Alex Murdaugh Makes Explosive Push to Overturn Murder Conviction in Case Tied to DNA, Dirty Money and Lies

The disbarred South Carolina attorney is due to appear at 10 a.m. before Circuit Judge Debra McCaslin in Lexington County for a pretrial hearing tied to his April 2027 retrial in the killings of his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, and their son, Paul Murdaugh.

Friday’s hearing is expected to be more substantive than Murdaugh’s June court date, which largely established the retrial schedule. Since then, prosecutors and defense attorneys have filed a series of motions that offer a clearer view of how each side plans to approach the next trial.

At issue are several high-stakes disputes, including the defense’s bid to dismiss the murder indictments altogether. The two sides are also clashing over whether the state can again introduce evidence related to Murdaugh’s financial crimes, use testimony he gave during his first trial and present other contested material to a new jury.

Nathan S. Williams, a South Carolina federal criminal defense lawyer and former assistant U.S. attorney who served as criminal chief for the District of South Carolina, told News Outlet that a retrial presents significant strategic challenges for Murdaugh.

“There is no surprising the government or the state at trial,” Williams said. “He’s given his testimony, they can prepare infinitely now to cross-examine him.”

Williams said that dynamic often benefits prosecutors, who enter a second trial with a fuller understanding of the defense’s playbook. Still, he noted that if the judge restricts portions of the state’s evidence, those rulings could create openings for Murdaugh’s defense.

Murdaugh, 58, was convicted in 2023 of murdering Maggie, 52, and Paul, 22, at the family’s Moselle estate in Colleton County in June 2021. The South Carolina Supreme Court later overturned the convictions after finding that former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill improperly influenced jurors.

The high court ordered a new trial, but the retrial may look significantly different from the first.

At Murdaugh’s first trial, prosecutors argued that years of theft and financial fraud were closing in on him and that the killings were an effort to distract from mounting scrutiny.

The South Carolina Supreme Court did not rule that all evidence of Murdaugh’s financial wrongdoing was inadmissible, but it said prosecutors had been allowed to go too far into the details during the first trial.

McCaslin will now be tasked with determining how much of that evidence can be presented to jurors the second time around.

Williams said he expects the amount of financial evidence to shrink from the first trial. He said, “there will definitely be less,” adding, “How much less I think will be a good question.”

Prosecutors are also vying to use Murdaugh’s sworn testimony from his first trial during the retrial.

Murdaugh took the stand in his own defense in 2023 and admitted lying to investigators about his whereabouts shortly before Maggie and Paul were killed. He denied murdering them.

Whether jurors in the new trial will be able to hear portions of that prior testimony could become especially important if Murdaugh chooses not to testify again.

The defense has separately mounted a wider challenge to the charges themselves.

Murdaugh’s attorneys, led by Dick Harpootlian, have asked McCaslin to dismiss the murder and weapons indictments, alleging that false physical evidence was presented to the grand jury that indicted him.

The motion targets testimony from South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) investigator David Owen and raises questions about the evidence used to secure the original charges.

It is not yet clear whether McCaslin will rule on the dismissal motion Friday.

Williams called the dismissal request “a big ask” and “the explosive one, frankly, at this point,” noting that it attacks the validity of the indictments based on alleged misconduct or false statements.

“They’re alleging misconduct or false statements by one of the main case agents,” he said. Williams added that he would be “a little surprised if that gets taken up on Friday,” saying the issue will likely require evidence, testimony and additional briefing.

Another major fight involves forensic evidence.

Murdaugh’s attorneys have sought additional DNA testing using newer techniques, including testing tied to evidence found underneath Maggie’s fingernails.

Prosecutors have not opposed additional testing outright but have sought safeguards surrounding the handling of evidence, testing procedures and access to results.

“Independent testing might be tough,” Williams said. “It wouldn’t shock me if she lets them have a separate new test by the defense. To me, that strikes me as being fair, assuming they have the evidence available to be retested.”

The defense has also sought to move the retrial out of Colleton County, where the killings occurred and where the first trial became a media spectacle.

Murdaugh’s attorneys have argued that extensive publicity surrounding the case, along with the fallout from Hill’s conduct, makes it impossible for him to receive a fair trial there. They have proposed moving the case to nearby Charleston County.

Williams said venue may be one of the more straightforward disputes for McCaslin to address Friday, though the location could be the real fight.

“The battle, frankly, does seem to be not the venue change, but where,” he said. “Personally, I’d be a little surprised if she doesn’t change the venue.”

Other pending disputes involve access to phone data, third-party guilt evidence, discovery rules, polygraph evidence, juror questionnaires and protective orders governing sensitive material.

News Outlet has reached out to the attorney general’s office and Murdaugh’s defense team for comment.