie Robbins. None of whom I am babysat, either, I will add, in the past. I've been a prosecutor for 30 years now. I've tried hundreds of cases in front of magicians, family court judges, and circuit court judges.

I've argued cases in the Supreme Court. And I mentioned these trials, but I've also pled, had hearings, and appearances in front of in thousands of cases during my 30 years as a prosecutor. And I tell you all that because I estimate that I've been in front of anywhere to as many as a hundred different judges in the state of South Carolina in the last 30 years over a hundred. So take it for me when I tell you this, someone who's appeared before maybe about 100 different judges.

We have good judges in the state of South Carolina, some phenomenal public service. You heard from a good one last week in Justice Kittrich. And I hope I'm not screwing up his vote in the next couple of months, but you heard from a great one in Justice Kittrich. Like any profession, we have some good judges, we have some bad ones, but the good far outweighs the bad.

So I'm not here to bash the judiciary. I'm here asking to provide them a system where they don't have to look over their shoulders every time they make a decision to make sure that they're not offending a lawyer legislator or a member of the JMSC. I'm also not here to castigate lawyer legislators. We have some phenomenal lawyer legislators who serve us every single day in the legislature. Many of them on this panel right here today on this committee. Some who've been my mentor for over 30 years and others others who I've butted heads with for 25 years,

who I go to for advice, often, because we have some great lawyer legislators in Columbia. And I appreciate that. The reason I'm here is because you can help us make the system better, understanding that it's never going to be perfect. You can help us make the system better, understanding that it's never going to be perfect, you can help us make the system better. I have had many judges, plural judges, and the last two years as I've gone

around the state talking about this issue, Juducia Rufuim. Call and tell me, and this is a verbatim quote from one of them, any judge who tells you they don't worry about offending a JMS, you remember in their courtroom courtroom is lying to you. That's that judges quote. I wasn't gonna mention this, but Representative Amber got me kind of fired up. I had one judge call me recently within the last 18 months, I believe, just to vent almost in tears to tell me he was forced to give a JMSC member a continuance in a civil case wasn't even criminal in a civil case because he

feared that if he didn't he was gonna lose his job when he had to go out in front of the JMSC just weeks later and if you don't think that happens hold tight and just wait and see what Solicitor Brackett and I have to talk to you about today. I don't fault Solicitor bracket and I have to talk to you about today. I don't fault Solicitor Pasco for toasting these guys with little shot glasses of their own self-delusion, because I know better. I know that some of our elected officials, particularly the ones who seem to hold the most power, are such craven, fragile children that they would shut down and stop listening if they weren't first told how wonderful they are. The beauty here though is that even though Pasco was supremely diplomatic, he also came with some serious receipts. Judges don't like this current system, he told them, but they can't say this for

fear of offending members of the JMSC. He told the committee that Justice Kitchwich, the man who is expected to become our next Chief Justice and who spoke to the committee last week and quite incredibly told them that lawyer legislators don't get special treatment is honest but has some blind spots. Last week, Justice Kitchwich said

he was intentionally not going to talk about lawyer legislators getting preferential treatment. But then he said they don't get preferential treatment. He specifically cited two high profile cases as proof. The first one was derived price, where the Supreme Court did rule against a lawyer legislator in a three to two opinion.

And then the second case he talked about was Murdo, the Murdo trial, where he said, quote, ask Senator Harpickley and if lawyer legislators get preferential treatment. I want to talk about those two things briefly. Okay, so in high profile cases, when the world is watching, we can count on no preferential treatment and no one being pressured into preferential treatment. But what happens when the world is not watching? What happens when the world is not watching? Well, we know the answer of that from one of the cases that Justice Kitchwich cited, Gerard Price, because when the world wasn't watching, a JMSC member goes back in chambers with the judge and the solicitor

represented Mike and I'm glad I think it was you that brought that out. I'm glad you did. And the solicitor. But it's the JMSC member who tells the judge what he wants the convicted dangerous murder sentence to be reduced to. And the judge does exactly what the JMSC member did with regards to the sentence. And that came out during the Supreme Court hearings. I couldn't believe it. One of the justice is asked, but where did the judge get the idea on that sentence? And the JMSC members said, I told them to give them 18 years.

And the judge then signs a secret, unlawful order. That's what happens sometimes with JMSC members when the world is not watching and ask for Senator Harputland whether lawyer legislators get preference to treatment. It has been alleged that I am friends with Senator Harputland and I'm not going to address that allegation at this time but I will say that I want to hidden call them right after that. And I asked him that question, and I invite y'all to ask him the question. Anyway, you can invite him. But I'm going to tell you what he told me with a lot more tact and a lot fewer curse works.

