The police in South Carolina stated on Thursday that they have been investigating whether or not a courtroom clerk improperly communicated with jurors who later convicted Alex Murdaugh for the homicide of his spouse and son in one of the well-known prison trials within the state’s historical past.
The investigation by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division was opened two days after Mr. Murdaugh’s attorneys made explosive claims in regards to the clerk, Rebecca Hill, and requested for a brand new trial for Mr. Murdaugh, the scion of an influential authorized household who was sentenced to life in jail in March. Two jurors signed sworn affidavits saying that Ms. Hill had warned jurors to not “be fooled” by Mr. Murdaugh’s protection.
Ms. Hill, who later wrote a ebook on the case from her personal viewpoint, has not responded to the allegations or commented on the protection’s movement.
The regulation enforcement investigation was opened on the request of the South Carolina lawyer basic, Alan Wilson, whose workplace prosecuted the case. It is yet one more surprising growth in a yearslong authorized saga that started when Mr. Murdaugh’s spouse, Maggie, and youthful son, Paul, have been shot to demise on the household’s rural searching property in June 2021.
In saying an investigation into the allegations of jury tampering, the state police company and the lawyer basic stated in an announcement that their “only vested interest is seeking the truth” and that they have been “committed to a fair and impartial investigation.”
Mr. Murdaugh, who has maintained his innocence, took the stand to tearfully defend himself within the almost six-week-long trial, which was streamed stay and considered across the nation. Jurors deliberated for about three hours earlier than convicting him of homicide, and one juror later stated that the jury had come to an settlement on the decision in about 45 minutes.
On the night time that Mr. Murdaugh was convicted, Mr. Wilson had addressed reporters outdoors the Colleton County courthouse and singled out the courtroom clerk as one of many individuals he wished to thank.
“I call her Becky-Boo, that’s her nickname, but Madame Clerk, wherever you are tonight —” Mr. Wilson started, looking for Ms. Hill. A lady’s voice got here from above: “General …” It was Ms. Hill, standing on the second-floor balcony of the courthouse together with her canine, Gizmo, close by.
The elected courtroom clerk handles primarily administrative issues, equivalent to ordering meals for jurors and overseeing logistics for trials, however Mr. Murdaugh’s attorneys provided affidavits suggesting that Ms. Hill had private interactions with a number of jurors which will have inappropriately influenced the end result of the case.
The 4 affidavits described the accounts of 4 jurors: two who have been on the panel that convicted Mr. Murdaugh, one who sat by the trial as an alternate juror and one who was excused simply earlier than the jury started its deliberations. Two jurors signed affidavits themselves, whereas two have been signed by a paralegal who described latest conversations between the 2 different jurors and Mr. Murdaugh’s authorized group.
Together, the affidavits claimed that Ms. Hill had a number of secret conversations with the jury forewoman and likewise made feedback in regards to the case with different jurors, who aren’t even supposed to debate the case with each other till they begin deliberating.
One juror’s affidavit stated that when deliberations have been set to start, Ms. Hill advised jurors, “This shouldn’t take lengthy,” and that if the group could not reach a verdict before 11 p.m., they would be taken directly to a hotel for the night. “I had questions about Mr. Murdaugh’s guilt but voted guilty because I felt pressured by the other jurors,” the affidavit said.
The defense motion seeks a hearing over the claims and, if they are supported, a new trial. The lawyers have also asked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to conduct an independent investigation, expressing concern that the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division could be biased because it had investigated the murders and was “invested in maintaining” the conviction.
Source: www.nytimes.com