Murdaugh's Murder Appeal Hinges on Silenced Juror

South Carolina's high court questions if jury tampering undermined a fair trial.

Published on Feb. 14, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Alex Murdaugh was convicted in 2023 for the murders of his wife and son, but his lawyers have filed two appeals challenging the prosecution's evidence and alleging jury tampering by the Colleton County clerk of court. The state Supreme Court is now considering whether serious questions about possible jury tampering and prejudicial evidence should warrant a new trial for Murdaugh, despite the overwhelming evidence against him.

Why it matters

This case highlights the importance of ensuring a fair trial, even for defendants accused of heinous crimes. The allegations of jury tampering and prejudicial evidence raise concerns about whether Murdaugh's Sixth Amendment rights were violated, which could potentially lead to a retrial despite the strength of the prosecution's case.

The details

Prosecutors argued that Murdaugh killed his wife and son out of desperation as his world was unraveling, with lawsuits piling up and his financial crimes coming to light. The state presented detailed evidence that they say was overwhelming. However, Murdaugh's lawyers have filed two appeals challenging the inclusion of emotionally packed victim statements and the behavior of the Colleton County clerk of court, who allegedly tried to influence the jury's verdict.

  • Murdaugh was convicted in 2023 and sentenced to two life sentences.
  • A 2024 hearing before Justice Jean Toal examined the allegations of jury tampering, but she ruled against a retrial.
  • Murdaugh's lawyers are now appealing the decision to the state Supreme Court, which held a hearing on the case on Wednesday, 2026-02-14.

The players

Alex Murdaugh

A convicted murderer who is appealing his 2023 conviction for the murders of his wife and son.

Creighton Waters

The prosecutor who argued that Murdaugh killed his family members out of desperation as his world was unraveling.

Mary Rebecca 'Becky' Hill

The Colleton County clerk of court who is accused of trying to influence the jury's verdict in the Murdaugh trial.

Rhonda McElveen

The Barnwell County clerk of court who testified that Hill had told her she needed a guilty verdict for book sales so she could buy a lake house.

Juror Z

The alternate juror who replaced the 'egg lady' and testified that Hill had told her to 'watch [Murdaugh's] body language' when he testified and to 'not be fooled' by evidence presented by the defense.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“There's no 'overwhelming evidence' exemption in the Sixth Amendment.”

— Dick Harpootlian, Murdaugh's attorney

“Can we consider that affidavit? What was the rationale for [Toal] not allowing the 'egg juror' to testify?”

— Justice George C. James

“What do we do about the order [from Toal] that doesn't even mention that Juror Z did in fact testify about the comment 'Don't let the defense confuse you'?”

— Chief Justice John Kittredge

“If Hill's alleged statements to jurors were true, 'Do you still have a path to victory?'”

— Chief Justice John Kittredge

What’s next

The state Supreme Court will decide whether the alleged jury tampering and prejudicial evidence warrant a new trial for Murdaugh.

The takeaway

This case highlights the delicate balance between ensuring a fair trial and upholding the integrity of the justice system, even for defendants accused of heinous crimes. The allegations of jury tampering and prejudicial evidence raise serious questions about whether Murdaugh's constitutional rights were violated, which could potentially lead to a retrial despite the strength of the prosecution's case.