Jeannie Seckinger — Direct/Cross/Redirect
1,179 linesMR. WATERS: The State's next witness would be Jeannie Seckinger.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, there are matters that must be addressed outside of your presence. I do not know exactly how long it would take, but I do not like to have jurors sit in jury rooms just for longs periods of time, so we're going to excuse you through the -- after you speak with the bailiff, we're going to take a recess with the jury while we deal with these matters. Let's see now, you all have lunch coming at what time? Nobody knows. 1:00, 1:15. All right. Well, we don't need you before lunch, so if you'll go to the jury room and wait for further instructions, but we'll be having you all take a break until around that time. Please do not discuss the case.
(The jury left the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir, you may proceed.
MR. WATERS: The state would call Jeannie Seckinger.
IN-CAMERA HEARING
The witness, JEANNIE SECKINGER, was first duly sworn and testified as follows:
COURT CLERK: Take a seat in the witness stand. State your name again for the record. Spell your last name.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: My name is Jeannie Seckinger, S-e-c-k-i-n-g-e-r.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. WATERS:
MR. WATERS: Ms. Seckinger, how are you doing today?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm good.
MR. WATERS: Good. Do you understand we're here right now outside the presence of the jury for an in-camera hearing to determine the admissibility of some of your testimony?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I do.
MR. WATERS: And just very quickly, if you would, give us a little bit -- I'm not going to go through all of the background that I would in front of the jury.
MR. WATERS: Unless Your Honor would like.
MR. WATERS: But give us a little bit about your background and where you currently work, and how that led to where you currently work.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I graduated with a BS in accounting from USC, went to work in an accounting firm for a few years, then switched to industrial at Westinghouse. And in 1999 I came to work at PMPED, which is Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, as a temporary bookkeeper, and that has grown over the years to the office manager, CFO, accounting, anything business, insurance, and HR related.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and that's for whom?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: For Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, Eltzroth, and Detrick.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, that's PMPED?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: And that's the law firm that Alex Murdaugh used to work for?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Does it have a different name now?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We are now a new entity that's called Parker Law Group, LLP.
MR. WATERS: All right. So just very quickly, you've already kind of said this, but go through sort of the financial side of your job duties as it existed for PMPED back at the relevant time periods.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Okay. So, my financial duties are -- actually I have people under me that do the day-to-day processing of checks, but my duties are to balance and reconcile accounts, provide financial statements, help with all tax documents, preparation of taxes. Also prepared anything for any government census or surveys that we needed, and anything HR related.
MR. WATERS: Okay. I want to ask you a little bit about the financial structure of how PMPED works, if I could. And if you could, explain that a little bit. Are the -- people often think of lawyers as partners, but are they called partners under the employment agreement that everyone signed?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No. We're called partners when we refer to each other as they're in the business, but for tax purposes everybody was an owner. It was a C-Corporation, so everybody is shareholders. And within Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, every employee was a salaried employee, including the partners.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and did the employment agreement that everyone signed require that any fees or money generated by any partner or lawyer by the firm had to go to the firm?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It did.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and explain to me how, if you're a -- and let's just call them partner. If you're a partner, how does the compensation work? What are the element of compensation as it worked under the PMPED structure back in 2021 and prior?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, every partner received a base salary that they would receive in biweekly payments throughout the year that was set at a level of about $125,000. The majority of their pay came through an end-of-the-year bonus, which is when we closed out the books and settled on the books. And primarily after overhead and other expense were met, the net profit was divided amongst those partners, and in a simplified form it was basically distributed based on a ratio of the fees that they brought in and percentage to the total.
MR. WATERS: Right, but that distribution would not take place until when?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Usually the last week of December.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Waters, I was distracted. Can you repeat the previous question for me?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: Going back, Ms. Seckinger, we were talking a little bit about the compensation structure for PMPED as it existed in 2021, and if you could, again explain to the Court how that worked. How were partners -- and we're going to call them loosely that term -- how were they compensated?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Okay, partners are employed -- salaries -- who were paid a biweekly paycheck throughout the year with a base salary of $125,000. And at the end of year, they received a bonus check usually in the last week of the year that divided up the remaining profits of the firm based on the percentage of revenue each attorney brought in to the total.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, when fees came in, they're going to be attributed to a particular lawyer, and ultimately that's going to be a percentage of the total revenues, and that's going to determine their percentage of the compensation at the end of the year after all overhead is paid.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Is there also some sort of 7 and a half percent fund or fee or something like -- or not -- or amount that's put aside?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There is. We take the gross bonuses that are the gross fees everybody brought in, less the overhead, and once we get to that number, everybody would throw in the pot 7 and a half percent, and that money was divided back equally among the employees. And then a new percentage was arrived at to determine how much everybody would receive of the net income.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, you have to take care of overhead, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: And what is an overhead just generally?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Overhead is just basically the expenses to run the business. What it cost us to advance client cost. What it cost to pay our own employees. What it cost to rent the building, to provide equipment, office supplies, postage, et cetera.
MR. WATERS: All right, and that's got to be accounted for, and then you've got to account for this 7 and a half percent as well, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then only after that does each partner get compensation based on their relative contribution during that year.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Is the -- typically the vast majority of compensation received by a partner of PMPED received in that distribution at the end of the year?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: And when does that take place?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The last week of the year generally speaking.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and what is the point of that goal? Why do you want to sort of clear out all the money and clear the books?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Basically we don't want to leave the money in there to be taxed by the corporation because it's a C-Corp entity. So, the objective is to get it out to the partners and avoid double taxation.
MR. WATERS: And so because of that, is it up to each individual partner to essentially manage the bulk of their compensation that's received in one lump sum during the course of the next year?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. They need to budget.
(EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 310 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: All right. Let me show you what's been marked for purposes of this hearing as State's 310 and see if you recognize that document.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. This is the employment agreement each shareholder/partner would have signed.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and I just want to direct your attention to number two, and if you could tell the Court what that provision that's signed by all of the partners says.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It says: The employee accepts such employment and agrees that the employee will devote the employee's entire time and endeavor to the employer's business.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then number three, if you could read that to the Court, please.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Services for the benefit of the employer. All professional services rendered by the employer shall be rendered as an employee of the employer, and all proceeds and remuneration received therefore shall inure to the employers's benefit.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Now, tell me what that means.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That means that all fees earned should come through payable to PMPED.
MR. WATERS: All right, and so if a lawyer earns fees, is it appropriate at all for those fees to go directly to the lawyer as opposed to going through the law firm?
MR. WATERS: Is that a hard rule to understand?
MR. WATERS: Anybody ever have a problem with that rule or not understand it?
MR. WATERS: Pretty easy and hard and fast rule in that firm, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: If you get the money written straight to you, what is that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The money is taken straight to you?
MR. WATERS: Yeah.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That would be stealing it.
MR. WATERS: Stealing it. All right.
MR. WATERS: Can I have the ELMO, please?
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: Briefly, can you see that, Ms. Seckinger?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, two and three are the provisions you were just referring to?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Tell me just a little bit of your observations -- how long have you known Alex Murdaugh? Let me ask you that.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I've known Alex since I was in high school, so roughly forty years.
MR. WATERS: And how long have you worked with him, or did you work with him?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: About twenty-three or twenty-four years, since 1999.
MR. WATERS: And did he have a lucrative practice in your observation?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, he did well.
MR. WATERS: Was he sometimes getting as much as seven figures at the end of the year?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He has.
MR. WATERS: Are you familiar with what's been called the boat case?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: And tell me what your understanding of the boat case is. Just generally, what was that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Generally speaking, it was an accident that several children got in one evening where it was in Paul's -- or the Murdaughs' boat. Paul was accused as the driver, and there were a lot of civil suits and some criminal proceedings going on related to that crime.
MR. WATERS: And following the boat case, is it your understanding that Paul Murdaugh was charged?
MR. WATERS: Is it your understanding that Alex Murdaugh was civilly sued?
MR. WATERS: And there was ongoing civil litigation at the time that Paul and Maggie were murdered?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: After the boat case happened, did you and Alex ever have any discussions about structuring fees?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. We did in late May of 2020/2021, right about the end of the month. We had some discussions about Hershberger. A disbursement came through that he had tried to send his fees to a structured settlement. And the conversation was that he had done it improperly because for -- to structure fees properly, it has to be part of the release. It has to go straight from the insurance company straight to the insured structured annuity place, and we would need to be told about it in our firm so we could account for it in our 7 and a half percent. But in this particular case, Alex had sent the money directly to Forge. We discussed the fact that it would not be any tax benefit to him, and at that point in time he said he was not really worried about the tax benefit of it, and he said he was trying to put some money in Maggie's name due to the boat wreck, and that he was trying to figure out if he was going to structure fees for the future.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Did he say he was trying to do a favor for anyone, too?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He did say he was friends with Michael Gunn, and that he was the owner of -- or one of the operators of Forge, and that he was going to try to put up to about $250,000 into a structure as a favor for Michael Gunn.
MR. WATERS: All right. When you say Forge, what are you talking about?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, Forge is a company that does structured annuities --
MR. WATERS: Do you know the full name real quick?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Forge Consulting.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let's call it Forge Consulting.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Okay. Forge Consulting.