He said, yes, lawyer legislators get preferential treatment. It's not a secret. It's not a secret. It's not a secret, which is why he, a Democrat, Representative Wooten, a Democrat is about to pre-file legislation with the Republican. I saw him earlier. Maybe he might have ran out of here when I mentioned how Putin is named, but with Senator Westclimer in the Senate,

a Republican in a Democrat sponsoring legislation together in the Senate to take lawyer legislators off of the JMSC. Everyone in the system knows about the preferential treatment where they want to admit it or not. Dick Harp, Pooley and ladies and gentlemen, the same man who stood up on the Senate floor right after the murder trial to declare to his colleagues that he is proof that lawyer legislators do not get preferential treatment in the courtroom. Apparently, he's now admitting the very opposite of that. Please tell me, the future of this system does not lie in this man's hands. And we will be right back. The justice system can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be.

Join us to hold public agencies accountable because we all want to drink from the same cup of justice and it starts with learning about our legal system. With tales from the newsroom and the courtroom, Liz Farrell, Eric Land and I invite you to gain knowledge, insight, and tools to hold public agencies and officials accountable. If you liked our cup of justice bonus episodes, you will love cup of justice shows on the new feed. Together, our hosts create the perfect trifecta of legal experience, journalistic integrity, and a fire lit to expose the truth wherever it leads.

Search for cup of justice wherever you get your podcast or visit cupofjusticepod.com with you in mind because everyone loves a friend with a truck, especially a Toyota. A truck is dependable and capable as you are. So when that inevitable ring-a-ding-ding for health comes, you're there rolling up in an award-winning truck because you're an award-worthy friend. It's time to live with your legs. It's time to Toyota. Lisa 2023 Tacoma Double Cab SR5 from $129 weekly for 64 months at 7.79% with $4,000 down. They're in stock now. Visit shoptoiota.ca or your local Ontario Toyota dealer today.

Pasco then told the committee that every day, hardworking lawyers see the problems with the system and have had to work with in it despite those challenges. He talked about public defenders who see their lawyer legislator colleagues being able to secure these low bonds for defendants charged with violent crimes, bonds that the public defenders could never imagine getting for the people they represent. He talked about lawyers getting to the courtroom early when judges tell them they're going to hear motions

in the order of lawyers arrival that day, only to be pushed back for lawyer legislators who are allowed to skip the line. And he talked about the thing that makes lawyer legislators particularly valuable in the courtroom. The absolute protection they're afforded while the General Assembly is in session. It's a marketable privilege, with enough money, anyone can purchase a lawyer legislator to attach to their case, just to use their legislative immunity to further delay proceedings. An example of this would be when Representative Todd Rutherford, all of a sudden, showed up at Russell the Feet's table

during a hearing this summer to tell the judge that he needed more time to familiarize himself with the case and, oh right, in January he'll be back in the luncheslatures, so oopsie. Here's Pasco with more examples of how this privilege gets abused. I talked about how my office had a CDVHANA, a criminal domestic violence of a high aggravated nature case, ready for trial, witnesses ready to go, but on the EVA trial, Defense Council, co-counseled a lawyer legislator, and the judge was forced to grant a continuance. She had no choice, didn't want to grant a continuance, but had to. That's preferential treatment for a defendant and for the lawyer. Around the same time, Solister Wilson's office had a very serious felony DUI, set for trial,

for January. It had been set for months. It had been set for a while with the victims' family members coming in from across the country to attend But two or three weeks before that trial date in January two or three weeks before that January trial day Lead defense counsel announces no we aren't going to trial The judge didn't grant the continuance Who's supposed to control the docket represented Bamberg. The attorney did, because the attorney said, I have assigned a lawyer legislator from

my office, and he's protected through July. The case had been pending for nearly three years when the lawyer legislator was assigned to that case on the eve of trial, three years. The head of the firm, a renowned criminal defense attorney, then announced that he was assigning all of his criminal cases to the lawyer legislator. So he told the judge and the lawyer legislator all of the cases are continued until after July 31st.

In Judge Jefferson, a judge I have incredible respect for, All of our cases are continued until after July 31st. In Judge Jefferson, a judge I have incredible respect for and have known for years had no choice but to continue the cases. Then Pasco reminded the committee of what happened in January 2022, when Chief Justice Donald Beatty tried to address the problems that lawyer legislator's immunity was causing in court rooms. The Chief Justice sent out another order, Chief Justice Betty saying, lawyer legislators, you no longer get full protection.

You are now going to have to come to court for cases that are over three years old. The trial judge can call your cases for court at the rate of three years old. I was extremely pleased with Chief Justice Baydie for doing that. Whether it's because I was complaining about it or not, he made the decision. The next day, I called a state senator and we discussed it. This would have been on Wednesday.

