← 13th Juror Podcast
13th Juror Podcast
Beyond the Jury Box: Alex Murdaugh
00:28:18
Years after the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh shocked the nation, the legal system is once again under the microscope. With allegations of outside influence and misconduct threatening the integrity of the verdict, the possibility of a retrial could change everything.
Loading summary
Transcript8 lines
- [00:02]
A
You've got better things to do this summer than deal with old appliances. That's why right now at Lowe's, you can still get in on Memorial Day savings and get up to 45% off. Select major appliances plus get up to an additional 25% off when you bundle. Select major appliances. It's time to upgrade what's outdated. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's, valid through six three while supplies last. Selection varies by location. See lowe's.com for more details.
- [00:31]
B
This is a paid message from GoFundMe. Meet Juan Naula. When his son was hospitalized for a viral infection, Juan started a GoFundMe to pay for medical expenses.
- [00:41]
C
It was 5k to pay the bill for my son and I need only 22 hours. It was amazing. People really trust on GoFundMe.
- [00:49]
B
How did Juan raise $5,000 in less than a day? He posted a short video on GoFundMe telling his story in 30 seconds.
- [00:57]
C
30 seconds. Be specific, be quick and tell what are you going to be using the funds for? I was nervous to do it because it doesn't feel okay to ask money. But you shouldn't be nervous. Sometimes you just have to do it and see the results. We were able to save my son's life thanks to gofundme that we still have my son with us.
- [01:20]
B
Start your GoFundMe today at gofundme.com that's gofundme.com gofundme.com this message reflects one person's experience.
- [01:34]
D
For much of his adult life, Alec Murdoch was able to hide the truth. Behind the reputation, behind the influence and behind the name, there were details that no one fully saw. He came from a family that had built its identity inside the legal system. And for years, that position carried weight, a sense of trust and authority that in many ways allowed him to operate in a space where questions weren't asked. Or if they were, they didn't go very far. It wasn't until Alec's life unraveled that the truth began to come out. What began as questions about missing money turned into something much bigger. Financial discrepancies led to investigations, investigations led to exposure. And once that unraveling started, it didn't stop. Because alongside the financial crimes came something far more serious. The murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh brought scrutiny he couldn't contain. And for the first time, everything was laid out in the open. Piece by piece, detail by detail, in a courtroom, where the narrative was no longer his to control. And for a moment, it felt like we finally had answers like the full picture had come into focus and the case was closed. And it seemed, at least on the surface, that the system had done what it was supposed to do. But now, more than three years later, we're back in a place no one expected. Because instead of closure, new questions have started to emerge. Not about what happened on the night of the murders, but but about what may have happened in the courtroom afterward, about the process, about the people involved, and about whether everything unfolded the way it was supposed to. Those questions have now made their way through the courts, rising all the way to the highest court in the state. And now, after months of speculation and legal arguments, we finally have an answer. In a decision that could reshape one of the most high profile murder cases in the country, In a decision that could reshape one of the most high profile murder cases in the country, the court ruled that Alec Murdaugh's conviction has been overturned. But what does that actually mean? How did we get here? And could the man, once convicted of murdering his wife and son, really end up back in a courtroom fighting for his freedom all over again? Today, we're taking a closer look at the decision that changed everything. This is the 13th juror podcast where we break down real court cases and put you in the juror's seat. Two sides, the same evidence. You decide what to believe. I'm your host, Brandi Churchwell. Today's episode is South Carolina vs Alec Murdaugh, Part 2. Beyond the jury box. After the convictions, at least for a moment, it felt like the legal battles were behind Alec Murdoch. The trials were over. The verdicts were in. And with that part of the process out of the way, the focus shifted to accountability, because now it was time for Alec to pay. But that raised a much bigger question. Where was that money actually going to come from? After pleading guilty to his financial crimes, Alec was ordered to pay millions in restitution. His victims wanted their money back, but what did he even have left? By the fall of 2021, attorneys representing those victims started noticing something troubling. There were signs that Alex's family may have been quietly moving money, emptying his bank accounts. Just as civil judgments were getting closer. That set off alarms. And in response, a judge stepped in and placed Alec's assets under court control in what's known as a receivership. For the next two years, court appointed attorneys worked to track down anything tied to Alex. Bank accounts, property, personal assets, anything they could recover. When it was all said and done, after legal fees and administrative costs, about $1.76 million remained. That money was then divided among the victims using a court approved