Nearly three years after Alex Murdaugh was sentenced to life in prison for the murders of his wife and son, the dramatic saga returned to the spotlight this week as his attorneys urged South Carolina’s Supreme Court to throw out his convictions, arguing that a court clerk improperly influenced jurors, depriving his right to a fair trial.
On Wednesday, Murdaugh’s defense attorneys said former Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca “Becky” Hill tainted the jury by making comments about Murdaugh’s demeanor and testimony during his 2023 trial – actions they say stripped him of the presumption of innocence before deliberations even began.
Murdaugh, a former lawyer serving two life sentences for the 2021 murders of his wife Maggie and son Paul at their home, was not present in court. His defense team asked the justices to overturn his convictions and order a new trial.
“If only the people who may be innocent get a fair trial, then our Constitution isn’t working,” Murdaugh’s attorney Dick Harpootlian said, during oral arguments before the court’s five justices.
Harpootlian, along with lawyers Jim Griffin, and Phil Barber, argued that Hill’s remarks influenced at least one juror and violated their client’s constitutional rights.
“We spent getting ready for this trial, weeks preparing. No one wants to do this again less than we do,” Harpootlian said. “But that trouble is not the issue, the issue is what does Alex Murdaugh deserve under the 6th amendment.”
Much of Wednesday’s hearing focused on Hill, the court clerk assigned to oversee the evidence and jury during the trial. The defense argued that she influenced jurors to find Murdaugh guilty, hoping to promote a book she was writing about the case.
Hill resigned in 2024 amid the fallout over the case. In December 2025, she pleaded guilty to perjury and obstruction of justice in a separate case involving leaked sealed evidence, as well as two counts of misconduct in office for taking bonuses and promoting through her public office the book she wrote about the trial. Judge Jean Toal sentenced her to three years probation.
On Wednesday, prosecutor Creighton Waters argued that the evidence against Murdaugh was overwhelming and that the clerk’s comments to the jurors were fleeting and insignificant over the course of the six-week trial.
Waters acknowledged Hill’s actions during the trial were “improper” but should not lead the South Carolina Supreme Court to reverse the guilty verdict.
“They were not appropriate. They were not,” he said. “But they do not justify reversal.”
Justice John Kittredge noted that both sides had top-tier legal teams but that Hill’s conduct complicated the case, calling her a “rogue clerk.”
“There were top notch attorneys on both sides and a rogue Clerk,” he said, adding that “everyone must recognize her comments were improper.”
“It was improper. Perhaps not improper to the point of reversal, but it was improper,” Kittredge said.
Defense lawyers also renewed claims that the trial judge Clifton Newman allowed prejudicial evidence into the case that prevented a fair trial, such as allowing extensive testimony about Murdaugh’s financial crimes, that they argued had nothing to do with the killings but biased jurors against him.
They emphasized the lack of physical evidence linking Murdaugh directly to the killings, which included the lack of blood found on his clothes despite the close-range nature of the killings with powerful weapons that were never found.
Prosecutors countered that Murdaugh’s financial collapse, mounting debts and lies to investigators formed a powerful motive, pointing to cellphone video placing him at the scene minutes before the murders.
There will be no immediate ruling. The South Carolina Supreme Court does not issue decisions from the bench and will now deliberate privately. A written opinion could take weeks or months.
The court could decide to uphold Murdaugh’s convictions or vacate the verdicts and order a new trial. But even if his murder convictions were overturned, Murdaugh would remain in prison on a 40-year sentence for federal financial crimes.
Still, Harpootlian said the appeal is about more than prison time.
“He insists that he did not kill his wife and child, and he wants the world to know that,” Harpootlian said. “And the way that you get that is a new trial.”
