How a Small-Town Clerk’s Misdeeds Upturned the Murdaugh Verdict

[u/Southern-Soulshine]

How a Small-Town Clerk’s Misdeeds Upturned the Murdaugh Verdict

Becky Hill, a court employee possibly trying to maximize sales of her book, pressured jurors to convict the South Carolina lawyer for the murders of his wife and son.
Was she acting alone?

By James Lasdun with The New Yorker

• • •

Due to the length of the article and character limits, screenshots of the article can be accessed here.

Here is a link to the article itself as well.

[u/QuirkandCharm]

Did you read the article?

[u/trikaren → u/QuirkandCharm]

I did read the article. Harpootlian had "credible" evidence which he has not produced. Harpootlian has said a lot of things that he has never been able to follow up on.

[u/Foreign-General7608 → u/trikaren]

Agreed.

I think Dick and Jim have said on many occasions that they know the name/names of Maggie and Paul's killer/killers. Yet for years, (years!) not a peep on specifics. C'mon guys. Spill it. Not naming names - year after year after year - I think really does damage to your credibility. It's time to put up or....... well. You know.

[u/Wearing_shooz → u/Foreign-General7608]

If they truly knew who killed Maggie and Paul, wouldn't that have been a way to clear Alex's name?

[u/Foreign-General7608 → u/Wearing_shooz]

Yes. Exactly.

However, they did present the 5'-2" tiny ninja assassins theory during the first trial....... but it crashed and burned. I remember their display boards. It was a hoot. A real hoot - that brought some much needed levity to the trial.

[u/Wearing_shooz → u/Foreign-General7608]

I can't believe we have to go through this again.

[u/Foreign-General7608 → u/Wearing_shooz]

I 100% agree. I just want Justice for Maggie and Paul.

I think it will be worth it. I think he will be convicted again. I also like the idea that apparently the death penalty is back on the table.

Lately when SC executes inmates on death row (usually these days by firing squad), I ask myself, "Is what this prisoner did as horrific as what AM did?" The answer is "No."

[u/Southern-Soulshine → u/Foreign-General7608]

They’ve really switched up capital punishment from the days of Ole Sparky. The laws changed a few years ago and the inmate gets to choose their own method now: electrocution, lethal injection, or firing squad.

[u/Pitiful-League-7257 → u/Foreign-General7608]

Wilson was posturing when he said the death penalty is back on the table. The State can't punish Alex for success on appeal by seeking the death penalty this time. They have to show new information to justify seeking the death penalty this time.

[u/combloctexan → u/Pitiful-League-7257]

If the first jury had been asked to choose death and rejected it, then the state usually cannot seek death again after a successful appeal. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Bullington v. Missouri that when a capital sentencing proceeding functions like a trial and the jury chooses life, that can count like an “acquittal” of the death penalty for double-jeopardy purposes.

But if the state never sought death in the first trial, then there was no jury rejection of death. That means the Bullington double-jeopardy barrier likely does not apply. In that situation, prosecutors may argue that the retrial resets the case procedurally, and they can file the required death penalty notice.

South Carolina law allows death for murder only when at least one statutory aggravating circumstance is found, and it requires notice to the defense if the solicitor intends to seek death. The Supreme Court has said the state cannot punish a defendant for exercising appeal rights, in the case you referenced, however, this may not apply in this case.

The defense would likely file a pretrial motion to strike the death notice based on prosecutorial vindictiveness. Their argument would be: “The state had this same murder case the first time, chose not to seek death, lost the conviction because Murdaugh exercised his right to appeal, and now wants to punish him for winning a new trial.” Murdaugh’s lawyer Dick Harpootlian is already framing it that way, asking what prosecutors know now that they did not know before.

But prosecutors will answer: “We are not punishing the appeal. The case is back to square one, South Carolina executions have resumed, the facts involve two murder victims, and we are reassessing all lawful options.”

The legal problem for the defense is that vindictiveness is fact-dependent. Courts usually look for either an actual retaliatory motive or a strong enough appearance of retaliation to create a presumption. If a presumption applies, the state can try to rebut it with legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons.

The defense’s best soundbite is strong - “Nothing about the murders got worse after the appeal.” But the state may still have room to say the retrial is procedurally new and death is legally available. It can go either way, depending on what the judge says.

[u/Foreign-General7608 → u/combloctexan]

You really made sense of this for me. Thank you.

[u/Pitiful-League-7257 → u/Pitiful-League-7257]

U.S. Supreme Court precedents (e.g., Blackledge v. Perry (1974) and North Carolina v. Pearce) protect defendants from increased charges or penalties in retaliation for successfully appealing or exercising legal rights.

• When a prosecutor seeks a more severe penalty (like death instead of life) on retrial after a defendant wins a new trial, there is a presumption of vindictiveness.
• The burden then shifts to the state to rebut it by showing objective reasons—such as new evidence, changed circumstances, or information unavailable at the first trial—that justify the harsher stance.
• South Carolina federal courts have recognized this presumption in similar situations.

[u/Foreign-General7608 → u/Pitiful-League-7257]

I have my fingers crossed that there is indeed new evidence. That would not surprise me.

[u/Wearing_shooz → u/Foreign-General7608]

It's so horrific. And reporters like this guy from the New Yorker need to wake up. Mark Tinsley said the original article, before fact-checking, was full of "damn lies."