MR. WATERS: Try and do that. All right. Tell me about Forge Consulting and what they are.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They're a company that will do structured annuities for clients; they'll do structured fees for attorneys. They do some wealth management. They do minor pool trust. They are several different things that they do. I think they branched out into insurance coverage now. They provide a lot of financial tools.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Stand by for me one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
(SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 311 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: Now, when you say that you had a conversation with him about him supposedly structuring fees, how did this come to your attention?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It came to my attention over the fact that a disbursement -- one of my secretaries -- well, my assistant brought to me that had been brought to her attention by Alex's secretary or paralegal, Annette Griswold, and came and asked me if this was proper, and it came to me after the fact, and that's when I went and had conversations with Alex about this.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, had the money already been paid?
MR. WATERS: And you went to Alex and you asked what's this about?
MR. WATERS: And he said I'm doing what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm trying to defer and put money into Maggie's name and structure some fees.
MR. WATERS: Did he tell you where or did he -- where that money had gone? What was your belief where that money had gone after you talked to Alex?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: My belief was it had gone to Forge Consulting.
MR. WATERS: The real entity Forge Consulting?
MR. WATERS: All right. I'm going to show you just real quick what's been marked for purposes of this hearing as State's 311 and see if you recognize that series. I think there's four documents in there.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. These are the Hershberger settlement documents, which is the case that we're talking about, the fee that he sent as the structure.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and are there one or two in there ultimately?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There are ultimately two. There's one that's structured to look like a fee, and then the other one was structured to look like it was client's money that was being sent on the client's behalf.
MR. WATERS: Which one were you aware of at the time?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I was aware of the fee one for the $83,333.33.
MR. WATERS: All right. At the time, did you think that any money had been misappropriated or stolen, or did you just think that Alex was trying to sort of divert some money because of the boat case but not necessarily anything misappropriated at that time?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We were not thinking about his misappropriating funds or stealing any client funds. What we were concerned about was he was trying to either defer income by leaving it in somebody's trust, or either trying to put some money into Maggie's name to avoid things for the boat accident.
MR. WATERS: And when you say we were concerned, who's concerned?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Myself and some of the partners.
MR. WATERS: And why are y'all concerned about him potentially trying to put the money in a structure in Maggie's name because of the boating accident?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Well, because that would be wrong, and we did not want any part of that.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let me put this up on the screen real quick. All right, do you recognize this document right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Excuse me. Yes. That's the document that's in question with the $83,333.33 fee sent to Forge.
MR. WATERS: All right, and right there, tell me what this disbursement sheet is very quickly. Explain that to the Court.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, this is a -- where the client recovered $250,000. You can see it came from three different insurers, and we would take a portion of our fee -- generally this looks like a third, and our expenses of 9300. The Sedgwick claims would have been the lien that we were paying off, and then the $140,678.55 would have been the money disbursed between the beneficiaries of that estate.
MR. WATERS: And what is this line right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That would represent the fee.
MR. WATERS: At this point in time, had you actually seen the check that was made out for those fees?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I don't recall if I actually looked at it at that point in time.
MR. WATERS: Normally fees, where would they go?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Normally fees would come to us and we would deposit it into our income account, what we call our income account.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, fees come in from somebody who pays the settlement. Where do they go initially? What account do they go in?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: To the income account, the PMPED operating income account.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Fees go in there?
MR. WATERS: All right. When a settlement comes in, where does it go?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It goes into a client trust account for the benefit of the client.
MR. WATERS: And then the portion of that is allocated for fees. It goes from the trust account to where?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: To the income account.
MR. WATERS: It usually doesn't go out to Forge Consulting or anything like that?
MR. WATERS: After you had that conversation with Alex, did you follow up -- at that time, did you follow up anymore on that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We had a couple of conversations about it in relation to some other -- when we were having some other conversations, but we didn't really readdress this again until late September -- late August or early September.
MR. WATERS: All right. Did you kind of put it on the back burner?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I did. I put it -- I was -- at that point it had been done, and I was trying to figure out how we were going to account for it on our books, and just kind of had it out there as a reminder to try to see -- to put in my mind later to see if anything else had been done like that, or to see if he was going to try to do that again.
MR. WATERS: After that particular event -- you said that was in late May sometime?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Right.
MR. WATERS: Did another matter come to your attention about disbursements as it related to Alex Murdaugh's practice and his business?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It did.
MR. WATERS: And tell me what that was, please.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, this was a case called the Faris v. Mack Truck case. And on a Monday -- I believe it was May 24th -- Annette Griswold called me and said that she had something that she needed to discuss with me. I was out of the office that day in our Walterboro office, but when I returned we met, and when she showed me the -- what had happened was we received a check for our client expenses. So, this case was actually disbursed by the associated attorney, which was Chris Wilson. So, he sent us a check for the money that we had forwarded as client expenses, but we did not receive a fee check, and that is itself is odd generally.
MR. WATERS: And why is that odd? Why did Annette call you because y'all had received a fee check from Alex's best friend Chris Wilson but not the -- excuse me, expense check but not the fee check?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Right. Most of the time we receive them together. Well, Annette, when she did not receive them together, called my assistant, Nicole, to make sure we had not already received the fee, verified that we had not already received the fee. And at that point, Annette had some conversations with Vickie Lyman in Chris's office, and Vickie informed Chris that their bosses had already got the fee when the settlement was signed, which had happened in March, and this was May.
MR. WATERS: And Vickie informed Chris or Vickie informed Annette?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Vickie informed Annette of that.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, why is that a concern to you that you -- now you're hearing the fee has already been paid?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Because now we know we don't have the check. We've never received it. So, either he's got a fee -- either he's got a check he hasn't turned in to us that's properly payable to PMPED, or he's received a check payable to him.
MR. WATERS: All right, and when you are considering the possibility that he perhaps receives a check payable to him, aside from that being stealing, as you earlier testified to it, what's your concern then?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Saying that he's trying to hide money from the boat wreck.
MR. WATERS: Hiding money for the boat wreck. All right. Stand by for me.
(Break in proceedings.)
(EXPENSE CHECK WITH DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 312 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: All right, I'm going to show you what's been marked for purposes of this hearing as Exhibit 312, and see if you recognize this document.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. This is the actual -- the expense check that we received in the Faris matter.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: From Wilson Law Group.
MR. WATERS: Just quick flip through it and just tell me generally what that -- what's in that packet.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The rest of the packet is our deposit, which is an internal record, costs -- client costs report, which matches that expense check. Then the rest of it -- the second -- what I'm looking at right now is a check made payable to Richard Alexander Murdaugh, Esquire, for $192,000, and it references Faris fees.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Keep going.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Next page is the deposit where it says Bank of America deposit only, and it looks like ACH. That looks like -- it actually looks to me like Alex's initials, and then it says Bank of America.
MR. WATERS: Is there a series of emails after that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The series of emails starts with Vickie Lyman informing Annette Griswold about the fact that their bosses had received the fee back when the disbursement was signed.
MR. WATERS: All right, let me put those emails up on the screen, I believe -- if there's no objection for the purposes for this hearing.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, this is an email to Annette Griswold. Explain to the judge who Annette Griswold is, please.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Annette Griswold is one of Alex's primary paralegals.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and right here, this is an email that was ultimately sent to you as part of bringing this to your attention?
MR. WATERS: All right, and what is she asking right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: She said: Why just expenses and no fee?
MR. WATERS: All right, and what was the response there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Dear friend, it is only costs because your boss and mine and Liz's got their fees once they were signed.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, Annette is informing you that Chris Wilson's office says they've already got the fees.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. After that, did you have a conversation with Annette what to do?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I did. I actually talked with Lee Cope. We went to Lee -- sometimes a lot of the partners are not in the office, and Lee Cope was the one who was in the office, so I went to talk to Lee about what we should do. And, of course, Annette was worried about getting -- you know, ramifications if she was wrong and didn't want to be in trouble. So, Lee and I decided to take it over from there. And the course of action that we decided upon was that I would send an email to Annette requesting the disbursement, the supporting documents, and the general ledger printout from Chris Wilson's office, which is what we keep in our office.
MR. WATERS: All right, and before we go right here, is that the email you're speaking of right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and what's the date on that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: May 27th.
MR. WATERS: All right, and so then what happens to that email from there if we look over to the next page?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, apparently Vickie in Chris Wilson's office was on vacation. So, on June 2nd Annette clarifies with Vickie what exactly we were looking for. And again, she asked for the full disbursement paperwork, including the disbursement sheets, expenses, supporting docs, and ledger.
MR. WATERS: All right, and you're included on that email?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I am cc'd, yes.
MR. WATERS: All right. Did y'all ultimately get a response from that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Vickie responded that she would have to send that email to Chris because she did not have -- provided that information, so that was on the 2nd. The next day Alex came into my office early and asked me why I needed that information and assured me that the money was in Chris Wilson's account and that they could get it any time.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and did y'all discuss anything further when you had that conversation?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Just that we needed to get it or I needed proof that it was there, that it was necessary to get it. At that point, I didn't indicate to him that I thought it was missing. I was just asking for the documentation.
MR. WATERS: And that was on what day?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It was sometime in between June 2nd and June 7th.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. On June 7th, did the issue come back to a head?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The issue did come back to a head.
MR. WATERS: To be clear, this is June 7, 2021?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This is -- yes.
MR. WATERS: And how much were these fees supposed to be, did you know?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $792,000 in total.
MR. WATERS: And to this point, the firm had not received those fees. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And Chris Wilson's office is saying initially we already disbursed them?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, and Chris Wilson is not saying anything to me.
