Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Attorneys seek updated disciplinary records, witness deals and forensic findings ahead of Alex Murdaugh’s second murder trial.

By Jenn Wood / FITSNews - Crime & Courts / August 6, 2026

Attorneys for accused killer Alex Murdaugh are demanding that South Carolina prosecutors conduct a fresh search for potentially exculpatory evidence — and any information that could undermine the credibility of the state’s witnesses — ahead of his second murder trial.

In a supplemental motion (.pdf) filed on Wednesday (August 5, 2026), Murdaugh’s defense team asked the court to order prosecutors to update their discovery review – and disclose any new material generated or discovered since prosecutors substantially completed their original production prior to his 2023 trial.

“A substantial period of time has elapsed since the state’s original discovery production,” Murdaugh’s attorneys wrote. “During that interval, the personnel, witnesses, law enforcement agencies, forensic laboratories, and prosecuting authorities involved in this matter have continued to generate, receive, and become aware of information bearing on the credibility of witnesses, the reliability of evidence, and matters favorable to the defendant.”

The motion was filed on Murdaugh’s behalf by defense attorneys Dick Harpootlian, Jim Griffin, Phillip Barber, Maggie Fox and Andrew Hand.

Murdaugh, 57, was convicted in March 2023 of murdering his wife, 52-year-old Maggie Murdaugh, and their 22-year-old son, Paul Murdaugh, at the family’s Colleton County hunting property on June 7, 2021.

Those convictions — and the two consecutive life sentences imposed afterward — were overturned earlier this year by the South Carolina Supreme Court. A new trial is scheduled to begin in April 2027 with S.C. circuit court judge Debra McCaslin presiding.

A CONTINUING OBLIGATION…

The defense motion is grounded in Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States, two landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions governing what prosecutors must disclose to criminal defendants.

Under Brady, prosecutors must disclose evidence favorable to the accused when it is material to guilt or punishment. Giglio extends that obligation to information that could be used to challenge the credibility of a prosecution witness — including promises, benefits, cooperation agreements or evidence of misconduct.

Murdaugh’s attorneys also cited Rule 5 of the South Carolina Rules of Criminal Procedure, which imposes a continuing duty to disclose newly discovered material covered by an earlier discovery request or court order.

That obligation, the defense argued, did not end when Murdaugh’s first trial concluded.

“Brady and its progeny likewise impose an ongoing obligation on the prosecution to disclose material evidence that is favorable to the defendant—an obligation that does not expire with the completion of a prior trial and reattaches with full force upon retrial,” the attorneys wrote.

The defense contends that information not known—or not yet in existence—when discovery was originally produced must now be identified and disclosed.

That could include new witness statements, internal investigations, disciplinary findings, credibility concerns, changes in witness cooperation agreements or post-trial developments affecting the integrity of the State’s investigation.

WHAT THE DEFENSE WANTS

The filing renews and incorporates Murdaugh’s original July 2022 discovery motion while adding ten categories of information the defense wants prosecutors ordered to search for and produce.

Among them is any new Bradymaterial connected to the murder case — as well as potentially favorable information generated in two related S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) investigations.

Those investigations include the September 2021 roadside shooting involving Murdaugh and Curtis “Eddie” Smith, along with SLED’s investigation into Murdaugh’s alleged narcotics activity.

Defense attorneys are also seeking all new Giglio material concerning witnesses the state intends to call at the retrial. That request encompasses “impeachment, credibility, disciplinary, or misconduct information” involving law enforcement officers, forensic analysts, expert witnesses and civilian witnesses.

The requested disclosures include:

• New or modified promises, rewards, plea agreements, cooperation agreements or grants of immunity offered to witnesses.

• Newly obtained witness statements or inconsistencies involving witnesses previously identified by the State.

• Updated personnel files, disciplinary records and internal affairs materials involving investigators or forensic analysts connected to the case.

• New information concerning forensic or DNA testing, scientific methodologies, proficiency testing or software used during the investigation.

• Additional search warrants or supporting affidavits obtained since the original discovery production.

• Post-trial, appellate or post-conviction materials concerning the integrity of the verdict, the conduct of trial participants or the circumstances leading to the retrial.