formula to determine who received what percentage. But the largest asset tied to Alec Murdock was the Moselle property, the 1700 acre estate where Maggie and Paul were killed. In 2023, Moselle was sold for just under $4 million. The proceeds were again divided by court order. Some went to the family of Mallory beach and the survivors of the boat crash. Some went to Alec's financial victims. And a portion went to his surviving son, Buster. Not long after that sale, the contents of the estate were auctioned off. Now, estate auctions aren't unusual, but this one drew national attention not just because of what was being sold, but because of how much people were willing to pay for. Became clear that some buyers weren't just purchasing items. They were buying pieces of a story that had captivated the country. In closing arguments, prosecutor Creighton Waters mocked what he called the shortest nap in the history of the South. He was referring to Alex's claim he had been asleep on the couch while Maggie and Paul were down at the kennels. That custom leather sofa set, the couch tied to Alec's alibi, sold for around $30,000. A Yeti cup that normally cost about $35 sold for 400. Even a beer koozie went for $500. And just like the property sale, that money didn't go back to Alec. It was added to the estate and distributed toward victim compensation. But not every victim saw a share of those funds. One family in particular had already been left out long before any of this began. Tony Satterfield and Brian Harriot are the sons and only heirs of Gloria Satterfield, who worked for the Murdaugh family for decades as a housekeeper and nanny. In February of 2018, Gloria died after what Alec Murdaugh claimed was a trip and fall accident at his home, supposedly caused by the family's dogs. Her death was later reopened as a part of a criminal investigation by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, or sled. After her death, there was an insurance settlement, initially believed to be around $505,000, reached on behalf of her sons. But there was a problem. They say they were never told about it and never received any of that money. And as more information came to light, it became clear the situation was far more serious than anyone originally understood. The total settlement tied to Gloria's death wasn't just a few hundred thousand dollars, as initially thought. It was closer to 3 or 4 million money her family says never made it to Them. At the time, Alec had directed Gloria Sunz to an attorney who happened to be his close friend to represent them in a case against Alec himself. That's not how the system is supposed to work. But by now, that pattern should sound familiar. According to the Satterfield family, they were never informed about the claims, the settlement or any payout. In fact, they say they didn't even know the settlement existed until years later, when the truth about Alec Murdaugh started coming out in the news. After everything came to light, Gloria's sons finally had the chance to take action. They brought in new attorneys separate from anyone connected to Alec. And for the first time, someone was working directly on their behalf. And in simple terms, here's how that worked. Even though the original insurance settlement had already been paid out years earlier, their attorneys were able to go back and prove that the money had been wrongfully taken. Because of that, they pursued legal action against the people and institutions involved. That led to a series of new settlements, this time designed to actually compensate Gloria's family the way it should have from the beginning. So while it didn't undo what had been taken from them, it did finally result in millions of dollars being recovered and paid directly to her sons. And in many ways, that outcome became a defining piece of the larger financial story surrounding Alec. It showed just how far the deception had gone and how much work it took to unwind it. By the time the receivership wrapped up, after the properties had been sold, the assets liquidated and settlements like this reached, the legal system had done what it could to piece things back together. But even after all of that, there were still parts of this story that hadn't been fully resolved. Because one of the biggest legal battles tied to Alec Murdaugh wasn't just about what he stole. It was about what happened the night of a boat crash that left a 19 year old girl dead. In the civil case that followed, the boat crash case is widely seen as the catalyst for the fall of the Murdaugh dynasty. Long before the murders, before the financial crimes were exposed, this was the case that first brought real scrutiny to the Murdaugh name. And while the murders may have brought that case to a temporary halt, it didn't go away. It was just on pause. Not long after Alec's trial wrapped up, attorney Mark Tinsley filed an amended complaint. He expanded the scope of the lawsuit, naming multiple defendants, including Alec Parker's Convenience Stores, Buster Murdoch and the estates of Maggie and Paul. At the center of that complaint is a much bigger argument that what happened that night wasn't just a tragic accident. It was the result of a series of decisions that, according to the beach family, should have been stopped long before anyone got on that boat. According to the lawsuit, one of those decisions involved Buster Murdaugh, Paul's older brother, who they say allowed Paul to use his ID to buy alcohol even though he was underage. That's how Paul was able to walk into Parker's and make a purchase using an ID that, according to the complaint, didn't closely resemble him. The argument is that he appeared