MR. WATERS: Was -- to your knowledge, was an inquiry made to Chris Wilson at that time?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Lee Cope -- we had not inquired of Chris Wilson other than requesting this information at this point in time.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, tell me about June 7th. How does that go?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So on June 7th, I was going to make another run at finding out from Alex if we had the information. I went upstairs to -- his office is on the second floor. He was on -- leaning on a file cabinet outside of his office. He turned and looked at me when he I came up and said what do you need now and gave me a very dirty look. Not a look that I had ever received from Alex. Just kind of frustrated with me look, which made me go, oh, you want to know? Let's go in your office. So, we went in the office and closed the door, and at that point I told him that I had reason to believe that he had received the funds himself, and that I needed proof that he had not.
MR. WATERS: Received those fees himself?
MR. WATERS: And I needed proof that they are not?
MR. WATERS: And what did he tell you?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He told me -- again, he assured me that the money was there and that he could get it. And at that point I said I know -- I said I'm just trying to do my job, and if I don't get this paperwork and verify that with these questions, I'm not doing my job. He actually acted like he respected that, and again said that that money was there and that he, again, was trying to decide what he was going to be doing with it.
MR. WATERS: And did y'all get to conclude that conversation or did something interrupt you?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did not. He took a phone call in the middle of that conversation. That phone call was about his father that was in -- he was in the hospital, that he was going to be terminal, that there was nothing else they would be able to do for his father. So, that changed the mood of the conversation. We quit talking about business and I immediately asked about him and his family and his dad, and, you know, we got talking as friends at that point concerned over the family, and after that I shortly left. So, it briefed -- and cut down the conversation.
MR. WATERS: All right. You're coming in there asking for proof where that money was because you believing -- reason to believe he took it, and then the conversation ultimately got short by the call about his father?
MR. WATERS: All right. Did you have a conversation later in the day with Alex?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I did. Around 4:00 my phone rang, and I remember that because I had been under the impression Alex was going to leave and go to the hospital or leave to deal with his father. And around 4:00 my office extension rang, and at that point he was asking me for some information on his 401(k) balances because he stated he was working on some financials for the hearing on the boat accident that was later in the week.
MR. WATERS: There was a hearing later in the week, and he was working on financials for the boat accident.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Did that strike you as odd?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That he called and asked me?
MR. WATERS: Yes.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No. He had asked me before, so -- and he -- I would be the one to give him the 401(k), so it didn't surprise me that he's calling me asking me about that. But I was surprised that he was in the building working on it.
MR. WATERS: And why was that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I just thought he was leaving to deal with his father.
MR. WATERS: Because that interrupted the prior conversation.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Is that the last conversation you had with him?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It is.
MR. WATERS: When did you find out about the murders?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I initially found out through the rumor mill around 10:30 or 11:00 the evening of them, but I did not get confirmation until I received a text from a partner roughly 2:30 or 3:00 in the morning.
MR. WATERS: Were you shocked by that?
MR. WATERS: Scared?
MR. WATERS: Worried?
MR. WATERS: Worried for Alex?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Worried for everybody, yes, especially Alex.
MR. WATERS: In the wake of the murders, do you know if the hearing that was later that week got canceled?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It did get canceled.
MR. WATERS: That was a hearing in the boat case where he's personally a defendant?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's my understanding, yes.
MR. WATERS: In the wake of the boat case, did you and the partners have a discussion about what to do about getting to the bottom of these Faris fees?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. We did not the week of the murders because pretty much our office shut down the week of the murders, and then his father also passing away. But when we got back around to it, Lee and Mark Ball and I were the ones doing the discussion. Lee decided that he would call Chris Wilson himself directly and try to get the information, and Lee took over from there.
MR. WATERS: In the wake of the murders, did anyone want to bring that up to Alex again?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No. Nobody want -- Alex was distraught and upset and not in the office much, and nobody wanted to harass him about nothing that we thought was really missing. We had several months until the end of the year to clear it up, so we were not going to harass him at that point in time.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, that part just got stopped in its tracks. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. Lee took over calling Chris Wilson and trying to pursue it.
MR. WATERS: All right, and when was that? You said in July sometime?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, probably early July.
MR. WATERS: And what was the result of that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Lee said -- and you can speak to him more clearly -- but Lee said Chris Wilson got off the phone pretty quick with him, which was surprising because apparently Chris Wilson has the gift of gab. But again, Chris assured Lee that it was there.
MR. WATERS: Ultimately, did y'all get an email about that -- this particular issue?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. Ultimately on July 19th, there was an email from Chris to Alex stating that the money was in Chris Wilson's trust and would have been available any time that we requested it. That email was forwarded to Lee Cope and myself.
MR. WATERS: Okay. From whom?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: From Alex.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and what -- is that the email up on the screen that you're talking about right now?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It is.
MR. WATERS: All right, and we see 600,000 for Andral Faris and 192 for Denise. What's -- explain that breakdown if you would, please.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So there's two parties in this case, and apparently there was two recoveries, and each of them would have had a fee dependent upon their recovery. So, to me this looks like -- and Andral's portion -- the fee for his settlement was the 600,000 and Denise's was 192,000.
MR. WATERS: At this point in time, had the firm received this $792,000?
MR. WATERS: Did this email, though, sort of end the inquiry at least for the present moment?
MR. WATERS: All right. Well, let's move the story forward again. Did this matter ever come to your attention again at a later time?
MR. WATERS: All right, and tell me when that came to your attention.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That would have been in September after we found some other misappropriations, and we had confronted Alex and he'd resigned. We ended up having more conversations with Chris Wilson right after that, and Chris admitted that he did not have all of the money.
MR. WATERS: Well, let me back it up. Before we get to there, I'm talking about as far as it relates to Alex, did this particular issue with trying to get the Faris fees come to your attention? And let me take you to early September of 2021.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No, not that I recall.
MR. WATERS: In early September of 2021, did the Hershberger matter that you mentioned earlier, did that come back to your attention?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That came back to my attention. I started pursuing that and decided that I was going to go through and look and make sure that he had not tried to already defer something else that we had missed. And at that point I decided to print a ledger printout of our system of payments to Forge. And as I did that, I started printing all of the documents that would relate to those disbursements, the disbursement statements and the canceled checks. And as I started printing the canceled checks off, I could see Bank of America on the back and Alex Murdaugh's signature. And every one that came out was -- just put it a little bit more in the grave for me. That's -- when I found that out, I had William Barnes come over, who was a partner who was in there in the office that day, and had him look at them. He also believed that they were -- that they were Alex's signatures on the back of these checks.
MR. WATERS: All right, and just real quick, these are checks coming from the client trust account?
MR. WATERS: And they're made out to what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Forge.
MR. WATERS: But what's unusual to you that's causing you to have that feeling that you just described?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That the endorsement, the Bank of America on the back, and the fact that it looked like Alex's signature.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right, and so you talked to William Barnes. Is that right?
MR. WATERS: And did you talk to other partners about what you were finding?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. William and I then called Mark Ball, who had been aware of this situation the whole time. Mark Ball was the treasurer. So, he came back into the office. We showed him the signatures. He agreed with us, and he also recognized one of the disbursements as a case that could not have possibly been disbursed yet because it was held up awaiting some court orders for a workers' comp lien. We also talked to Lee Cope that night about it, and Lee -- we came to the plan for Lee to call Michael Gunn with Forge and see if they had banked at Bank of America. And they had -- Michael Gunn confirmed that they had not banked at Bank of America in a number of years.
MR. WATERS: Did y'all send them a list of clients, of the ones that you were pulling off of your system that had payments to Forge and Bank of America?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. We gave them a few names that evening, not the complete list. We gave them a few names that we had, and he verified that those two -- Michael Gunn verified to Lee Cope that those were not any structures or any annuities. They didn't have records of them.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. Around this time, did Annette bring you anything when this is all going on?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. So, this is completely independent and coincidental. Annette, the same afternoon of September 2nd, was in his office trying to look for something, and when she moved a file a check fell out. When the check fell out, she looked down. It was Chris Wilson, and it was the $225,000 check payable to Richard Alexander Murdaugh that we had already found.
(CHECK MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 313 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: All right, and I'm going to show you what's been marked as Exhibit 313 State's for the purposes of this hearing. Do you recognize that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is -- that's the check.
MR. WATERS: This is the actual check that was found. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. Hold on for me real quick.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: It's got an endorsement on the back. Let me ask you this. You've worked with Alex Murdaugh for how long?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Twenty-three years roughly.
MR. WATERS: During that time, did you become familiar with his handwriting?
MR. WATERS: Do you recognize it when you see it?
MR. WATERS: Looking at the handwriting endorsement on the back of that document, do you recognize it?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's his signature and handwriting.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Waters, do you have copies of these various exhibits for the Court?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir. Thank you.
MR. GRIFFIN: Is this my copy?
MR. WATERS: Yes, sir.
MR. GRIFFIN: Thank you.
MR. WATERS: You're welcome. Your Honor, if you'll just give me one second I'll hand the exhibits we're talking about up to the Court --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: -- as well.
MR. WATERS: But up on the screen, is this the check?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. Yes.
MR. WATERS: All right, and on the back, whose writing is that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Alex's.
MR. WATERS: Once we -- once you started printing out all of those Forge ones that had Alex's writing on it and Bank of America, and you contacted Forge, did you ask them whether or not they ever banked -- the real Forge -- if they ever banked at Bank of America?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Lee Cope had that conversation and Michael Gunn verified that they had not banked there in a number of years, more than ten years.