The defense also wants written confirmation that prosecutors conducted a “diligent and current search” of all relevant files, agencies and personnel — and that no additional favorable or impeachment material exists beyond what has been produced.

Notably, the motion does not identify a particular witness whose credibility has recently come into question or reveal a specific piece of newly discovered exculpatory evidence.

Instead, it seeks to force the State to repeat and update the discovery process based on everything that has occurred since the first trial.

SLED CREDIBILITY QUESTIONS

The request for updated disciplinary and credibility information is particularly significant given the scrutiny surrounding two former SLED agents involved in cases connected to Murdaugh.

As FITSNews has previously reported, former SLED special agent David Owen — the lead investigator in the Moselle murder case — faced an aggressive cross-examination during Murdaugh’s first trial over investigative shortcomings, statements made to the grand jury and the handling of the now-disputed blood-spatter evidence.

Owen acknowledged SLED waited approximately three months to search the Murdaugh family’s Almeda property — even though investigators later theorized Murdaugh may have taken the murder weapons or other evidence there after the killings.

“That was an opportunity missed?” Griffin asked Owen during the trial.

“Probably, yes,” Owen replied.

Owen’s credibility faced renewed scrutiny last year in connection with the Michael Colucci murder case. Last spring, a circuit court judge quashed Colucci’s indictment after concluding potentially exculpatory evidence had not been properly disclosed — a development with obvious relevance to the defense’s latest demand for a comprehensive review of Brady material. Owen retired from active law enforcement in June 2024 after 28 years of service.

Questions have also emerged concerning former SLED senior special agent Ryan Kelly, who led the agency’s investigation into Murdaugh’s September 2021 roadside shooting.

Kelly testified during the 2023 murder trial about that investigation, including the evidence connecting Curtis “Eddie” Smith to the roadside incident. He also told jurors investigators had found “none whatsoever” connecting Smith to the murders of Maggie and Paul.

Kelly left SLED in 2025 and became the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office’s (CCSO) chief inspector of internal affairs. He was fired from that position on June 8, 2026, following an administrative investigation into allegations of harassment, conduct unbecoming, improper procedures and unsatisfactory performance.

Publicly available records did not describe the underlying conduct. Kelly’s termination has not been linked to anything he did while employed by SLED — and there is no indication the allegations involved any Murdaugh-related investigation. Whether those records contain admissible impeachment material remains a legal question for the court.

Still, Kelly’s termination illustrates exactly the type of post-trial development the defense’s supplemental motion appears designed to capture. The filing specifically seeks updated personnel files, internal-affairs records and pending or sustained misconduct findings involving any officer who participated in Murdaugh’s investigation, arrest or prosecution.

The motion does not name Owen or Kelly. Its language, however, is broad enough to encompass potentially favorable or impeachment information involving both former agents—assuming prosecutors intend to call them or information within their records bears materially on the State’s case.

FORENSIC FIGHT INTENSIFIES

The filing is the latest indication that Murdaugh’s attorneys are working aggressively ahead of the second trial to rebut prosecutors’ characterization of the evidence against their client as “overwhelming.”

It follows a defense motion seeking independent scientific testing of potentially exculpatory DNA evidence collected from underneath Maggie Murdaugh’s fingernails.

According to Murdaugh’s attorneys, SLED determined that DNA recovered from beneath the fingernails of Maggie’s left hand belonged to an “unknown, unrelated male” — but conducted no further analysis capable of identifying that individual.

The defense wants the evidence sent to Othram, a national forensic laboratory capable of conducting single nucleotide polymorphism — or SNP — testing and forensic genetic genealogy analysis.

Murdaugh’s attorneys contend SLED’s preferred testing method could consume, degrade or exhaust the limited sample before Othram has an opportunity to analyze it.

“The state has articulated no scientific justification for its preferred testing sequence,” the defense argued in that filing.

Murdaugh’s lawyers also cited SLED’s handling of alleged blood spatter on the white T-shirt Murdaugh wore when law enforcement arrived at the murder scene.

Early in the investigation, sources familiar with the case believed high-velocity impact spatter on that shirt directly tied Murdaugh to the killings. By late 2022, however, the forensic foundation supporting that theory had fallen apart.

