Alex Murdaugh Appeal: What the Supreme Court Justices Just Told Us Without Saying It
True Crime Today | Daily True Crime News & Interviews
Tony Brueski
4.2 โข 612 Ratings
๐๏ธ 21 February 2026
โฑ๏ธ 32 minutes
๐๏ธ Recording | iTunes | RSS
๐งพ๏ธ Download transcript
Summary
The South Carolina Supreme Court heard Alex Murdaugh's double murder appeal today. The justices asked sharp, pointed questions โ and nearly all of them were aimed at the prosecution. The hearing covered both tracks of the appeal: Becky Hill's alleged jury tampering and whether the trial court committed reversible evidentiary errors. On both, the state was on its heels. Justice James opened by raising the egg juror affidavit Justice Toal excluded. Chief Justice Kittredge pointed out that Toal's written order never addressed the allegation that Hill instructed jurors not to be fooled by Murdaugh's testimony. He called the corroboration between juror accounts and independent witnesses "striking." Hill has since been convicted of perjury, obstruction, and misconduct โ a development that wasn't part of the record when Toal ruled. Justice Few challenged Waters: how do you characterize someone as "not completely credible" when her own guilty plea proves she's a perjurer? The defense argued Toal used the wrong legal standard entirely.ย
Harpootlian told the court the question isn't whether Hill changed the verdict โ it's whether she violated Murdaugh's Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury. That distinction changes everything about how the court evaluates the evidence. On the trial record, Kittredge told Waters that 404(b) is a rule of exclusion and said the gate was left wide open โ he couldn't find a single financial evidence ruling that went the defense's way. He questioned why emotionally charged victim testimony from Murdaugh's financial crimes was admitted in a murder trial. Waters tried a Fargo reference. Justice Few ended it. Jim Griffin argued the state's underlying case has no eyewitnesses, no murder weapons, and no biological transfer evidence from a close-range shotgun blast. If the financial testimony is stripped, the case changes shape. Eric Faddis, criminal defense attorney and former felony prosecutor, dissects the hearing moment by moment โ what each justice's questions signal, where the state failed to hold ground, and which of the three possible outcomes the arguments most strongly pointed toward. He also addresses whether a federal Sixth Amendment challenge is viable regardless of how this court rules. Decision expected within sixty days.
#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughAppeal #BeckyHill #SupremeCourtSC #EricFaddis #CreightonWaters #Rule404b #JuryTampering #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | This is the big breakdown. |
| 0:02.2 | A long look back at some of the biggest stories we're covering for you at the Hidden Killers podcast and True Crime Today. |
| 0:09.2 | Is Hidden Killers with Tony Brewski. |
| 0:11.8 | Here now, Tony Brewski. |
| 0:15.3 | The very first question asked inside the South Carolina Supreme Court the other morning in the Alec Murdoch |
| 0:22.3 | hearing really kind of told you everything you needed to know about where this case is headed. |
| 0:29.1 | Justice George James looked at the attorneys and before anyone could settle into their prepared |
| 0:34.8 | remarks, he asked a simple question. |
| 0:38.8 | Can we consider the affidavit of the egg juror? |
| 0:43.6 | That's the juror dismissed right before deliberations. |
| 0:47.5 | Who former Chief Justice Jean Toll refused to let testify |
| 0:52.0 | at the January 24 evidentiary hearing. |
| 0:54.5 | The juror whose account of what Becky Hill said to the jury panel |
| 0:58.0 | was apparently too inconvenient to put on record, |
| 1:01.7 | and now nearly two years later, the highest court in the state wants to know why. |
| 1:06.7 | Dick Harputalin's response was almost understated. |
| 1:09.7 | I don't know. |
| 1:11.2 | He told the justices, I'm not sure she stated a coherent reason. |
| 1:16.3 | That answer hung in the room because if the Supreme Court of South Carolina is opening its hearing by asking why a key witness was excluded from the proceeding that was supposed to determine whether there was jury tampering. |
| 1:27.9 | Is that a court looking to rubber snap a conviction. |
| 1:30.3 | That's a court looking for answers. |
| 1:34.5 | We're going to get into all of this and what took place at the Alec Murdoch hearing and where it may lead next. |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Tony Brueski, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Tony Brueski and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright ยฉ Tapesearch 2026.

