Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Alex Murdaugh Re-Trial: Becky Hill, SLED, and the Records Prosecutors Now Want Released (7/7/26)

Transcript

Alex Murdaugh Re-Trial: Becky Hill, SLED, and the Records Prosecutors Now Want Released (7/7/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. Things
• 0:05
  down in South Carolina continue to heat up with Alex
• 0:08
  Murdoch and the retrial that has been ordered by the
• 0:12
  Supreme Court, and in a new filing, Alec Murdaugh's lawyers
• 0:16
  are absolutely destroying Becky Hill, and not only that, they
• 0:22
  want the files to be unsealed. They want all this
• 0:27
  information to be public. And according to this reporting, the
• 0:32
  prosecutors are on board with unsealing the Becky Hill files
• 0:35
  as well. And I think that's the right way forward. Transparency, transparency, transparency,
• 0:43
  especially considering the cloud that's hanging over this now. If
• 0:47
  I was somebody involved, I'd want to be as transparent
• 0:50
  as possible. So today we have an article from Fitznews
• 0:54
  and the headline Murdoch saga prosecutors support unsealing Becky Hill files.
• 1:01
  This article was authored by Jen Wood two months after
• 1:05
  asking the South Carolina Supreme Court to unseal records related
• 1:09
  to the removal of former murdaw murders jur Myra Crosby,
• 1:14
  also known as the Egg Jur. Prosecutors have made it
• 1:18
  clear they also support releasing the investigative files that precipitated
• 1:22
  the downfall of call Itton County clerkal Court Rebecca Becky Hill,
• 1:28
  so long as sensitive information is first redacted, boys a
• 1:32
  little caveat right. You know, we're going to give you
• 1:34
  some information, but we're gonna deem what's sensitive. We're gonna
• 1:38
  deem what's important. And obviously they have to do that right.
• 1:43
  They have to protect their case, the integrity of it,
• 1:46
  and they have to make sure that they don't give
• 1:47
  Alex Murdoch any kind of tell about what the strategy
• 1:51
  is going to be. But it leaves the public wanting more.
• 1:56
  And a filing submitted Monday, July six, prosecutors for sc
• 2:01
  Attorney General Alan Wilson urged the court to once heal
• 2:05
  everything related to Crosby, the investigation into Hill by the
• 2:09
  se State Law Enforcement Division, and the various documents in
• 2:13
  video recordings that form the basis of the jury tampering inquiry.
• 2:17
  And look, I've told you guys for a long time
• 2:21
  when we were talking about this case that I think
• 2:25
  there's evidence enough to prove that Alec Murdock is guilty.
• 2:28
  But that's not what this is about. Once you start
• 2:32
  destroying people's constitutional rights and you have the clerk of
• 2:36
  the court doing what Becky Hill allegedly did. It becomes
• 2:40
  a different argument. So now the government South Carolina, they're
• 2:46
  going to have to prove their case once again, but
• 2:49
  this time the spotlight's going to be even hotter. Now
• 2:51
  does that mean I don't think they'll get the ball
• 2:53
  across the goal line? No, that's not what it means.
• 2:57
  But I think things are going to be pretty complicated
• 2:59
  and we're going to be looking at a different kind
• 3:01
  of trial. And whenever you have a retrial and you're
• 3:05
  the prosecution, it comes with all kinds of pitfalls. Right,
• 3:11
  evidence walks away, it's degraded, people forget things, you know,
• 3:15
  a whole host of issues can pop up. So for
• 3:19
  the prosecution, they're definitely on tenuous ground. But that said,
• 3:23
  I think the evidence is what it is, and I
• 3:26
  think the evidence is damning for Alec Murdoch. The filing
• 3:30
  comes in a response to competing motions from Alec Murdoch
• 3:33
  and Crosby's attorney Joe McCullough, seeking public access to these records,
• 3:39
  as well as Murdoch's requests to modify an existing protective
• 3:42
  order governing their use. Look, he wants this stuff out there,
• 3:47
  Alec Murdoch thinks that he has the initiative right like
• 3:51
  he has the advantage, and it does look good for
• 3:54
  him when you get something thrown out. And look, we're
• 3:57
  not talking about some little pickywn thing here. When you
• 4:00
  have the county clerk trying to manipulate the proceedings in
• 4:05
  the juror room, that's a big problem. But let's not
• 4:09
  act like the evidence wasn't there, because I think it
• 4:11
  most certainly was. But you have to play a fair game.
• 4:16
  And if you're not playing fair and by the rules
• 4:18
  and you're the government, well, penalties must follow. Unlike earlier
• 4:25
  stages of the litigation, when prosecutors opposed unsealing the records
• 4:29
  while Murdock's appeal remained pending, Wilson's office now says the
• 4:33
  public interest favors disclosure, while prosecutors insisted transparency should not
• 4:38
  come at the expensive promises made the jurors. Look, I
• 4:42
  get it, a lot of jurors probably don't want their
• 4:46
  name out there, right, they don't want this nonsensical circus
• 4:51
  showing up at their work or their house or whatever.
• 4:53
  I get that. So you have to go through and
• 4:55
  redact some information. It's respectfully some that the sealed in
• 5:01
  camera hearings and related investigative material that led to exclusion
• 5:05
  of juror seven eighty five for misconduct be unsealed. Prosecutors wrote, however,
• 5:10
  these materials should be redacted to protect juror identifying information
• 5:15
  and other sensitive information. That's fair. Let's see the people involved,
• 5:21
  and you can redact the names of the people that
• 5:23
  weren't involved. That seems to be the best way to
• 5:27
  go about it. Now. I do have my reservations about
• 5:31
  how good the redaction system will be considering what we've
• 5:34
  seen with Epstein. But let's give these guys the benefit
• 5:38
  of the doubt and let's see what they come up with.