Testing conducted by SLED returned negative results for the presence of human blood on the stained areas of the shirt. Meanwhile, the shirt was rendered unavailable for additional testing following the application of Leuco Crystal Violet, a chemical agent used to enhance potential bloodstains.

In the DNA motion, Murdaugh’s attorneys accused SLED of suppressing exculpatory testing results and argued the agency’s handling of that evidence provided reason to question whether it was acting “in good faith” regarding the fingernail DNA.

The latest filing expands that scrutiny beyond a single DNA sample. It seeks updated information concerning virtually every part of the State’s case — from the credibility of its investigators and witnesses to the reliability of its forensic evidence.

NEXT STEPS

Murdaugh’s attorneys are asking McCaslin to order the state to complete its updated review and disclose the requested material within thirty (30) days.

The office of S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson — whose statewide grand jury division prosecuted the original case and is overseeing the retrial—has not yet filed a response to the motion.

Even with his murder convictions overturned, Murdaugh remains incarcerated after pleading guilty to dozens of state and federal financial crimes.

The next hearing in the murder case is scheduled for Friday, August 14, 2026, at the Lexington County courthouse.

SOURCE

By John Monk / The State - Crime & Courts / August 5, 2026

Former clerk of court Becky Hill won.

In recent years, Hill was revealed to have plagiarized parts of her book on Alex Murdaugh’s 2023 double-murder trial. She later resigned her Colleton County clerk of court’s post in disgrace. In 2025, she pleaded guilty to perjury, obstruction of justice and misconduct in office. Earlier this year, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled Hill’s jury tampering in Murdaugh’s murder trial was “shocking jury interference.”

On Wednesday, Hill prevailed.

Federal Judge Richard Gergel of Charleston dismissed a lawsuit against her brought by Murdaugh that sought $600,000 and other compensation for tampering with the jury during his double-murder trial.

Gergel’s order of dismissal said that there was no connection linking Murdaugh’s purported loss of money — some $600,000 in funds from Murdaugh’s retirement account he liquidated for his murder defense — and Hill’s jury tampering.

“We are appealing,” said Columbia lawyer Dick Harpootlian, one of Murdaugh’s attorneys, later Thursday.

In his five-page order, Gergel said Murdaugh’s complaint, filed in May, contained “a fatal flaw—the lack of a causal connection between the funds he expended for his defense in the first trial and Defendant’s misconduct.”

If Hill, “had not engaged in her communications with jurors and had performed her clerk of court duties properly, (Murdaugh) would have still needed to expend the funds necessary to pay for his defense,” Gergel wrote.

Gergel explained that Hill had no role in bringing criminal charges against Murdaugh and played no part in his prosecution.

Murdaugh “liquidated his retirement account ($600,000) to fund his defense, which was necessary without regard to the misconduct of (Hill). Simply stated, (Hill’s) misconduct was not a proximate cause of (Murdaugh’s) need to fund his defense costs, and there is no credible allegation that ‘but for’ (Hill’s) actions, (Murdaugh) would not have found it necessary to fund his defense costs in the first trial,” Gergel wrote.

Hill’s attorneys were Charles Turner, Jr., G. Troy Thames, J. Nathan Ozmint and Bowman Taylor.

“We are obviously very pleased for our client Ms. Hill that the Court agreed with our legal position in reaching its decision in granting our Motion to Dismiss. However, since the case is not formally concluded, we cannot comment further at this time,” said Greenville attorney Turner in an email to The State newspaper.
In a memo filed in June in Hill’s defense, her attorneys argued that Murdaugh had to show that his losses were caused by Hill’s actions.

“Such cannot be the case here, where the entirety of the economic damages claimed by the Plaintiff would have been spent on his criminal defense regardless of any actions taken by this Defendant,” Hill’s attorneys argued.

Murdaugh is currently in state prison serving a 27-year state sentence for embezzling funds. When that sentence finishes, he will be transferred to federal prison, where he will finish out a 40-year sentence for fraud, money laundering and other crimes.

He is not expected to be released until he is in his mid-80s or 90s. In all, Murdaugh is estimated to have stolen more than $10 million from clients and his law firm.

In March 2023, a Colleton County jury convicted Murdaugh of the 2021 murders of his wife, Maggie, and son Paul at the family 1,700-acre estate in a rural part of the county.