MR. WATERS: And they didn't have any active structures on any of the clients y'all had given them?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: As a result of that, what did the leadership at the firm do next?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We convened a meeting on the morning of Friday, September 3rd, at Lee Cope's house with the majority of the partners and myself present. We discussed what we had found and showed everybody the documentation that we had recovered, and then the choice was made -- Randy was not present initially. The choice was made to bring Randy in and show him what we had found.
MR. WATERS: All right, and after Randy was brought in and showed what was found, what happened next?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Randy immediately conceded that we needed to talk to Alex, that it looked like he had stolen, and Danny and Randy got together and met with Alex outside of the office.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and did they confront him with this information?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They did, and it was my understanding that Alex admitted it and that it was determined he would resign.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Did he ask for a leave of absence to your --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I think he tried to do a few other things before resigning, but we made him resign.
MR. WATERS: After the decision was made to resign, was it announced right away, or was there any statement put out or anything like that right away?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It was not announced right away because the decision was made -- Johnny Parker was getting married the next day, and it was late on a Friday, and that we were going to kind of hold off until the first of the week. We were going to contact some ethics attorneys and see what we needed to do and announce it the first of the week.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, we're in the weekend September 3rd, September 4th, something like that?
MR. WATERS: Is that Labor Day weekend?
MR. WATERS: What's the next thing you recall hearing about Alex?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The next thing I heard about Alex was -- I was actually with my family on the Sandbar, and the next thing I heard was Suzanne Peeples with the EMS came down and told me that Alex had been shot in the head and was being flown out to Savannah.
MR. WATERS: Was that on the side of Road at Old Salkehatchie?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: What's the first thing you thought when you heard he'd been shot?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: You know, nobody knew what to think. A lot of thoughts went through, but fear went through. Was this retaliation? Was he involved in something bigger that was going to get more of us in trouble? And -- just fear.
MR. WATERS: All right. As the months went on after that, did y'all continue to review your records looking for additional misappropriations?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. We immediately decided once we found this out on September 2nd and had the confrontation on the 3rd, we immediately started doing a dig into our books and proactively going to look for anything, and anything that we found we turned over to law enforcement. We also had a forensic audit from an outside firm come in and providing information from them. So, this took most of September, gathering all of this information and going through all of our stuff, to figure out what else we had missed or what else had occurred.
MR. WATERS: You've already described the checks to the Forge account at Bank of America, which was a fake Forge account. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Was there another manner in which Alex Murdaugh was misappropriating money that you uncovered in your review of the firm's records as CFO?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. We also found out some payments made through Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and generally explain how those were working.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, those were working -- some of those Russell Laffitte was a conservator on, and funds were directed to Palmetto State Bank as if they were going to be held for the beneficiary, and those checks were later converted into personal use for Alex.
MR. WATERS: All right.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: And incidentally the week after we -- of the boat -- I mean, of the roadside shooting when we were going through stuff in Alex's office, we actually found Forge -- R. Alexander Murdaugh doing business as Forge bank statements in his office.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, you found the Bank of America bank statements?
MR. WATERS: And the title on those bank statements was what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: R. Alexander Murdaugh, doing business as Forge.
MR. WATERS: Okay.
MR. WATERS: I'm going to get a document marked if I could real quick.
(Break in proceedings.)
(SPREADSHEET MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 314 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 315 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: Do -- the client trust account checks, what color are they?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Green.
MR. WATERS: All right, and the operating checks, are they a different color?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Blue.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, 314 for this hearing. This will be the spreadsheet that's in one of the folders in the pack that I just gave you. It starts at the top, the check date 12/26/18.
MR. WATERS: And I'm going to show you what's been marked as State's 314 for this hearing and see if you recognize that document.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes. This is a spreadsheet that we've developed of the money and the clients that had money stolen using the Forge payment method.
MR. WATERS: All right, and by the Forge payment method, you mean what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Basically checks payable to Forge that looked like they were going to be for a structured annuity on behalf of the client.
MR. WATERS: All right, and, again, for the purposes of this hearing, in preparing that chart, you've been keeping a chart and keeping these records. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Is this all of the misrepresentations, or is this focused just on some for purposes of a particular category?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This is just for the purposes of this particular category.
MR. WATERS: And what category is that again?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Forge.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. I'm going to put this up on the screen. And just real quick, if you could just go across and tell me what the various categories represent?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Excuse me. The categories, if you see the column and category Forge payment, those would be where checks were actually written to Forge as if those were the beneficiary's proceeds that were being sent for a structured annuity.
MR. WATERS: Okay.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The next line where it says Barrett Boulware took insurance proceeds, this is actually a check that was payable to Barrett Boulware from Southern Fidelity Insurance, and Alex actually endorsed that check. He had power of attorney on that file. He actually endorsed that check, and later we were able to trace it into his personal accounts.
MR. WATERS: All right.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: If you keep going down, the majority of these are Forge payment. If you get to Deon Martin, the first line says fake --
MR. WATERS: Just real quick -- sorry to interrupt you. I just wanted to cross through -- we have got the client. We've got the civil action number. We've got the category that you were just describing. We've got the date that the trust was funded, and then we have the amount. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And the date that the trust was funded, what does that category refer to?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's refers to when we found out and did the deep dive into exactly what had happened on each file and deposited the money back immediately into our client trust. So, that's -- the firm actually, as we found these, put money into client trust. We then met with all of the clients, reestablished what the correct disbursement should have been, and returned all funds to the clients.
MR. WATERS: So, the firm had to pay the money back that you determined in each one of these cases that Alex Murdaugh misappropriated through the fake Forge on this list?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: What's the total amount on this sheet?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 2,841,512.55.
MR. WATERS: And again, does this represent everything or just a particular category?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Just a particular category.
MR. WATERS: Just real quick, I see that says 1/29/11 for Thomas Moore. Is that supposed to be '21?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, and that would be the date and the check number of the check that was taken.
MR. WATERS: I'm going to hand Exhibit 314 up to you. And if you could, correct that with my pen here and then just put your initials next to it, please. Going back to Exhibit 314, if you look at all of the check dates on here, we have the earliest one being August of 2015. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And then it continues all the way up to early 2021. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Along with your spreadsheet that was just marked, have you also prepared some supporting documentation for each one of those transactions and the misappropriation that you've identified?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, we have.
MR. WATERS: And these are from the records and your investigation into the records at the firm?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And each one of these says the firm had to make the clients whole because of the defendant's misappropriations?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: All right. I'm going to show you as what's been marked as 315. And this is a particular case -- it's Elease Mallory just as an example -- and see if you recognize that document.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I do. This first document is the disbursement, which would have been drafted at the end of the case that states the recovery, expenses, fees, and payments to clients. Next we have -- and this one actually had a payment to Forge, so I have a copy of that canceled check. And then the third and fourth pages are where we did our correcting disbursements with footnotes about what had happened and explained everything to our clients when we reimbursed them.
MR. WATERS: Okay, let's put that up on the screen real quick. Are there similar documents, supporting documents, for each one of these transactions that's on your spreadsheet?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There is.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, this is a disbursement sheet. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And I didn't ask you, but very quickly, tell me what a disbursement sheet is and how it's supposed to work.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, a disbursement sheet just shows at the conclusion of a case once the recovery -- it will show the recovery amount, list out the fees that were sent to the attorneys, shows fee splits if there's multiple attorneys, shows the amount of expenses we collect back, any liens or loans that were payable that were in the scope of that case, and then the final amount would be the payment to the client or the client's beneficiaries if they had been beneficiaries.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then down here at the bottom of this particular one, do you recognize that signature?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, that's Alex's.
MR. WATERS: And going to the second page, what is this right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is a copy of check that was payable to Forge that you saw on the bottom line of that other disbursement, as well as the back of it showing the endorsement.
MR. WATERS: And is that the real Forge or the fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's the fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: What then -- what is this document right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This is the correcting disbursement. The yellow totals would signify what the correct amount should have been and the corrections that would needed to have been made.
MR. WATERS: All right. Going back to this first page, in this particular one, how much was the recovery?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $183,528.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then was there an attorney fee taken from PMPED?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There was an attorney fee taken. In this case it was $30,000, which was a reduced fee. We generally get a third or 40 percent, but there are instances where the attorney will reduce their fee for some reasons.
MR. WATERS: And do you know why -- who requested the fees be reduced in this case?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That would be Alex would have done that.
MR. WATERS: Alex did that, and so -- but those fees got paid to the firm from that recovery, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They did.
MR. WATERS: All right, great. So, the rest of that money went to the client, didn't it?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It did not. It actually went to the fake Forge account where Alex stole the money from the client.
MR. WATERS: Every last bit of it?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Every bit, the 152,866.
MR. WATERS: That client -- that client didn't get one dime until y'all had to make it right.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And that's similar to the rest of the examples we have.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It's exactly like the rest.
MR. WATERS: Been going on for years.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, there is supporting documentation like that for each one of these and they're in a packet up there. I'm happy to go through all of those with the witness. I don't want to sell myself short if I need to. I don't know if we're at the point for purposes of Your Honor if it is made or if you would like me to go through each one of those. I'm happy to keep going.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Griffin, is this yours?
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: All right. Court's indulgence one moment, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
(Break in proceedings.)