And he commended it. But the senator said, we'll see how long this lasts. We'll see how long that order lasts that was signed on January the 11th, giving and telling the lawyer legislators they had to come to court for all cases. Because that state senator had run into a ways and means lawyer legislator, not the chairman at the time or now, but they had run into a ways and means lawyer legislator and they were complaining a lot about Chief Justice Betty.

And I remember telling that Senator Tuff, it's in order now that legislators just gonna have to live with it. So my office was putting together bond revocations and old trials three years or older with lawyer legislators on the docket. When the judge calls me and says, Mr. Pasco, we can't put these lawyer legislator cases

on the docket anymore. And I said, asked, what are you talking about? Chief Justice Bady just signed an order about this. And the judge said, well, on the very next day, on January the 12th, the same day that that legislator on ways of means, complained to the state senator about the order, the Chief Justice had Quirter Base Administration send out an email saying ignore my order. The very next day, I can't tell you why he resented the order in just 24 hours, but I can

tell you what my perception was, and I can tell you what the perception of that state senator was when I talked to that senator later. I don't think I have to say it out loud because it's also the perception that judges and members of the bar had as to why that protection was rescinded 24 hours later. Criminal defendants know how to game this system if they have the money to hire a lawyer legislator. This is what Pasca repeatedly told the committee. He also told them about a case in which a lawyer legislator had used his legislative immunity

to delay a bond revocation hearing for client A, but then astoundingly showed up in court on another day during the legislative session, but this time for client B, for whom he was waving his legislative immunity so that he could strike a plea deal on that client's behalf. You heard me, right? Legislative protection is meant to protect legislators from court dates so that they can

focus on making laws. That is the sole purpose of it, but it's gotten so casually exploited that a lawyer legislator felt perfectly comfortable using his immunity to keep one client out of jail while at the very same time telling that same court that he was waving his immunity to seal up a deal for a second client. He was literally telling the court, I'm too busy to come to court for that, but not for this. Either way, he was making money at it. The lawyer legislator is directing the judge how to call his cases.

There's a problem with that. And Judge Young goes on to say, I haven't seen that in order, but that doesn't seem like it's in the spirit of things. But ladies and gentlemen, there's nothing the judge could do. That is wrong. And let me ask you this. How do you think the optics were of that exchange for not just the judge and the solicitors and the attorneys and the public defenders, but also the victims and the defendants

in that courtroom? Think about that. I know you're a judge, but you can't lock my client up today. I'm here because I want to do a case, but you can't lock my client up today. I'm here because I want to do a case, but you can't lock my client up today because I'm a lawyer legislator and I'm protected. Then Pasco told this story. A judge put out word

that the judge needed to speak to the assistant solicitor on a case. The assistant solicitor went back in chambers and the judge told the assistant, I'm friends with the JMSC member. He represents this defendant. He wants to be here for his bond hearing but can't make it. What's the defendant charged with? The assistant's solicitor says trafficking heroin. The judge immediately says, well, I'm going to give him a bond. I mean, never mind that the defendant was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and got a 20-year sentence in 1992.

Never mind that he has a 2007 trafficking heroin conviction where he got seven years in prison. Never mind that he was already out on possession of drug charges when he picked up this trafficking heroin that the JMSC member called the judge about because he can't make it to the bond hearing. Nevermind that he's facing life without the possibility of parole. Before the hearing, the judge says,

I'm gonna give him a bond, but it gets even stranger. Somebody told me that a non-JMSC members have ever been able to do this. The judge in Chambers gets the JMSC member on the phone. It says, we're going to do the bond by phone. And the judge has his cell phone taken down to the holding cell so the convicted drug dealer and killer can use the judge's cell phone to talk to the JMSC member, his lawyer.

I've heard a lot of crazy stories in my time in 30 years, but I've never heard of a judge allowing a convicted killer and drug dealer to use his phone while he's in a holding cell. Never mind the issue about the potential of illegal contraband to a defendant. And I've never heard that happen with another lawyer, but it happened for a JMSC lawyer and his client. The deputy then brings the phone back to the judge. They go back out in the courtroom

and they set bond with the judge holding the cell phone up for the JMSC member to hear it and the defendant got a bond and he is now out on our streets. That is what goes on in our state. And like Pasco said several times, everybody knows this is how it works. So why are people like Justice Kitchwich pretending

it's all okay? Not to get too high up on our high horse with this, but there is a domino effect when this kind of thing is allowed to happen in any justice system. Go to any sheriff's office or police department in South Carolina and ask for a list of their unsolved murder cases. Then ask the investigators why they're unsolved. In many offices, the answer for some of those cases anyway is going to be, we know who did it, but no one who saw it happen wants to talk to us,

never mind, is willing to testify. A few years back, I sat in this packed room at the St. Helena Island Library, where family members of people whose loved ones were shot and killed, grilled solicitor Duffy Stone about why it was that their children's killers were walking the streets free.