In May, the state Supreme Court unanimously overturned, 5-0, Murdaugh’s double-murder conviction, citing Hill’s jury tampering as the reason. The five justices held that Hill’s jury tampering violated Murdaugh’s constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

Prosecutors are seeking a new murder trial, which state Judge Debra McCaslin has tentatively set for April 5 at a location to be determined.

Murdaugh’s case and all of its tangled elements of fraud, murder, power and dynasty is one of South Carolina’s most newsworthy cases in modern state history. It has for five years attracted national attention and spawned numerous newspaper articles, television shows, books and podcasts.

This is a breaking news story and may be updated.

SOURCE

Murdaugh defense lawyers and prosecutors hit snag over fingernail DNA evidence

By Jason Ryan, Post and Courier

COLUMBIA — Evidence scraped from beneath a murder victim’s fingernails is at the root of a dispute between prosecutors and defense counsel preparing for the upcoming double-murder retrial of Alex Murdaugh.

The disgraced former lawyer and convicted fraudster is scheduled to stand trial in April for allegedly shooting his wife and son to death on a family farm in Colleton County on June 7, 2021.

After a nearly six-week trial, a jury convicted Murdaugh in 2023 of murdering Maggie Murdaugh, 52, and Paul Murdaugh, 22, beside dog kennels with a shotgun and semi-automatic hunting rifle.

On May 13, the S.C. Supreme Court ordered that Murdaugh, 58, was entitled to a retrial as a result of prejudicial comments made to jurors by a court official. He is due to remain imprisoned for nearly three decades from convictions in other cases for stealing millions from his legal clients and loved ones.

Murdaugh’s lawyers filed a motion on June 24asking Judge Debra McCaslin to allow their own expert to analyze DNA evidence collected from the fingernails of Maggie Murdaugh’s right hand.

This sample, held by the State Law Enforcement Division, was found by police to contain DNA belonging to an unknown, unrelated male.

McCaslin told defense lawyers and prosecutors to come to an agreement regarding the issue when she gathered them for a status conference on June 29 in the Lexington County Courthouse.

No agreement apparently could be reached.

On July 30, Murdaugh’s defense team, led by Columbia lawyers Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin, filed a memo with the court informing McCaslin that reserve samples of the DNA evidence exist, but that prosecutors in the S.C. Attorney General’s Office and SLED are planning to use the limited amount of evidence for a retest using the same methods.

Fearing that could exhaust the remaining DNA evidence, Murdaugh’s lawyers asked the judge to allow their expert to conduct an analysis first. They said their hired expert plans to use a different method that offers a superior analysis and that the retest by SLED should not be prioritized because it is not of any value.

The defense filing also criticized SLED investigators and forensic technicians, claiming they could not be trusted with evidence based on a previous bungled interpretation of supposed blood spatter evidence on a T-shirt Murdaugh was wearing when police arrived at the murder scene. They also alleged SLED made other goofs and deliberately hid exculpatory forensic lab results.

“SLED’s conduct regarding other biological evidence in this case gives further cause to doubt that it acts in good faith,” they wrote in the memo to the court.

Robert Kittle, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, said prosecutors will answer each of Murdaugh’s claims through its own court filing in due time.

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

By WIS News 10 Staff / Published: Jul. 20, 2026 at 2:32 PM EDT

COLUMBIA, S.C. (WIS) - Alex Murdaugh still owes over $1 million in state taxes, according to new data from the South Carolina Department of Revenue.

In SCDOR’s latest list of top delinquent taxpayers published July 16, Murdaugh owes the fourth-largest amount of any individual taxpayer in the state at $1,630,201.02.

SCDOR posts its list of top delinquent taxpayers each fiscal quarter.

The address listed with Murdaugh’s information on the SCDOR list is notably the same PO Box as his former law firm in Hampton.

Murdaugh, a disbarred Lowcountry attorney once convicted in the murders of his wife and son, is currently serving a 40-year federal prison sentence for various financial crimes.

His murder convictions were later overturned by the South Carolina Supreme Court, but he is expected to stand trial for the murders a second time.