• 5:43
  The filing does not represent a reversal of prosecutor's position
• 5:46
  that the record should ultimately become public, which they first
• 5:49
  acknowledged following the Supreme Court's decision over turning Murdaw's murder
• 5:54
  conviction in May. Instead, Friday's filing focused almost entirely on
• 5:59
  how these records should be released. According to prosecutors, the
• 6:03
  court repeatedly assured jurors, through both the original murder trial
• 6:07
  and post trial jury tampering proceedings that their identities would
• 6:11
  remain protected these assurances, they argued, continue to carry weight
• 6:16
  even though litigation has entered a new phase. Look, if
• 6:20
  that's what you told the jurors, you have to make
• 6:23
  every single attempt to make sure that that happens. Simple
• 6:27
  redactions will do. The filing noted that some jurors have
• 6:34
  voluntarily spoken about the case publicly, but those individual decisions
• 6:38
  do not relieve the judiciary of its independent obligation to
• 6:42
  safeguard confidential information. And no, it does not if that
• 6:46
  was the deal that was made. If the jurors don't
• 6:49
  want their information to be public, then that's information that
• 6:52
  should be kept private. But at the same time, we
• 6:55
  have other issues at hand and other things that need
• 7:00
  to be dealt with. So my opinion, the best way
• 7:02
  to move forward is to split the baby. In support
• 7:08
  of that position, prosecutors cited multiple state and federal decisions
• 7:11
  which held that courts may release judicial records while redacting
• 7:15
  names and identifying information to protect juror privacy. Why do
• 7:19
  people have a problem with that? Is that an issue
• 7:21
  for some people? Honestly don't get it. Now, Look, we
• 7:25
  want transparency, right, but the jurors, if they don't want
• 7:29
  their identities released, I think they should be protected. While
• 7:33
  much of the public attention is centered on the sealed
• 7:36
  hearings involving Crosby's dismissal, the filing also confirmed prosecutors supported
• 7:41
  releasing materials generated during sled's investigation into Hill. The investigation
• 7:47
  ultimately resulted in Hill pleading guilty last December to misconduct
• 7:51
  in office and perjury charges stemming from her conducts surrounding
• 7:55
  the Murdock trial. Though prosecutors declined to pursue criminal jury
• 7:59
  tip uppering charges, they should have pursued them. This lady
• 8:03
  screwed it up bad, and you know who's going to
• 8:06
  pay the taxpayers in South Carolina. That's who. Like usual,
• 8:11
  take it in the pants, boys and girls enjoy it.
• 8:16
  The records include interview memoranda, video recordings, and other investigative
• 8:21
  material that have remained under protective order throughout the post
• 8:24
  trial litigation. Prosecutors argued those materials should become public as well,
• 8:29
  but only after redactions remove duror identities and other sensitive information.
• 8:36
  Even if the court grants the pending motions, prosecutors caution
• 8:40
  that the records will not become public overnight. According to
• 8:43
  the filing, interview recordings must first be edited to remove
• 8:46
  identifying information, while audio recordings contain portions requiring redaction. Written
• 8:52
  interview memoranda also must be carefully reviewed. Even interviews involving
• 8:57
  non juror witnesses may require additional rest actions before they
• 9:01
  can be released. And that's pretty typical for a situation
• 9:05
  like this. There's nothing out of bounds here. This is
• 9:09
  exactly what I would expect from the prosecution. Prosecutors are
• 9:14
  also asking the court to allow sufficient time to complete
• 9:16
  that process before any records are made public. The Circuit
• 9:21
  Court must now decide not whether the records should remain
• 9:24
  permanently sealed, but under what conditions they should be disclosed.
• 9:29
  If the court adopts the proposals submitted by Wilson's office,
• 9:33
  the public will gain access to some of the most
• 9:35
  consequential records generated during the jury tampering investigation that ultimately
• 9:40
  unraveled Murdoch's murder conviction, while keeping juror identities and other
• 9:45
  sensitive information shielded from public view. The ruling will also
• 9:49
  determine whether Murdoch may use portions of those material and
• 9:53
  is pending federal civil rights lawsuit against Till, which alleges
• 9:57
  her misconduct deprive them of constitutional affair trial and seeks
• 10:01
  damages stemming from the reversal of his conviction. I think
• 10:05
  he'll win there, Honestly, I think he has some real
• 10:08
  tenable ground. And I think that Becky Hill really shit
• 10:12
  the bed. She messed everything up and now she's caused
• 10:17
  all kinds of chaos. So yeah, if I was Alec Murdoch,
• 10:20
  i'd see her too. And if I was the government,
• 10:24
  if I was the prosecutor down in South Carolina, I'd
• 10:28
  indict her or I would have. I don't know if
• 10:30
  they still can. We'll have to see, you know, what happens.
• 10:33
  But if it was me, I would have hit her
• 10:35
  with an indictment. So we'll see where things go, and
• 10:39
  we'll see what the judge comes up with with the
• 10:41
  rulings on all of these matters. And when we have
• 10:45
  some information one way or the other, we'll get that
• 10:47
  added to the catalog. All the information that goes with
• 10:52
  this episode can be found in the description box.