(DISBARMENT DOCUMENT MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 316 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 317 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 318 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 319 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 320 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 321 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 322 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 323 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 324 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 325 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 326 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 327 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 328 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Waters, do you have a summary of everything Ms. Seckinger --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Ms. Seckinger, yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- Ms. Seckinger --
MR. WATERS: I can do that from the spreadsheet, Your Honor, and then we're marking the supporting documentation. So, I'll go ahead and mark -- but I think with Ms. Seckinger we can kind of walk through each one and describe each one while we do that. But each packet has -- we've got this spreadsheet that has each one on there, and then for each one of them -- we tried to minimize it down to the bare minimum. And again, this isn't even all of the misappropriation, but we just have a few supporting documents for each one, which is the disbursement sheet, the fake Forge check typically, and then the corrected disbursement sheet that the firm had to do. That's generally what each packet has, for example the one we last did.
MR. WATERS: Is that correct, Ms. Seckinger?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And so I can go through those quickly and we can do that on the spreadsheet. And then we have one other category that they uncovered, the manner in which he was able to misappropriate the money going back to, I think, 2008 or 2009.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir, you may proceed.
MR. WATERS: Thank you. All right. So, Your Honor, we're going to go through that packet that was provided up to you, and we're going to go in the order except the Hershberger which we've already talked about.
MR. WATERS: And so, Ms. Seckinger, can you see okay on that screen there?
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. I'm just going to kind of move through these as expeditiously but as accurate as we can. The first one we have, this particular client, Ms. Adrianna. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right, and I'm going to put 317 up on the screen, and this is the disbursement sheet for that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is the disbursement sheet for that, yes.
MR. WATERS: All right, and down at the bottom, do you recognize the signature where it says attorney?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's Alex's signature.
MR. WATERS: All right, and would typically the attorneys meet with the clients and get them to sign these disbursement sheets before any disbursements were made?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Typically we signed -- we did the checks on the attorney's signature, and then the attorney met with the client and had them signed at the same time they distributed and discussed the disbursement.
MR. WATERS: Got you. All right, and then right here on this particular one, we have a total recovery amount of how much?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 247,5 -- $247,500.
MR. WATERS: And the firm gets paid its fees out of that.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: And, again, that looks like a reduced fee of $22,000.
MR. WATERS: And what happens to the rest of the money?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The 225,073.46 went to a fake Forge account that was for Alex's benefit.
MR. WATERS: All right, and is that a check right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is.
MR. WATERS: Whose signature is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's Alex's.
MR. WATERS: And that's 225 and change. And then you have the corrected disbursement sheet. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And this is where the firm had to make good on Alex's misappropriation.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let's go to the next one. This would be for Mr. Barrett, using the first name. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right, Barrett Boulware.
MR. WATERS: All right. We're just using his first name. You have the disbursement as 75,193. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is the check I discussed earlier that was payable to Barrett that Alex endorsed directly and deposited into his account.
MR. WATERS: All right, and I'm on Exhibit 318. We're in the third page. Is this that check right here that was made out to Mr. Boulware?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is, and that was actually found as we went through his desk after September 3rd.
MR. WATERS: All right, and do you recognize that writing on there? I can zoom in if we need to.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's Alex's writing.
MR. WATERS: All right, and this is the deposit that went along with it?
MR. WATERS: And what's the name right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Alex Murdaugh.
MR. WATERS: All right. Going to the next one on the list, you have this one, and the amount is 279,865. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right, and we're still on Exhibit 318. And this is the disbursement sheet, the original disbursement sheet right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And whose signature is down at the bottom?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's Alex Murdaugh's.
MR. WATERS: And what does that say right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $279,850.65 payable to Forge.
MR. WATERS: Fake Forge or real Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Fake.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then what is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's the check payable to Forge showing Alex signing it and the endorsement on the back.
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. Let's move on to the next one we have -- this is Hershberger. We already did that one, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Well -- yeah, we already did that one. All right. Let's go on, and then we did the next two. Those were those two fees that Alex told you he was structuring?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right. At least this one was, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let's go on to Ms. Gary. This is State's 319. Is this the disbursement sheet right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is the initial disbursement sheet.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and what is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Excuse me, that is not the initial. That's second one. So, there's a Forge structure right there of 112.5, a payment of the personal rep, and the amount divvied between the beneficiaries. That Forge structure should have been paid to the beneficiaries, and again it was paid to the fake Forge account. You see the check signed by Alex and endorsed by Alex.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, that is the 112.5 right there, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And then you have the corrected disbursement where y'all had to make it right to your clients.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right, and moving on to the next one, we have Mister -- I'm going to use the first name, so use that for me if you can, please.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Okay.
MR. WATERS: All right. Mr. Christopher?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Uh-huh.
MR. WATERS: All right, and we have this -- you have this disbursement right here. Is that correct?
MR. WATERS: And whose signature is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Alex Murdaugh's.
MR. WATERS: And we've got how much?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 750,000.
MR. WATERS: Going to what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: The fake Forge. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And then we have the check?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We do.
MR. WATERS: And whose -- do you recognize that on the back?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is Alex Murdaugh's.
MR. WATERS: And this is $750,000?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then we have another disbursement sheet where y'all had to correct it and make it right to the client?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Y'all had to pay back $750,000 --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: -- that Alex spent. It was client money?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did. He stole it.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let's go to the next one, Deon Martin. We have three for Mr. Martin. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. Let's look at that. We have --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, you have a little new category here. You see above where is says structured annuity directly to Michael Gunn for 500,000, and then it's offset by the proceeds structured annuity below. This would represent -- like, there was an annuity associated with that case that had been properly structured and sent, and that resulted in there being a $200,000 fee taken on that $500,000 that should not have been taken from the client.
MR. WATERS: So, just a slight of hand, the paperwork, and Alex created a phantom 200 -- well, a real $200,000 in fees from thin air.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right, and that's not the end of this one, is it?
MR. WATERS: Okay. All right. Right here on the second page we have the disbursement to Forge. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Is that a real Forge or fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's the fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: How much is that one?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $338,056 cent -- $56.14.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Now, we already talked about on this list -- we talked about fake fee of 200,000 that you just mentioned.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And you've got 338,056 and 14.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Let's keep going. So, what's that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's the check for the $338,000 that's payable to the fake Forge and endorsed by Alex.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then what is this disbursement sheet?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This one is showing a structured payment of $45,000, and this one incidentally had a quote attached to it, and it's signed by the client, and that also went to the fake Forge account, his personal account. And this is a copy of the quote from Forge.
MR. WATERS: But no Forge structure was materialized?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No, none was done. We verified none was ever done.
MR. WATERS: All right, and what is that $45,000 check there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This is the $45,000 check to the fake Forge deposited by Alex.
MR. WATERS: And is this the disbursement sheet where y'all had to correct it and make it right to the client?
MR. WATERS: All right. Moving on to the next one, we have Elease Mallory and that's the one I showed you at the beginning as an example.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: All right. We've done that one and that was 183,528 where he took every last dime of it. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: My apologies. I'm going too fast. All right. The last one I talked about is 321; the one before that was 320, and the one before that was 319. We are now on 322. Turn the page and we have Mr. Jamian. Is that correct.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right, and right here we've got a disbursement sheet. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And we have a Forge of $90,000?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And is that real Forge or fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and what is this right here sideways?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is the check payable to Forge, the fake Forge, and the endorsement on the back of the check.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then we have an expense disbursement here of 5541.17. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And is that another amount that y'all had identified?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We identified later that was an incorrect charge to a client file, so we reimbursed that as well.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and is that page right here?
MR. WATERS: And what did -- what did Alex bill to the client that y'all determined was improper?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Some air fair --
MR. WATERS: To where?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: -- on a private flight. I can't recall, but I believe that one might have been down to the Keys.
MR. WATERS: Did y'all have to pay that money back, too, in this corrected disbursement?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: And that was Exhibit 322. We have 323, Mr. Johnny, of $95,000. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. On the first page we have the disbursement sheet and we have the Forge line right here for $95,000?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Did that go to the real Forge or fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and we have a copy of the check right there. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's a copy of the check and the endorsement and a copy of the corrected disbursement.
MR. WATERS: Did y'all have to make that right to the client?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: Moving on to 324, Mr. Jordan. You've got a disbursement to Forge. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right, for $85,000, along with the fake check and the endorsement on the check.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then the corrected disbursement, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: You missed the one for $65,000. There was two in that one.
MR. WATERS: Yep, there it is right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right, and then the correcting.
MR. WATERS: All right. So, we have an 85 and 65,000 on that one, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Exhibit 325. This is now Mr. Manuel, and we have a $70,000 Forge. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: And what's that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The check payable to Forge, the fake Forge, and the endorsement, and this is the correcting disbursement where we paid the client back the 70,000.
MR. WATERS: Going to the next one, we've got Ms. Mary, and we've got a settlement of proceeds to Forge of 19.5 right there. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And this is Exhibit 326. And did that go to real Forge or fake Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The fake Forge.
MR. WATERS: And what is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Copies of the check to fake Forge and the endorsement on the back by Alex.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and then corrected business disbursement having to pay the money back?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: By the firm? All right. Going on to Mr. Randy, right here we've got a disbursement of $9,569.30 on Exhibit 327?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. The next page we have what?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The copy of the check payable to the fake Forge and the endorsement by Alex on the back of it.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then the correction and disbursement?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. The last one for this set is Exhibit 328, and we have Morris Mack -- excuse me, Thomas Moore. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And then whose signature is that right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is Alex's.
MR. WATERS: And the amount to Forge of $125,000. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Incidentally, that's a forged signature for Thomas -- the client, and the client confirmed that when we met with him.
MR. WATERS: Do you recognize that handwriting?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It appears to me to be Alex's printing.