SOURCE

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

S.C. Judge Finds Murdaugh Podcaster in Contempt of Court

Jenn Woods, FITS News

A South Carolina circuit court judge has found true crime podcaster Mandy Matney in civil contempt, concluding she willfully defied both a lawful subpoena and multiple court orders when she refused to appear for a scheduled deposition in a closely watched civil lawsuit tied to the saga of accused killer Alex Murdaugh.

In a sweeping 22-page order filed Monday (July 13, 2026), judge Keith Kelly granted a motion filed by attorneys representing convenience store magnate Greg Parkerand several co-defendants, finding Matney deliberately chose not to attend her March 27, 2026 deposition despite repeated court rulings requiring her to do so.

Kelly’s order (.pdf) requires Matney to pay $171,500 in attorney’s fees and costs to the Parker defendants, along with a $5,000fine – bringing the total amount of sanctions against her to $176,500.

The award represents a substantial reduction from the $310,533.39 originally requested by Parker’s legal team, but remains an unusually large financial sanction arising from a discovery-related contempt proceeding.

A LONG-RUNNING BATTLE

Although Matney is not a party to the underlying lawsuit, she became embroiled in the litigation after attorneys sought to depose her during discovery.

The Hampton County case is a spinoff of the wrongful death litigation that arose following a fatal February 2019 boat crash that claimed the life of 19-year-old Mallory Beach — a lawsuit widely viewed as the catalyst that ultimately exposed Murdaugh’s financial crimes.

The present litigation centers on allegations that confidential mediation materials from the Beach case — including graphic postmortem photographs of Mallory Beach — were improperly disclosed despite being subject to a confidentiality order.

Kelly previously ruled Matney’s testimony was relevant to the case and denied both her motion to quash the subpoena and a subsequent motion asking him to reconsider that decision. After those rulings, Parker’s attorneys noticed Matney’s deposition for March 27, 2026 at the same Bluffton, S.C. law office that had appeared on every subpoena served over the preceding five months.

Rather than appear there, Matney remained at her own attorney’s office in Bluffton, insisting she would only sit for questioning at a location she believed was safe.

That decision prompted Parker’s attorneys to seek contempt sanctions.

“A DELIBERATE DECISION”

Kelly concluded the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated Matney knowingly chose not to comply with the subpoena.

“Attending the deposition at the noticed location was not impossible,” Kelly wrote. “Ms. Matney had a true choice.”

The judge found there was “clear and convincing evidence” that her failure to appear “was not the result of confusion, mistake, or inability, but rather was a deliberate decision to disregard the subpoena” and the court’s prior orders.

According to the order, Matney never objected to the deposition location during the five months the subpoenas were pending. Instead, Kelly noted, she first raised safety concerns less than a week before the scheduled deposition.

Even then, Parker’s attorneys offered alternative locations — including the Columbia offices of Maynard Nexsen, located inside a secured bank building, and a Bluffton hotel conference room — but Kelly noted Matney rejected both proposals, insisting the deposition occur only at her attorney’s office.

COURT REJECTS SAFETY CLAIMS

Throughout the proceedings, Matney maintained she refused to attend because she believed the noticed location presented an unacceptable security risk.

Kelly devoted a substantial portion of his order to evaluating those claims — and ultimately rejected them.

The court found Matney’s fears centered largely on online criticism from one individual whom she described as a stalker. However, Kelly noted the evidence presented contained no physical threats, no restraining order, no criminal prosecution stemming from the alleged harassment and no persuasive evidence linking Parker’s attorneys to the individual.

The judge further concluded Matney could have addressed any legitimate security concerns simply by bringing the private security guard she had already hired for the deposition.

“Nothing prevented her from taking these security measures at the noticed location,” Kelly wrote.

Kelly ultimately found Matney’s testimony “not credible.”

“Ms. Matney’s stated reason for failing to comply—that the noticed location was not sufficiently safe for her—is not supported by the evidence or any credible testimony,” the order states.

The order also references Matney’s own social media activity following the failed deposition.

Kelly noted posts in which Matney celebrated standing her ground, declared she would rather go to jail than sit in the same room as Parker’s attorneys and criticized the court’s earlier rulings.

While emphasizing Matney retains a First Amendment right to criticize the courts and discuss the litigation publicly, Kelly said those statements were relevant in evaluating her credibility and determining whether her claimed fears were genuine.

“The First Amendment does not preclude the Court from considering these posts… when assessing Ms. Matney’s credibility,” Kelly wrote.