There was so much raw pain in that room, so much desperation, so many broken hearts. These were salt of the earth people who didn't have much money, but who had dressed up in their finest Sunday outfits to come and let the men in charge know how haunted they were by their children's deaths and how unsafe they felt in a community where the same criminals kept getting arrested and then freed and then arrested and then freed. And the truth of the whole thing was this. There really was no hope of them getting justice. Really none. Because we apparently live in a world where a heroin trafficking killer is handed a judge's cell phone so he can get out on the bond and be back on the street among those he's accused of terrorizing. That's why. So let's put her past go. Didn't say who the judge was in this case,

but he did mention that the lawyer legislator is on the JMSC and that this incident happened recently. So it was either state senator lu Rankin, state senator Ronnie Sob, state senator Scott Talley, state representative Makaja Kasky, state representative Todd Rutherford, or state representative Jay Jordan. Feel free to call any and all of them to ask, was that you friend because that was messed up? Speaking of Todd Rutherford. And again, why is it all the weird cases involved loyal legislators or JMSC members? He pleads his client to a drug charge carrying a mandatory minimum sentence. His client already had multiple drug convictions, drug trafficking

convictions had already been deprised and before. And Rutherford is able to convince a judge to allow his defendant to remain out on bond after his guilty plea. This convicted drug, multiple convicted drug trafficker is going to get the stout on bond after his guilty plea to get a pre-sentence investigation or a PSI. 30 years, I've never heard of someone who's been to prison on multiple occasions, getting a PSI for drug trafficking. Never seen it. But it gets worse. Oh, and of course, and let me point this out,

by giving them the PSI is no secret. The plea was in the month of December. It was in the month of December. The pre-sentence investigations are gonna be done till January or February. So what is the PSI allowed the defendant to do? Stout on the streets until at least August, because you can't order Todd Rutherford back to court, even to sentence a defendant

who's pled guilty to direct trafficking. No preferential treatment. But it gets even worse, because not only did the defendant not come back in August, he stayed out long enough to pick up a domestic violence charge in another county and get out on bond again. The defendant wasn't sentenced in August. He wasn't even sentenced that year. He wasn't sentenced the next year. He wasn't sentenced the year after that.

It took three years before they were able to get him to court and get him sentenced. And sadly, if this hadn't been reported in the press, I'm not so sure the defendant would have been sentenced today. This just happened back in August. If it hadn't been reported in the press, I don't know that he would have been sentenced back in August.

Solicitor Pasco did not hold back and calling out just how broken our judicial selection process is. Not only that, he said something that we know to be absolutely true about good old boys who expect the system to work very directly and specifically for them. Even when it hurts the rest of us, and that is this. Diversity is their kryptonite. Now, this next part is a little long, but it's so important. Pasco told a committee the story of what happened to Judge Christy Heraton, who served as a circuit court judge from 2008 through 2018 when she was pushed out by the JMSC. It's a stunning story that shows how members of the JMSC view themselves in relation to

the judges they elect. It shows how they use the ODC to their advantage. It shows the fug-like behavior what they engaged in to push out a judge who did not rule the way one of them wanted her to. Last week, it was discussed how the JMSC quote, weeds out bad judges, and that the JMSC should be commended, not condemned for not having bad judges reelected. I could not disagree more.

The JMSC process is rigged in a process that I can't even understand the rules of because they seem to change depending on the candidate and I can tell you that for my own experience in dealing with the JMSC. And it contradicts the purpose of what being qualified means. Just as Kittries told you all last week, it's a low threshold. And yet the JMSC member deprives you.

Every member on this panel, the right to vote up or down on a judge like Judge Harrington when they have them in their line of sights. The JMSC does not weed out judges. They berate them, they threaten them, and they intimidate them until they drop out. That is not a system we should support. Judge Harrington, who I knew, and I knew her very well, my lawyers knew that they had to be prepared when they went into her courtroom

and that she was fair, that she was no nonsense. She was known for her unequaled work ethic. In her 10 years on the bench, she tells me she presided over 250 jury trials to verdict with a 96% affirm rate when she went before the JMSC in 2017. Interestingly, former Judge Harrington to this day still teaches ethics at the National Judicial College in Reno, where we, where you pay to send our judges to learn ethics. She teaches them ethics.