noticeably younger and smaller, someone who shouldn't have passed even a basic check. But the sale went through. The lawsuit also claims that Alec and Maggie were aware of a pattern of Paul's underage drinking, risky behavior, and driving and boating drunk. And despite that, they still allowed him to take the boat out that night. They point to things like social media posts and cell phone videos as evidence that this behavior wasn't new and wasn't hidden. So when you zoom out, the claim being made here goes beyond one night. It's about a pattern, a series of choices, and who should be held accountable for the outcome of those choices. In July of 2023, Parkers reached a $15 million settlement in the case. Attorney Mark Tinsley said the beach family hoped that outcome would send a message, especially to businesses, that selling alcohol to minors isn't just a mistake. It can have real lasting consequences on the other side. Parker's attorney said the decision to settle was made by their insurance company, in part to avoid the risk of a much larger verdict, especially given the national attention surrounding Alec Murdoch. They argued that a jury influenced by that attention could have awarded significantly more, potentially as a way to punish Alex. And that risk could extend to anyone tied to the case. But even with that settlement, the legal battle wasn't over, because out of that case came yet another lawsuit, one that's still ongoing. Early on, members of the beach family began to claim that during the wrongful death case, they were being harassed and targeted not just by random people online, but by individuals they believed were connected to Parker's defense. According to that lawsuit, Greg Parker and others allegedly worked with a journalist and a private investigation group in what the family believed was a coordinated effort against them. In the suit, they claim fake social media posts were created, certain narratives were pushed, and pressure was applied, all with the goal of wearing the family down and discouraging them from continuing their case. And then there's another layer, one of the most serious allegations. The family claims that confidential materials, including deeply sensitive photos, were shared without permission. According to the complaint, that includes images of Mallory beach after her body was recovered, as well as private images of her family. These were materials that were gathered specifically for the civil case, to be used during mediation, not made public. But the family believes some of those images ended up circulating, even showing up in other productions like documentaries. And for them, that's not just a privacy issue. It's deeply personal. They argue it was part of a broader effort to cause emotional harm. At its core, the accusation is that the defense went far beyond fighting the case in court, allegedly using outside pressure and tactics to influence the family bringing the lawsuit. The legal battles surrounding Mallory Beach's death have been, at times deeply contentious and, frankly, difficult to watch. But in the middle of it all, there's another part of this story that matters just as much, because Malorie's family and friends made a decision early on to focus on who she was, not just how she died. And that's how Mal's pals was created. It's a charitable effort centered around rescuing and caring for animals, something Malorie loved deeply. Their goal is to one day build an animal shelter in Hampton County. So while much of this story has been defined by conflict, this part is about legacy, about taking something tragic and choosing to create something meaningful from it. But at the same time, the Murdaugh story was taking on a life of its own. Because as the legal battles played out in courtrooms, another version of the story was unfolding in real time across headlines, documentaries and streaming platforms. The Murdoch case quickly became one of the most covered stories in the country. And with that kind of attention came an explosion of content, docu series, specials, deep dives, each one trying to piece together what happened and who was responsible. But when a story is told that many times by that many different voices, the lines can start to blur. And for some people at the center of it, the way they were portrayed became a story of its own. Buster Murdaugh, Alex surviving son, found himself at the center of that. After several documentaries were released about the Murdaugh family, Buster filed defamation lawsuits in both state and federal court. At the heart of those lawsuits is how he says he was portrayed in connection to the death of Stephen Smith, a 19 year old whose body was found on a rural South Carolina Road in 2015. That case remains open and unsolved. Buster has consistently denied any involvement and argues that the documentaries unfairly suggested otherwise. One of those lawsuits filed against Warner Brothers and Blackfin has since been settled, although the terms were not made public. A separate lawsuit against Netflix is still ongoing with the company asking the court to dismiss the case. And while those lawsuits are still playing out, they point to something bigger. Just how far this case has spread, spread beyond the courtroom. Because even after the verdict, even after the financial crimes, even after the settlements, the story still didn't stop. If anything, it got more complicated. Because at the same time all of this was unfolding, another set of questions was starting to take shape. Not about the boat crash, not about the money, and not about how the story was being told in the media, but about the trial itself. About what happened