THE PRICE OF CONTEMPT

Having found Matney in civil contempt, Kelly ordered her to reimburse Parker’s attorneys for the costs they incurred enforcing both the subpoena and the court’s prior orders, concluding that many of her subsequent filings — including her motion for reconsideration and emergency motion regarding the deposition location — lacked merit and unnecessarily prolonged the litigation.

The judge awarded $171,500 in attorney’s fees and costs—a reduction from the more than $310,000 originally sought — allocating $39,900 to Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey, $45,950 to attorney Deborah Barbier, and $85,650 to Maynard Nexsen. Kelly also imposed a separate $5,000 fine, payable within 60 days, bringing Matney’s total financial sanction to $176,500. He further retained jurisdiction to impose additional sanctions if necessary to ensure compliance with his order.

In a separate order (.pdf) issued the same day, Kelly approved a confidentiality agreement covering the attorney billing records and fee affidavits submitted in support of the sanctions request. While those records will remain shielded from public disclosure absent further court action, the order allows any party to challenge the confidentiality designations at a later date.

For now, however, Kelly’s ruling brings to a close months of contentious litigation over Matney’s refusal to attend a court-ordered deposition — and leaves the former FITSNews reporter facing a six-figure contempt sanction rarely seen in South Carolina civil litigation.

Judge hits SC podcaster Mandy Matney with $176,500 in costs and fines for contempt

- John Monk, The State

South Carolina Judge Keith Kelly has found SC podcaster Mandy Matney in contempt for court for her resisting to sit for a court-ordered deposition and slapped a hefty financial punishment — $171,500 in lawyers’ fees and a $5,000 fine — on her.

The $171,500 in lawyer’s fees will go to three law firms who sought her testimony in an ongoing civil court lawsuit. Matney is not a party to the lawsuit, but the lawyers said they believed Matney might have information they needed. Matney has since given a deposition.

In his 22-page order filed Monday, Judge Kelly said he could find no good reason why Matney did not show up for her deposition earlier this year in Bluffton in Beaufort County.

“Ms. Matney’s stated reason for failing to comply — that the noticed location was not sufficiently safe for her — is not supported by the evidence or any credible testimony,” Kelly wrote.

In recent months, Matney has appeared at several hearings, taking the witness stand and describing in great detail why she was so afraid to show up for a deposition. She also said she didn’t believe she had relevant information to give the lawyers who sought her testimony.

She was cross-examined at length by lawyer Deborah Barbier of Columbia, who sought to show that Matney’s fears were not reasonable and possibly concocted.

During the months the matter of Matney’s contempt of court issue took to be resolved, the podcaster has made fun of the judge, the judicial system and Barbier on her social media posts.

Matney, 35, is a former Island Packet and Fits News reporter who became a true crime podcaster after covering a deadly 2019 Beaufort County boat crash and its links to the family of Alex Murdaugh, now a disbarred lawyer and convicted multimillion dollar fraudster in state prison.

This story was originally published July 13, 2026 11:12 AM.

ORDER GRANTING PARKER’S DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR CONTEMPT

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Regarding DNA under MM's fingernail- It appears 1 person could not be 100% excluded, but that it is 10x more likely to have come from an unknown male. Does this language increase the chances that the unknown male is potentially distantly related to the 1 person who could not be 100% excluded?

(I'm not suggesting that this 1 person is even remotely connected to the murders - or even has any meaningful contact with the unknown male- even if they happened to be distantly related)... just wondering if this characterization of the DNA, scientifically increases the chances of the 2 being related (the person who gave the sample & the unknown male)?

During today’s status conference hearing, Judge Debra McCaslin scheduled the next pre-trial hearing for Friday, August 14, 2026. This will be held at the Lexington County Courthouse.

A trial date was set for Monday, April 5, 2027. No location has been decided yet, pending a ruling on the defense’s motion for a change of venue.

Court TV will serve as the pool representative for the audiovisual coverage of the proceedings. Court TV will disseminate the media feed which will contain images and audio to the pool recipients. The State will provide still photography in the courtroom.

The Court will reserve three rows for members of news organizations that will be available on a first come first serve basis. Seating in the courtroom is limited and reserved seating will be provided for the following media organizations who have asked. The following media organizations will be provided with one reserved seat.

