The saga of the Murdaugh family, a tale that reads more like fiction than reality, is set to continue its dramatic journey in the courtroom. The Southern legal dynasty, which has been brought down by a harrowing combination of double murder and extensive financial fraud, will face a new chapter as it heads back to trial.

Alex Murdaugh, once a powerful attorney in South Carolina whose family wielded significant influence in courtrooms for generations, was convicted in 2023 of the murders of his wife, Margaret “Maggie” Murdaugh, and their younger son, Paul Murdaugh. The tragic events unfolded at the family’s Moselle hunting estate in June 2021, casting a long shadow over the prominent family.

However, on May 13, the state Supreme Court made a decisive move by unanimously overturning these convictions. The court found that former Colleton County Clerk of Court, Rebecca “Becky” Hill, had improperly swayed the jury, thus compromising the trial’s integrity.

As the stage is set for a second trial, several key figures are poised to play crucial roles in this unfolding legal drama.

ALEX MURDAUGH LAWYERS FILE APPEAL ALLEGING OUSTED SOUTH CAROLINA COURT CLERK SWAYED JURY

Alex Murdaugh reacts as he addresses the court during his sentencing for stealing from 18 clients at the Beaufort County Courthouse in Beaufort, S.C., on Nov. 28, 2023. (Andrew J. Whitaker/The Post And Courier)

1. Alex Murdaugh:

Before the murders, Murdaugh was part of a legal dynasty in South Carolina’s Lowcountry. His father, grandfather and great-grandfather served as elected prosecutors in the region for more than 80 years, while the family law firm was a legal powerhouse.

At his 2021 murder trial, prosecutors argued that Murdaugh killed his wife Maggie and son Paul as his financial crimes were closing in, hoping the killings would generate sympathy and buy time from his impending money troubles.

While Murdaugh has admitted to stealing money and committing insurance fraud, he has denied the murders.

ALEX MURDAUGH, ACCOMPLICE ORDERED TO PAY MILLIONS IN MONEY SCHEME AFTER HOUSEKEEPER’S DEATH

In 2023, he was convicted after a six-week trial and sentenced to consecutive life terms without parole. But the convictions were recently overturned, leading to the legal scion’s return to court.

He remains behind bars on state and federal financial-crimes sentences tied to stealing roughly $12 million from clients.

ALEX MURDAUGH: TIMELINE OF THE ONCE POWERFUL SOUTH CAROLINA LAWYER’S SPECTACULAR DOWNFALL

A family photo of Buster, Paul, Maggie and Alex Murdaugh is shown during the murder trial of Alex Murdaugh at the Colleton County Courthouse in Walterboro on March 2, 2023. (Andrew J. Whitaker/The Post and Courier)

2. Margaret “Maggie” Murdaugh

Margaret “Maggie” Murdaugh, 52, was Alex Murdaugh’s wife and one of the two victims found dead near the dog kennels at Moselle on June 7, 2021.

MURDAUGH HOUSEKEEPER REVEALS ONE DETAIL THAT CONVINCED HER ALEX WAS GUILTY OF MURDERS: ‘HE DID IT’

Maggie and Alex were married at the Second Presbyterian Church in Charleston, South Carolina, on Aug. 14, 1993.

From left to right, Buster, Maggie, Paul and Alex Murdaugh in an undated photo. (Facebook)

Maggie was shot four or five times with a rifle, while Paul was shot twice with a shotgun.

In a retrial, Maggie’s death will again be central to the state’s burden. Prosecutors must prove who killed her and Paul, beyond a reasonable doubt, without the benefit of the now-vacated 2023 verdict.

‘UNTOUCHABLE’ ALEX MURDAUGH COMPARED TO TED BUNDY FOR INDIGNANCE AT FAMILY MURDER SENTENCING

3. Paul Murdaugh

Paul Murdaugh, 22, was Alex and Maggie Murdaugh’s younger son and the second murder victim. Long before his death, Paul was already a controversial figure because of the 2019 boat crash that killed 19-year-old Mallory Beach.

From left to right: Buster, Paul, Alex and Maggie Murdaugh pose together on a fishing boat. (Facebook)

At the murder trial, Paul became crucial in another way: his cellphone video from the kennels. The state’s case relied heavily on evidence placing Alex Murdaugh at the murder scene shortly before the killings.

4. Richard “Buster” Murdaugh:

Richard “Buster” Murdaugh is Alex and Maggie Murdaugh’s surviving son.

