We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2
RIcHARD A. HAKPOOTLIAN| OFFice Dinecr Contacr
Pritur D. BARBER ssa Tous rae age) 706987
Maine Appress | ONLINE
H. ARPO OTL IAN Anprew R. Hanp fost onneetorive HARPOOTUANLAW.COM
September 5, 2023
VIA HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Adair Ford Boroughs
United States Attorney for the District of South Carolina
1441 Main Street, Suite 500
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Inre: State of South Carolina v. Richard Alexander Murdaugh
Indictment Nos. 2022-GS-15-00592, -593, -594, and -595
Dear Ms. Boroughs:
On Mareh 1, 2023, after a six-week trial in Colleton County, my client Richard Alexander
‘Murdaugh was convicted of the murder of his wife Maggie and son Paul. I write to request an
urgent federal investigation of conduet by a South Carolina elected official during that trial. I have
attached Mr. Murdaugh’s recent filing in the South Carolina Court of Appeals regarding this matter,
which describes jury tampering by the Clerk of Court for Colleton County, Rebecca Hill.
Ms. Hill’s conduct described in detail by jurors in swom affidavit testimony implicates 18
US.C. § 242, which imposes criminal penalties on any person acting “under color of any law,
statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person . . . 0 the deprivation of
any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United
States ....” Ms. Hill acted “under color” of South Carolina law. She is the elected Clerk of Court
charged with “jury management.” See 8.C. Code tit. 14, chs. 7, 17; 8.C. Clerk of Court Manual
ch. 4 (2014). Every interaction she had with any juror during the murder trial was under the
pretense of authority granted by state Jaw. In our recent court filing, we assert that Ms. Hill’s
actions deprived Mr. Murdaugh of his rights under the Constitution:
‘We believe that the statements of the [state actor] to the jurors are controlled by the
command of the Sixth Amendment, made applicable to the States through the Due
Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It guarantees that “the accused shall
enjoy the right toa... trial, by an impartial jury... (and) be confronted with the
witnesses against him... .” As we said in Turner v. State of Louisiana, “the
‘evidence developed’ against a defendant shall come from the witness stand in a
public courtroom where there is full judicial protection of the defendant’s right of
confiontation, of cross-examination, and of counsel.” . .. We have followed the
“undeviating rule,” that the rights of confrontation and eross-examination are
among the fundamental requirements of a constitutionally fair tral
Parker v. Gladden, 385 U.S. 363, 364-65 (1966) (citations omitted). I request that federal law enforcement investigate whether Ms. Hill and any other state
actor violated 18 U.S.C. § 242 by tampering with the Colleton County jury. Even if no federal
charges are ultimately brought, an investigation by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI agents
is needed to discover the truth and to vindicate Mr. Murdaugh’s federally guaranteed right to a fair
trial. ‘The professionalism and integrity of the FBI's agents are unimpeachable. FBI agents will
not attempt to direct the outcome of any investigation by pressuring or deceiving any juror or other
witness. No juror will attempt to deceive an FBI agent. If FBI agents interview the jurors, the
truth will be known, whatever the truth may be, The same cannot be said of any investigation
conducted by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED), who has a vested interest in
upholding Mr, Murdaugh’s conviction.
Mr. Murdaugh may be the most unpopular man in South Carolina right now. He has
become the symbol of the Lowcountry judicial corruption. Disgust at his frauds unfortunately has
created in some minds a “but not Alex Murdaugh” exception to the due process rights enjoyed by
all Americans, regardless guilt or innocence. Those minds may delight in the irony that he may
very well be a victim of the corruption he symbolizes. Federal law enforcement has long acted as,
a shield that prevents popular passions against a hated person from injuring the rights enjoyed by
all persons. I ask that it do so again here.
With warm regards, I am,
Sincerely,
WR
Richard A. Harpootlian
ce: Emily Limehouse, Esquire
William Edward Campbell v. Amos E. Reed, Secretary of Correction of State of North Carolina and Attorneygeneral of The State of North Carolina, 594 F.2d 4, 4th Cir. (1979)