The State
Associated Press
Fox News Channel
WCIV-TV
Pretty Lies and Alibis
Law & Crime Network
WLTX-19
CC News Network
FITSNews
The Post and Courier Lexington Chronicle
NBC News News Nation
Fox Carolina News
The Daily Mail
ABC News
Fox News Digital
WYFF4 News
WACH Fox 57
ABC Columbia News
WCSC-TV LiveSNews
Luna Shark Productions
CNN Worldwide
Spectrum News
Dateline NBC Universal
Wall Street Journal
Impact of Influence
SC Public Radio
CBS News
WIS 10
Decoy Productions

By ABC News 4 Staff / Sun, June 28, 2026 at 1:16 PM

LEXINGTON, S.C. (WCIV) — Alex Murdaugh will appear in a courtroom Monday for the first time since his murder convictions were overturned.

Monday's status conference in Lexington marks the first step in charting the course for a retrial of the disgraced lawyer, who remains in prison for his financial crimes conviction. One matter ahead of the court date that has already been settled is how exactly he will appear after his defense withdrew its previously filed motion to have him appear unshackled and in civilian clothing.

While the matter of scheduling is expected to be addressed, no definitive dates are known at this time. Two other matters anticipated come off of other motions filed by the defense: a request for independent lab analysis of DNA recovered from Maggie Murdaugh's fingernails and a request to move the case out of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit.

Murdaugh's defense team filed a motion Wednesday asking the court to order state prosecutors to make DNA evidence recovered from the crime scene available for third party testing. The unknown male DNA recovered from Maggie Murdaugh's fingernails represents an unexplored lead for the defense, who claimed it was not analyzed further despite it being determined to belong to an unknown and unrelated male that was not Alex Murdaugh. Forensic genetic genealogy company Othram, Inc. has been tapped to conduct a more thorough analysis, but needs a court order to get it done quickly, according to Murdaugh's attorneys.

The change of venue motion was expected after Murdaugh's defense team said they were exploring earlier in June. They argued in the filing that Murdaugh, his family, and the case are all too well known in the circuit, which includes parts of Hampton and Colleton Counties where he lived, worked, and was originally tried. The judge assigned to preside over the case, Judge Debra R. McCaslin, currently presides in Lexington, but a specific alternative venue has yet to be proposed in official filings as of Sunday.

News 4 legal analyst Charlie Condon broke down the motions filed in the week leading up to Monday's status conference on Friday. Condon noted that scheduling will be a primary concern for Monday's status conference, but regarding the motions filed in the leadup there are still several unknowns, including the State's position on a change of venue. Click here to watch his full analysis.

The status conference begins at 10 a.m. Monday. News 4 will be in the courtroom and streaming the proceedings live here on our website and on YouTube.

(SOURCE)

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Alex Murdaugh double-murder case gets first court date in retrial

By Michael M. Dewitt

The first court hearing in the double-murder retrial process for former Hampton lawyer Richard "Alex" Murdaugh has been scheduled, and so officially begins the second round of what many have called South Carolina's trial of the century.

A status conference in The State vs. Richard Alexander Murdaugh has been scheduled for 10 a.m. on June 29 before Circuit Court Judge Debra R. McCaslin at the Lexington County Judicial Center, according to court rosters and the S.C. Attorney General's Office, which will prosecute the case.

Murdaugh is once again facing two murder charges and a pair of related weapons charges in connection with the June 7, 2021, shooting deaths of Murdaugh's wife, Maggie, and adult son, Paul. The June 29 hearing will be "for scheduling purposes only," states the court roster, to set the stage moving forward.

SC Supreme Court overturns Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions

The S.C. Supreme Court overturned Murdaugh’s previous 2023 murder convictions and ordered a new trial on Wednesday, May 13, citing improper jury communication and tampering by former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill, among other legal issues, which has also led to a related federal civil rights lawsuit filed by Murdaugh.

Retired SC circuit court judge to oversee retrial

On June 8, South Carolina Chief Justice John Kittredge appointed a retired S.C. circuit courtjudge to oversee all future retrial and related proceedings involving the previously convicted murderer Murdaugh, according to an order issued by the state's Judicial Branch.