WATCH: Buster Murdaugh: I do not believe the trial was fair

Buster Murdaugh and Brooklynn White leave the Colleton County Courthouse for a lunch break on Wednesday, March 1, 2023, in South Carolina. (Mark Sims/Fox News Digital)

In a Fox Nation series “The Fall of the House of Murdaugh,” Buster spoke candidly about his father and his murder trial during an exclusive sit-down interview conducted by Fox News’ Martha MacCallum.

“I do not think that he could be affiliated with endangering my mother and brother,” he said. “We have been here for a while now and that’s been my stance.”

ALEX MURDAUGH’S DEFENSE ATTORNEY EXPLAINS WHY HE THINKS THE DISGRACED LAWYER IS INNOCENT, WILL GET A NEW TRIAL

5. Dick Harpootlian:

Since the conclusion of the first trial, Harpootlian’s message has been that the first trial was tainted by Hill’s misconduct and that the second trial must be carried out under stricter rules.

Harpootlian, one of Murdaugh’s lead defense attorneys, has already previewed a retrial strategy that includes seeking a venue change, attorney-led jury questioning and possibly sequestering jurors.

Defense attorney Dick Harpootlian reacts to prosecutor Creighton Waters asking Alex Murdaugh if he is a “family annihilator” during Murdaugh’s trial for murder at the Colleton County Courthouse on Friday, February 24, 2023.  (Joshua Boucher/The State/Pool)

6. Jim Griffin:

Jim Griffin, another Murdaugh defense attorney, has been central not only to the appeal but also to Murdaugh’s civil lawsuit against Hill.

MURDAUGH RETRIAL HOPES DIM AS EX-AG SAYS BECKY HILL’S GUILTY PLEA WON’T SWAY HIGH COURT

Defense attorney Jim Griffin talks with Dick Harpootlian as Alex Murdaugh testifies at the Colleton County Courthouse in Walterboro, Thursday, Feb. 23, 2023.  (Grace Beahm Alford/The Post and Courier/Pool)

After the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed Murdaugh’s convictions, Griffin helped announce a lawsuit against Hill. The suit accuses the former clerk of violating Murdaugh’s right to a fair trial and seeks punitive and compensatory damages, as well as $600,000 of attorneys’ fees.

Griffin said the lawsuit was meant to hold Hill accountable and reveal the “entire scope of her conduct.”

7. Creighton Waters:

Creighton Waters is the prosecutor who secured the original guilty verdicts. Now he faces the job of trying to win the case a second time, under a microscope, after the first conviction was blown up.

Waters and Harpootlian have already previewed competing visions for the retrial, with Waters signaling an impending fight over whether Murdaugh can receive a fair jury in South Carolina.

Prosecutor Creighton Waters cross examines Alex Murdaugh during Murdaugh’s trial for murder at the Colleton County Courthouse on Friday, February 24, 2023. (Joshua Boucher/The State/Pool)

“We depend on our citizens to do what their oath requires them, put aside things that they might have read in the media or in a podcast or whatever, and base their evidence and their decisions solely on the evidence that’s presented in the courtroom,” Waters told Fox News Digital.

8. Alan Wilson:

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said prosecutors could seek the death penalty if Murdaugh is convicted again.

WATCH: AG vows quick retrial after Supreme Court tosses Murdaugh murder convictions

“We’re back to square one on this case,” Wilson said in a statement to Fox News Digital, adding that all legal options were on the table, including the death penalty.

In the first trial, Murdaugh received life without parole. A retrial could, in theory, expose him to something more severe if prosecutors pursue capital punishment and meet the legal requirements.

FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA CLERK IN MURDAUGH MURDER TRIAL ARRESTED ON MULTIPLE FELONIES

9. Rebecca “Becky” Hill:

South Carolina Supreme Court found Hill exercised “improper external influences” during the first trial.

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

According to testimony reviewed by the court, jurors said Hill told them to “watch him closely,” “watch his actions” and not be “fooled” by the defense.

Former Colleton County Clerk of Court Mary Rebecca “Becky” Hill smiles after pleading guilty on Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in St. Matthews, S.C. Hill pleaded guilty Monday to showing sealed exhibits from Alex Murdaugh’s murder trial and other charges.  (AP Photo/Jeffrey Collins)

The court’s ruling also referenced findings that Hill was drawn by the “siren call of celebrity” and allowed public attention to overcome her duty.

SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER

Hill co-authored a book about the proceedings, “Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders,” which the lawsuit says earned roughly $100,000 before being withdrawn amid plagiarism allegations.

WATCH: Becky Hill walks into Colleton County Courthouse

According to the book’s synopsis, Hill had known the Murdaugh family for decades and was aware of “the rumors of corruption and crime surrounding the Murdaugh family.”