She served as the chair of the faculty committee, and has been on the board for six years after she went through her JMA's SC experience in the fall of 2017. Pasco went on to describe a nightmare situation for this judge, where she, while doing her job, made a lawyer legislator angry, and she was worried about her reelection hearing

with the JMSC simply because she upset a JMSC member. Here is what happened at that hearing in 2017. The hearing comes along. I think it was November, December and it was brutal. There are all kinds of articles about it. They berate her. They threaten her until she withdraws. At some point, a member of the JMSC member sitting in the back right now, read Judge Harrington her rights. Her rights.

First day a accuser being mean, when that didn't pan out, they accused her of having debt and too many student loans, which ended up being paid off within the next year or two. The JMSC member sitting in the back mocked her and told her she couldn't afford a sandwich. When that didn't pan out because her credit score was too high, they said she had contact with the legislator. And when that didn't pan out, her credit score was too high. They said she had contact with the legislator. And when that didn't pan out, they turned to intimidation. They threatened her and she dropped out.

They intimidated her to the point where she had no choice but to drop out. Read the articles. It's brutal. That is not a system we need to be proud of. Like Sala Sutter Pasco said, why are they defending a system like this one? Oh right, because in this system, members of the JMSC and their friends can pack the court with their spouses, friends, family members, and friends of friends. Who got elected the same year that Judge Harrington was pushed out by the JMSC?

Well, I can think of two people. One was then JMSC member Peter McCoy's friend, Bentley Price. Judge Price took over Judge Harrington's spot. And according to Solicitor Pasco, McCoy talked about how hard he had worked to get price elected. Another person elected that year was Peter McCoy's wife. The friend and the wife of the man who was so angry at Judge Harrington because she wouldn't further delay his murder trial are now judges. No wonder Judge Carmen Mullen felt so comfortable when she tried to order a deputy to a rest of man who had committed no crime.

No wonder nothing happened to her after that was exposed. No wonder nothing has happened after her permissive off-books behavior was exposed in the satirical case, which ended up helping Eleg Murdoch abscond with millions of dollars that weren't his. No wonder. Judges are scared of legislators, but as long as the judges don't cross them

or their friends, it sounds like they'll do just fine. And this is the part where I ask you to remember representative Rutherford's handcuff handshake with Elik the murderer. A guess they were friends. One of the elements of this that we haven't talked enough about is the separation of powers between different branches of government and how the current system we have is one in which the judicial branch is basically under the legislative branch. It is not independent as our nation's founders had envisioned. The legislative branch has the power to hire, fire, and fund our judges. When we talk about these two systems

of justice, that is what's at the heart of it. That is where the blood flows from. That is the cancer that needs to be removed. And we'll be right back. Okay, let's talk about what's going to happen this week with Team Murdoch. At 10 a.m. Friday, Dick and Jim are expected to appear in front of Judge Clifton Newman in Buford County to discuss the so-called jury issues related to Alex November 27 trial in the Saturday case. It is possible that Judge Newman will also allow them to address other related issues,

such as their latest motion asking for a change of venue. This will be the first time they will be appearing in front of Judge Newman, since they filed their writ of prohibition, asking that Judge Newman get removed from all of their cases. A.K.A. this is the first time they will be seeing Judge Newman since they did him dirty and they pulled that unthinkable move to go after America's judge who has been nothing but kind, gracious, and fair to Team Murdoch. So let's start by saying this. Friday could be a reckoning for Dick and Jim.

It should be a reckoning for Dick and Jim. It should be a reckoning for Dick and Jim. There has been enough judicial terrorism at this point. There's been enough behavior that defies logic, such as this. On Monday, T Murdoch filed its motion for a change of venue, claiming that there's been far too much publicity in Alex's case for the case to be fairly tried in Buford County. And what's more, far too much publicity to try Alex's case fairly for a while now. So hey, why don't we just wait until late 2024 for Alex's next trial? Comically, they mentioned that Alex has been the subject of two docuseries and two movies since the murder trials. Less comically, they fail to mention their own roles, and facilitating at least one of those projects. By the way, we still don't know to what extent the Murdock family and Dick and Jim have been

involved in those productions. Maybe the state should suggest getting them on the record for that because if they have been involved to any extent, then it is another example of them orchestrating chaos so that they can later point to it as evidence when arguing their motions. Speaking of the Fox News documentary series that had teen Mardock written all over it, I have been wondering why exactly it was rushed released in late August. You know, just days before Dick and Jim dropped their big Becky bomb on South Carolina and sent this case back into the madness of the media spotlight. No one was really talking about Buster or Becky or much about the Murdoch's at all before that

