A South Carolina Supreme Court decision recently overturned Alex Murdaugh’s murder convictions, annulling his life sentences. The court discovered that court clerk Becky Hill improperly influenced the jury, aiming to promote her book sales. Despite the overturned convictions, Murdaugh remains imprisoned due to a 40-year federal sentence for financial crimes.
Following the decision, former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill has requested a federal judge dismiss Murdaugh’s lawsuit against her. The lawsuit seeks $600,000 in damages, claiming Murdaugh spent this sum on his defense during the 2023 double-murder trial. Hill’s motion, filed Thursday, argues Murdaugh lacks the legal right to reclaim these funds.
Hill contends she acted within her official capacity during the alleged conduct. Her defense claims she is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity, quasi-judicial immunity, and qualified immunity, all of which they state bar Murdaugh’s lawsuit.
“Most critically, even if Plaintiff states a compensable claim, Defendant is nonetheless entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity, quasi-judicial immunity, and qualified immunity, all of which bars Plaintiff’s suit,” her lawyers wrote.
The appeal by Murdaugh’s lawyers alleges that Hill improperly swayed jurors, affecting his right to a fair trial. Murdaugh argues he withdrew $600,000 from his retirement to fund his defense and now seeks reimbursement from Hill through a federal civil rights lawsuit. However, Hill’s lawyers argue this expense would have been incurred regardless of her alleged conduct.
The filing characterizes Murdaugh’s lawsuit as based on an untested legal theory not recognized by courts in the Fourth Circuit. Hill’s defense asserts that gaining a new trial does not entitle Murdaugh to receive substantial financial compensation for legal fees incurred.
Hill’s team argues the appropriate remedy for an unfair trial was a retrial, which he is slated to receive. They also contend the legal fees Murdaugh seeks are not directly linked to Hill’s conduct, challenging whether her actions caused the damages claimed.
Prosecutors and a grand jury initially brought the murder charges against Murdaugh, leading to his trial. Hill’s defense argues these legal costs would have been unavoidable.
The motion also references former South Carolina Chief Justice Jean Toal’s original decision against granting Murdaugh a new trial. This decision indicates differing opinions on whether Hill’s actions constituted a constitutional violation.
Additionally, Hill once pleaded guilty to charges of obstruction, perjury, and misconduct related to her handling of Murdaugh’s trial. She served probation and later resigned from her clerk position.
Murdaugh’s convictions for the 2021 murders of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, were voided when the South Carolina Supreme Court found Hill guilty of attempting to influence jurors.
The announcement coincides with Murdaugh’s defense team’s preparation for a potential retrial. In a recent interview, defense attorney Dick Harpootlian stated the team has a strategy for addressing the critical kennel video evidence used in the trial.
“We absolutely do, we absolutely do,” Harpootlian affirmed regarding the defense’s plan for handling the video. “Yes, and we understand that’s an issue and it’s got to be dealt with.”
Harpootlian mentioned uncertainty over whether Murdaugh would testify again, calling it a “game-day decision.” He expects a shorter trial this time, iterating the difficulty prosecutors face in proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.