MR. WATERS: On the disbursement sheet?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then we have the fake check right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And a fake Forge check and then -- that's all on that one for right now. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Well, it's a partial correction, yeah.
MR. WATERS: All right. Were things like this going on in a lot of the cases that Alex had, a fair amount?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Well, we found them in these several cases, and in the scope of all cases not so much. I mean, we have a ton of volume, so this doesn't represent a large portion of those, but this was common with him.
MR. WATERS: And that's my point is that there is a large volume and these are sprinkled throughout over years and years and years.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They're sprinkled out over a decade or better.
MR. WATERS: Whenever there was an opportunity, it happened.
MR. WATERS: All right. I'm going to show you -- let me get a couple of more documents marked.
(Break in proceedings.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 329 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 330 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 331 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(DISBURSEMENT DOCUMENTS MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 332 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. WATERS: Let me show you what's been marked as Exhibit 329 here to this proceeding, and see if you recognize that.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I do. This is a spreadsheet of the payments that were made to Palmetto State Bank and misappropriated with that method.
MR. WATERS: You testified earlier that the fake Forge account for Richard Alexander Murdaugh DBA Forge started around 2015. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And -- but you just uncovered a different mechanism whereby Alex Murdaugh misappropriated money from clients prior to that. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct. Most of these took place in 2011 and 2012.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and did Alex have some particular big cases in those years?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He did.
MR. WATERS: What were those cases?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So he had Arthur Badger, which was against a UPS truck in Allendale where wife -- his wife was killed and I believe a couple of children hurt. There were several beneficiaries in this case. In that same wreck -- well, then he had another one with Hakeem Pinckney, who in that same wreck had a cousin in the car named Natasha Thomas.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Let's talk about the Badger case. What was the total settlement in that particular case?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: In the Badger case, the total that was apportioned Arthur Badger was 3.1 million. There was also a companion case, Donna Badger, with a good bit apportioned to it as well. I can't recall the number right here right off the top of my head.
MR. WATERS: All right, but just for Arthur Badger, who was just one of clients that Alex had, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Right.
MR. WATERS: Just for Arthur Badger, what was the attorney fee that he received in that settlement?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He received $1,240,000.
MR. WATERS: The firm did at least.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The firm did.
MR. WATERS: But that would be ultimately on his books at the end of year?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It would be credited to him.
MR. WATERS: $1,260,000. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 1,240,000.
MR. WATERS: Is that all of the money that Alex received from that particular case once y'all did your review?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is not.
MR. WATERS: What else did Alex take?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $1,325,000.
MR. WATERS: Another $1.325 million. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And how did he -- how did he go about doing that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Checks were payable to Palmetto State Bank that were then converted into personal items: payments for bank loans, payments for loans from a conservator account, payments to Johnny Parker, I believe it was. One to his father for paying back personal loans that they had given him.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, we've got now with regards to Exhibit 329 up on the screen.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: I guess I'll just talk over it. All right, we've got on this one -- at the top you have Mr. Arthur Badger. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And we have a date, and we have the amount, which is how much?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 1,360,000, and that is because we returned the PR fee in that case as well because the PR failed to do their job properly.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and I'm going to show you what's been marked for this hearing as 330. And is this the disbursement sheet?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, sir.
MR. WATERS: And down here we have: Palmetto State Bank payment for funds structured per client request. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And that's the 1.325 million?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And did that go to the client?
MR. WATERS: I see there's an email right here. Who is that from and to, and what's the date on that? Do you need me to bring it to you?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, this email is from Russell to Alex. There was an email that came from Alex to Russell asking if we could recut the checks in a certain way. Then Russell independently sent an email to Alex, which was forwarded to me and my accounting staff, asking if we could recut the $1.3 million check into four different checks.
MR. WATERS: And did y'all do that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: Did you have any reason at all to mistrust what was going on at that time?
MR. WATERS: All right. So, ultimately --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: And ultimately those got broken down into all of these payments. This is the payments and how these checks were written and what benefit they went to.
MR. WATERS: And they were made out to what entity?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: And after they were made out to Palmetto State Bank, what happened to them?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They got converted to personal usage for Alex Murdaugh's benefit.
MR. WATERS: Real quick. I see the spreadsheet says July of 2005. I'm going to point to this disbursement, though. What's the date on that disbursement?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: November 2012.
MR. WATERS: So, is that an error that needs to be corrected?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm sure that that's an error that needs to be corrected.
MR. WATERS: I'll hand you the spreadsheet and let's do that real quick. All right, I'm going to hand you a pen.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: All right, let's talk about another case. I'm looking now at Exhibit 322, and we go back to your spreadsheet and we have Natasha Thomas. Do you recognize that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I do.
MR. WATERS: And what was the amount on that particular one?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There were two payments. One was for $325,000 even; the other one was $25,245.08.
MR. WATERS: All right, and looking at Exhibit 332, we have down here at the bottom, we have payment and it says what entity right here?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: For 325?
MR. WATERS: So, was a check cut from the trust account of 325?
MR. WATERS: And is that it right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is it.
MR. WATERS: And did that money go to the client?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No. That money went for Alex's benefit.
MR. WATERS: And did y'all have to pay that back and make that right for his misappropriation?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did pay that back. What you're seeing now is just all the different payments that were made from that money.
MR. WATERS: And those were converted at the bank into personal use for Alex?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. We're looking at the second check for -- how much is that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $25,245.08.
MR. WATERS: All right, and that's made out to what entity?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: From the client trust account?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Did that go to the client or did that go somewhere else?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That went to Alex's personal use again.
MR. WATERS: And did y'all ultimately have to make that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: And the last one is Mr. Hakeem, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Is that a companion case to Ms. Thomas?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It is.
MR. WATERS: You've got two misappropriations. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Looking at this disbursement sheet we have right here on this disbursement sheet, what entity is that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: How much?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: $309,581.46.
MR. WATERS: And that's signed by who on this?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Russell Laffitte as conservator.
MR. WATERS: And is that the check right there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is the check.
MR. WATERS: Made out to an entity?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Palmetto State Bank.
MR. WATERS: In what year?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: December 2011.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Did that money go to the client?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It did not.
MR. WATERS: Did y'all ultimately have to pay that back?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: And finally $60,000 for --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: The PR fee again. We decided to pay the PR fee back.
MR. WATERS: And that's the PR fee right there for Mr. Laffitte. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And when he signed that disbursement sheet.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Court's indulgence just one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. WATERS: You mentioned Russell Laffitte. Do you have a relation to Russell Laffitte?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Russell Laffitte is my brother-in-law; he's married to my husband's sister.
MR. WATERS: June 7, 2021, you came in demanding answers about those Faris fees, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And that conversation ended because he got a call about his father, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And the inquiry got pushed to the side because of the tragedy of the murder of Maggie and Paul?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And additionally, Alex called you about having to get finances together for a hearing in the boat case later that week. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And that hearing got canceled as a result of the tragedy of the murder of Maggie and Paul.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: And ultimately in July y'all received an email from Chris Wilson saying the money was in the account. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: When did you later find out about whether or not all of that money was in the account?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We found out after September 3rd that all of that money was not in the account. Chris Wilson called us and actually wanted us to pony up the other portion of the money.
MR. WATERS: And what portion was that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It was a couple of hundred thousand dollars that was still missing.
MR. WATERS: And once a few months later your attention got turned back to these matters and you ran that inquiry, then the whole thing started to unravel. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: Nothing further at this time, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Griffin.
MR. GRIFFIN: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do you have an idea about how long you plan to be?
MR. GRIFFIN: Thirty minutes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: So, we'll take about -- we'll take a break now for about 10 minutes.
(A break was taken.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Griffin.
MR. GRIFFIN: Thank you, Your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. GRIFFIN:
MR. GRIFFIN: Good morning, Ms. Seckinger.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Good morning.
MR. GRIFFIN: I want to first go to June -- I want to go to June 7th. You were up in Alex Murdaugh's office and you were talking to him about the Faris attorney fee money, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And while you were in the midst of this conversation, he received a telephone call informing him that his father had been readmitted back in the hospital, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That was my understanding, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: And his father had just gotten out of the hospital either that Saturday or Sunday, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I don't know.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and do you know that he spent Friday night in the hospital with his dad?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I don't know.
MR. GRIFFIN: Do you -- well, his father was Randolph Murdaugh, who was one of the principals of that law firm, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I know who his father was, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: Was he a principal of the law firm?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He was previously. He wasn't at the time of his death.
MR. GRIFFIN: Was he a -- was he beloved by the partners of the law firm?
MR. GRIFFIN: And his father -- when Alex got the phone call that his father was going back into the hospital -- and you mentioned that the belief was that it was terminal.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: You stopped your work and turned into a friend, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And provided him sympathy, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And backed off of what you were doing to allow him to do whatever he was going to do with his father.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And so when you walked out of the office, things had come to a standstill as to your investigation to Alex directly as to where is the Faris fee money, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And Mr. Randolph Murdaugh passed away -- Monday was the 7th. He passed away on the 10th, I believe, didn't he?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm not sure of the date but that sounds right.
MR. GRIFFIN: It was that Thursday, correct? And if Alex had stayed out of the office from the day that -- from that Monday when he got the phone call that his dad was going back in the hospital and was terminal until his dad passed or shortly after he passed, no one would have said a thing in that firm, would they?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm not sure if they would or not.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, what you were looking at investigating was where is the fee due to the law firm on the Faris case, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that was a case where Alex was associated with Chris Wilson, and they represented plaintiff -- I assume Mr. Faris or Ms. Faris or the estate of Faris.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And they got an excellent result during the case. It was verdict -- a non-jury verdict after a trial in Richland County. Do you remember that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I don't know the details of the case.
