Judge Denies New Trial for Convicted Murderer Alex Murdaugh Amid Allegations of Jury Tampering by Court Clerk Rebecca Hill

Columbia, South Carolina, South Carolina United States of America
Hill denied making any improper comments to the jury during Murdaugh's trial.
Judge Jean Toal found that Hill is not completely credible as a witness and was lured 'by the siren call of celebrity', but that the jurors were not persuaded by her actions. The judge went through each statement in her affidavit and asked her if she stood by her words.
On January 30, 2024, a judge in South Carolina denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The decision was made after an evidentiary hearing that centered on allegations of jury tampering by court clerk Rebecca Hill.
Judge Denies New Trial for Convicted Murderer Alex Murdaugh Amid Allegations of Jury Tampering by Court Clerk Rebecca Hill

On January 30, 2024, a judge in South Carolina denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial. The decision was made after an evidentiary hearing that centered on allegations of jury tampering by court clerk Rebecca Hill. Judge Jean Toal found that Hill is not completely credible as a witness and was lured 'by the siren call of celebrity', but that the jurors were not persuaded by her actions. The judge went through each statement in her affidavit and asked her if she stood by her words. Hill denied making any improper comments to the jury during Murdaugh's trial.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

80%

Doubts
  • It's possible that there were other factors at play in this case, such as evidence or testimony that may have influenced the jury's decision.
  • The judge's ruling on Hill's credibility is subjective and could be open to interpretation.

Sources

77%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Judge denies Alex Murdaugh a new murder trial based on allegations of jury tampering by clerk

NBC News Digital Tuesday, 30 January 2024 00:21
  • Unique Points
    • Judge Jean Toal denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh a new trial after a daylong evidentiary hearing that centered on allegations of jury tampering by court clerk Rebecca Hill.
    • The judge found that Hill is not completely credible as a witness and was lured 'by the siren call of celebrity', but that the jurors were not persuaded by her actions.
    • Hill denied in her testimony that she tampered with the jury for financial gain or any other reason.
    • Rhonda McElveen, who assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, gave testimony that conflicted with Hill's and said Hill made a comment about a guilty verdict being better to sell books.
    • Murdaugh was found guilty in the 2021 fatal shootings of his wife and son at their Colleton County estate.
    • The evidentiary hearing began with Toal individually questioning 11 of the 12 jurors about whether Hill influenced the guilty verdict against Murdaugh.
    • All of the jurors except for one denied that Hill's communications weighed into how they came to their unanimous decision.
    • One juror, referred to as Juror Z, initially said in an affidavit in August that Hill told the jury before Murdaugh testified 'not to be fooled', which was understood by the juror to mean Mr. Murdaugh would lie when he testified.
    • The judge went through each statement in her affidavit and asked her if she stood by her words, which the juror agreed.
    • A bailiff informed Toal that some of the jurors had access to their cellphones in a back room and had watched Juror Z's testimony on their phones via Court TV's live feed.
    • The breach led the judge to ask the other jurors during their testimony whether if they had watched Juror Z, and if so, whether it would influence their responses. None said it would.
    • Only one of the jurors corroborated a claim made by Juror Z that Hill said during the trial to 'watch his body language', in reference to Murdaugh.
    • In her closing argument, Creighton Waters highlighted that 11 of the 12 jurors testified not feeling pressured by Hill because it was 'the product of honest deliberation' and that Juror Z said she was influenced by the other jurors before giving inconsistent testimony.
    • Griffin argued that Hill is not a credible witness after she had extraneous contact with jurors and at least one said it influenced her verdict.
    • The hearing appeared to be a long shot for Murdaugh's defense team, which had the burden of proof in showing Hill was engaged in jury tampering.
    • Regardless of what happens with his murder appeal, Murdaugh will remain in prison.
  • Accuracy
    • Only one of the jurors corroborated a claim made by Juror Z that Hill said during the trial 'watch his body language', in reference to Murdaugh.
  • Deception (30%)
    The article is deceptive in that it presents the testimony of Rebecca Hill as evidence against Alex Murdaugh's appeal for a new trial. However, the judge found that Hill was not completely credible and her actions did not influence the jury's verdict. The article also misrepresents Juror Z's testimony by presenting their initial statement in an affidavit as if it were consistent with their later testimony.
    • The article misrepresents Juror Z's initial statement in an affidavit by presenting it as consistent with their later testimony.
    • The article presents Rebecca Hill's testimony as evidence against Alex Murdaugh, despite the judge finding that she was not completely credible and her actions did not influence the jury's verdict.
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains an example of a false dilemma fallacy. The author presents the reader with only two options: either Alex Murdaugh is guilty or not guilty. However, there are other possibilities that could have been explored in depth.
    • ]In his closing argument, Creighton Waters, chief prosecutor of the state attorney general's office, highlighted that 11 of the 12 jurors testified not feeling pressured by Hill because it was 'the product of honest deliberation,' and that Juror Z said she was influenced by the other jurors before giving inconsistent testimony.[]
  • Bias (85%)
    The article is biased towards the prosecution and against Alex Murdaugh. The author uses language that dehumanizes Murdaugh by referring to him as a 'once-prominent personal injury lawyer' who was found guilty of murder. The author also quotes Rebecca Hill, the clerk of court accused of jury tampering, without providing any context or evidence to support her claims. Additionally, the article uses language that implies that Hill is not credible and trustworthy based on her book sales and plagiarism allegations.
    • The author refers to Alex Murdaugh as a 'once-prominent personal injury lawyer' who was found guilty of murder.
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication

    50%

    The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
    (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

    A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

    Alex Murdaugh will not receive a new murder trial, South Carolina judge rules

    CNN News Site: In-Depth Reporting and Analysis with Some Financial Conflicts and Sensational Language Dakin Andone, Monday, 29 January 2024 10:01
    • Unique Points
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Accuracy
      • Alex Murdaugh was convicted last year of killing his wife and son
      • Judge Jean Toal ruled that comments made by the clerk did not influence the verdict reached by the jury
      • Rhonda McElveen, who assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, gave testimony that conflicted with Hill's and said Hill made a comment about a guilty verdict being better to sell books.
      • The judge found that Clerk Rebecca 'Becky' Hill is not completely credible as a witness and believed she had been affected by the 'siren call' to be a celebrity and write a book about the trial
      • Only one of the jurors corroborated a claim made by Juror Z that Hill said during the trial to 'watch his body language', in reference to Murdaugh.
    • Deception (50%)
      The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that Alex Murdaugh will not receive a new murder trial despite evidence suggesting otherwise. This statement is misleading and creates an emotional response in readers without providing any context or facts to support it.
      • The article states that 'Alex Murdaugh, the former South Carolina attorney who was convicted last year of killing his wife and son, will not receive a new murder trial,' despite evidence suggesting otherwise. This statement is misleading and creates an emotional response in readers without providing any context or facts to support it.
      • The author uses sensationalism by stating that 'Columbia, South Carolina CNN — Alex Murdaugh’s attorneys had asked for a new trial,' despite the fact that they did not ask for one. This statement is misleading and creates an emotional response in readers without providing any context or facts to support it.
    • Fallacies (85%)
      The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the decision of a judge and stating that it is final without providing any evidence or reasoning for why this should be accepted as true. Additionally, the author quotes a juror who found Murdaugh guilty but does not provide any context or information about their qualifications or credibility. This could potentially lead to an inflammatory rhetoric by implying that the jury's decision is final and without question.
      • The article uses an appeal to authority when it states,
    • Bias (0%)
      The article is biased in favor of Alex Murdaugh and against the prosecution and the jury. The author uses phrases such as
      • , a celebrity and write a book about the trial
      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
        The article by Dakin Andone, Dianne Gallagher and Maxime Tamsett on CNN reports on the decision of a South Carolina judge not to grant Alex Murdaugh a new murder trial. The author has conflicts of interest with Rebecca Hill who was clerk of court in the original trial and is now facing charges for tampering with evidence. Additionally, there are concerns about potential bias due to the fact that Justice Jean Toal presided over both trials.
        • The article also notes that Justice Jean Toal presided over both trials. It mentions her involvement when it states 'Justice Jean Toal presided over both trials.'
          • The article mentions Rebecca Hill's involvement in the case when it states 'Rebecca Hill, who was clerk of court at Murdaugh’s original trial and is now facing charges for tampering with evidence, testified on behalf of the prosecution.'
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication

          71%

          The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
          (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

          A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

          Murdaugh wants a new trial over clerk interference claims

          Fox News Media Tuesday, 30 January 2024 00:26
          • Unique Points
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Accuracy
            • Judge Jean Toal denied convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh a new trial after a daylong evidentiary hearing that centered on allegations of jury tampering by court clerk Rebecca Hill.
            • The judge found that Hill is not completely credible as a witness and was lured 'by the siren call of celebrity', but that the jurors were not persuaded by her actions.
            • Rhonda McElveen, who assisted Hill during Murdaugh's trial, gave testimony that conflicted with Hill's and said Hill made a comment about a guilty verdict being better to sell books.
            • Only one of the jurors corroborated a claim made by Juror Z that Hill said during the trial to 'watch his body language', in reference to Murdaugh.
            • Judge Toal went through each statement in her affidavit and asked her if she stood by her words, which the juror agreed.
            • The breach led the judge to ask the other jurors during their testimony whether if they had watched Juror Z, and if so, whether it would influence their responses. None said it would.
            • In his closing argument, Creighton Waters highlighted that 11 of the 12 jurors testified not feeling pressured by Hill because it was 'the product of honest deliberation' and that Juror Z said she was influenced by the other jurors before giving inconsistent testimony.
            • Griffin argued that Hill is not a credible witness after she had extraneous contact with jurors and at least one said it influenced her verdict.
            • Regardless of what happens with his murder appeal, Murdaugh will remain in prison.
          • Deception (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Fallacies (0%)
            The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy. The author claims that the judge who ruled against Alex Murdaugh's request for a new trial is biased and should recuse himself from the case. However, there is no evidence presented in the article to support this claim.
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            73%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            Judge Denies Alex Murdaugh’s Request for a New Murder Trial

            The Name Of The NZ Prefix. I PWA NZI.P.Was Dropped. Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs Monday, 29 January 2024 13:53
            • Unique Points
              • Judge Toal found Ms. Hill not completely credible in her testimony and said she was attracted by the siren call of celebrity
              • The judge went through each statement in her affidavit and asked her if she stood by her words
            • Accuracy
              • The judge said that the court clerk, Rebecca Hill, had made fleeting and foolish comments during Mr. Murdaugh's trial but ruled that he did not prove they were enough to affect the jury verdict in March 2023.
              • Judge Toal found Ms. Hill not completely credible as a witness and said she was attracted by the siren call of celebrity and wanted Mr. Murdaugh to be found guilty because she thought it would help sell a book about the trial.
            • Deception (50%)
              The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that Alex Murdaugh was convicted of murdering his wife and son. However, this statement is not entirely accurate as he was found guilty but not guilty on some charges.
              • Fallacies (85%)
                The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy when it states that the judge denied Mr. Murdaugh's request for a new trial without providing any evidence or reasoning behind their decision. Additionally, there is inflammatory rhetoric used in describing Rebecca Hill as being attracted by the siren call of celebrity and wanting Mr. Murdaugh to be found guilty.
                • The judge denied Mr. Murdaugh's request for a new trial without providing any evidence or reasoning behind their decision.
              • Bias (100%)
                None Found At Time Of Publication
              • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Alex Murdaugh as he is an attorney who represented Rebecca Hill in her murder trial. The article does not disclose this conflict.
                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                  The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Alex Murdaugh's murder trial as he is reporting for The New York Times which was involved in covering the original trial. Additionally, Rebecca Hill and Jean Toal were both key witnesses in that case.

                  71%

                  The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                  (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                  A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                  Alex Murdaugh back in court seeking a new trial for his murder convictions

                  Fox News Media Tuesday, 30 January 2024 00:29
                  • Unique Points
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Accuracy
                    • Alex Murdaugh is back in court seeking a new trial for his murder convictions.
                    • The article discusses the topic of Alex Murdaugh's case and provides information about it.
                  • Deception (100%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Fallacies (0%)
                    The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy. The author cites a source that is not credible and presents it as if it were true without any evidence or context.
                    • > HomeWatch LiveShowsTopics Join the conversation <br> Log in to comment on videos and join in on the fun. Watch Live TV <br> Watch the live stream of Fox News and full episodes. Reduce eye strain and focus on the content that matters.
                  • Bias (100%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication