Jury Voir Dire (Continued) and Pretrial Motions
1,471 linesTUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2023
(Court resumed at 9:48 a.m.)
JURY PANEL FOUR
JUDGE NEWMAN: Good morning. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. You are here for jury selection, or jury qualification, that is, in the case of The State v. Richard Alexander Murdaugh. I am Clifton Newman. I am the presiding judge. The Clerk of Court here, Ms. Becky Hill, accompanied by a number of her colleagues and associates, will be helping us with jury qualifications. The first part of the jury qualification is the roll call, which we will do in a few minutes and which you will be placed under oath to give truthful, give complete and truthful responses to all questions you're asked and to provide truthful information.
COURT CLERK: If you will ---
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hold on ma'am.
COURT CLERK: Oh, I'm sorry.
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you don't mind.
COURT CLERK: I'm sorry.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, the defendant, Mr. Richard Alex Murdaugh, if you will please stand.
ALEX MURDAUGH: Good morning.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Mr. Murdaugh is charged with the offense of murder. He is accused of murdering his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, and son Paul Murdaugh on June 7, 2021, outside their home located at 4147 Moselle Road, Islandton, South Carolina. He's pled not guilty to that charge. He's presumed to be not guilty, and the purpose of a jury trial is to determine whether the State can prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We will proceed now with the administration of the oath and the roll call with those of you who are here.
COURT CLERK: If you would stand and raise your right hand, please.
(At this time, the jury panel was sworn.)
(Roll call was followed by jury venire.)
JURY VOIR DIRE - PANEL FOUR
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, ladies and gentlemen, we will move now to questions more specific to this case. As I stated, Mr. Murdaugh is charged with murdering his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, and Paul, and son Paul Murdaugh on June 7, 2021, outside their home at 4147 Moselle Road, Islandton, South Carolina. Has any member of the jury panel read, heard, or know anything about this case or about Mr. Murdaugh? If so please stand. And I would like for you to give me your juror number only, and then you may be seated, starting here, the lady in black, and remove your mask so we can hear you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 580.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 509.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And after giving the information, be seated. 509?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 470.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 522.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 556.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 476.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 674.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 6 --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 5 --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Just a moment. Just one moment. We're going to go in an order. Next in order is the gentleman on the row with the -- what kind of colored shirt is that? Plaid? Yes, sir, you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 535.
JUDGE NEWMAN: No, just a moment. The one that everyone is pointing to. You, yes, sir. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 556.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. No, no. 556 is behind you. Come on, in front here.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 669.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 669. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 651.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 651.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 515.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 515. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 575.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 575. You may be seated. And going front to back, not mixed in. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 658.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 658. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 495.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 495. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 601.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 601. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 674.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 674. Thank you. The guy in the blue shirt, yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 5 --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Just a moment. The guy in the blue shirt with the mask. If you will pull your mask down?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 556.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 556. Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 668.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 668. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 609.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 609.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 568.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 568.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 557.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 557.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 471.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 471.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 655.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 655.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 548.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 548.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 508.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 508. And on this side from the --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 588.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 588.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 555.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 555.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 573.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 573.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 571.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 571.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 650.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 650.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 545.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 545.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 482.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 482.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 589.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 589.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 533.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 533.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 593.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 593.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 885.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 596.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 596.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 524.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 524.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 528.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 528. 528.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 615.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 564.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 564.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 595.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 595.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 567.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 567.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 667.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 667.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 558.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 612.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 612.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 663.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 663.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 463.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 463.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 648.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 640 -- 648.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 585.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 630.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 630.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 595.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 595.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 670.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 670.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 530.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 530.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 518.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 518.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 582.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 582. Thank you. If you did not stand to the previous question, meaning that you have not read, heard, or know anything about this case, if you have not read, heard, or know anything about this case, please stand, and give me your juror numbers in like fashion. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 460.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 460. All right, you may be seated.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 578.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 578.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 654.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Six-five?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 4.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 654. Front row, lead row.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 675.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Pardon?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 675.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 644.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 644.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 474.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 474.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 572.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 572.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 534.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 534.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 544.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 544.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 550.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 550. All right. Thank you. Now I need to know the source of the information that you have received concerning this case. For those of you who have indicated that you either read, heard, or know something about this case, I need to know the source of the information that you have received, either through a news article, podcast, TV, TV, radio, personal conversations with other people. I need to know the source of your information. Starting again on this side, those of you who know or heard something about the case, if you could all stand again on this side first, and tell me the source of your information, starting with that row and then going back. Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Local news, Internet, and conversations.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, tell me your juror numbers and then that information.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 580.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 509. Facebook, local news, television, radio, personal conversations.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 470. Social media, news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Yes, sir, in the black.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 575. Local news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. And behind him.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 658. Internet news stories.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 515. Just talking to people and news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 651. Talking to people and Facebook headlines.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 669, my wife.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am, in the gold.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 522. National news, listening to podcasts. I just heard something along the way, and Apple News on the phone.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 556. Local news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 476. Facebook, and talking to people, and the news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 604. Social media.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 601. Post and Courier. My wife used to teach at Wade Hampton High School. FitsNews.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm 495. Friends and family, podcasts, TV, listening to the news, social media, articles.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. Thank you. Yes, ma'am, in the black.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 471. Internet and the news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 557, and the local news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 568. News articles and my husband.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 609. Local television from Charleston.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 668. Local news, Internet, talking to friends.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Local news, TV shows, Dateline. That's it.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And juror number as well.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 655.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 548. Local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 508. All of the above.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. We'll move to this side. If you all will stand and provide the same information, starting with the gentleman --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 588. Radio.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 565. Pretty everything about this: YouTube, podcasts. I live in the area. I've talked to locals.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 573. Podcasts, word of mouth.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 571. Rumors and news articles and a documentary.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Next. Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 650. Local media, podcasts, word of mouth.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 545. National news, local news, talked with friends.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 482, local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 589. Local news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 533. Local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 593. All of the above.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 553. Television, local news.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 519. Podcasts.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 524. Just from hearing of it, just talk.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558. Local news, social media, and podcasts.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 615. Local news and podcasts.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 564. Local news, social media, and word of mouth.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 599. Social media and family.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 567. Just local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 667. Local news, newspaper, Internet.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558. Local news, social media, talking with people.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 612. Local news and personal conversations.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 663. Local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 463. Personal conversations, social media, local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 348. News and gossip.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585. Social media, local news, and personal conversations.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 630. News, social media.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 595. Local news, Facebook, Internet.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 670. Local news.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 530. Internet and conversations.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 518. National Public Radio news, Wall Street Journal.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 582. Local newspaper, social media, and gossip.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, those of you who have heard, read, or stated others -- or have talked with others about it, have you formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant regarding the murder charges? If you have formed an opinion as to guilt or innocence of the defendant, please stand. And we'll take the juror numbers of those of you who have formed an opinion as to the guilt or the innocence of the defendant.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 580.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 580.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 509.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 509.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 515.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 515.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 471.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 655.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 555.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 573.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 545.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 593.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 605.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 667.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 463.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 648.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 670.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, ladies and gentlemen, the law and practice requires that jurors decide cases based on the evidence presented during the course of a trial and the law as explained to you by the court. No matter what you may have heard or seen or what opinions that you may have formed, the question I have for you is that whether or not you can put all that aside and decide this case only on the evidence you receive in court, followed by the law, and decide the case in a fair and impartial manner. If you can do that, please stand.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: You said can I?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Pardon?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: You said if I can?
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you can decide the case based on the law and the evidence as presented in court regardless of what you previously heard, please stand. If you can decide the case based on the law and the evidence -- those of you who have previously formed an opinion, as it relates to those of you who have previously formed an opinion, the same folks who were standing after the last question who have indicated that they've formed an opinion, if all those folks would stand again who have previously formed an opinion? All right, this question is directed to all of you who have formed an opinion. As relates to you all, aside from the opinion you have formed, can you put aside all of that and decide the case solely based on the law and the evidence presented in court? If you can do that, remain standing. If you cannot, please be seated. From the jurors who are -- remain standing who indicate that they can decide the case on a fair and impartial basis despite what they previously thought or may currently be thinking, those jurors are juror number?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 522.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 522.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 515.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 515.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 585. All right. Thank you all. Now, those jurors who -- You may be seated. Those jurors who have a fixed opinion that will not change or cannot change based on what is presented in court, please stand again and give me those juror numbers. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 580.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 580.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 509.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 509.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 476.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 476.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 471.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 471.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 655.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 655.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 555.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 555.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 573.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 573.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 545.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 545.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 593.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 593.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 605.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 605.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 667.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 667.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 558.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 558.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 463.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 463.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 648.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 648.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 670.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 670. Are there any objections to those jurors being excused?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: None from the defendant, Your Honor, no objection.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll stand and stretch for a moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Says the State?
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, no objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, those jurors, those jurors will be excused. Confirm the list that I'm -- you all have noted: Juror Number 580, 580, Number 509. If you all will stand. Number 580, you're excused. Yes, you may leave. 509.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: This is 580. I'm 509.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes. Good. Thank you. 476, 471. Let's see, two folks. Just a moment. What is your number?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 571.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you're 476?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 471.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I said 476 and 471.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. I apologize.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 471, 655, 555, 573, 545, 593, 605, 667, 558, 463, 648, and 670. The next question. Were you or any family member of yours or significant other related by blood or marriage or social acquaintance with the victims Margaret, Maggie, Murdaugh and Pearl -- Paul Murdaugh? If you're related by blood or some significant other is related by blood, marriage, or social acquaintance with them, either or any of them, please stand. And tell me your juror number.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And your acquaintance?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: We're related down the line.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You're related to?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: We're related down the line, blood.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you're related to Ms. Murdaugh, Mr. Murdaugh?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Mr. Murdaugh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. With the defendant, Alex Murdaugh?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And his son, and what degree of relationship? You said down the line?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. I was told we were related down the line.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, and would that affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Possibility there.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Sir?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It would? And your juror number is?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 583. Any objection to him being excused?
MR. WATERS: None from the State, Your Honor.
MR. GRIFFIN: Your Honor, we would like further inquiry.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, if you'll stay with us for a bit, Mr. 583. Yes, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 582. We're about seventh or eighth cousins to Mr. Alex Murdaugh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And would that affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, it would not, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm 585, and I married into a family, and I just heard that they were distantly related.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And would that fact affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. If you are personally acquainted with Mr. Richard Alexander Murdaugh, related to him, have any type relationship with him currently or in the past, if so please stand. Yes, sir, juror number.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 668.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Can I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir. We'll have you approach at the end of the process. Thank you, and thank you, sir. Any other jurors who wish to approach and make any statement outside the presence of everyone else, that is certainly fine. Now, moving a step backwards to the lawyers involved, both sides are represented by counsel and would like for them to introduce themselves at this time.
MR. WATERS: Good morning, everyone. My name is Creighton Waters. I'm from the Attorney General's Office in Columbia, and I will be the lead prosecutor in the case against Alex Murdaugh. With me is some other prosecutors. Savannah Goude right here. Next to her is Johnny James. Next to Johnny is Don Zelenka. That's David Fernandez right there, John Conrad is right there, and then finally John Meadors in the back. Thank y'all.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Please the Court, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm Dick Harpootlian, and I'm a member of a much smaller team representing Mr. Murdaugh. This is Jim Griffin, who has his own practice in Columbia; we're working together on this case. Phil Barber, who's not here this morning, and Margaret Fox, who is with Jim's office, we will be representing Mr. Murdaugh here during this proceeding. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you've ever been represented by any of the lawyers or sued by any of the lawyers involved, or if you have any acquaintance with any of the lawyers involved or any members of their respective law firms or agency, if so please stand. All right, yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585. I'm not sure if -- 585. I don't know if this is -- answers the questions, but my husband's uncle works in the same law firm.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Which law firm is that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: PMPE.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Oh. We haven't gotten to asking about that firm, but you can tell us while you're telling us. Your --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My husband's uncle works in the same law firm.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what is your husband's uncle -- he's a lawyer?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what is his name?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My husband's uncle?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Steven Murdaugh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583. I had a -- when it was Peters, Parker, I had a lawsuit in magistrate's court.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you, and would that affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Are you or any member of your immediate family or significant other employed with or ever been employed by the Colleton County Sheriff's Department, or State Law Enforcement Division, commonly known as SLED, the solicitor's office for the Fourteenth Circuit, or the Attorney General's Office of the State of South Carolina? If so please stand. All right, yes, sir. Juror number.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 530.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And the reason you're standing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My brother works for Colleton County Sheriff's Department.
JUDGE NEWMAN: He's a current employee?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what type work does he do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Well, he's a deputy.
JUDGE NEWMAN: A deputy. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 609. My brother's also a deputy for the Colleton County Sheriff's Department.
JUDGE NEWMAN: For the?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Colleton County Sheriff's Department.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Colleton County Sheriff's Department. All right. Thank you. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585. My husband's uncle also works for the sheriff's department.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Your husband's uncle. The same uncle or another uncle?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Different uncle.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. And, and ma'am, would that fact affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It would affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any objection to this juror being excused?
MR. GRIFFIN: Your Honor, we would like to have further inquiry.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, we will speak further with you, ma'am. Are you or any member of your immediate family or significant other employed with or have ever been employed with the law firm of Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, Eltzroth, Detrick or the Parker Law Group? Ever been employed by or represented by the law firm or law group? If so, please stand. All right, yes, ma'am, 585, and tell me about it.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My husband's uncle is a lawyer at PMPE.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 601. My company installed the HVAC system at the Peters office here in Walterboro.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, and would that impact, affect your ability to be fair and impartial as a juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Would not.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. If you have ever attended any functions, any events, parties, hunts, giveaways, raffles, gatherings, or any related activity hosted by the law firm Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, Eltzroth, Detrick or Alex Murdaugh or any member of his family, if so please stand. All right, and --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 668.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 668?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 8.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, and the basis for your standing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I was in law enforcement for twenty-one years and over that twenty-one years, many times we did a lot of socializing.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583. I went to a Christmas party they had one year for the office. I was dating a girl that worked there.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Anyone else?
(No one stood.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you have a personal, professional relationship with Mr. Murdaugh or his family, if so please stand. If you have a personal or professional relationship with him now or previously. No one is standing. Ladies and gentlemen, do you have any religious belief or related or other belief that would prevent you from being a fair and impartial juror in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant? Please stand if you're prevented by any religious or other type beliefs of being a fair and impartial juror. No one is standing. Ladies and gentlemen, there is a long list of witnesses that I have to call out and/or announce, and at the end of the process, I will need to know if know any of these potential witnesses, if you have any business, personal, or any other acquaintance or relationship with them. And if any of the witnesses are here, I'd like for you to stand. Daniel Greene from the Colleton County Sheriff's Office. Chad McDowell from the Colleton County Sheriff's Office.
William Cody Pruitt, sheriff's office. Tinish Bryson Smith, Hampton County dispatcher. Angela Stallings, Colleton County dispatcher. Dathan Varnadoe with the sheriff's office. With fire and rescue, Charlie Jones. Barry McRoy. Laura Rutland with the sheriff's office. From SLED, Melinda Worley. Thomas Darnell. Rachel Nguyen. Paul Greer. Madison Willis. Julia Begeman. Olivia Cartwright. Rachel Noelle Johnson. Christine Dadabo. Norris Laffitte. From SLED, Jeff Croft. Katie McCallister. Claude C.B. Rowe. Roger Dale Davis. Mushelle Shelley Smith. From SLED, Christian Moore and Jennifer Nates. Belinda Rast. MaeLynn Haynes. Barbara Mixon. From SLED, Sara Zapata. Kukila KiKi Wallace. Megan Fletcher. Britt Dove from SLED. From the US Secret Service, Jonathan VanHouten. From the Charleston County Sheriff's Office, Paul McManigle. From SLED, Rebecca Gregg. Bobby Bancroft. Brian Dudak (sic). Todd Schenk. Dylan Hightower from the Fourteenth Circuit Solicitor's Office.
Tom Bevel. John Bedingfield. Nathan Tuten. Nolen Tuten. Willis Chapman. Marian Proctor. Chris Wilson, attorney. Attorney Lee Cope. Attorney Mark Tinsley. Carson Burney from the Attorney General's Office. Michael Gunn. Johnny Parker, attorney. Jan Malinowski. Carey Sauls. Eric Harriott. Ryan Kelly from SLED. From Hampton County EMS and formerly of EMS, Andrew Farmer, Charles Long. Curtis Eddie Smith. Attorney Mark Ball. Attorney Ronnie Crosby. Attorney Danny Henderson. Matt Wright from SLED. Custodian of records from Savannah Memorial Hospital. Registered nurse from there at Savannah Memorial, Jessica Dunivan. From SLED, Tommy Robertson. Joshua Duerkp, D-u-e-r-k-p. Lynn Black. Kenneth Martin, BGA. Sydney Freeman. Hunter Wilson. Bailey Wilson. Anthony Russell from the sheriff's office. Lynn Black from SLED. Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson. Kenny Hughes. Rogan Gibson. Will Loving. Bart Proctor. Randy Murdaugh, attorney. Jeannie Seckinger. Annette Griswold.
From SLED, Paul Rudofski. Alfred Johnson from JLA Investigations. David Grubbs from the Attorney General's Office. Demi Harvin (sic) from the Forensic Science Network. Kenny Kinsey from the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Department. From SLED, Dave Owens. Charles Ghent. Ryan Neill. Courtney Adams. Jomar Albayalde. Oswaldo Toledo from the Attorney General's Office. Jason Chapman from the sheriff's office. Greg Cook. Alice Hazel, CPA. Mitchell Altman. Mark Altman, IT, PSB. Steven Bechtold from SLED. Attorney Eric Bland. Matt Brown from SLED. Frank Chapman. Charles Chapman. Dalila Cirencione, Cirencione from SLED. Timothy Collier, Sr., from SLED. John Conley from Highway Patrol. Tyrone Corbin from Varnville Fire Department. Keith Crosby from the sheriff's office. Gary Davis. MaryAnn Dempsey. Richard Dixon. Morgan Doughty. From the sheriff's office, Richard Haley. Nancy Drawdy. David Drawdy, coroner, deputy coroner. Donna Eason. Ashlynn Gantt.
Haley Godley from SLED. Virginia Hadwin. Jamie Hall from SLED. Scott Harriott. Richard Harvey from the sheriff's office. Laura Hash from SLED. Bailey Haley -- Bailey Haynes from SLED. Michael Hazel. William Headden. Adrienne Hefney from SLED. Gray Laffitte Henderson. Kendrell Henderson from the Hampton County Sheriff's Office. Marcus Heyward from SLED. Guerry Buddy Hill from the sheriff's office. Tommy Hines from SLED. Jonathan Holdbrook from SLED. Graham Holmes. Chandler Horney from SLED. Steven Hudson. Jennifer Huntun from SLED. William Hutto. Jessea James from the Highway Patrol. Kristi Jarrell. Hannah Jefferson from SLED. Blake Johnson from SLED. Bryan Jones from SLED. Pat Keegan from SLED. Tommy Kinard. Tonya King. Wayne Kirby, III, from SLED. Richard Kneece, Jr. Mark Labreche from the FBI. Henry Laffitte. Attorney Rebecca Laffitte. Paul LaRosa from SLED. Stacey Loadholt from the sheriff's office. David Long from the sheriff's office.
Elizabeth Laffitte Malinowski. Vera Martinez from SLED. Linda McAlhaney. William McElveen. Leigh McGuinness. Jaclynn McKay from SLED. Haley Moody. John Nelson from SLED. Haley Nelson from SLED. John Peters. William Polk from the sheriff's office. Captain Samuel Reighley from SLED. Kashyap Patel. Emily Reinhart from SLED. Dr. Ellen Riemer, MUSC pathologist. George Rioux from the sheriff's office. Major Tommy Robertson from SLED. Diane Rowe. Walter Salisbury. Anthony Sampson from SLED. Christopher Sarine from the rural -- from the fire and rescue. Michael Tommy Satterfield. Jerry Smith from SLED. Caleigh Smoak. James Tallon, III from SLED. Dana Temple from SLED. Courtney Thompson. Chelsea Townsend from DHEC. Phillip Turner, SLED. Dr. Luis Vega. Russell Vernali from SLED. Tammy Weber. Glen Welcker. Chad Westendorf. Samuel White from the Hampton County Sheriff's Office. Lawrence Wiggins, formerly of SLED. Matt Wild from the FBI. David Williams from SLED.
Matthew Williams from fire and rescue. Madison Willis from SLED. From Savannah Memorial Hospital, the following doctors and employees: William Bromberg and Caitlyn Bowman and Dr. Karie Jeter, Alice Dionne, Drs. Brandon Runyan, Brenna Casey, James Mitchell, Brittany Matthews. From SLED, Lesa Chapman. Bailey Morgan. Margaret Pauli. Haley Fiorucci. Jennifer Hunton, SLED. Lonnie Nettles from the sheriff's office. David Weaver from SLED. Al Jarvis from SLED. Christopher Anderson. Arthur Badger. Johnny Bush. James Drawdy. Angel Gary. Jordan Jinks. Damien Risher. Elease Taylor Mallory. Deon Martin. Thomas Moore. Pamela Pinckney. Natarsha Thomas. Buster Murdaugh. John Marvin Murdaugh. Liz Murdaugh. Kennedy Branstetter. Terry Branstetter. Marian Branstetter. Russell Laffitte. Jay McGill. Joseph Dingle. Scott O'Quinn. Charles Laffitte, II, and Laffitte, III. Harold Trey Mathisen, III. Meagan Kimbrell. Terry Haynes. Kyna Treherme. Attorney Amy Bower. Stephanie Stanley of SLED. Dr. Robin Cotton. Dr. Jonathan Eisenstat, pathologist. Crime scene analysis, Tim Palmbach. Mike Sutton. Kenneth Zerci, crime scene reconstruction. Jim Persinger, computer forensics. Chip Johnson, computer forensics. William Tobin, GSR firearms and ballistics. Micah Sturgis, Cellebrite digital evidence. Dr. Amy Broduer, Broduer, Broduer. Lynn Murdaugh Goettee. Dr. Donna Schwartz Maddox, psychologist. Eric Robinson. Kyla Robinson, and Phillip Strother.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, number 39.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What about it?
MR. WATERS: can I approach real quick? I don't know if that one was read.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Dwight Falkofske from the FBI. I think I read that already. If you know any of those people, you have any friends, relatives, or association with any of them, if so please stand and tell me about it. All right, yes, sir, the gentleman in the black, your juror number and tell me.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 555. Chad McDowell and Varnadoe, I detail vehicles.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Their what?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Vehicles.
JUDGE NEWMAN: They are?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Chad McDowell and Varnadoe.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I used to detail vehicles.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Okay, we're missing what you're saying about them. Say it a little louder.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I know both of them. I detail their vehicles.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Detail their vehicles, okay. Thank you very much. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Detective Buddy Hills, I used to hang out with one of the daughters when I was younger.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And juror number?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 651.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 601. I've installed HVAC equipment for eight on the people on there.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 522. I don't personally know Buster, but my children and nephews were friends.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 668. Through law enforcement I know several of the deputies, fire/rescue.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 609. I know Scott O'Quinn; he's my first cousin.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 650. I personally know Curtis Eddie Smith.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 644. I used to cook for most of them over at the jail house.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 583. I know Eddie Smith and I know a couple of the deputies.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 533. I know some of the deputies.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 589. A couple of deputies are customers. I used to shoot pictures for one of the deputies.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 528. I have sold a truck to Mr. Russell.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 564. I know numerous law enforcement guys and some of the other witnesses, customers.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 599. Mark Ball is very close to my husband and his family, and they all hunt together and do a lot of work for him on his property.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 612. Several deputies, and I know personally Curtis Eddie Smith.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 582. I'm related to all the Murdaughs up in that list, and Curtis Smith is actually my second cousin.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 530. Chad McDowell, he's my brother.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And should he be a witness, would that affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It will not.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 585. My husband's uncle. I've been dealing with him on that.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. Having asked all the questions that I've asked, if you know of any reason why you cannot serve as a fair and impartial juror or as why you should not be selected to serve, please stand. All right, tell me your juror number.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 599.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll ask you about it a few minutes, Number 599. Anyone else? Yes, sir, juror number?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 635.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 635. We'll ask you about it in a few minutes. All right, ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the list of questions and information we're seeking to get from you. There are a number of jurors we're going to talk with further.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, ladies and gentlemen, aside from the jurors I'm going to ask to remain, we're going to excuse you all to come back at 11 tomorrow morning. You are the fourth jury panel, and from all these panels condensed into one panel, we're going to get a list of prospective jurors from which to choose our jury in this case. Intending to choose eighteen jurors, twelve regular jurors and six alternates. The jurors that we need to stay with us are the following jurors. If you all will stand at this time: Number 515, Number 522, Number 585, Number 583, Number 668, Number 599, Number 635. Are there any additional jurors the State or the defense would like for further questioning?
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, I had marked 612.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 612.
MR. WATERS: And I have marked 571.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 571.
MR. WATERS: And 460, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 460.
MR. GRIFFIN: Number 530.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 530.
MR. GRIFFIN: And 609.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 609.
MR. GRIFFIN: Number 585.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 585 is standing now.
MR. GRIFFIN: Oh, I'm sorry, and, and, Your Honor, I'll put questionnaire of 495.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 495.
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes, sir. 522.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 522, who's already standing.
MR. GRIFFIN: Thank you. 599.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 599, who's already standing.
MR. GRIFFIN: Great. I apologize. 601.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 601, 601. Who's 601? All right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And, Your Honor, there are -- there's one cut off at the top. Can't read the name of this person.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, ladies and gentlemen, except for the jurors whose names I've called -- Do you have another?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir. We have 582 and 654, please, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 654.
MR. WATERS: And 582.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 654, all right, and 6?
MR. WATERS: And 582.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And 582. 582. All right, I need you all to remain. All the other jurors are to return at 11 a.m. tomorrow morning. So, you all are excused until 11 a.m. tomorrow morning. Please be sure to be here at 11 a.m. tomorrow morning.
(Part of the jury panel exited the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay, we're going to have the -- each juror come back individually as the clerk calls your names, and we'll otherwise be in recess as we address these jurors.
(At this time, individual voir dire was conducted with the following jurors outside the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 515.
COURT BAILIFF: 515.
(Juror Number 515 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir. How are you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm doing good.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, Juror Number 515. Did you indicate you've developed an opinion concerning guilty or not guilty? Is that what you said?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. That's why we had you come back, explore whether or not you could set aside that opinion, decide the case based on what is presented in court as to what you already --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I can't be biased, Judge. I can't, I can't, I can't set there and say that I could police -- I'd let the man go.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, you -- say again.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I couldn't believe he's not guilty.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You have decided in your mind he is guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Questions by defense or the State?
MR. WATERS: Just very quickly, and I understand your, your point. Obviously, this case has had a lot of publicity, and, you know, one of the things that jurors are asked to do is to put aside all that publicity and --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I can't do that.
MR. WATERS: Can't do that? That's fair. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Objection to him being excused?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, sir.
MR. WATERS: None from the State, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. You are excused.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 522.
(Juror Number 522 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hi, there.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hi.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, I think you've indicated that you had formed an opinion as to guilt or innocence, and I think I asked the question can you set aside that opinion and decide it based upon what's presented in court.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes. I, I did -- if I have to be honest, I did have an opinion.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, you have to be. You have to be honest.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I have to be honest. I did sort of form an opinion last year. However, I know in the media that you can't really take everything that you hear, and a lot of rumors are there. So, I understand that, and that's why I feel like I could be fair with only the facts.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Says the State?
MR. WATERS: Ma'am, very quickly, obviously there's been a lot of publicity out there and like you just said, this case is kind of different in that regard, but jurors have to put everything aside and just base it on the -- and what's in the courtroom. You feel that you can do that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I think so, yes, I can.
MR. WATERS: And you've got to be sure about that.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I know I can.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and then the second thing you mentioned is, is that your children know Buster.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
MR. WATERS: I just want to be -- you know, find out if that would be a problem, if that would potentially cause you issues --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It --
MR. WATERS: -- if you were having to address this case.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, it wouldn't be an issue.
MR. WATERS: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: But I just wanted --
MR. WATERS: Sure.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Because I figured you needed all the information.
MR. WATERS: All right. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just a couple questions. So, if you were seated on this jury --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- you would be able to, as you sat on the jury, presume he's not guilty, presume that he would be acquitted. That would be your presumption going into the case.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, until, until evidence proved otherwise. Going into it, you're innocent until proven guilty.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that your questionnaire you pulled out?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You said: I heard that he was in financial trouble. What did you know? What did you know?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: That he was embezzling or something and, you know, like you say, it's probably hearsay, but he was estranged from his wife and had gone out that day to kill her and Buster was out -- I mean, not Buster. Paul was out in the dog pen feeding the dog that he was keeping, and he killed him, too, is what I've heard.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know whether that's -- I mean, do you assume that's true? Are you going to walk in there assuming we have to disapprove those, those -- like, for instance, you indicated just now that they were estranged. Would we have to prove to you that they were not estranged?
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, I think we're starting to stake out this juror a little bit. I think the questions are what we've asked as if --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, Your Honor.
MR. WATERS: -- you know, you've heard things and then whether or not you can put them aside.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: She, she obviously has a very detailed knowledge of so-called facts. We know they're not facts. But I guess what I'm trying to figure out is will you -- does he have to disapprove this?
MR. WATERS: I don't --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. I would listen to the facts because I know that a lot of what we hear are rumors, and I don't know that any of that's true.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: That's just what I've heard.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It says, you know, what did you hear, so I put it down. I'm sorry. I know it's a lot, but.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, no. It is good. Thank you for being so honest.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm just being honest.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We don't have any objection to her.
MR. WATERS: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. We need you back tomorrow at 11.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 585.
(Juror Number 585 entered the room.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hi.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, ma'am. Come on in.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hi.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, in answering a number of your questions, Number 585, you said your uncle is a lawyer? Was a lawyer?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My husband's --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Your husband's --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- uncle.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay, was a lawyer?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Is a lawyer. He has started his own practice since he left PMPE.
JUDGE NEWMAN: When did he leave?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I think it was last year.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How long did he work there?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. I'm not sure.
JUDGE NEWMAN: A long time?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm not sure.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How old is he?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Fifties, he was in his fifties. He was in the law firm a long time.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And regarding whether or not you formed an opinion about guilt or innocence, did you stand on that the question?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I did, uh-huh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what did you say?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I said that I had formed an opinion, but I could be impartial and give this defendant a trial and form an opinion based on that.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
MR. WATERS: Hey, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Hey.
MR. WATERS: Creighton Waters. So, obviously this case has had a lot of publicity and, you know, it's, it's kind of unusual in that regard. And, of course, as the judge has instructed you, you know, jurors have to put all that out of their minds, but -- whatever they may have heard and be able to judge it just on what's in the courtroom. Do you feel like you could do that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm going to change my answer to no.
MR. WATERS: No? You can't do it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No.
JUDGE NEWMAN: She says she can't do what?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: She can't -- go ahead. I'm sorry.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I can't do that. I change my answer.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You can't do what?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Listen to the trial in the courtroom and keep all other information out.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You said cannot do it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, you would decide the case based on what you know or believe coming into the courtroom, coming into the case?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You've already decided?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you're going to stick to what you've already decided?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes. Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we ask that she be excused.
MR. GRIFFIN: Your Honor, I think she also -- her husband's related to a deputy also, and I think she indicated that she'd have a hard time being fair if he was involved in the case.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Says the State?
MR. WATERS: All right. Thank you very much, ma'am.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thanks. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. You will be excused.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you very much.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Okay. Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
COURT BAILIFF: Right through there, sir.
(Juror Number 583 entered the room.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How you doing? Hey.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Come right in there. Stand in front of the camera. No, not the camera but the --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How are you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: All right, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Tell me what kind of answers you gave out there about being related.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. I was always told that we were related. My grandma used to tell us and my dad, but they both passed. I couldn't tell you how, but they always told us we were, you know, blood related.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What's your last name?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Murdaugh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How long have you lived in this county?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: All my life, yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Have you formed an opinion as to whether he's guilty or not guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Kind of, yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What do you mean by that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I've seen documentaries. I've seen what I've -- you know, kind of --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Follow everything pretty closely?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Pretty much, yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Talked to a lot of people about it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Everybody talks about it. They find out my last name, everybody -- you know how it goes. The first thing they ask, you kin? You know him? Well, you know, down the line.
JUDGE NEWMAN: State?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How you?
MR. WATERS: I'm good. I'm good. So, obviously this case has had a lot of publicity --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Right.
MR. WATERS: -- from this community, which kind of makes it a lot different. You know, what jurors have to do is kind of put all that out of their minds.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
MR. WATERS: And, and try to be fair and impartial. Is that something you think you can do? I know you kind of seem like you're going one way and then the other way. So --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I mean, it's family. You know, they -- you know how it goes. I'm just --
MR. WATERS: So, that family part is --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Is kind of hard, yes.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and you think that might interfere with your ability to --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It may.
MR. WATERS: -- just be right down the middle?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I mean, you know, you know, family.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Okay. So, you could -- you think that would interfere with your ability to --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. Maybe. Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, no objection to excusing him, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you, sir. You'll be excused.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Number 668.
(Juror number 668 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir, Number 668.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How are you doing, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Why did you want to come talk to us?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I was, I was chief of police of the City of Walterboro, like, nine -- I was with Berkeley twenty-one years. I didn't want to say nothing in front of all them cameras because -- but I thought --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, the cameras weren't on.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: But they were out there, though. Take a chance.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: But -- and then after I was sitting there thinking, one of the -- probably not in this particular case here, but one of the codefendants, Mr. Smith, Curtis Smith.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Bought a vehicle from him, oh, about eight years ago. So, I just thought all that mattered or not.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Title was good and all that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: At that time, yes, sir, but that won't happen anymore.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, you don't think you should be on the jury?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I think there might be something later, you know, because I talked to several of the deputies when this first happened, and from my experience with investigations and stuff, I gave them some ideas and stuff.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You gave them ideas on how to investigate or what --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes. Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- to look into and do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. You don't think you should be on the jury?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir. No, sir, no. I don't mind serving on any jury, but not this particular.
JUDGE NEWMAN: This one?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Did you work with the Murdaughs pretty closely when you were --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Not necessarily. Like I said, was the chief, so several functions I went to with them. And in my earlier days in law enforcement, Mr. Buster Murdaugh, used work close with him, being the solicitor here, and I was in investigations. So, going back and forth from Walterboro to Hampton, taking things and --
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Okay. Says the State?
MR. WATERS: Hey. How you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How you doing?
MR. WATERS: Hey. So, you said you helped on the investigation a little bit or just kind of --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, no, no. Not helped, not this particular case.
MR. WATERS: Uh-huh.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Gave them ideas on what to look for and stuff like that.
MR. WATERS: I got it. Obviously, this case is different from probably any case that this state has ever experienced, and you being in law enforcement for a long time know that you just have to try to put aside everything you know and may have heard from the outside and to be fair and impartial, but you don't think that's anything you can, you can do in this --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I've been doing --
MR. WATERS: -- particular case?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- this twenty-one years. I look at things totally different than most people.
MR. WATERS: Right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: From my experience, you know.
MR. WATERS: Sure.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I look at people differently, you know? Like, for example, if I go to the restroom -- like, it's kind of hard for me standing here right now because, you know, I'm surrounded, you know.
MR. WATERS: I hear you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: And just found out last month got PTSD from military stuff and police stuff. And, you know, so, I mean, once my mind is, like, its made up, it's made up like a tunnel.
MR. WATERS: I gotcha.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: So, if I'm dealing with something, you're guilty.
MR. WATERS: Uh-huh.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Right or wrong, you're guilty.
MR. WATERS: I gotcha. All right. Thanks. Appreciate it.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any questions?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I mean, what you've just indicated is that your, your sort of default position is guilty.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Pretty much.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, and so --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I might not -- I might be wrong. That's me.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you don't think you ought to be on this jury.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir. No, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Your Honor, we, we'd ask that he be excused.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You're the lead singer or backup or?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I was named after Otis Redding. That's it.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You have one of those, one of those voices.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Kind of -- not nervous but, you know, it's uncomfortable, like I say.
JUDGE NEWMAN: They're all right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm pretty -- as long as you're here, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And our officer is here for protection.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I don't recognize him.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, we're going to excuse you. We're not going to tie you up. Thank you for coming.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, sir.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 599.
(Juror number 599 entered the room.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hi.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hello, Number 5-90 --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 9.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 99, all right. Why did you come back here?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Mallory Beach was my second cousin; her daddy's my first cousin. She's the one killed in the boat accident with Paul. I don't -- I would like to say I know I'd be fair about it. I don't know that I would. I've known about this long before this trial was going to take place because of what happened with Paul.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: And I was told that I needed to make everybody aware of that. That's why.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Right. Right. All right, the State?
MR. WATERS: Ms. Nettles, how are you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm good.
MR. WATERS: Obviously, this, this case has a lot of connections in the community.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, yeah.
MR. WATERS: A lot of publicity and, of course, what the judge will instruct you were you to serve and what the juror's obligation is to put all that aside and --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
MR. WATERS: -- judge it fairly on what's in the courtroom. Is that something you think you can do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I don't know. I mean, I guess with my family, because I am a Beach family, and it was just a lot before all this happened. I have made a point of avoiding all the news and stuff on it because we'd done went through enough with it, but I just -- I don't know. I don't how to answer that --
MR. WATERS: Sure.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- any other way truthfully.
MR. WATERS: Absolutely, and I know it's tough, and I appreciate your answers. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, I don't have any further questions, but I think this young lady has been very honest, and she should be excused.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any objection?
MR. WATERS: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you, ma'am.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you, ma'am.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You'll be excused.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 635.
(Break in proceedings.)
COURT BAILIFF: No one is answering to 635.
JUDGE NEWMAN: The guy with the purple jacket.
COURT BAILIFF: Purple jacket, okay.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Purple shirt.
(Break In proceedings.)
COURT BAILIFF: There's no one answering that description.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll skip to the next one, 612.
COURT BAILIFF: 612.
(Juror Number 612 entered the room.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hi.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay, come on in, ma'am, Number 612.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. What kind of answer did you give us that --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I --
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- caused you to come back here?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I know Curtis Lee Eddie Smith personally, yeah.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Curtis Smith?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And do you think that would affect your ability to be fair and impartial?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Should he testify in this case, would that prevent you from being a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Is that the only --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Other than Steven represented my husband and my stepfather.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Steven?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah, his brother, I guess, is --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Steven Murdaugh?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Represented your?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Husband and my stepfather.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And how long ago was that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Roughly about two years.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And do you know Alex Murdaugh?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. It was Steven.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I said do you know him, Alex Murdaugh?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. I just know of him.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. All right. By the State?
MR. WATERS: Yes, ma'am, Ms. O'Quinn, how are you doing today?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Doing good.
MR. WATERS: Obviously, this case had had a lot of publicity and there's a lot of connections in the community and, and I know it's kind of different than any other cases in that regard. And, of course, what a juror has to do is put all of that out of their minds and just base their decision on the evidence. Is that something you feel comfortable you can do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And of course I have to ask. With that relationship or your husband being represented by a Murdaugh, is that going to affect you in any way, or do you think you're going to be able to put that out of your mind as well?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm fine.
MR. WATERS: Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I've just got -- I've got a couple of questions, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And I'm Dick Harpootlian, along with others who represent Mr. Murdaugh. If Mr. Smith testified, you say your relationship with him, he's a friend?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: He is my husband's friend.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Has he been to your home?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. We have been to his.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You've been to his home?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would, would you necessarily believe or disbelieve his testimony based on your relationship or your husband's relationship with him?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You'd be fine?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'd be fine.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and in terms of the representation by Steven Murdaugh, that would -- I mean, was there anything about that that was off putting to you? Did they -- did you get the result y'all wanted, not get the result?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: They got the results they wanted.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm still impartial. That's not doing me --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, no, no.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just we've got to ask.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, no problem.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: You're welcome.
MR. WATERS: No objection.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, we'll see you tomorrow at 11.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Normally we have a clerk in here taking notes on a strike sheet. We need a clerk.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Ms. Fox is taking notes.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 571.
COURT BAILIFF: 571.
(Break in proceedings.)
(Juror Number 571 entered the room.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How you doing, Your Honor?
(Break in proceedings.)
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How you doing, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hey, there.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm 571. My name is -- may I give you my name? My name is Ashley Morris.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I stay in -- off of Mount Carmel Road in Walterboro, South Carolina.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay, and you stood up a few times.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm sorry?
JUDGE NEWMAN: You stood up a few times to say -- what did you stand up about?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: The first time I stood up was about my record. I had two misdemeanors back in 2013 and 2016. One was a malicious damage to personal property, which I paid the fine for. It's been, I guess, dismissed now. And 2016 I did time served, did thirty days in county.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. What are you doing now?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm a machine operator, about to become a welder. I work for a manufacturer up here in Walterboro. I'm common-law married. My husband, he also works as a tack welder and a painter. I've worked for manufacturing as well. I have three kids, two in which I do not have care of due to litigation matters. I have a -- but the third one I do have care of, and she's a gaseous cases baby. My husband and I have both spoke about if he -- if he could be able to take care of her while I'm on jury duty -- jury duty, and it was verbally agreed.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How old are your children?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My oldest is eight, my youngest is six, and my youngest one just turned three months old today.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Three months old?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, when I said that do you want to be exempted based on having children under seven, you did not want to be exempted?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I did not want to be exempted, no, sir, because I've gotten a verbal agreement from my youngest's father to watch after the kids.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay, and did you stand up about anything else?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir, not that I can recall.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. State?
MR. WATERS: Hey. How are you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm good. How are you?
MR. WATERS: I'm doing well. Doing well. Obviously, this case has had a lot of attention and a lot of publicity. You may not have known any of that, but obviously the obligation of the juror is to put anything you've heard outside and put that out of your mind and just focus on what the evidence is in the courtroom. Do you feel that you can do that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Thank you very much.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you. So, am I --
MR. WATERS: He might have a question.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I get to ask you a couple of questions.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Okay.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I have to release you before you can go. I have to release you before you can go.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I didn't know.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You're here until he says go.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I'm sorry.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So -- and I'm Dick Harpootlian. I represent -- I'm one of Mr. Murdaugh's lawyers. Can you presume him innocent? Can you presume him not guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I cannot state that for -- if there's evidence involved --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. I'm talking about going into the courtroom.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I mean --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: If there's enough evidence, you know, if it's evidence involved that he's guilty, then, you know --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, but --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- I put all my personal matters to the side.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you presume, though, that he's not guilty right now? Presume it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah, I presume it, I guess. I guess that's a correct answer. I've never done jury duty before, so this is a --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, that, that judge --
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, I think the juror --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Excuse me one second. That judge is going --
MR. WATERS: Well, I'm not objecting to these questions. I think these are questions of law. I think is fair to ask her if she can be fair and impartial, and after that is follow the law of the judge.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, I think she -- we can --
MR. WATERS: I think that's a fair question.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, with all due respect, if you instruct her that you've got to look at Alex Murdaugh and presume he has not committed the crime, can she do that. Right?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I mean, if there's, if there's enough evidence stating that he hasn't done it, then yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You'd require him to prove he hasn't done it? You would? Even if the judge told you you could not do that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I gue -- I -- no. Well, if it was by the judge's honor, then no. But, like, I said, it's all based off of the evidence. That's --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, but, but -- or the lack of evidence. If they don't prove him guilty --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- beyond a reasonable doubt, you would you acquit him. Do you understand that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You don't require him to prove himself innocent, right?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I mean, if it's -- if it's lack of evidence that he's, I guess -- I guess innocent -- I'm not understanding.
MR. MEADORS: Your Honor, with all due respect, I think she's --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, excuse me. Excuse me one second. One person can object, not two.
MR. MEADORS: That hasn't been established in here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. MEADORS: He hasn't said that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor.
MR. MEADORS: His Honor will decide that, not you, Dick.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And I think that --
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. So, ma'am, it's quite obvious you, you are -- haven't had any experiences as a juror. How far did you go in school?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I graduated high school.
JUDGE NEWMAN: From high school?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what kind of work experience do you have?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I've always worked as a cashier or customer service representatives.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: But this manufacturing, this is my very first job.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we have no objection. We have no objection to her.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. There's no objection to her?
MR. WATERS: No objection. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll see you tomorrow at?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 11 o'clock.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 11 o'clock. All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 460.
COURT BAILIFF: Which one?
JUDGE NEWMAN: 460.
COURT BAILIFF: 460.
(Juror Number 460 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hello, 460. How are you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: All right.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Is this where the pizza is?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Which answers did you give that caused you to come back here?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: What answers did I give that caused me to come back here? I don't know.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Did you comment on whether or not you thought you'd made up your mind?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I couldn't hear you, the one, it was, like, if you could or could not.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yeah. You were confused as to the question?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. I didn't hear the preliminary word.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: People that had already stood up, and when you said I can or cannot, I didn't hear the can or cannot part.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: But that wasn't relevant to myself on that one.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Right. So, on the part of whether you have ever been convicted of a crime, did you have a grand larceny background? Did you have a grand larceny charge?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, no. I was charged with that. Got a driving without a license.
JUDGE NEWMAN: That was in -- what state was that in?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: New York. Yeah, they were -- that's from New York State police, but it was dropped --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Poughkeepsie.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- dropped down to driving without a license.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. Poughkeepsie?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes. Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, and so do you believe that you could listen to the evidence and be a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, absolutely.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: In fact, years of watching Forensic Files and whatnot, it give you a new insight in how to look at things from an outside perspective without jumping the gun one way or the other.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Have you looked at, followed any TV in this case?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. No. My mother-in-law had Alzheimer's. My wife at the same time, like, three and a half years ago -- well, three years in December, she had one knee fail. Got it replaced. Then it was infected. She's still waiting for the other knee, but she's not nutritionally sound enough for it. So, the last three and a half years have been taking care of my mother-in-law and my wife.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: And working 10 hour days. It's an hour, hour and a half to work each way.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you're available to serve on this jury?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Absolutely, yeah. Have lots of vacation. Rick Hendrix is really fair.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. From the State?
MR. WATERS: Just a couple of questions. Obviously, you say -- there's been a lot of publicity about this case, but you haven't been privy to much of it or anything?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. I don't really -- you know, pay attention to the weather.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Right. Gotcha and --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: With taking care of your mother-in-law with Alzheimer's, it's full-time by itself and the wife down, too. Like I said, spent at least the last three and a half years, a little bit more for her knees, but the mother-in-law, too, but it was full-time for three and a half years and part-time before that, but then you're working full-time, too. Just the weather. That's pretty much it.
MR. WATERS: You mentioned you'd watched some TV shows like Forensic Files and that sort of thing.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah.
MR. WATERS: And then, of course, a juror has to put out anything that's on a TV show and publicity and all the rest of it and just concentrate on the evidence that's in the courtroom.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Right. The facts, the facts on hand.
MR. WATERS: Right, right, and is that something you feel comfortable you can do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Absolutely. Yes.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll need you back at 11 tomorrow morning.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Good.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
MR. WATERS: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 530.
(Juror Number 530 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, Mr. 530, come right in right here. All right, I think you said your brother worked at the sheriff's office?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And what's his name?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Chad McDowell.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Is he listed as one of the witnesses?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: He is.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And have you talked with him about the case?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Not in any detail. So, he was one of the responders and the night that that happened, he came home as I was leaving to go to work, and I heard that there was a murder, but that was the extent of the detail that he had talked about it.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Have you formed an opinion as to guilt or innocence?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do you believe you can be a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I do.
JUDGE NEWMAN: By the State?
MR. WATERS: The State believes he's answered the questions as he needs to and can be a fair and impartial juror. Thank you very much.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that Mr. Murdaugh believes he can be a fair and impartial juror.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: All right. Thank you very much.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll see you tomorrow at 11.
MR. WATERS: Appreciate it.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 609.
(Juror Number 609 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir, number 609, come right in.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Okay.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You stood up on a few questions. You remember what they were?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm just related to a member of Colleton County law enforcement, so sheriff. My brother's a mechanic and a reserve deputy. My first cousin, you called his name, Scott O'Quinn, he works for the fire department.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You believe any of those relationships would affect your ability --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- to be a fair and impartial juror? Do you know of any reason you can't serve?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: State?
MR. WATERS: I believe the juror has answered that he can be fair and impartial in this trial. So, he is acceptable to the State.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: On behalf of Mr. Murdaugh, we believe he can be fair and impartial.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We need you back at 11 tomorrow.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Okay. Thank you, sir.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Gentlemen.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 585.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, 585 is gone. Give me another one.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 495.
(Break in proceedings.)
(Juror Number 495 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, Mr. 495.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Hey. How are you?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Come stand right here for us. Have you made up your mind as to whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Well, yesterday I did, and then I had some -- I had some friends talk about it just out of the blue, and then it was kind of -- they kind of convinced me to he's not guilty. So, I think they like to make fun. I'm pretty easily swayed.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, they convinced you what?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: That he wasn't guilty with -- I mean, logically how some things worked in favor of others, and I think maybe. So, I kind of -- and --
JUDGE NEWMAN: You've gone back and forth --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- in the last two days?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. Well, I'm -- they say I'm easily swayed.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, how about before the last two days?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I, well, I was, like, he was found guilty.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do you believe that you can decide the case based on what's presented in court and not based on what your friends told you and all that, or is your mind made up?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I think I -- I think can -- I have a strong case with myself about it, but I'm not entirely sure.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. The State?
MR. WATERS: Mr. Lynch, a couple things. You said that you talked to your friends yesterday or a couple of days ago?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yesterday.
MR. WATERS: So, after you had appeared here for jury --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah, after I had already been here.
MR. WATERS: You had some discussions with them?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Well, they just brought it up because they live out of state, and so they were -- you know, this is kind of all over the -- America right now.
MR. WATERS: It is.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: They just bring it up.
MR. WATERS: Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: About it and they just start talking about why, why he didn't -- why he isn't the one who did it, and I was, like, okay.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you have a position?
MR. WATERS: Would you mind stepping out for a moment? Well, Judge, is it okay if he steps out?
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
MR. WATERS: All right.
(The juror exited the room.)
MR. WATERS: Well, he wrote he did it on the form, and now he says, well, based on his friends he didn't. I'm also concerned that he, you know, talked with people about it yesterday even though, you know, he was instructed not to.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Not to.
MR. WATERS: I think that he's, he's -- we'd say we'd move to strike for cause.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And, and, Your Honor I think the fact he's talking to somebody about it yesterday indicates when you instructed him not to talk to anybody --
MR. WATERS: That's what I mean.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- once he's sworn in, yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Of course, actually, we didn't talk to this panel yesterday.
MR. WATERS: Well. Fair.
JUDGE NEWMAN: We postponed them until today.
MR. WATERS: That's fair.
JUDGE NEWMAN: He wasn't given that -- I didn't qualify them.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, but still. Yeah. So, we, we'd agree with the State and excuse him, please. He's sort of wishy-washy.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Was that on the questionnaire at all?
MR. GRIFFIN: No, sir. No, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, he was convinced he was guilty. Now he's convinced he's not guilty. I just -- I mean, that's dangerous for both of us.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any objection to the -- by the State that he be excused?
MR. WATERS: Yeah. We, we would move for cause, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We'll, we'll join in that.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Bring him back in.
(Juror Number 495 reentered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, yes, sir. Sounds like you're in a tough spot. When you talk to one person, you're convinced one way.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And then you go back. We're not going to put you through it. We're going to let you go.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
MR. WATERS: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I thank you for your time.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 599. Just a moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Just got through. 601.
COURT BAILIFF: 601.
(Juror Number 601 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir. You stood up on a few questions. Do you recall what they were?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. I've -- we sold HVAC equipment at the Peters, Parker law firm in town, and I installed HVAC equipment for at least eight of the people that got called on that list.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And have you formed an opinion as to guilt or innocence of the defendant?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Not firmly, I would say.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What kind of opinion have you formed? If it's not firm, how would you rate it, categorize it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I was -- I think he did it. I don't see any other options of who could have done it. I grew up out in Sniders and there's not a lot of murderers running around there that are -- far as I'm concerned.
JUDGE NEWMAN: State?
MR. WATERS: Obviously, there's been a lot of publicity about this case. You know, this is a relatively small community, as you were just describing, but the obligation of a juror is and the oath you would take as a juror is to put all of that out of your mind and base that -- any decision you made solely on the evidence that was in the court. And I know a few times you said that that's something you felt like you could do. So, is that something you still feel like you can do, obey your oath to just look at the evidence in the courtroom and base your decision just on that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, I think I could.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You filled out a questionnaire in which you said that you had heard that his son and he were being sued for the boating accident when Mallory Beach was killed. Do you know the Beach family?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir, I do not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, where did you learn that from?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: My wife taught at Wade Hampton High School.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Uh-huh.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: From 2019 till 2022, and she did not teach any of those kids involved in that boat wreck, but some of her coworkers did, and one of her very good friends taught Mallory Beach. So, she heard things through hearsay at work.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And did your wife communicate those to you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, you've had more detailed knowledge about the Mallory Beach boating accident than most folks.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I would say so, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the fact that Paul and Alex, you point out, were both being sued over that, have you formed an opinion about that, that Paul had participated in killing the Mallory Beach girl?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: That he was driving the boat?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. I have, yes. Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you believe that now?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. I believe that he was driving the boat when that wreck happened.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you put that out of your mind for this trial in terms of viewing what happened surrounding this?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes. I don't see how that would --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- that would deal with this.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you also put: The bodies were found by the dog kennel. They were shot with a shotgun and rifle. Alex Murdaugh was under scrutiny for stealing from clients.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I read that in the Post and Courier.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. I guess what I'm saying is you a moment ago said you grew up in this kind of environment, like down near Moselle, and you just don't believe that murderers are running around. That's why you assumed Alex did it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I don't know who else would be involved.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would you require him to prove that somebody else did it?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we'd move --
MR. WATERS: Can I ask another question? If the judge instructed you what the law was that you're supposed to follow and your oath as a juror, and that law says that the State has to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and you are to presume his innocence until we do that, and that is the law that the judge gives to you, will you honor your oath and obey that law and look at the case that way as a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I would have to see who else -- who did it.
MR. WATERS: Sure, and what, what that means is, is you start from ground floor.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
MR. WATERS: That he is presumed to be innocent, and then you listen to the State's evidence and then you listen to the defense evidence, if they decide to put up any. They don't have to, and then only after that, you decide whether or not the State has proved him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant does not have to prove anything, and so that's all the question is, is that if you can be honest -- or, excuse me, be a fair and impartial juror and obey that oath and follow the law as the judge gives it to you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I would like to think so.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, let me follow up on that. You would like to think so. But as you -- as you stand here today, you believe he did it.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and he just told you you'd have to, if you're sworn in as a juror, you would have to believe his innocence. That is, you would have to go into the trial believing he didn't do it.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you do that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Not really, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Your Honor, we'd move that he not be put --
MR. WATERS: Can I --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- through all that.
MR. WATERS: Can I follow up with one more question?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, I object. He's already said he couldn't do it.
MR. WATERS: I think I'm entitled to follow up on that latest line of questioning. May I proceed, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Let me, let me rephrase what it is because I think the accurate statement of the law is that you don't have to go in believing that he didn't do it. You just have to give him that presumption of innocence. Put everything else out of your mind, and only remove that presumption of innocence based on the evidence that's presented in the courtroom. So, again, put everything else out of your mind, start from ground zero, and then only convict him if the State proves him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's the law that the judge would give to you. Is that something you could do like any other juror has done in other courts?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I will see how I could -- I don't see how I could just forget everything that I've heard over the last -- since 2019 and realistically come in and say I will be completely impartial and I would start from zero. I, I don't -- I just don't see how -- I don't see how anybody could do it, to be honest with you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you for your answers. Your Honor, we move that he be excused.
MR. MEADORS: State?
MR. WATERS: I believe that the totality of his answers are that he can be fair. I think that he's just expressing a natural reluctance. As he just said, people, you know -- to do something that's very difficult to do, but he's been -- in the courtroom he repeatedly said he could be fair and when he was asked the direct questions here, he said he could be fair.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That is not -- I wouldn't -- I wouldn't characterize -- he said he's being honest, that he wouldn't be able to put that out of his mind.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I think you've pretty much made up your mind on this case, don't you think?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. I would say so.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I'm going to excuse him.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: All right.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You don't have to come back. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Take it easy.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 582. One more after this.
COURT BAILIFF: 582.
(Juror Number 582 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 582, how are you doing?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Good. How about you?
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. What kind of answers did you give out there that made us want to talk to you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Possibly that I was related to him.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh, yeah.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Who are you related to?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: The Murdaugh family and Eddie Smith.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You're related to both? Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm closer related to Eddie Smith than what I am the Murdaugh family.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Are you a Murdaugh or a Smith?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm a Murdaugh.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You're a Murdaugh. How closely related to Eddie Smith?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Eddie Smith is my grandfather's nephew.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And Murdaugh, Alex Murdaugh is your?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: They're more like seventh or eighth cousins. They down the line a good bit.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And being related to both of them, would that affect your ability to be a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Absolutely not.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, you could put all that aside and decide the case based on the evidence and the law?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. From the State?
MR. WATERS: Hey, Mr. Murdaugh. How are you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Good. How about you?
MR. WATERS: Good. I mean, that's obviously why we called you back. You've got the same last name. Just needed to verify that you -- obviously, this case has had a lot of publicity, and it's a small community, and any juror that gets selected just has an obligation to be fair and impartial, and base their his decisions only on the evidence in the courtroom. And that's something you feel that you're confident you can do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, if they're not guilty, you're not guilty. It's based on evidence.
MR. WATERS: Based on evidence.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Evidence has to prove it.
MR. WATERS: And that's the same thing with your relationship with Eddie Smith. The fact that he may or may not be a witness, that's not going to affect you in --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Absolutely not. I'm not really that close to Eddie.
MR. WATERS: All right. Thank you, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just want to follow up with one question, Mr. Murdaugh, Murdaugh. I'm sorry. I keep pronouncing it Murdaw. I understand.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It's probably pronounced as MUR-duck.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Mur-duck? I'll try to work on that. Alex has criticized my pronunciation a lot.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, what's the correct pronunciation?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: It's MUR-duck.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: MUR-duck?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: MUR-duck.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I don't think I've heard that before.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, and now I know Alex mispronounces it. So, Eddie Smith, if Eddie Smith were a witness in this case, the fact that you're related to him or -- have you spent a lot of time with him?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I haven't really talked to Eddie other than I saw him at AutoZone a few months back. But other than that, the last time I talked to him would be nine, ten years ago.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, the fact that -- if he were a witness, you wouldn't necessarily believe him over any other witness?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You wouldn't default to that.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Wouldn't default, no, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We don't have any objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You said a couple months ago you saw him?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Well, I worked at AutoZone part-time and he came in to buy parts. That's the last time I saw him.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How many months was that?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Let's see, I worked at AutoZone probably about 2019, 2018, something like that. It's been a while.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, a couple of years ago?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. It's been a while.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
MR. WATERS: Absolutely. He says he can be fair and impartial, so he's acceptable to the State.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And acceptable to Alex Murdaugh. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And we need you back at 11 tomorrow.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: 654.
(Juror Number 654 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Hey there. Come and take this hot seat -- hot spot right here. How are you doing, Number 654? All right, why do we want to talk to you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm not sure.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What kind of answers did you give that would cause us to want to ask you questions? Do you know?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Is it working for the military? Is it working for the military?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Oh, I don't know. I'm asking you. You don't know either? Did you say you could be fair and impartial? Can you be a fair and impartial juror?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh. Yes. Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, can we have just one moment?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. If you'll step outside one moment.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it.
(The juror exited the room.)
MR. WATERS: I think she showed up on the rap is having a pending federal charge for assaults, and obviously there's questions if she was -- you know, had been arrested or investigated. So, that was going to be the only question.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But it's pending. It's not a disqualifier.
MR. WATERS: Is not a disqualifier, but it is a -- that is a question that was on the questionnaire, and then there the --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Federal charge, not state, so she wasn't investigated by SLED. She was investigated by the feds.
MR. WATERS: Yeah, but, I mean, the general questionnaire had crime. You know what? I'm going to waive my own opinion.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is she out on bond?
MR. WATERS: I don't know. That's why I was going to have an inquiry.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Tell her to come back.
(Juror Number 654 reentered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do you have a case going on, a pending case?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Did you ever get some federal investigation or crimes, charges?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You have a clean --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- clean record?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And you work where?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Parris Island on the military base as a server and part-time Family Dollar.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You have how many children?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: No children. All right, and how old are you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm twenty-one.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Twenty-one, okay. Very good. Very busy and ready to serve?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. Any questions?
MR. WATERS: Hey, ma'am. How are you? I'm Creighton Waters. I'm with the State Attorney General's Office, and I think you repeatedly indicated you could be a fair and impartial juror, and so you're acceptable to the State. So, thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: You're welcome.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm Dick Harpootlian, and I represent Alex Murdaugh, and I want to say that we listened to you and watched you. We think you can be a fair juror, and Alex Murdaugh would like you to be on this jury panel.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How did you get such good eye contact?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Oh, I'm sorry. It must be a force of habit.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Oh. You just have to --
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Over the years. I like to look at people in the eyes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. Take care.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: See you tomorrow at 11.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: See you tomorrow.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that it?
JUDGE NEWMAN: 635 came back. Tell him to come on.
COURT BAILIFF: All right.
(Juror Number 635 entered the room.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, Number 6 what?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: 635.
JUDGE NEWMAN: 635. What happened to you? You left?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. I didn't realize that I was to, to stay. I thought I was just going to leave and come back tomorrow at 11.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I apologize, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. That's okay, and did you say you didn't have a car or a ride, or what's your situation?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I have a car.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Have a car, and you're available to serve?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: During the events of -- what I learned -- I have a wife and two kids and from what I've learned out there from him, I don't think I can forget something like that. I don't know if I would give a fair opinion to that.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Have you made up your mind as to whether he is guilty or not guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And if you were told that everyone is presumed to be not guilty, and the State must prove the person guilty, otherwise you have to find him not guilty, could you follow that, you think? Or, or have you just made up your mind?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I've made up my mind. I don't think I could forget something like that.
JUDGE NEWMAN: State?
MR. WATERS: Mr. Perez, how are you today? And I understand this is very difficult stuff to talk about and consider. And one of the things that jurors do when they take that oath is agree to put things that they've learned out of their mind, outside, and just base their decision solely on the evidence that's in the courtroom, and that includes kind of starting from ground zero and giving the defendant the benefit of the doubt, the benefit of the presumption of innocence, and then requiring the State to prove them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And I understand this is difficult, but is that something that you think you can do?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: (No response.)
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. Thank you. I understand this is hard. Thank you, sir. He may have some questions for you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do I need to have some questions?
MR. WATERS: I'm just asking if you want to have some questions.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Was that intimidating to you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. I'm just trying to grasp the gravity of the situation and the defendant's -- he's trying to find some way to see if -- how he could be innocent.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How he what? I'm sorry.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How he could be innocent from this, but.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you've made up your mind he's guilty?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yes, sir. Sorry.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to put that out of your mind and be a fair juror? I'm just asking. I'm not criticizing. Is that your attitude right now?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Yeah. I go to my -- I go to my wife and kids every day, and from this, I don't think I can look at them the same if he --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If he was acquitted, you could never look at your wife and children the same way?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: No. No. I'm saying that if I come here with that mentality.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm also a Christian. I do believe in fair play, but with my two kids and my wife.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
JUDGE NEWMAN: He has four lawyers. Would that matter?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm, I'm not in tone with the law whatsoever. I'm -- I know I'm fairly young and I don't really read the news that oftenly (sic). All I -- all I know is my feelings and how I view things --
JUDGE NEWMAN: How old are you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: -- currently.
JUDGE NEWMAN: How old are you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: How come?
JUDGE NEWMAN: How old are you?
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: I'm twenty-five.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. All right, anything else of this witness?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, I think obviously he wants to be --
MR. WATERS: Nothing from the State.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- excused.
MR. WATERS: Thank you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I think he wants to be excused.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you, sir. We're going to excuse you. You won't have to come back.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Good luck.
(End of voir dire with this juror.)
MR. GRIFFIN: For what it's worth, Judge, we view Dick as our father figure.
MR. GRIFFIN: And how he comes home at night and looks at us, we're not sure.
MR. WATERS: Is it intimidating?
MR. GRIFFIN: Very.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. Well, we're going out. The folks are still out there, the Clerk, clerks. Is the Clerk still out there?
COURT BAILIFF: I'm sorry, sir?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Is the Clerk, someone from the clerk's office still out there?
COURT BAILIFF: Yes, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll just reconvene in a moment.
MR. GRIFFIN: Thank you.
(All parties returned to the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, we now have a qualified panel of how many jurors, Madame Clerk?
COURT CLERK: 39.
JUDGE NEWMAN: The total number of jurors.
COURT CLERK: Oh, total. 123 or 124.
JUDGE NEWMAN: The jurors that we have reviewed -- And did you give her the updated tally which we just excused?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Ms. Fox, let's see it. What's, what's contained on this list?
MS. FOX: Oh. Sorry, Your Honor. The jurors that we just questioned back there. Those are the ones that have been excused.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Excused.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, and follow me, the State as well. Number 515 has been excused. 515 has been excused. 585 is excused. 583 is excused. 668 is excused. 599 is excused. 635 is excused. 495 is excused. 601 is excused. The others of that group that came back have been kept. So, is that correct from the State?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, we need to know how many qualified jurors we now have from the total of the four panels that we have qualified.
COURT CLERK: Yes. Yes, sir. 123, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: We have a total of 123 qualified jurors, and we would like the Clerk to randomly select eighty jurors for jury selection tomorrow morning at 11. Any questions by the State or the defense?
MR. WATERS: None from the State, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we don't have a problem with that. Can we get -- once she has randomly picked those eighty today, can we get that list so tonight when we're looking at how to exercise our strikes, we're focusing on the eighty, not the 120-something?
MR. WATERS: Certainly I would request the same thing if the Clerk can accommodate that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It would make it go quicker.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, you can -- defense counsel do not get strike sheets.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, sir, but we -- it would allow us to look at those eighty. We understand they'll be brought up randomly from the back. We understand that there's no strike sheet. But at least it would allow us to get a sense of who we want to strike and who we don't want to strike and allow us overnight to look at -- we've got all kinds of data on these good folks. So does the State, I assume.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. So, Madame Clerk, from the 123, you'll pull a list of eighty that you will give to defense counsel and to the State this afternoon. Then you will pull another strike sheet tomorrow morning, and the lawyers do not get the strike sheet. You can pull it today if you want to.
MR. WATERS: That's acceptable, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm not sure what the -- what a strike sheet is.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Strike sheet is in civil court. You get a strike sheet and you go one and this and that. In criminal court, you do not know what order the jurors will be selected. So the Court, there's an internal strike sheet for the Court.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh. Okay.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, according to the clerk personnel, it won't allow pulling eighty out of 120. They could give you the sheet of 123, and the first eighty on that sheet will be the first eighty we are concerned with.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: What time this afternoon can you have that?
COURT CLERK: We could do it now.
JUDGE NEWMAN: We're going to take lunch now.
COURT CLERK: Yeah.
JUDGE NEWMAN: But by 2:30, all right. Then if there are questions, we can address them this afternoon.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, anything else before we break for lunch?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Mr. Waters and I assume we come back, we'll deal with motions.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you have an order you'd like to go in?
JUDGE NEWMAN: No. I have no preference as to order.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, one of the motions that was filed yesterday was --
JUDGE NEWMAN: We'll take lunch, and we'll address all of that. You can talk among yourselves about order and all of that. It doesn't matter to me.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
MR. WATERS: Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: We'll be back at 2:00.
(A lunch break was taken.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Regarding the jury list, I'm told by the clerks that the CMS system will not allow them to create a list, a merged list of jurors, that they can only create one list and that is the strike sheet. Is that correct, Madame Clerk?
COURT CLERK: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, we know that you have 123 qualified jurors, and one juror called them and indicated that her mother was taken to the hospital and will have surgery tomorrow. And what juror number is that?
COURT CLERK: It's right here on your bench, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Juror Number 343. Her mom is having surgery tomorrow. She found out today, and she cannot serve. I have excused Juror Number 343. So, we have 122 jurors. When the jurors report tomorrow, there will be a strike sheet of 80. Any questions by the parties?
MR. WATERS: Not from the State, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: None from Mr. Murdaugh, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. We'll proceed now to motions.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, in a conversation with the defense over the lunch break, as we discussed, some of the motions that have been filed and that are pending. I think many of them are motions that are appropriate to arise during the course of the trial as they -- as witnesses who address them come up. I will point out that there are a number of motions that the defense has filed as it relates to a particular blood spatter expert, that being Tom Bevel. In conversations with the defense, we have agreed at this time that that will not be discussed in opening or before the jury. Of course, we'll alert the Court when that testimony is approaching and have the appropriate in-camera hearing at that time. So, I think that's addressing that particular issue as of today.
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes, Your Honor, that's correct. And we had also filed a motion regarding Mr. Kinsey having similar expert opinions, and we had requested a Council hearing as part of our motion, and we'll -– what we agreed to is once we got to that part of the case, if they decide to call Mr. Bevel, then we would to have a hearing on Mr. Bevel. And then we would also whenever they call Mr. Kinsey, if they intend to offer spatter opinion testimony, we would need a Council hearing for that. And the sanctions motion is still pending. We're not withdrawing anything, but I think once they make a final decision as to whether to use Mr. Bevel and he's here, then we can address all of those issues.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Mr. Waters?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir, that's correct.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, fine.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, there's a couple of State's motions, just to mention real quick, and I think that the same issue should be in play because these are really more trial issues. There was a motion in limine to exclude evidence related to third-party guilt. As Your Honor is aware, there are longstanding law in South Carolina that precludes the defendant from going into conjectural inferences of third-party guilt unless they meet the standard, which, of course, means that that evidence must be limited to such facts as are inconsistent with the defendant's own guilt, and to such facts as to raise a reasonable inference or presumption as to his own innocence. Obviously, that's the kind of evidence that, I think, has to meet that standard before it's admitted. This is also the kind of thing that we don't know what it's going to be until we hear it, but we didn't want to raise that issue with the Court, but again, I think that's something that will be addressed as it arises during the trial.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we agree with the State's analysis of what the law is. We don't -- I'm not sure what witnesses we're going to call. There's a couple, two to three of them on there that we may have to confront this issue on. But that and the polygraph -- we obviously understand polygraph is an item that is focused under very limited circumstances. Those are issues that would arise should they call witnesses that took and failed polygraphs, as we said in our motions, like Eddie Smith, and would only derive from a limited context. But there's no reason -- it's pure conjecture today as to whether they call any of those witnesses, and whether those witnesses arise, so we obviously would not blurt out polygraph. We would ask for a -- ask the jury to be excused and deal with those issues of third-party guilt, and deal with those issues at the appropriate time.
MR. WATERS: And that's, of course, the point, Your Honor, and that's acceptable. Just like the spatter expert because stuff like that could be highly prejudicial to a jury. It was just to make sure that before we get into the issues of third-party guilt or issues of polygraph that the defense advised us of before and we have the opportunity to address, you know, those issues outside the presence of the jury and get guidance from the Court before we proceed.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh my goodness, Judge, I would never consider blurting that out.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, very good.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, there are -- I know we had -- previously back on December 7th we had had some extensive argument about the State's motion and the defense motion for a bill of particulars, the State's motion to admit evidence of motive. Today we received a motion from the defense specifically addressing one aspect of the boat case seeking to limit testimony about the boat case, and in particular a particular discovery motion that was pending on June 10th of 2021 just days after Paul and Maggie were murdered and seeking to sort of limit testimony as to that. Your Honor, we obviously have made some extensive argument on that particular issue, and I don't know if the Court has any guidance or any ruling just generally on the admissibility of the motion based on the arguments that have been made, and certainly happy to make any further arguments in that regard.
We have that issue, I think, that’s still outstanding, and then the other issue is that the defense yesterday filed a motion for a Council hearing on the admissibility and -- of the ballistics evidence, tool mark and firearms identification evidence. And that is something that we think needs to be addressed. We're prepared to have an evidentiary presentation on that, but we believe that needs to be addressed before and ruled upon, Your Honor, respectfully before the jury is sworn, as that is a significant piece of evidence in as much as the cases at -- found around the body of Maggie Murdaugh match -- or at least matched pursuant to the analysis of the firearms examiner, weathered cases that were found at other places on the Moselle property. And we believe substantial evidence shows that that is -- that they are from a 300 Blackout AR style rifle that was purchased by Alex Murdaugh and can no longer be accounted for, and so that's obviously a very crucial piece of evidence, and I think we need to have a ruling on that particular issue prior to the jury being sworn because of its importance.
JUDGE NEWMAN: From the defense?
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes, Your Honor, I'll take the financial crimes evidence motion first. We have fully briefed that. We did argue it, I think we were in Florence, and subsequent to that we filed our written response with case law and attachments. They filed a reply. Happy to argue further if you want to hear argument on that. With regard to the ballistics motion, Your Honor, we did file a motion in limine and then requested a Council hearing on the -- we have gotten a report from Mr. Greer, the SLED ballistics expert, and essentially he says that based on the markings of shell casings found at the crime scene, 300 Blackout shell casings and specific markings he relies upon are a -- tool marked from extracting and injecting the shell casings, the cartridges that have been fired. We're not talking about the bullet but we're talking about the cartridges, spent shell cartridges, that the markings on those found at the crime scene match markings of fired shell cartridges at a shooting range on the property and around the residence, and he puts those two together, says they match, and therefore they were fired from the same gun. What we've asked for a Council hearing is what's the basis for his opinion that they had to be fired from the same gun. What studies have been done to establish that like fingerprints, which is their theory, that only one 300 Blackout made in the world would produce those markings in the era of mass production of extractors, ejectors. And so, you know, we were asking what's the basis of his opinion for that. We've cited studies that are critical, but, you know, we don't know of any 300 Blackout studies that have ever been done, and so, you know, that is the basis of our motion. We think it can be taken up when Mr. Greer testifies --
JUDGE NEWMAN: This is a motion that you filed today?
MR. GRIFFIN: Yesterday, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yesterday.
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: Obviously it's a very significant motion. We -- I filed a response as quick as I could early this morning, and -- in which we cited extensive case law. As Your Honor is aware, there was the NAS study in 2007/2008 --
JUDGE NEWMAN: I'm not aware of a study.
MR. WATERS: Sorry, Your Honor. It's in -- and I know -- because this was so late from the late filing of the defense, I'm sure you probably haven't had the opportunity to review these. But there was a study in late 2008/2009 that called into question firearms and tool mark examination. I've done one of these hearings before. And then there was a subsequent 2016 study as well, a PCAST study, so there's the NAS study and the PCAST study. And if you look in our brief, Your Honor, the Attorney General of the United States of America refutes the report. The FBI refutes the report. The Association of Firearms and Tool Mark Examiners refute the report. And the overwhelming late case law that’s cited in our brief that we filed this morning, including very, very recent case law from federal courts, from North Carolina court, from Kentucky courts, of course, have affirmed the longstanding admissibility of firearms and tool mark identification and examination in the courts. And we actually quoted extensively, just to show you how long this has been accepted evidence in the South Carolina courts, State v. Hackette going back early as 1949. So, this is obviously a well established field, and obviously they have the opportunity to cross-examine any expert and to raise any issues that they want, or to put up their own expert. But as always, particularly with such a well established, well used in almost every firearms type of case, type of evidence that's been accepted in South Carolina courts for decades and decades and decades, any issues that they may want to raise go to weight, not admissibility. That's the general rule there.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You agree that Mr. -– in counsel's argument that the expert's conclusion is that no other -- no other weapon could have possibly fired those rounds?