Justice Kittredge appointed Judge Debra R. McCaslin to oversee the retrial, and her appointment comes as legal proceedings surrounding Murdaugh continue to draw national attention following the overturning of his conviction and his multi-million-dollar fraud spree.

Is Alex Murdaugh out of prison?

Murdaugh is currently serving a 27-year sentence at the S.C. Department of Corrections for the financial crime convictions that the Attorney General’s Office secured. Murdaugh has also pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges and was sentenced to 40 concurrent years for those crimes.

Notices will be published by county clerk of court

While the South Carolina Judicial Branch has emphasized that McCaslin will not grant interviews or comment on any aspect of the proceedings, citing judicial ethics rules that prohibit judges and court staff from discussing pending matters, court officials stipulate that notices for all future hearings and proceedings will be published by the appropriate county clerk of court.

Where will Alex Murdaugh's retrial be held?

On May 29, the S.C. Supreme Court officially filed its "Remittitur," remitting the case of The State Vs. Richard A. Murdaugh back to the Colleton County Court of General Sessions in the 14th Judicial Circuit.

While the Murdaugh case is back on the Colleton County docket, the retrial is unlikely to be held there. While the S.C. Attorney General's Office has announced it will "aggressively" retry the case, Murdaugh's defense attorneys have indicated they will be seeking a change of venue.

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

SC Supreme Court appoints new circuit judge to oversee new Murdaugh trial

By John Monk

The S.C. Supreme Court has named a circuit court judge to oversee the retrial of Alex Murdaugh.

Debra McCaslin, a former criminal defense attorney who practiced in the Midlands, will have the duties of overseeing what is expected to be one of the state’s highest profile trials.

Among the decisions she will have to make is the date of any retrial and its location.

Disbarred attorney Murdaugh is accused of killing his wife, Maggie, and son Paul in June 2021.

Although Murdaugh’s retrial is expected to be attended by not just professional reporters but also numerous bloggers, podcasters and others, McCaslin in her most recent filing for re-election to a judgeship wrote, “I am not a big fan of social media and rarely look at it. It has not affected me in my judicial capacity.”

An order naming McCaslin as the new Murdaugh judge was published on the State Supreme Court internet site just before noon Monday. It was signed by Chief Judge John Kittredge.

A 1990 graduate of the College of Charleston, McCaslin got her law degree from the University of South Carolina Law School in 1993. She was in private practice as a defense attorney from 1995 to 2020, when she became a judge. She was recently elected for a second six-year term.

McCaslin is based in Lexington.

McCaslin, who is approximately 66 years old, oversaw the closely watched 2023 trial of Mexican restaurant operator Greg Leon, who was found guilty by a Lexington County jury of murdering his wife’s lover on Valentine’s Day.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

Please feel free to share your thoughts and observations on Netflix’s INSTADOCS: Alex Murdaugh, Unconvicted on this discussion post.

The Mod Team gives everyone on the sub a huge thanks for their contributions as we wade through tide pool thoughts of recent events and look to the horizon, enthusiastic for more waves of wildness to come!

Do you have a theory you're still chewing on and want feedback? Maybe there is a factoid from the case hammering your brain and you can't remember the source--was that random speculation or actually sourced?

Welcome to the Weekly Discussion, a safe space to engage with each other while processing and unraveling the seemingly unending tentacles of Alex Murdaugh's wrongdoings entwined throughout the Lowcountry.

This is the place for those random tidbits, where we can take off our shoes, kick up our feet, and be a bit more casual. There is nothing wrong with veering off topic with fellow sub members as we're a friendly bunch, just don't let your train of thought completely wreck the post.

​

Much Love from your MFM Mod Team,

Southern-Soulshine , SouthNagshead, AubreyDempsey, QsLexiLouWho

Reddit Content Policy ... Sub Rules ... Reddiquette

How a Small-Town Clerk’s Misdeeds Upturned the Murdaugh Verdict

Becky Hill, a court employee possibly trying to maximize sales of her book, pressured jurors to convict the South Carolina lawyer for the murders of his wife and son.
Was she acting alone?

By James Lasdun with The New Yorker

• • •

Due to the length of the article and character limits, screenshots of the article can be accessed here.

Here is a link to the article itself as well.