SEND US A TIP HERE

WATCH: Murdaugh court clerk Becky Hill appears in South Carolina court for hearing

The state’s Supreme Court said Hill “egregiously attacked Murdaugh’s credibility” by suggesting to jurors that he was guilty and that his testimony could not be trusted. Hill later pleaded guilty to lying about what she said and did during the trial, including showing graphic crime-scene photos to media members.

LISTEN TO THE NEW ‘CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO’ PODCAST

Hill had previously pleaded guilty to four charges — obstruction of justice and perjury for showing a reporter photographs that were sealed court exhibits and then lying about it, plus two counts of misconduct in office for taking bonuses and promoting a book she wrote on the trial through her public office.

“There is no excuse for the mistakes I made. I’m ashamed of them and will carry that shame the rest of my life,” Hill said in a statement read to the court.

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? FIND MORE ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB

She was sentenced to three years of probation.

Timeline of the reversal:

• October 2023: Murdaugh attorneys allege jury tampering
• January 2024: Jurors testify under oath
• December 2025: Hill pleads guilty to related charges
• May 13, 2026: Supreme Court overturns convictions
• May 18, 2026: Murdaugh sues Hill over jury tampering accusations

10. Mallory Beach:

Beach, 19, died in a 2019 boat crash involving Paul Murdaugh. The crash and ensuing litigation helped drag the Murdaugh family’s power into public view before the killings.

Alex’s father, Randolph Murdaugh III, was the top prosecutor overseeing South Carolina’s Lowcountry until 2005 — including Beaufort County, where the crash occurred. The family wielded enormous influence in the region.

Paul had taken out five friends in his father’s boat Feb. 23, 2019, and they were all drinking heavily. Paul had a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit when he smashed into the piling of the bridge.

After the collision, it took more than a week to recover Beach’s body about five miles from the crash site.

MURDAUGH TRIAL COURT CLERK PLEADS GUILTY TO SHOWING SEALED CRIME SCENE PHOTOS TO PHOTOGRAPHER

Mallory Beach’s family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the Murdaughs in 2019 after she died aboard their boat. (Unknown)

In the first trial, the prosecution argued Murdaugh’s financial life was collapsing before the murders due to Beach’s death.

NEW YORK (AP) — Lawyers for Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student at Columbia University, announced plans to seek intervention from the U.S. Supreme Court. This comes after a federal appeals court declined to revisit a decision moving the government closer to deporting Khalil, who is known for his pro-Palestinian activism.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia narrowly voted 6-5 against a full court review of the ruling. Earlier this year, a panel of three judges from the same Circuit determined that a federal judge in New Jersey lacked the jurisdiction to order Khalil’s release from immigration detention, which had been granted last year.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing Khalil, plans to ask the 3rd Circuit to issue an order that would prevent the implementation of the decision. This would stop Khalil from being detained or deported while his case is presented to the Supreme Court.

The appeal to the nation’s highest court is anticipated in the coming months, potentially by late summer.

“Today’s decision is not the final word, and we remain confident in our arguments as we proceed,” stated Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel at the ACLU.

In its January ruling, the 3rd Circuit found that Khalil’s lawsuit challenging his detention and U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz’s subsequent rulings in the case were premature because federal law requires that such challenges first move through the separate immigration court system. That system is part of the Justice Department, not the judicial branch.

The decision didn’t decide the key issue in Khalil’s case: whether the Trump administration’s effort to throw Khalil out of the U.S. over his campus activism and criticism of Israel is unconstitutional.

Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, who had voted for the 3rd Circuit to review the decision, wrote in a dissent that the court was “abdicating our duty to meaningfully review Khalil’s constitutional claims. The Judicial Branch, she wrote, cannot fulfill its role as a check on the other branches of government, “if we write ourselves out of relevance and leave the Executive Branch to check itself.”

Khalil, 31, has also appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana, where he was detained, after the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld his removal order.

Through his lawyers, Khalil argued that the immigration judge who issued the order failed to consider relevant evidence and wrongly upheld a charge that he had misrepresented information on his application for legal permanent resident status. That charge, Khalil’s lawyers said, was brought in retaliation for his protest activity.

The immigration judge suggested Khalil could be deported to Algeria, where he maintains citizenship through a distant relative, or Syria, where he was born in a refugee camp to a Palestinian family. Khalil’s lawyers have said he would face mortal danger if forced to return to either country.

An outspoken leader of the pro-Palestinian movement at Columbia, Khalil was arrested in March 2025. He then spent three months detained in a Louisiana immigration jail, missing the birth of his child.

Federal officials have accused Khalil of leading activities “aligned to Hamas,” though they have not presented evidence to support the claim and have not accused him of criminal conduct. They also accused Khalil of failing to disclose information on his green card application.