Dock You series was released. It is unbelievable to me that Dick and Jim are now weaponizing the media hype that they created themselves as a reason why they can't go to trial. Are they just gonna pretend like that didn't happen? Are we just gonna pretend like they didn't play a major role in keeping the international media spotlight on this case throughout the fall of 2023? And in this same motion, in this same motion, in which they're claiming they can't get an impartial jury to judge whether or not Ellick is guilty of the crimes, he is accused of committing

against the satir fields. They write this. What is the rush to dispose of this case before the end of 2023? The defendant has entered a plea in federal court to the same conduct for which he will be tried in this case. The victims will have their day in court at the defendant's federal sentencing. Certainly, there are older criminal cases pending in Bufert County with victims who are

waiting for their rights to be vindicated. There is no good reason to try this case, or any other pending cases against the defendant ahead of older pending criminal cases. In what world does a defendant get to say, where? I won't get a fair trial on these charges I've already admitted to. This is literally what they are saying here. There's no rush to try this case because he's already pleaded guilty to these charges

and those victims should be satisfied with that. What other lawyers get away with filing a motion like this without consequence? I want you all to sit back and picture Judge Newman reading this motion at his desk. What must be going through his head right now? What fools? What buffoons? And remember, this is to convince the court to move the trial so that the jury can be fair when deciding on Alex guilt for charges that he is already admitted to.

Seriously, where do they expect to get this fair jury? Somewhere where the jury doesn't understand the words, I did it. This is insane. I don't know how, they keep managing to do this, but they are making a even bigger mockery out of this court than they already have. Actually, I do know how they manage to do this. No one holds them accountable for their behavior. And also, you heard how the system works behind the scenes.

Sure, they've lost most of their motions so far, and just about every single one of their strategies has failed, but that is just jurisprudence. No one has sanctioned them for their behavior in the courtroom, or for their intentionally misleading arguments, or their assertions that are just plain wrong. Now, speaking of Dick and Jim's strategies, let's talk about how calculated these latest moves are. We told you last week how the states replied to team Murdoch's motion for a new trial,

completely dismantled their claims of jury tampering. We've told you before how the bulk of Dick and Jim's argument for a new trial is centered on a Facebook post that had nothing to do with the removal of a juror. And we've told you how the legal standard they have cited for the new trial based on these bogus charges of jury tampering is weak. They say that Becky Hill talking to the jurors at all is enough to grant them a new trial based on these bogus charges of jury tampering is weak. They say that Becky Hill talking to the jurors at all is enough to grant them a new trial or at least an evidentiary hearing for a new trial. In an attempt to bolster that argument, they cite a 1993 case in which

a new trial was granted for a man accused of burglary. In that case, the jury wasn't just supposed to reach a verdict of guilty or not guilty. If they voted guilty, then they had to instruct the judge on whether they wanted him to sentence the defendant with mercy. The jury's had questions about what the, with mercy sentence might look like against the without mercy sentence.

So the four person asked the bailiff to relay a note to the judge. But in that conversation, the bailiff told the four person that the judge was a fair person, either way. So, the jury decided to leave the sentencing decision in the judge's hands and did not ask him to do so with mercy. The appeals court reversed the jury's verdict because they felt that the bailiff's input ultimately affected how the jury ruled. Though the four person later said that the bailiffs' input ultimately affected how the jury ruled, though the four person later said that the decision about mercy or no mercy did not factor into their decision

of this person's guilt. So, Dick and Jim are extrapolating from that and saying that the legal standard this creates is not if an officer of the court's words affected the outcome, but could those words have affected the outcome. Needless to say, this is not how we read the case. In reversing the verdict, the appeals court cited a fourth circuit decision in the 1960 case, Holmes V. United States, in which the court ruled that, quote, when there has been such a communication,

a new trial must be granted, unless it clearly appears that the subject matter of the communication was harmless, I could not have affected the verdict. Digg and Jim argue that because Callatin County Clerk of Court Becky Hill is an officer of the court, like this bailiff was, that this case supports a new trial based on jurors saying that they heard her say something about paying attention to the witnesses, including their body language. Beast on the subject matter, and what could have happened. But the thing is this, the state says not one juror, including the one cited by Dick and Jim, has reported that anything Becky said or did affected their verdict. And that right there is why the court should deny their request. The jurors not only say they reach their verdict

on their own, they say that Becky reminding them to pay attention was taken generally. In other words, this is not like the bailiff case cited by Dick and Jim. The outcome was not changed or affected in Alex case in any way, that comes remotely close to what happened in the bailiff case. In fact, the outcome was not affected at all. And it's not at all clear how telling a jury to pay attention specifically would hurt ELEC. Unless Dick and Jim are saying that paying attention to ELEC and their witnesses is a bad thing? Is that what they're saying? The state argues that the defense's request for the judge to pull the jury individually right after they declared elegility. To verify that each juror had reached his or her opinion independently, was the appropriate legal remedy to suss out whether they had been affected by any outside influence. And that this polling, in addition to their post-trial investigation into the jury-tamparing charges,

