Alex Murdaugh trial clerk ‘appears to have done something very wrong’: Legal experts warn ‘there’s no smoke without fire’ and believe Rebecca Hill’s book deal could be ‘a step over the line’ as murderer launches appeal

Legal experts have warned Alex Murdaugh could win a new trial if allegations that the clerk interfered with jurors in his successful trial prove true.

“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and it looks like Clerk Becky Hill has done something very wrong,” Columbia Law School attorney and educator Danny Karon told DailyMail.com on Wednesday.

Murdaugh’s legal team filed an appeal Tuesday against his conviction, arguing that Colleton County court clerk Rebecca Hill repeatedly “influenced the process” and took advantage of a book deal she obtained thanks to her position as an insider .

Attorneys Jim Griffin and Dick Harpootlian claim they have affidavits from two jurors who say Hill “messed with the jury,” at one point even warning them “not to be fooled” by Murdaugh before his position.

While the allegations against Hill have not been proven, Karon says publishing a book is inappropriate and only strengthens Murdaugh’s case.

“I don’t know if she entered the jury room or said something inappropriate to the jurors. But the fact that she has already published a book about her story – when this was not her story in the first place – smacks of meddling and opportunism to me. It’s people like them who tend to cross the line,” he said.

In legal documents, Murdaugh’s lawyers stated that Hill would regularly enter the jury room and ask jurors for their opinion of Murdaugh’s guilt or innocence.

Hill, who is serving her first term as the court’s elected clerk, published a book about the trial in July, Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders. The work has risen rapidly on Amazon’s ranking for non-fiction crime books and thrillers.

Murdaugh’s lawyers allege that Hill violated a South Carolina code that states, “No officer, member, or official shall knowingly use his office, membership, or employment to gain any economic interest for himself.”

Now that Murdaugh’s lawyers have filed an appeal, the attorney general will have to respond within ten days. A judge will then have to look at the evidence they claim to have – two affidavits containing the outrageous claims – and decide whether their arguments are valid.

The judge would then hold a hearing for Murdaugh to prove the allegations that Hill had interacted with the jurors to influence the trial, and if he does, the judge must allow a new trial.

The prosecution would then have the heavy burden of proving that Hill’s contact with jurors was harmless, Karon explained.

He added: “In a criminal case, any private communication, contact or tampering with jurors during a trial is considered presumably harmful.

“While this presumption is inconclusive, the state would have a heavy burden to overcome that contact with jurors was harmless to Murdaugh.”

South Carolina attorney Andrew Postal told DailyMail.com that the allegations against Hill are serious, and if what the defense says is true, the motion for a new trial has a chance.

He explained, “The clerk should never attempt to influence the jurors and ultimately the outcome of the trial. What’s even worse is that she is accused of doing this for personal financial gain to sell a book.

“The ultimate question will be whether the clerk’s behavior influenced the verdict, and the answer to that will depend on the interviews with each juror.”

It’s not clear how much money Hill made from her book, but the title is currently doing very well on Amazon and is number 58 in the books.

As a South Carolina attorney, Postal added that he doesn’t see how Murdaugh could get another trial in the state.

“Because of the publicity surrounding the first trial, it’s hard to imagine finding a fair and impartial jury for a new trial anywhere in South Carolina,” he said. “Maybe that’s part of their strategy, we’ll have to wait and see.”

The defense team filed a motion Tuesday on behalf of the disgraced South Carolina attorney.

It read: ‘Mrs. Hill did these things to secure for herself a book deal and media appearances that wouldn’t happen in the event of a mistrial. Mrs. Hill betrayed her oath of office for money and fame.”

Murdaugh’s legal team says he was “shaking and in disbelief” after they presented him with the evidence. He is currently serving two life sentences for the murders of Maggie and Paul.

They claim they were made aware of Hill’s alleged behavior after the book’s publication, when jurors reported “angry” at her.

“We hit brick walls until her book came out,” Dick Harpootlian said. “Subsequently, jurors who were clearly uncomfortable with the way she handled things, and even less comfortable with her going on a book tour and making money from it, reported it to us.”

They say they are “optimistic” for a new trial, but would not answer questions about any new suspects or evidence they might present in the case.

Griffin and Harpootlian say Hill traveled to New York with judges when they appeared on NBC’s Today Show.

NBC did not immediately respond when DaiylMail.com reached out with a request for comment.

The pair further allege that Hill “made up a story on a Facebook post to remove a juror she thought would vote not guilty.”

Joe McCulloch, attorney for two jurors who signed affidavits, told News Nation that his clients “reluctantly agreed” to speak with the defense team.

He added: ‘This is one of those chips that fall where they can fall. I have great respect for the clerk and it is a pity that we find ourselves here.

“It’s hard to say where this is going, but it’s a challenge for our justice system to evaluate all of this and determine what the next right thing to do is.

“I will say that today’s defense claims, along with the statements of the people I represent, are serious and there is certainly a way for the court to come to the conclusion that this cannot be treated as an innocent mistake. marked.

“But we’ll have to wait for the court to do its job.”

During the trial, Judge Clifton Newman ordered Hill to post a Facebook post she saw, alleging that a juror’s ex-husband “said things” about how his ex-wife told him what her “judgment would be.”

But the new documents now claim that Hill “invented” the post, with the juror claiming it couldn’t have been done because she hadn’t seen her ex-husband in over a decade.

‘Mrs. Hill has never seen such a Facebook post. She made it up,” the newly filed motion claims.

The former husband also denied the allegations that he wrote the message, as well as a follow-up apology, in an affidavit.

Judge Newman eventually acquitted the juror, but said, “Oh boy. I’m not too happy about the clerk questioning a juror instead of coming over and bringing it to me.”

The lawyers said there are more jurors who won’t talk to them, so they want them subpoenaed to testify under oath.

Griffin claimed that Hill even went so far as to tell the jury not to be “fooled” by Murdaugh’s testimony.

“If we are to believe these jurors, it is an impossible task for the state that we get a new trial,” he added.