Body

The South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Alex Murdaugh’s murder convictions and life sentence for the deaths of his wife and son, and prosecutors said afterward that they plan to retry him. In a ruling issued Wednesday, the court said the trial was tainted by improper comments made to jurors by the Colleton County Clerk of Court, Becky Hill, that the justices said undermined Murdaugh’s credibility and effectively urged a verdict.

Prosecutors said they would pursue another trial, a move they described as likely to take place in 2026. Murdaugh, who is 57, will remain in prison because he is serving a federal 40-year sentence and also a 27-year state sentence tied to financial crimes, even as the murder case heads back to court.

In court filings and statements following the decision, Murdaugh’s defense attorneys characterized the Supreme Court ruling as a win and said they looked forward to a new trial. “Alex has said from day one that he did not kill his wife and son. We look forward to a new trial,” defense lawyers Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin said in a joint statement.

The Supreme Court’s decision centered on what it described as Hill’s conduct while serving in a role overseeing evidence and the jury during the trial. The justices said Hill “egregiously attacked Murdaugh’s credibility” by suggesting to jurors that his testimony could not be trusted, including comments that urged jurors not to be “fooled,” “confused,” or “thrown off” by what he might say when he testified.

In its unanimous ruling, the court said Hill’s actions “essentially implored the jurors to find him guilty, the ultimate issue in the case.” The justices added that Hill “placed her fingers on the scales of justice, thereby denying Murdaugh his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury,” describing the right to an impartial jury as a core demand of the justice system.

The Supreme Court also said Hill’s motivation reflected what it called the “siren call of celebrity,” linking her comments to an effort to promote a book about the case. The court said Hill sought to increase sales of her book, “Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders,” which it said had been pulled from publication after plagiarism allegations.

Murdaugh’s attorneys pointed to what they called gaps in the physical evidence in the first murder trial. The defense argued there was no DNA or blood found splattered on Murdaugh or on any of his clothes, even though the killings involved close-range attacks with powerful weapons that were never found.

Prosecutors, for their part, argued that Hill’s comments were fleeting and that the evidence against Murdaugh was overwhelming. The state also relied on what investigators described as a timeline leading up to the killings, including claims that they cracked a passcode on Paul Murdaugh’s phone and found a video with a barking dog and Murdaugh’s voice admonishing it about five minutes before Paul stopped using his phone.

The Supreme Court additionally directed attention to how prosecutors introduced information about Murdaugh’s thefts during the murder trial. The justices said some evidence about the financial crimes might be acceptable in limited form, but they warned that details about victims who were disabled or otherwise vulnerable could unfairly sway jurors away from the central question: whether Murdaugh killed his wife and son.

At a Wednesday news conference, the chief prosecutor said he did not regret bringing a broad presentation of financial-crime evidence in the initial trial. “You don’t hit a home run if you’re afraid to strike out,” prosecutor Creighton Waters said.

State Attorney General Alan Wilson, who is running for South Carolina’s open governor’s seat this year, said he respected the court’s decision. He said politics would not play into how the case proceeds, saying the decision about whether to pursue the case would be built on whether to seek justice, and not on who holds the elected post.

Hill’s attorney did not respond to requests for comment.