Khalil has dismissed the allegations as “baseless and ridiculous,” framing his arrest and detention as a “direct consequence of exercising my right to free speech as I advocated for a free Palestine and an end to the genocide in Gaza.”

The government justified the arrest under a seldom-used statute that allows for the expulsion of noncitizens whose beliefs are deemed to pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests. In June 2025, Farbiarz ruled that justification would likely be declared unconstitutional and ordered Khalil released.

President Donald Trump’s administration appealed that ruling, arguing the deportation decision should fall to an immigration judge, rather than a federal court. The 3rd Circuit ruled 2-1 in the administration’s favor.

Judge Emil Bove, who was involved in investigating student protesters while a top Justice Department official, did not participate in the 3rd Circuit vote on whether to review the decision. He later issued an order denying a request by Khalil’s lawyers that he step aside from the matter, calling it moot.

___

Attorney General Letitia James finds herself needing to address concerns regarding the oversight of New York’s extensive Medicaid program.

In her role, James oversees the state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, which is tasked with taking legal action against individuals or organizations that defraud the taxpayer-supported program or mistreat its vulnerable beneficiaries.

Given that New York allocates more money per capita on Medicaid than any other state, one would expect this unit to be exceptionally active.

However, under her leadership, the unit’s performance metrics have been less than impressive, and at times surprisingly low, considering the magnitude of the $119 billion social program.

James’ performance in managing this crucial area is now under examination from two fronts: an audit of the unit’s effectiveness initiated by the Trump administration and pointed critiques from her Republican opponent, Saritha Komatireddy.

As a two-term incumbent Democrat in a thoroughly blue state, James might get away with ducking her political opponent’s questions.

But she can’t evade the review recently ordered by the inspector general of the US Department of Health and Human Services, T. March Bell — not, at least, without putting federal aid in jeopardy.

“Noncompliance with your MFCU obligations can take your State’s entire Medicaid program out of compliance,” Bell warned in a May 13 letter to attorneys general nationwide.

“This means your failure to do your job as head of the MFCU has put all of your State’s Medicaid funds in jeopardy.”

One way or another, James will have to defend — or at least explain — the underwhelming performance of her anti-fraud unit, and that should be interesting to watch.

Federal statistics over the past five years show that New York’s MFCU logged almost 3,000 investigations for fraud, abuse and neglect, which was the sixth-highest number in the country. 

That doesn’t sound so bad until you consider that New York’s Medicaid budget is the second-highest in the country.

In terms of investigations per billion spent, New York’s unit ranked 48th out of the 50 states.

It was 49th in indictments per billion and 50th — dead last — in convictions per billion.

Another troubling sign, as Komatireddy has pointed out, is that fraud enforcement seems to have trended sharply downward on James’ watch.

Since she became attorney general in 2019, the number of annual fraud investigations has dropped 45%, federal data indicate; the national total also declined during those years, but by about a third as much.

According to James’ self-reported “annual reviews,” Medicaid recoveries by her office went from $168 million in 2019, her first year on the job, to just $31 million in 2024.

It seems that fraud enforcement is the only thing about New York’s Medicaid program that’s shrinking rather than soaring.

Responding to a separate federal inquiry, the governor’s office recently declared that “New York has one of the largest MFCUs in the United States in terms of both staffing levels and total recoveries.”

What that claim neglected to mention, again, is that New York also has one of largest Medicaid budgets, second only to California’s.

So the fact that New York also has the second-largest MFCU staff was no big surprise.

And the fact that its gross recoveries ranked fifth — behind much smaller states such as Indiana and Massachusetts — was not much to brag about.

What accounts for these seemingly poor statistics? One possible explanation is the series of labor-intensive lawsuits that James’ office has lodged against nursing homes. 

These eye-opening cases accused operators of improperly siphoning away Medicaid dollars that should have been spent on patient care, which allegedly resulted in disturbing levels of neglect and abuse.

But they have yet to trigger much in the way of a crackdown from either the state Health Department or Legislature. 

Meanwhile, the nursing-home push diverted time and personnel from other signs of trouble with Medicaid, such as the explosive growth of spending on home care.

That funding covers invaluable services for disabled people who need it, but it’s also vulnerable to fraud and abuse.

James might try to dismiss the criticism of her record as politically motivated. If that’s the case, she should have little trouble knocking down the arguments and defending herself from federal probers.

Both the federal government and her campaign challenger are raising valid, substantive questions about a crucial function of the attorney general’s office.

Answers, please, AG James.

Bill Hammond is the senior fellow for health policy at the Empire Center.