Alex Murdaugh hearing: Judge rules evidence must be shared, but protected

South Carolina Judge Clifton Newman has ruled on dueling motions regarding evidence disclosures in the murder cases involving former S.C. attorney Richard "Alex" Murdaugh.

During the Monday morning hearing in Colleton County General Sessions Court, Judge Newman ruled that all evidence against Murdaugh must be disclosed by the prosecution to the defense, yet he also issued a temporary order restricting the defense from releasing or sharing any of that information improperly.

Murdaugh was indicted on double murder and weapons charges on July 14 in the June 2021 shooting deaths of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, after being indicted on scores of other crimes. He is currently jailed in Richland County.

In what is perceived as a win for the South Carolina Attorney General's Office, both parties came out swinging in this legal battle, with raised voices and emotional outbursts of interruption from the onset.

The legal back story on this Murdaugh pretrial hearing

On Aug. 16, Murdaugh attorneys Richard Harpootlian and Jim Griffin filed a “motion to compel” in hopes of forcing the state to turn over all information they plan to use to prosecute Murdaugh under Rule 5 of the S.C. Rules of Criminal Procedure, claiming that they are missing "100 percent" of the evidence and this is delaying and hindering Murdaugh's legal defense. A trial has been requested for January 2023.

On Aug. 18, prosecutors with the S.C. Attorney General's Office filed a motion requesting an order to unseal search warrants and requesting a temporary and, hopefully later permanent, blanket protective order that would seal all evidence from a public release before the murder trial.

The Attorney General's Office had stated that it would release the discovery evidence and agree to restrictions only upon the condition that the defense also agreed to protective orders as well in order to ensure a fair trial.

What was discussed during Monday's hearing?

Within minutes of the judge entering the courtroom, Harpootlian rose to his feet to loudly interrupt SC AG prosecutor Creighton Waters and claim he was trying to "hijack" the hearing, which set the emotional tone for much of this contested hearing.

Distrust was evident on both sides of the courtroom when it came to the protection of evidence and playing by proper legal procedure. State prosecutors have accused Murdaugh's defense team of playing last-minute "games," while the defense has accused the state of deliberately delaying their efforts to prepare a defense in an attempt to orchestrate a "trial by ambush."

"Your Honor, I am not done!" Harpootlian said after Waters attempted to interrupt him. "I'm sorry if I appear upset, but every time we turn around, they are trying to hide something."

Harpootlian also said, "I don't trust the state to follow the rules." Later, he added, "I trust Mr. Waters, I don't trust the rest of his office."

"The state wants nothing more than a fair trial in this case," countered Waters, adding, "I have not leaked any information, and I am not aware of any leaks."

Harpootlian wished to call a witness during the hearing - Capt. Ryan Neal with the SC Law Enforcement Division - but Newman denied the request.

Some of the evidence to be disclosed includes statements from witnesses, "phone dumps" from the victims, and interviews with people that were eventually excluded as witnesses.

After hearing often-heated arguments from both sides, Newman agreed to rule on both the defense's motion and the state's countermotion. In doing so, he mentioned the State Grand Jury investigations that are also ongoing against Murdaugh.

"It's automatic that the state must provide discovery," he said, later adding, "It would be an improper intrusion on that [SGJ] investigation for there not to be certain restrictions on the dissemination of this information."

"This is a case that cries out for a protective order," Newman added.

In ordering the state to comply with Rule 5 disclosures, Newman issued a blanket temporary protective order on all information shared, which restricts the defense from disseminating any information improperly until a more permanent and possibly modified protective order can be given. He also ordered that search warrants be unsealed so this information could be disclosed.

The judge's ruling does not include a "gag order" on extrajudicial statements by either party, other than restrictions already set by existing legal procedure, it does not restrict the release of information already in the public domain, nor does it restrict new information gathered in investigations by either party.

Newman also agreed to allow Murdaugh's legal team to have this evidence placed on a laptop computer for viewing, with the exclusion of any previous State Grand Jury evidence. This laptop is to be viewed at the jail under supervision but not left at the jail. The judge also agreed to allow both legal teams to agree on special provisions that would allow Murdaugh extra time to view this evidence, which could possibly include the use of a secure location outside of the jail.

One idea that was discussed but not ruled on was to have a "master" appointed in this case, such as another judge or attorney, to directly evaluate and supervise any specific releases of information.

After the judge's ruling, the Attorney General's Office issued the following statement: "As we have always intended, we will provide discovery as soon as the protective order is signed by Judge Newman. Any other comments, we would leave to our statements in court."

Harpootlian declined to comment on the judge's rulings.

Newman has agreed to sign the order later today, or as soon as possible, in order to allow for the release of the discovery so the defense can get started preparing its case.

Murdaugh murders in the public eye

During the hearing, Waters said that the Murdaugh case is "unprecedented in South Carolina history." He claimed that the evidence and information to be disclosed have a potential six- or seven-figure value to some people following this case.

"This information is worth over a million dollars to unscrupulous hands," said Waters, adding that this was a unique case with "unique media interest and the evidence did not need to be left lying around a jail cell with Murdaugh unprotected.

"The whole point of this is not to have this [evidence] in the wrong hands," he added. "If not in this case, in what case is a protective order necessary?"

In its motion last week, the state contends that the Murdaugh murders have generated "significant public attention" and that much of the evidence in this case contains "sensitive information" that should remain protected until it is used in court. The motion also requests that no sensitive information be left unprotected in the Richland County jail with Murdaugh - he is to be allowed to view the evidence only under supervision.

On Aug. 22, the Murdaugh defense team filed a motion in opposition to the state's request, claiming that the state must establish a "good cause" for such a blanket protective order and called it hypocritical, alleging that "For months on end, the state's prosecutors have selectively leaked information" about evidence to various media outlets.

The defense cited media stories about an audio recording obtained from Paul Murdaugh's cell phone that allegedly places Alex Murdaugh at the scene of the murders. The defense says they have since confirmed the existence of the video and audio recording but added that they first learned about this possible evidence in news articles - not in the discovery process that is required by law.

The defense motion further states that on Wednesday, Aug. 17, SC Law Enforcement Division agents, acting under the direction of the Attorney General's Office, played portions of the recording for family families members of the slain victims, and Murdaugh's attorneys allege that this was done so without obtaining a court order authorizing its disclosure.

In the countermotion, Murdaugh's attorneys state that the video is taken by Paul Murdaugh of an ailing dog that he was concerned about, and Alex, Maggie and Paul are captured having a "convivial, light-hearted" conversation in the background with "absolutely no indication of a disagreement or dispute," but adds that the state didn't leak that detail about the recording to the media because it wanted to "portray Alex Murdaugh in the worst possible light."

Alex Murdaugh saga: Ex-Hampton banker struck with lawsuit, more federal indictments

Previous coverage: New indictments allege Alex Murdaugh stole from his brother, name 2 new accomplices

On the night of the killings, Murdaugh told 911 dispatchers and police that he had been away from home and had found the unresponsive bodies of Maggie and Paul lying on the ground near the dog kennels after they had been shot.

Murdaugh is also facing more than 90 other criminal charges and is being detained in the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center on a $7 million bond he has been unable to meet, as his assets have been seized and placed under court-ordered receivership in the face of 11 pending civil suits.

This article originally appeared on Greenville News: Alex Murdaugh case: Judge: Evidence must be shared, but protected