CHARLESTON, S.C. (Court TV) — A former clerk of court accused of making inappropriate comments to the jury in a high-profile murder case is fighting back against a lawsuit filed by the defendant.
Alex Murdaugh, right, talks with his defense attorney Jim Griffin during a jury-tampering hearing on Monday, Jan. 29, 2024. (Andrew J. Whitaker/The Post And Courier via AP, Pool)
The South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Alex Murdaugh’s convictions for killing his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, and son, Paul Murdaugh, after finding that former Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca “Becky” Hill interfered with the jury in his case. In their order granting Alex Murdaugh a new trial, the justices found that Hill had influenced the jury by making comments about Alex Murdaugh’s credibility and by having one juror removed from the panel before deliberations.
As he awaits his retrial, Alex Murdaugh has filed a lawsuit against Hill, accusing her of depriving him of his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial. In her response Thursday to the lawsuit, Hill continued to deny the allegations that her behavior affected the jury, but conceded that she has faced criminal charges related to the case. Hill pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and perjury for showing a reporter sealed exhibits and then lying about it, as well as to two counts of misconduct in office for taking bonuses and promoting a book she wrote about the Murdaugh trial through her public office.
MORE | Buster supports his dad and named his son for him, Alex Murdaugh’s defense reveals
In her motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Hill argued that suing her for $ 600,000 — the amount Alex Murdaugh spent on his criminal defense in his first trial — isn’t supported by the law. “A plaintiff must show that his damages were caused by the defendant’s actions,” the motion reads. “Such cannot be the case here, where the entirety of the economic damages claimed by the Plaintiff would have been spent on his criminal trial regardless of any actions taken by this Defendant.”
Rebecca Hill testifies during the Alex Murdaugh jury-tampering hearing on Jan. 29, 2024. (Andrew J. Whitaker/The Post And Courier via AP, Pool)
Hill argued that it would perhaps be more appropriate to sue her for the cost of the second trial, on the theory that her behavior was responsible for the conviction being overturned, but considering that case would be premature. “Plaintiff has not yet suffered any damages because of Defendant’s alleged constitutional violation, as the potential retrial has not taken place, and therefore any potential [legal] costs to defend said retrial have not been incurred.”
At a news conference following the court’s decision to overturn Alex Murdaugh’s conviction, his attorneys said they would not accept further payment for the retrial and that the initial $600,000 payment covered their representation in the case, regardless of how long it lasted.
Hill’s motion went on to suggest that even if Alex Murdaugh’s Sixth Amendment rights were violated, the fact that he is getting a new trial “wholly compensates” him “for any alleged constitutional violation of his rights…as the very purpose of granting a new trial is to protect the interest of fairness by ensuring the integrity of the jury’s verdict.”
Alex Murdaugh is expected to return to court in July for the first hearing as his case proceeds for a retrial. A judge set a trial date for the civil case of May 3, 2027.
