The South Carolina Supreme Court recently overturned the murder convictions of Alex Murdaugh, vacating his life sentences. This decision came after the court found that former court clerk Becky Hill improperly influenced the jury in his trial, with motives linked to her book sales. Despite this development, Murdaugh is still incarcerated due to a separate 40-year federal sentence for financial crimes.
Following the overturn, Hill is now seeking to dismiss a $600,000 lawsuit Murdaugh filed against her. Murdaugh claims that Hill’s actions led to his need for a costly defense during his 2023 double-murder trial. Hill’s defense argues that her conduct as a court clerk grants her immunity from such claims, citing Eleventh Amendment, quasi-judicial, and qualified immunities.
Hill’s lawyers maintain that Murdaugh would have incurred the legal fees regardless of any actions she allegedly took. They describe the lawsuit as presenting a “novel theory,” suggesting that securing a new trial does not entitle Murdaugh to reimbursement of his legal expenses.
The filing further insists that the true remedy for Murdaugh’s unfair trial is the new trial itself, which has already been granted. Hill’s legal team argues that Murdaugh’s legal costs cannot directly be traced to her conduct since prosecutors would have proceeded with the trial regardless.
Recently, Hill pleaded guilty to charges related to obstruction and misconduct in her handling of Murdaugh’s trial. She was given probation and resigned as the clerk of court. The court had deemed her behavior as an attempt to influence the jury, which led to Murdaugh’s appeal for a retrial.
Murdaugh’s defense team is preparing for the potential retrial. They plan to address significant evidence, particularly a kennel video that prosecutors have used to place Murdaugh near the murder scene. Whether Murdaugh will testify again in a retrial remains undecided, as his defense attorney refers to it as a “game-day decision.”
A federal judge will soon decide if Murdaugh’s lawsuit can proceed or if Hill’s motion for dismissal will succeed. Both parties are awaiting further developments in the case.