MR. GRIFFIN: And in that -- and you were -- the firm got an expense check but no fee check, and immediately a question went out to Chris Wilson's paralegal. Where is the fee to the law firm, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And the paralegal said our bosses got paid, and then that caused you to look into the matter.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay. Now -- and Alex told you no, no, the money's still in Chris Wilson's trust account, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And he said that to you on multiple occasions.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And, in fact, Chris Wilson sent an email saying the money is in my trust account.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He did in July.
MR. GRIFFIN: In July, and it was forwarded on to you, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And I noticed -- well, let me back up. Did Alex explain -- did he come up with a story and explain that the reason the money is in the trust account is because I'm considering whether to structure the fee?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did discuss that, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: And in that law firm, your law firm that you're an employee of, partners had structured attorney's fees in the past, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They had.
MR. GRIFFIN: And so the fact that -- and just so the record is clear, when we're talking about structuring attorney's fees, it is delaying the payment of the fees through some financial product. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And by delaying the payment of the fees for a financial product, if successful, you're -- it allows you to delay the payment of the taxes on that money.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, in the times that the fees had been structured in the past when the payment of the fees have been delayed, who is the beneficiary of the financial product? Is it the partner that brought the fee to the firm, or is it the law firm?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: So, we've only done it once or twice in the past, and when it was done it was -- the beneficiary was the partner, but it was also contributed and figured into our allocation of the fee breakdown at the end of the year.
MR. GRIFFIN: So, there's no -- I mean, the fact that there's a structure at the time you did it when it was disclosed, aboveboard -- and let's say a $100,000 fee, for example. I mean, you allocate it to the firm. That partner who delayed receiving $100,000 until sometime in the future would still have to put his 7 and a half or her 7 and a half percent into the kitty at the --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Right, and that would also be the percentage of the money that he would receive that would be taken into account of that.
MR. GRIFFIN: Well, wouldn't it, if was $100,000 --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, he did.
MR. GRIFFIN: So, he got credit or she got credit for the $100,000 even though it never went to the firm?
MR. GRIFFIN: So, if a partner --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: If a partner did it correctly, it would be recognized and it would be accounted for correctly. The question wasn't whether he was going to structure a fee. It was whether he had received the fee personally.
MR. GRIFFIN: I understand. The -- and he had said he had it and it was at Chris Wilson's office.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's what he stated.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, the spreadsheet and the files that you were asked about, I notice the Faris matter wasn't on any of it, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And the Faris matter wasn't on any of them because the Faris matter -- the firm ultimately got paid 792,000, which was what the firm was owed on the Faris case.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. GRIFFIN: And after Maggie and Paul's murder and after Mr. Randolph's death, the murder on the 7th, Randolph Murdaugh's death on the 10th, how long of a delay was there before you got in touch with Lee Cope and Lee reached out to Chris Wilson?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: There wasn't a delay in me getting in touch with Lee Cope. Lee Cope knew about it. The decision was made to call me off of it and that Lee would deal with it from there with Chris Wilson.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay. So, as far as you know, there was no delay. It was just taken over by Lee Cope.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It wasn't a delay on my part. It was taken over by Lee Cope.
MR. GRIFFIN: And you don't know whether Lee -- how long it took Lee to -- Lee Cope to reach out to --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: You would have to ask Lee.
MR. GRIFFIN: So, I mean, you can't testify to that. We would have to ask Lee.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yeah, I don't know.
MR. GRIFFIN: And then you had talked about the Hershberger case where there was actually what appeared on paper to be a structured fee, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And your having done one in the past, it did not appear that the proper procedures were followed so that Alex would have to pay income tax on it, whether it was structured or not.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And his explanation, I think you said that was back in --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Late May, early June.
MR. GRIFFIN: Yeah. That check was May 12th of 2021, the Hershberger.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I can't be sure when the exact conversations were. They were all going around the same time, but it would have been after that check.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and that -- so the thought there was -- and Alex told you that, well, I'm just trying to sort of shelter money from me and put it in Maggie's name because I'm being a defendant in the boating case.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, the -- you and your firm -- and you had outside forensic accountants looking at everything, and you don't have any information or evidence or documents that would suggest that any of the Hershberger fee went into Maggie's name.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I did not pursue that portion of it. We have testimony from Michael Gunn that there was no annuity set up.
MR. GRIFFIN: Right, and I guess, you know -- right. So, as far as you can tell Judge Newman here today is that Alex put that money in a fake Forge account that was Alex Murdaugh doing business as Forge?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And you don't have any information that that money then went into Maggie Murdaugh's investment account, personal account, or any sort of account, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I know that it went into his Forge account. After that, I don't know how it was used.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and I think you said that you didn't start back up looking into the Hershberger matter until some time in -- I think you said you did not readdress it until late September.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: In early September, you were sitting in your office and you had an epiphany or, you know, just a thought. Well, let's just see what these -- how many times Alex in his cases had checks going to Forge.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Well, when you're speaking of an epiphany, I had started digging through his client list for every fee that he'd brought in. And rather than going one by one, my epiphany was let me just run a payment ledger on Forge and see what that turns up rather than digging one by one.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and what prompted you to do that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Because I was trying to look to see if there had been anymore settlements that had been written to Forge like this other one with Hershberger so that we could account for them and discuss how we were going to handle them at year end with the bonus distribution.
MR. GRIFFIN: I see, and what time of the year do you have to prepare final reports for --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: December.
MR. GRIFFIN: In December? And when do you start working on that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It depends every year, but usually December.
MR. GRIFFIN: In September you were, I guess, doing your job trying to see if there were other Hershberger-type structures out there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And so you ran a report of financial records that were maintained at the law firm, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: These were electronic records?
MR. GRIFFIN: And you didn't have to order bank statements from anyone. You had them right there at -- on your computer system?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I have mine, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: And there's nothing that happened in -- well, let me back up. We've seen checks from Forge, I think you said, going back to 2015?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: Had those checks been on the firm financial system and maintained since 2015?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They were. They didn't catch our attention before that.
MR. GRIFFIN: And there's nothing about the murder of Maggie and Paul that prevented you from accessing that information at any point in time, is there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: No. What prevented me was work and personal obligations to get to that point in time to have the opportunity to look.
MR. GRIFFIN: And the -- but the information had been at your fingertips. If anything was done in 2015, it was there; '16, it was there; '17, it was there.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that's why you were able to go back and do the work, and the law firm stood up and made these clients whole. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, do you have the summary exhibit, 314, up there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I do not.
MR. GRIFFIN: Well, let me just have you look at this real quick. Can you go through Exhibit 314, and the grand total is $2,841,512.55, and tell us -- just identify any one on this list that is straight diversion of fees that is due to the law firm.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Both Hershbergers were straight diversions of fees that were due.
MR. GRIFFIN: Is there any other one?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Partials of some of the other ones. I can't remember the breakdowns, but I know, like, Elease Mallory were some -- one of those two. Some of them should have been firm's fees due to them.
MR. GRIFFIN: Right, but all of the other ones but the Hershberger matter involved proceeds that should have gone to the client, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Which your client stole, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that -- well, you investigated it and you came to that conclusion and the law firm came to that conclusion, right?
MR. GRIFFIN: But as part of the investigation, did you have to interview the clients and ask the client hey, did you authorize Alex to put this in a fake Forge account?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did interview clients, most of them. We met with them. Most of them were very surprised and shocked and stated that they had no idea that they had been stolen from.
MR. GRIFFIN: And so to establish that the clients didn't authorize Alex to do what he did, you had to go to the clients.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And get their response.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And you accepted their response, rightfully so, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: On this list of 314, is there any one where you didn't go to the client or the client representative, except perhaps Hershberger, and say did you authorize Alex to do this?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I might not have met personally with all of them, but somebody with our firm did.
MR. GRIFFIN: Right. Then Barrett -- the second one, Barrett Boulware, you said took insurance proceeds, and that's Exhibit 314. And I think you said Alex had power of attorney?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He did.
MR. GRIFFIN: And was Mr. Boulware alive in 2018?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I'm not -- I don't remember.
MR. GRIFFIN: And how is it that you know that Alex did not have permission from Barrett Boulware to keep that money personally, that perhaps Mr. Boulware had owed him some money?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: When -- I believe Ronnie Crosby is the one who spoke with Jared Boulware, who is his PR, so that would be a better suited question for Ronnie than it would be for me.
MR. GRIFFIN: So, we would need Ronnie Crosby and Jared Boulware to come in and testify as to what Barrett Boulware may or may not have agreed to with Alex.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: You may have one that he could come in and testify that to, but the rest of these on these lists, people have told me that they either did not know about it, it was covered up, or it was forged.
MR. GRIFFIN: And they would need to come in and tell us that.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They would and they have.
MR. GRIFFIN: Have they testified?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I believe they have.
