The Murdaugh Murders, Money & Mystery | Unsolved South Carolina

I wish there were more episodes more often such a great podcast

I have to agree with Drew that Justice Toal essentially led Juror Z into a trap. It’s like the old trick “What color is snow?” “White.” “What color is milk?” “White.” “What color is the President’s house?” “White.” “What do cows drink?” “Milk.” Oh no! Should be water. Juror Z should’ve been allowed to clarify. Why not try to get to the truth? Especially when she found Ms. Hill to not be credible.

Sorry—don’t care for your analysis of the case. Pls kindly look at the Green case - that Judge Toal used. She consulted with Supreme Court on this case. Two steps - 1) is there any evidence of interference with jury 2) Did any evidence of jury interference change or influence jury decision. Clearly 11 jurors said “No”. The one juror who said yes, changed her testimony & her sworn affidavit. Clearly she was pursued by Murdaugh defense team. Let’s check if she drives a new car or buys some property.

All three are very good, but having a former SC AG is so helpful to keep discussions framed in the context of legal system there. The episode following the AM retrial hearing struck me because Charlie redirected to the facts when it is so easy to go with the preferred dramatic interpretations. For the one juror that testified she was impacted - Charlie was one of the only voices reminding us all of what the facts of her affidavit were and what she said on the record during this hearing. I would add what Justice Toal pointed out : this juror raised her hand at the trial affirming the independence of her verdict, she then answered affirmatively when polled by Judge Newman, then when pushed by defense atty’s showing up at her home months after the trial she stated the pressure she felt was from other jurors, nothing about the clerk of court. Those facts reveal multiple responses by the juror in question that supported her guilty verdict. It is quite clear that ONLY after many, many months of pressure and stress did she change her story. Even then , she did not articulate the way she was pressured by the clerk, only that she perceived the clerk’s comments to reveal what the clerk believed. She never said that the clerk’s opinion was so compelling to her that her own experience and understanding of the extensive trial was rendered invalid. She was asked to explain how it influenced her verdict and she didn’t. She didn’t speak of a power differential, or a deep faith in the woman who arranged her lunches etc. I feel strongly that if this juror is so incapable of considering facts and testimony in the trial, based on the belief of a clerk, she would be even MORE influenced by the high powered defense attys grilling her about her clear choice and forcing her to question her own mind. It kind of seemed like Justice Toal could see that too, based on her assessment of off handed comments not being powerful enough to influence this jury. The only hope the defense has is if Justice Toal misinterpreted the application of a standard. Thanks to this team for being thorough, unlike so many main stream media. That is what is so great about podcasts vs sound bytes.