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

Great podcast with the exception of Drew. He is inarticulate, repeats himself constantly, and has a difficult time completing a sentence. Very difficult to listen to.

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.

“Mur daw”! Why is this so hard for people?

Thank you, Drew for saying I can have my own opinion. I wouldn’t have know that unless you had told me. Overall, enjoy the show, Drew just gets on my nerves sometimes. Love you all. I even left a 5 star review.

I’m still waiting for this show to treat this scum-ball like a convicted murderer. And treat his “lawyers” lime the good ol boys they are. But whatever.

Great podcast - no spin- great vetted info. Great explanations and detail. Thanks Drew, Charlie and Anne!

This is our favorite podcast about the Murdaugh saga. Very respectful, and non condescending. All hosts seem to try to offer factual and thought provoking items to think about when discussing the SC judicial system involving Murdaugh. Very calm non narcissistic hosts. Please you guys, do a podcast every week about the SC judicial system and other current trial/cases. I think these hosts could help expose more injustices and probably bring some justice to victims that have no one in their corner. Did the defense team pay Dr. Adams? Has other credited individuals like Dr. Adams looked at the canons in detail? This issue with jury tampering makes me not want to serve on another jury. You are told so many times not to discuss the case. Plus when the jury is polled in court and you say it was your decision, then you go back later after the trial and say no I felt pressured-why did you not go to the judge in the first place? A lot of people could filled pressured with the way some attorneys, etc come across. If you have not done anything wrong and still have an attorney come to your house or suggest you need to lawyer up, then I don’t think the stress and inconvenience is worth it anymore. I used to like jury duty (most of it). Thank you for the podcasts.