MR. GRIFFIN: Not in this proceeding.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Not in this proceeding.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, there was another group of cases that involved Palmetto State Bank. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And your brother-in-law?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And again there's Arthur Badger, Natasha Thomas, and Hakeem Pinckney. Do you know if Mr. Laffitte or anyone at the bank was personal representative to or conservator for any of these folks?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: He was conservator for Natasha Thomas; I believe he was conservator for Hakeem Pinckney. I can't remember the exact circumstance, and he was the conservator for Arthur Badger's wife.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and Mr. Laffitte -- all of these checks went to Palmetto State Bank, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And then from Palmetto State Bank they were sent out to pay, according to your investigation, expenses that Alex owed. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And repayment of loans that Alex owed, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that Mr. Laffitte was knowledgeable about that as far as you know, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Appeared to be.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, I want to go into a little more detail on some of these. The -- let's just go to -- I was just going to put it up on this ELMO. And it is the Ben Alan Kendall? Well, that's Hershberger. Let's don't put that up. Let's do the next one, Adrianna. Let me see if I can do this right. Do you see that one? That's the disbursement sheet?
MR. GRIFFIN: And the recovery amount here is -- it says settlement proceeds to Forge Consulting, and that's $225,000?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that, according to this document, represents what the client should have gotten and didn't get.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And then the attorney's fees here says $22,000. Is that -- the firm got $22,000?
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and then this same exhibit, there's a lengthy footnote down here. Does this footnote explain what happened?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, it does.
MR. GRIFFIN: In this footnote it says there were three previous disbursements in this matter. Is that right?
MR. GRIFFIN: And so the first one occurred on December 13, 2018, issuing attorney's fees and costs, $19,932.89 to Palmetto State Bank satisfying loans and et cetera, and other matters. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, do we know if any of those are fake?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: They look to be legitimate.
MR. GRIFFIN: Did you confirm their legitimacy?
MR. GRIFFIN: And how did you do that?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: By looking at the paperwork and observing the paperwork.
MR. GRIFFIN: And then here goes another disbursement on December 20, 2018. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And this document referenced some exhibits. That is Exhibit A through F? I don't believe that's attached. I mean, it may be. Did you prepare this footnote?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I don't remember which ones exactly I prepared. I prepared a lot of them, and Chelsea Avant prepared a lot of them as well.
MR. GRIFFIN: So -- and most all of these have an explanation and a footnote as to what the entire transaction was about.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and you didn't do every single one. It was a team effort, I take it.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And so people on the team investigated it and then would have to come here and explain exactly what they did and what they learned and --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct. It's also been through forensic audit, and also looked at former FBI, and it's been provided to law enforcement who all looked over it as well.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, I think you also said that back on June 7th that you said that Alex called you and asked for his updated balance in his 401(k)?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. GRIFFIN: And told you he was putting together some financial records for civil discovery in the boating case in the hearing coming up?
MR. GRIFFIN: And that he had asked you -- he questioned you previously about the balance of the 401(k).
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right. It's not been the first time.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay, and the time that he questioned you, was it in the context of putting together information for the boating case or just he was curious?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Putting together information for financials.
MR. GRIFFIN: Financials in general or financials in the boating case, or you just don't know?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I didn't really ask particulars. The perception was that it was for the boating case, talk in the office. We knew hearings were coming up; we knew they were looking for his financials.
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay. Well, you said on the 7th he called you about financials. Did he reference the boating case?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I believe he did.
MR. GRIFFIN: Now, do you know, do you know what impact or what consequences Alex would have suffered from his partners if he had just -- or if you had found that he had diverted the Faris fee to himself personally as opposed to putting it in a structure or putting it in the firm? Do you know?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I think that he probably would have had some bad repercussions for him because they are adamant that we were not going to be a part of having any portion of hiding or diverting any fees.
MR. GRIFFIN: And the concern was hiding fees from the civil discovery in the boating case.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Yes, at that point in time it was.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that wasn't -- and at that point in time, no one was saying that that they thought he was stealing from the firm, but that he was sheltering money from being disclosed.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That was the opinion, yes.
MR. GRIFFIN: And then it wasn't until September when you ran a report and you saw all of these Forge checks being deposited in the Bank of America account and endorsed by Alex and seeing his signature that you realized there's been something far different going on than what anyone believed.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that's what led to his resignation or termination.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: And that information had been in the books and the records of the law firm since 2015.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. GRIFFIN: Give me one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. GRIFFIN: One last question. The information that was part of the investigation when you and members of your staff and the forensic accountants determined that the clients did not authorize any of these transactions, you have no personal knowledge other than what has been told to you by people working with you or by the clients, right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: I also saw some of the deposits going into his personal Bank of America account statements.
MR. GRIFFIN: No, I understand that, but whether the clients --
JEANNIE SECKINGER: If they had some back deal, I don't know about any of it, no.
MR. GRIFFIN: Right. Right, and any information you have about what the clients told the firm is hearsay as far as you know?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It's not hearsay if they said it to me.
MR. GRIFFIN: So, some said it to you?
MR. GRIFFIN: Okay. Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any redirect?
MR. WATERS: Very briefly, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. WATERS:
MR. WATERS: One thing you know is that the money that you've talked about with the fake Forge went into an account, Richard Alex Murdaugh DBA Forge, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Was there any possible legitimate explanation for client trust funds to go into that account?
MR. WATERS: And after you realized that they went into those accounts, did the firm ultimately refund the money to those clients?
MR. WATERS: You mentioned that you actually found in his office some bank statements for that particular account. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: I'm going to show you what's been marked as Exhibit 335 and have you take a look at it. Is that consistent with the Richard Alexander Murdaugh DBA fake Forge account that you saw?
MR. WATERS: That you have repeated instances of client trust money going into?
MR. WATERS: And that there's no possible legitimate explanation for?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: You were asked some questions about the manner of your inquiry and that sort of thing, and I want to take you back a little bit further very quickly. Do you remember -- is it common after the books get cleared at the end of the year for certain partners to loan money to the firm to handle operating expenses until fees start to come in?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It is. Basically we wipe out all of the cash reserves. So, in order to operate for the first couple of months, attorneys will loan money to the firm for operating expenses.
MR. WATERS: At some point in time, prior to all of this, did you become aware of an instance in which Alex Murdaugh had erroneously received a repayment that was actually meant for his brother, Randy?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: All right, and that -- did that happen once or did the same thing happen twice?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It actually went through twice. The check was written to him erroneously, and within a few days he brought the check back to my staff and had it recut to him. So, the first check that was recut was held for him for about a year. So, the replacement check went through immediately, and the first check cleared about a year later, and that's when we were discovered that -- going back and looking that I discovered that he was paid erroneously and that it should have been Randolph Murdaugh and not R. Alexander Murdaugh.
MR. WATERS: So, it was one repayment but he managed to get it twice.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: How much was that check roughly? Do you recall?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: 125,000 roughly.
MR. WATERS: $125,000. Was he confronted about this when that was discovered?
MR. WATERS: What was his explanation?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: His explanation was that it was an accident, that he thought it was due to him and that he didn't know, and that he'd found the other one later and deposited it, too, because he thought they were due to him.
MR. WATERS: And was he required to pay that money back?
MR. WATERS: And after he gave that explanation of oops, I didn't realize these two $125,000 checks were for me, was that matter then forgotten or moved on from?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: This was shelved, yes.
MR. WATERS: It was shelved. Nothing -- no repercussions happened at that point in time or anything like that.
MR. WATERS: Okay. So, the money gets paid back and people moved on. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Okay. You testified before that when the murders happened, that the inquiry, nobody was going to bring that up now in the wake of murders, the Faris fee that you had talked to Alex about the morning that Maggie and Paul were killed, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right. It's a family-like place. Everybody was concerned for him, his family. We knew we had time to discuss this before the end of year, and at that point, like I said, we didn't think he was stealing any money from us.
MR. WATERS: Had no reason at that time to think he was stealing, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And so it did get shelved, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: All right, and then in July you got an email. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And you testified to this before. What did the email say from Chris Wilson's office?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: It said that the money was in the account and available to us at any time that we would ask.
MR. WATERS: And then so at that point, the money seemed like it was there. The money had -- is not missing and so the matter was shelved. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That is correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. However, you have testified that things had been going on for awhile, and it was months later that triggered you to do that inquiry. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: Okay, because there had been multiple instances over the years. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: But that has nothing to do with the fact that this might have occurred regardless at any point in time. Because of all of the things that had been going on, that has to do with the fact that when things were happening in June they got shelved. And then you found out the money was there and you thought that that matter was closed. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right. We never knew about the prior. We had no reason to look. We had no complains from clients. We had -- nobody was saying they were missing money, and this just turned up when we started searching because of the Hershberger and the other relevant things.
MR. WATERS: Has there ever been instances with when Alex used the firm credit card for personal expenses and was required to pay that back?
MR. WATERS: And if the money got paid back, well, then the matter -- everybody moved on. Is that right?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: So, there was a history of that.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: You get the money back in and everybody moves on. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right. There's history of trust and brotherhood.
MR. WATERS: And that's what happened in July with the Faris fees. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: You were asked about whether or not you were told in July that the money was in Chris Wilson's trust account. That's what you were told. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Right.
MR. WATERS: Have you come to find out, however, that it actually had not been there?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We did.
MR. WATERS: And you found this check proving it, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: The bottom line is is that there had been a long history of if the money got paid back, people would move on, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's right.
MR. WATERS: And things were continuing to percolate. They get delayed in June because of everything that happened, correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: But you were now curious, and eventually months later you look back at that. Is that correct?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: That's correct.
MR. WATERS: That also was highlighted and sparked by the discovery of a check proving that he had not been telling the truth the entire time.
JEANNIE SECKINGER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: Thank you. Nothing further.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Anything further?
MR. GRIFFIN: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Thank you. You may step down.
(The witness exited the stand.)