MR. WATERS: That's not exactly how it's phrased, Your Honor. Just one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: And I was just clarifying with counsel there. And just to be clear, Your Honor, there were spent cases found around the body of Maggie Murdaugh. There were spent cases found next to a stoop on the side of the house right outside the gun room where Paul Murdaugh and his friends liked to sight in 300 Blackouts, one of which is now missing that was purchased by the family. There were also spent cases found on a shooting range on the property as well. What the firearms examiner will say is that -- his conclusion is is that all of those cases bear markings similar with one another, that they were all cycled through the same weapon. So, I'm not -- I don't want to overstate the conclusion, but that is the nature of the conclusion that he will offer is that the individual characteristics, the subclass characteristics of that particular -- of those examinations show that those cases were cycled through the same weapon. And, again, he can get on the stand and then put a final point on it, but they're, of course, very aware of the standards of which they can -- that they need to apply, and, of course, are very aware of the limits to which they can go.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Is he here today to testify?
MR. WATERS: He is, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Is that the Council hearing that you all wish to have?
MR. WATERS: The State's position is it needs to take place before the jury is sworn because obviously this is a very significant piece of evidence, and we need guidance from the Court as to your rulings before we proceed. So, we are prepared to have that hearing on short notice.
JUDGE NEWMAN: For the defense?
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes, Your Honor. We are ready to go forward if Mr. Greer is here to address -- and the issue, frankly, is what's -- in the case law that we've cited is the level of certainty that you can say as to it came from only one versus -- you know, there are similarities. I mean, that's -- the case law talks about how certain the opinion is permitted and what's the basis for that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, may I --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- address one other matter not related to the weapons? We did file a motion this morning after -- and I understand it's late, but so was the discovery they gave us on Friday. I mean, this has been sort of a wait game playing on both sides. We're not playing games. We didn't wait, but there's a motion pending that was filed yesterday to preclude testimony on the question of law, and obviously we're not asking them to respond to that today since it was filed yesterday, but certainly something we can do tomorrow morning, or, depending on your ruling on the motive evidence. I mean, simply put, what they're arguing is that there was going to be a hearing on Friday in which he was going to have to produce financial information which would -- which -- when he got questioned that day by the financial person at the office about this $750,000, that panicked him, that he knew the jig was going to be up on Friday. Well, there are two things. One, nobody can say what was in his mind.
Number two, and as we outlined in this memo, Your Honor has tried enough civil cases, and I have, too. All you're entitled to on punitive damages is a net worth statement. I mean, god knows as a plaintiff's lawyer I've asked much more than that. Never had a judge give me anything more than a net worth statement after a prima facie case of punitive damages was shown. Now Judge Hall, who heard -- who would have heard this motion had it gone forward, did hear a motion against the codefendant Parkers where Mr. Tinsley asked for the same thing, and he denied the motion and said when we get to trial, if you show a prima facie case of punitive damages, then you get it. So, all -- the most he could have gotten on Friday was a net worth statement, which wouldn't even come in -- well, first of all, Parkers didn't even have to produce that until trial. What did he do? What did Mr. Murdaugh do in his vocation as a lawyer? He's a plaintiff's lawyer, and he and I talked about this.
We never got any net worth statements after there was a prima facie case in front of the jury. So, what this motion deals with is excluding sort of opinions of what the law was, or what would be -- what would happen in front of the judge, some prediction. Nobody certainly knows what he thought. We have witnesses, I believe, that may testify that he was asked to prepare a net worth statement, which as you know, again, one of my complaints as a plaintiff's lawyer, really doesn't give you a lot other than what their net worth is because that's all the jury can hear on ability to pay is net worth. So, if you want to -- we think you should allow them perhaps to respond to this in the morning, and take that into consideration on your decision on motive evidence. And we'll be happy to argue it in full. I've done a pretty poor job of doing it here right now.
MR. WATERS: Just in response, Your Honor, they did just file this motion, but it's never been the State's contention that somebody is going to testify and predict what Judge Hall would have done in this particular case. What we can and what we -- there is testimony, and already in the State Grand Jury transcripts, in which they've had access to for months and months and months and months, is the testimony about the manner in which the plaintiffs in the boat case were conducting that litigation, what they were expecting, what they had received from the defense. The fact that the defense had claimed that Mr. Murdaugh was broke, they didn't believe it, and so that's what ultimately led to the motion to compel. The motion to compel did not ask for a financial statement. It very clearly asked for identification of bank accounts and other sort of financial information with the intent to subpoena that.
That was the motion that was on the table for the very week, just a few days after Maggie and Paul were murdered, on top of the fact that Mr. Murdaugh was confronted the very morning of the murder by his own firm seeking missing fees. That's the temporal connection of those two events that then tie back to literally a decade of embezzlement, that one question begets another which begets another. To understand why these are significant, the jury has to understand that he had been stealing for over a decade, ninety-nine counts to date, and facing essentially life without parole on these particular financial accounts, and that's the significance of what he was trying to prevent from being exposed. So, again, I hear what their motion is, but I think this motion will be moot, and ultimately will be resolved during the course of testimony. Because no one is trying to say what Judge Hall would do, the point is a little different. It's what the plaintiffs were seeking to do, and what they very clearly said to Alex Murdaugh and his attorneys during the course of that litigation.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: To get information, they were going to file -- and I’ve litigated with Mr. Tinsley. He's very aggressive. He filed a bunch of motions to get financial information, bank accounts that he could not have gotten because you're not entitled to argue about financial ability to pay until you get a prima facie case of punitive damages, and that's what we say here. So, he could file whatever he wanted, but to say whether Mr. Murdaugh thought that was a real threat or not, what he thought -- and I will tell you that it's not consistent with the state of the law, not consistent with my experience. And I understand, you know, the Attorney General has not litigated a lot of civil cases. I have since 1986 been trying to get more than just net worth statements in a punitive damages case, never have gotten it. The one point I make is this. His theory and this is sort of -- is that he knew the jig was up, so he went home and butchered -- blew the head off his son, and butchered his wife.
There's not one shred of evidence there was any problems between any of them. There's texts, pictures, people that were with them the previous weekend at a ballgame, video from that day with Paul and he having a good time. There is no dispute anywhere that they were the perfect family in terms of their relationship. No divorce, no separated -- no weapon, no nothing. So, this is a fabrication, and they want to use what Griffin described as bad character evidence: he stole all this money, so he must have killed his wife and son. That is -- and as he cited, there are at least six South Carolina Supreme Court cases. I may be overstating it. How many? Four? Four South Carolina Supreme Court cases disallowing -- and judges have been reversed -- disallowing this kind of evidence. Now, if they've got some evidence that Maggie was getting ready to turn him over to the feds, or Paul knew about it and was getting ready to talk about it, or he had been threatened by them, certainly those cases say that's when that kind of stuff can come in, but not this theoretical we ain't got a motive, we're make one up motive. That --
JUDGE NEWMAN: What I'm getting from you -- both of you now, you're giving me jury arguments, and you're arguing multiple motions simultaneously. Regarding the motion by the State for me to grant an in limine motion admitting evidence, that's what you're seeking me to do, and you in your motion, you indicate that the basis for this is for judicial economy. That there may be no precedent for the Court ruling in advance of any testimony granting in limine the admission of motive as a -- as evidence during the trial. Are you seeking to have me do that?
MR. WATERS: Well, Your Honor, I don't -- so, I recognize what the Court is saying. I think the first issue with that was in response to the defense bill of particulars, and our response to that was -- they essentially asked, they said tell me what financial evidence you want to, to, to, you know, go into. And so we responded by saying, well, that's not recognized under South Carolina law. But we filed this particular motion --
JUDGE NEWMAN: I understand. I understand all of that. But typically a motion in limine is a motion to exclude evidence.
MR. WATERS: That's correct.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Your motion in limine is for me to admit evidence. And what authority do you have for me to admit evidence through a motion in limine?
MR. WATERS: Well, of course, in our motion -– and stand by for me, Your Honor, just one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: I recognize that typically a motion in limine is to exclude evidence, but the cases that we cite and the language we cite in our motion, of course, is, you know, to prevent disclosure of potentially prejudicial matter to the jury. And, of course, is to -- is strictly conditional and subject to the actual evidence being offered. And so the point was, was to -- because it's very extensive, and because we realize that this case is different, and it's not argued this case is much different than any case we've ever seen because of the complexity of all of these factors going together. I think essentially what we were trying to do is at least get some -- get some sort of preliminary guidance, understanding that evidence will have to be developed at trial, as to the admissibility of this. Now, ultimately if the Court is more comfortable with having in-camera proceedings as to the admissibility of evidence, then I understand that and we can do that as the case develops as we were talking about the other day.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, the defense complains that, well, this will create a mini trial, given all of the various offenses, ninety-something allegations, and, of course, we also deal with the issue of res gestae issues of matters that may be too remote in time and the like. What I am grappling with is your request for me to grant in limine the admission of evidence.
MR. WATERS: Certainly.
JUDGE NEWMAN: And I frown upon motions in limine period because I don't know the facts. I do not know the facts in this case. I know what you all have submitted in your briefs, your arguments, and whatever you say is the case the defense says the opposite. That's why we have testimony, and judges are to rule not based on lawyers' arguments but based on evidence. And I am not prepared to grant in limine a motion admitting evidence, though it may be admissible under the same theories that you have promoted. I agreed with the authority and the rule that allows for motive to be admitted in a case under appropriate circumstances in you all's argument and the cases cited by the defense. Some are remotely similar in facts, and most of them are dissimilar. Each case must be decided on the sum of the facts and circumstances.
MR. WATERS: Sure.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I believe that the Siegel case is persuasive authority, U.S. v. Siegel, though in that case a very noted jurist who spent some time in our state was reversed by one of our noted jurists, Judge Traxler, on the same issue. But I'm not prepared to grant admitting evidence in limine. It must be done during the course of the presentation of evidence during a trial.
MR. WATERS: I absolutely understand that, Your Honor. And, again, I recognize that we were attempting to, to perhaps identify those issues and bring those issues because of the complexity of everything to the Court's attention, and I certainly understand and recognize, and that's the typical manner in which we do that is to have those issues addressed as we move through the trial.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Well, that deals with that issue.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: That leaves the ballistics issue.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, I believe at this time we can move to that, and I'm going to turn the presentation of evidence over to Mr. Fernandez, who will call Mr. Greer.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you, Your Honor. May it please the Court?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.