inside that courtroom, what the jury may have heard and what they weren't supposed to hear. And whether the outcome everyone thought was final might not be final after all. Because as Alec Murdoch's attorneys continued to push forward, those questions made their way back into the legal system. This triggered hearings, testimony from jurors, and a closer look at the role of the court official who had been there for all of it. Becky Hill was the Colleton County Clerk of Court who oversaw the murder trial of Alec Murdaugh. It was by far the biggest trial of her career and the kind of national attention small towns rarely see. For weeks, cameras were everywhere. The courtroom was packed. After it was over, she didn't step away from that spotlight. Instead, she leaned into it. Becky co wrote a book about the trial offering her perspective on what happened behind the scenes and what it was like to be part of a case that had captured the entire country. And almost immediately, that raised eyebrows. Because while it's not unheard of for people connected to high profile cases to tell their stories, there are ethical questions that come with that, especially when the person writing the book played a role in the trial itself. So the question started coming. Was it appropriate? Should someone in her position be profiting from a case like this? And more importantly, did that kind of outside interest risk blurring the line between public duty and personal gain? At first, those concerns stayed in that gray area, but they didn't stay there for long, because what came next was far more serious. The conversation quickly shifted away from the book and toward allegations that directly targeted the integrity of the trial itself. Suddenly, Becky Hill wasn't just part of the story anymore. She was at the center of it. After the trial, Alex attorneys began reaching out to jurors, something that can happen in certain states when the defense is trying to understand the verdict that was reached and, and whether anything may have gone wrong during the process. They can't ask questions about deliberations, but they can ask about other aspects of what the jurors experienced, and it wasn't long before they said they started hearing things that raised alarm bells. According to the defense, several jurors described interactions that shouldn't have happened. Claims that Becky made comments during the trial suggesting ALEC was guilty, warned jurors not to be fooled by the defense and may have emphasized the importance of reaching a quick verdict. From the defense's perspective, those weren't small issues. They argued that those kind of comments could have chipped away at something fundamental. Alec's presumption of innocence. They also said those actions could potentially have influenced how jurors viewed the evidence before deliberations even began. At that point, the stakes changed. This was no longer about perception or optics, but it was about whether the process itself had been compromised and whether a man who had already been convicted of murder could now be entitled to a new trial. At the same time, Becky Hill was facing scrutiny of her own. In December of 2025, she pleaded guilty to four charges, including obstruction of justice, perjury, and two counts of misconduct in office. Prosecutors said she used her position for personal benefit, allowing a photo of Alec in a holding cell to be taken to help promote her book, showing a reporter sealed evidence, and misusing county funds, including paying for meals and awarding herself bonuses. She later admitted there was no excuse for what she had done, telling the court she would carry that shame for the rest of her life. But even with those admissions, the question for Alex's case remained separate. Did any of this actually affect the verdict? To answer that, the court took an unusual step. Jurors were brought back in and placed under oath, questioned directly about what they had heard, what was said, and whether any of it influenced their decision. The hearing was overseen by retired South Carolina Supreme Court justice Jean Toll, who was tasked with sorting through those claims. After hearing the testimony, she ultimately ruled that while there were concerns about Becky Hill's conduct, the defense had not proven that those issues changed the outcome of the trial. So the request for a new trial was denied. But that still wasn't the end of it. Because Alex attorneys didn't take that ruling as final, they appealed to the South Carolina Supreme Court, asking them to take another look at what had happened, not just with the jury tampering claims, but with the trial as a whole. Along with the jury allegations, the defense is also challenging one of the most significant parts of the state's case, the financial crimes evidence. They argue that bringing in Alex's history of theft and fraud unfairly prejudiced the jury, painting him as a dishonest person and making it more likely they would convict based on character rather than strictly on the evidence tied to the murders. Prosecutors saw it very differently, arguing that those financial pressures were central to motive, that the exposure of those crimes is what pushed everything to a breaking point. Now, that question, whether the jury heard evidence they shouldn't have, went in front of the higher court. And it's not just a theoretical argument. Alec's attorneys appeared before the South Carolina Supreme Court to make their case earlier. Back In December of 2024, Alec's attorneys had filed their appeal. It centered on two main arguments. That Becky Hill's conduct crossed a line and that improper evidence was admitted during the trial. During those arguments, the defense described Becky's actions as egregious, arguing that her alleged comments undermined Alex's right to a fair trial. They also broadened their focus to the evidence itself, arguing that very little physical evidence directly tied Alec to the murders. They also questioned the reliability of certain investigative methods and expert testimony presented at trial. At the same time, the justices pushed back on the prosecution, pressing them on their use of financial crimes evidence. They questioned how much of that information was truly necessary and whether it crossed the line from context into unfair prejudice. Prosecutor Creighton Waters stood firm, arguing that the financial evidence was essential, that it provided the context needed to understand motive. As Waters put it, you can't understand the boiling point without understanding the slow burn leading up to it. And that's ultimately the question the South Carolina Supreme Court was asked to answer. Whether the financial crimes evidence helped explain motive or whether the scope of that evidence unfairly influenced the jury. Whether the trial process held up under scrutiny, or whether outside influence compromised the fairness of the case itself. Now we have that answer. In a decision that sent shockwaves through the true crime world, the court ruled that Alec Murdaugh's murder convictions must be overturned and the case sent back for a new trial. The justices pointed specifically to improper outside influence involving former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill, concluding that her actions interfered with Murdaugh's right to a fair and impartial jury. Which means this case is no longer over. At some point, prosecutors could be forced to put the entire murder case in front of a brand new jury, new testimony, new strategy, new arguments, and once again, the same question at the center of everything who killed Maggie and Paul Murdaugh? But even with this ruling, Alec Murdaugh is not walking free. His financial crime convictions and the decades long sentences tied to the those cases still remain in place. And now, in a case that has already taken more twists than anyone could have predicted. We're left facing an entirely new chapter. One that could put Alec Murdoch back in a courtroom, fighting for his freedom all over again. This case has never really been simple. Not when it comes to the evidence, not when it comes to the people involved. And now, not even when it comes to the verdict. Because after everything that's come out, after the trials, the confessions, the financial crimes, it felt like we had finally reached a point of clarity. But now even that clarity is being questioned. And that leaves us in a place that feels all too familiar in this case. Somewhere between answers and uncertainty. No matter what conclusions the criminal or civil courts reach, there are parts of this story that will never have a clean resolution. Alec Murdoch devastated the lives of dozens of people. He stole life changing money from clients who trusted him during some of the worst moments of their lives. And while his assets have been tracked down, sold off and divided, the reality is most of those victims will never be made whole. The financial loss is staggering, but the human cost is far greater. And that cost doesn't stop with the victims in those cases. Because in the middle of all of this is a family that has been completely torn apart. Lester Murdoch is the only one left. In a matter of weeks, he lost his mother, his brother, and the life he had always known. Since then, he's been pulled into lawsuits, speculation, and a level of public scrutiny that few people could ever fully understand. Whatever people believe about this case, that reality doesn't change. He too is living with the consequences of everything that happened. And then there's Maggie and Paul. So much of this case is focused on how they died. On timelines, evidence and theories. But before all of that, they were people. A mother and a son. Their lives became the center of one of the most widely followed cases in the country. But their story didn't begin there. And it shouldn't end there either. Because at the heart of all of this, beyond the legal arguments, beyond the appeals, beyond the headlines, are lives that were lost far too soon. Alec Murdoch, the man who once held immense power and influence, now sits in prison. The dynasty that defined his family for generations has collapsed. The estate has been liquidated, the accounts emptied, personal belongings down to the last beer koozie sold off piece by piece. But none of that changes what was lost. And as the legal battles enter a new chapter, one thing remains unchanged. No ruling, no verdict. No outcome will ever restore what was taken. So now we're left with the same question that has followed this case from the very beginning. Not just whether justice was served, but whether the truth, in all its complexity, will ever fully be uncovered. Thirteenth Juror is an audio truck production hosted by Brandy Churchwell. Ashley Flowers is executive producer. You can follow 13th Juror on Instagram @Thirteenth Juror podcast I think Chuck would approve.
- [29:49]
E
Everyone's told a lie, but what happens when one lie becomes a life, a movement, a conspiracy? I'm Josh Dean, host of Chameleon, and I uncover true stories of deception scams so intimate and convincing they fooled the people closest to them. These aren't strangers. They're lovers, friends, and trusted allies. Because the most dangerous cons don't feel like crimes, they feel personal. Listen to Chameleon wherever you get your podcasts.