shows that the jurors came to their conclusions on their own. Okay, so what are Dick and Jim doing here? We know they want a new trial, we know they want Elik to be sentenced federally before he gets two more guilty verdicts in the state. But what we haven't talked about is this. If Judge Newman were to recuse himself from hearing Dick and Jim's motion for a new trial,

then Elik will get a new trial. It's that simple and that calculated. Judge Newman is the only judge who can hear that motion because the courts regard the trial judge as the closest authority to what went on in that courtroom during that trial. All of this nonsense since September has been an effort to pressure Judge Newman to quit the case and get that November 27 trial delayed. If they can get Judge Newman to quit the case and get that November 27 trial delayed. If they can get Judge Newman to quit or somehow convince the Supreme Court to disqualify him, then they get what they want it. They get a new trial. And while they wait for that to happen,

they'll bomb their way through the state court until they can get Elic released into the custody of the federal government. And guys, they are so close to that button. I know there are some people here who don't enjoy it when we harp on the headlines, but it has to be done. We are now a week out since the state filed its reply dismantling the jury tampering accusations. Not one headline has questioned Dick and Jim's credibility. Not one headline has mentioned that the jurors have not corroborated Dick and Jim's story. Not one headline has pointed out that Dick sat in the room with the egg lady's tenants and went over their affidavits with them lined by line. The affidavits that Team Murdoch later said were coerced out of them.

Not one headline teases a story about how the state's reply raises questions about the veracity of the egg lady's account of what happened, given that she was caught lying on the record. All we've gotten are variations of Clerk of Court speaks out, breaks her silence, denies tampering with the jury. And this is important because Digg and Jim want the public pressure to push Judge Newman off the bench, and they're using the headlines to that end. You heard what Solicitor David Pasco said happened to Judge Harrington when she didn't do what a lawyer legislator wanted her to do, right? You heard about the lengths the JMSC went to and pressuring her to give up, right? This is how these good old boys think.

This is what's happening right now with Judge Newman. I'll repeat it once more. If Judge Newman recuses himself from hearing the motion for a new trial, then that's it. They've gotten their new trial. So what happens now, right? Well, Dick gave us the roadmap and his appearance on Jim's podcast this week. What's that you say? Dick went on a podcast to talk about Alex Case the week he also filed a motion complaining about the publicity in Alex Case.

Girl, he went on a podcast to talk about Alex Case the day he filed a motion complaining about the publicity in Alex Case. The worklad he did it, but again, where was the media to point out that hypocrisy? In that podcast, Jim's co-host asked Dick what happens if their motion to have Judge Newman removed doesn't get heard before November 27th, or what happens if Judge Newman doesn't recuse himself before that. Dick's response will pick a jury and we will march ahead. Meaning nothing. Judge Newman will preside over this case in which Elic Murdoch will be tried on charges he and as attorney have admitted he is guilty of multiple times. So there you go. It's absurdity,

it's babble, baloney, bunk, craziness, drivel, foolishness, gibberish, madness, rubbish. I'm literally going through the alphabetical list of synonyms for the word nonsense right now because it needs to be said in every single form. Why are we even talking about this? Why have we spent weeks in it back and forth about a trial for crimes that Elic Murdoch has already admitted to. On Friday, we obviously expect to see more big, craten energy, where he leaves no crumb on the table. But also, we hope to see the court remain firm and not give one inch to these judicial terrorists. Dick and Jim are going to argue

that Buford County's jury pool is tainted and that they will be unable to get 12 impartial jurors for this trial for crimes. Their client has already admitted to. Here are some things to know about that. One is that the jury questionnaire and the threat of being sequestered were tools employed by Dick and Jim to spook this jury

pool into saying things that would keep them from, you know, being locked up in a motel by the highway for weeks on and right around the holidays. Even though this trial shouldn't take about a few days, we're sure people were looking at that six-week murder trial and thinking to themselves, Lord God, no, not me. So it's no surprise that according to Dick and Jim's account, if you can believe them on this, 147 out of the 167 replies that the Clercocourt has gotten so far have been from potential jurors who have heard of Elik Murdoch in his criminal charges. Dick and Jim were nice enough to include a sample of some of the replies. Here's David with a few of them.

I know too much history of the man on trial due to crime shows. I have heard too much about this family and cannot be impartial. I believe he is guilty of killing his wife and son, if that counts. My mind is made up in this case. Kilti, what the family did is disgraceful.

