LEXINGTON, SC — The judge overseeing Alex Murdaugh’s double-murder retrial sharply criticized both sides Friday over their contentious evidence disputes, warning that she “will not allow these proceedings to become a circus.”
During the tense hearing, Judge Debra McCaslin granted the defense’s request for additional DNA testing but rejected its broader bid for ballistic information.
McCaslin also corrected the record regarding a polygraph test that Murdaugh attorney Dick Harpootlian said in August his client passed with “flying colors.” The judge said Friday that Murdaugh actually failed the test, which concerned his financial crimes rather than the murders.
Murdaugh was convicted in 2023 of killing his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, at the family’s Moselle property in Colleton County.
The South Carolina Supreme Court later overturned those convictions, ruling that former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill improperly influenced the jury.
Murdaugh’s retrial is scheduled to begin April 5, 2027. He has continued to maintain his innocence in the killings.
McCaslin sided with the defense over prosecutors’ objections and allowed DNA testing on swabs taken from Maggie Murdaugh’s phone, even though the process will likely use the last samples available for testing.
The judge cited due process and Murdaugh’s right to a “full and complete defense.” His attorneys said the testing is expected to take about 90 days.
McCaslin ruled that defense attorneys will not have to provide prosecutors with the DNA test results unless they intend to use those results at trial.
The judge rejected Murdaugh’s request for a list of every crime in the 2nd and 14th judicial circuits since 2021 involving .300 Blackout ammunition, along with every recovered firearm of that type and shell casings from other shootings.
McCaslin said the defense theory that the murder weapon may be connected to an unsolved crime was speculative and based only on news reports. She added that the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division does not maintain such a list, while a manual review would be overly burdensome and could interfere with ongoing investigations.
Although McCaslin denied Harpootlian’s request to have his expert physically test shell casings recovered at the crime scene, she ordered the state to provide the defense with all available raw data.
She also ordered prosecutors to turn over 3D crime-scene scan data by Monday. However, McCaslin said she would not require the state to produce the same material repeatedly and directed the defense to have staff members sign for discovery.
McCaslin issued a similar warning after the state agreed to provide cellphone extraction data from Maggie and Paul’s phones, making clear that prosecutors would not be required to turn over the material again.
At the end of the hearing, McCaslin granted a state motion to correct the record concerning Harpootlian’s statement during an Aug. 14 hearing that Murdaugh had passed a polygraph “with flying colors.”
RELATED: Miley Cyrus Honors Godmother Dolly Parton in Powerful Tribute
The judge said Murdaugh took a polygraph about whether he had concealed other assets and failed it. She added that he has never taken a polygraph related to the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh.
McCaslin acknowledged that Harpootlian had submitted a letter apologizing for any confusion, then warned both sides that “candor with the court is not optional.”
McCaslin also ruled in the prosecution’s favor on a defense motion seeking evidence related to the disposal of the murder weapons, which have never been recovered.
The judge said prosecutors are required to turn over that material only if it proves favorable to Murdaugh’s defense.
The defense had initially asked McCaslin to compel prosecutors to produce information “concerning the handling, transport, concealment, or disposal of the alleged weapons used to kill Maggie Murdaugh and Paul Murdaugh.” The request included a 2023 statement a witness gave to South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agents alleging that a Lowcountry police chief discussed arriving early at the scene and providing Murdaugh with a change of clothes, as well as reports from every interview on the subject and testimony and exhibits presented to the State Grand Jury.
According to the motion, filed in late September by Murdaugh’s attorneys, press reports indicate that a state grand jury received testimony alleging Yemassee Police Chief Greg Alexander was observed in possession of the murder weapons shortly after the June 7, 2021, killings.
“According to those reports, witnesses have testified that the Chief of Police of the Town of Yemassee, Greg Alexander, was seen with the murder weapons in the immediate aftermath of the June 7, 2021, killings, and that second Yemassee officer is under investigation for transporting and concealing weapons and clothing,” the filing states.
It cites a story from The Post and Courier, which reported that “a Lowcountry official told SLED agents that Chief Alexander ‘spoke of arriving early to the murder scene and talked about providing a change of clothes to Murdaugh,’ and that the official believed the guns and clothing were brought into the police station and stored there.”
Notably, the allegations couldn’t be corroborated by The Post and Courier.
Alexander, through his attorney, Joe McCulloch, denied accusations made in the media reports.
“The same explanation has been provided to SLED,” McCulloch told Fox News Digital. “That truth will outlive any ridiculous rumors and gossip.”
Former prosecutor Joshua Ritter told Fox News Digital he considers the allegation against Alexander a “wild goose chase.”
“This is one of those cases that, you know, a lot of reporting was done early on, a lot of conspiracy theories swirling around this case,” Ritter said.
“I don’t see any reason for the judge to allow for this essentially wild goose chase in regards to an uncorroborated report about law enforcement perhaps being in possession of the murder weapon.”
“Obviously, the defense would love to pursue this to its absolute limit because they think that there’s a snowball’s chance that it might yield something, but I think that the judge is probably going to give very little leeway on something like this,” he added.