I wish I had a white privilege card. If you want unbiased, I'm not your juror. I know some of the people involved in this case, and I don't feel I can be fair and unbiased. I've been shocked that the behavior of the defendant was able to go on and feel that he is guilty of any and all charges. While I'm not a gossip junkie, I believe he has committed despicable acts on his family, employees, and associates. He is malicious and unforgivable.

He should rot in prison. Did he steal a bunch of money? Absolutely. Did he commit despicable acts and how he treated his clients? Absolutely. Oh wait, sorry. That last comment was from Dick, Alex Attorney. In his appearance on Jim's podcast Tuesday, you know Jim. Alex, other attorney. And we wonder where these potential jurors are hearing about

Alec Murdock and his guilt. So a couple of notes on Dick and Jim's assertions about the jury. One is that most of the jury pool in the murder trial had heard of the Murdock case, and still Dick and Jim were able to secure 18 jurors, of which seven of them had claimed not to have ever heard of Alec Mardock. 2. Is that even though, sure, the world is a different place than it was before Alec was found guilty, and more people now know about the case than ever before. Buford County was always ground zero for this.

It's in the 14th Circuit, so no duh, people have heard of the case there. 3. Buford County is a wealthy county, made up in great part by healthy, thriving boomers from somewhere else. Ask any Buford County lawyer, they'll tell you that Buford County jurors generally include highly educated people who pride themselves on being able to fulfill their civic duty. 4. They're a largely conservative group politically.

In fact, they are the target audience of Fox Nation, which aired the docu series that Dick, and Jim, and Ella, and Buster took part in this past September. I'm not a lawyer legislator who is known for being class and cursing a lot and being a cunning legal strategist, but if I wanted to make claims of a tainted jury later down the road in a conservative county, I would most certainly be using Fox Nation to get there.

Five, they haven't even tried to pick a jury yet. How about you try to do that first, Dick and Jim? And then we can talk. Six, the jury pool is big enough. In the murder trial, they were able to qualify more than 100 jurors, and then they went through the list in minutes to get 18. This case is so much less complex than the murder case. They're not going to need six alternates. The minimum number of

qualified jurors they're going to need is between 30 and 42 for this case. I think they can get there. And seven, and we cannot say this enough. Why are we even having this conversation? Why? Dick and Jim have gotten away with enough. In Jim's podcast, the one he went on after claiming to the court that publicity on Alex was causing them not to be able to get an impartial jury pool. Dick actually chuckled about how only he could get away with pointing a gun at the prosecution and saying the word tempting. Dick is a lawyer and a lawmaker, which means he has to know the law. He knows that section 1623-410 says that it is unlawful for a person to present or point at another person a loaded or unloaded

firearm and that pointing and presenting is a felony punishable up to five years in prison. And yet this man has the audacity to brag about getting away with that because he knows that we have two systems of justice. And this man thinks that that is funny. Teehee, I got away with something that poor people without power would have been thrown in jail for. Dick Harputlian is begging for someone to show him that he is not immune to accountability. In their writ of prohibition, they mischaracterize the context in which Judge

Newman was speaking on the Today Show and at his law school. They truncated quotes to make them seem more in line with their interpretation, or the interpretation that they want you to make them seem more in line with their interpretation, or the interpretation that they want you to make when you read the motion. In their jury tampering motion, they made a case out of thin air. Again, misleading the public on the significance of their so-called evidence. If you need a refresher on that thin air, Please, relic into last week's podcast. It is not a coincidence that the state is experiencing a reckoning when it comes to its judicial system. Alex Murdock is the shining example of how this system works for someone like him, both as

a lawyer and a defendant. But it is a happy coincidence that right before Friday's hearing, right when we're knee deep in the dog poo of Dick and Jim's motions for a new trial, and their quest to have Judge Newman removed, that we got to hear from Solicitor David Pasco on how lawyer legislators actually operate. None of what Pasco said on Tuesday should have been surprising or shocking to any of us. But the fact that Pasco and 16th Circuit Solicitor Kevin Brackett were brave enough to put this on the record, that needs to be commended. The Lawyer legislators challenged witnesses to put names on the record, to think of examples of the corruption

and the preferential treatment, likely thinking that no one would take them up on that. They were wrong. And now we know for certain just how right we are to call for change. No wonder the Judicial Marit Selection Committee refuses to publicly air their hearings. Sunlight is the biggest threat to their existence.

They know this system is not meant to survive public involvement. They know that the majority of the population would be up-pulled to see the scheming that goes on among the powerful at the expense of the rest of us. The bow and turner and Elicomrdock cases have exposed the ugliest parts of our system, which the corrupts have wanted to keep in the darkness. It is up to us to keep the lights on in the pressure up until the system changes for the better. No matter how long it takes, stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight.

We'll see you next week. 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. Buh-buh-buh!