In keeping with the Murdaugh saga’s swampy setting, the intrigue surrounding Crosby’s removal from the jury emerged murkily, and, even now, it is still partially veiled by sealed records. The state Supreme Court’s ruling, overturning Murdaugh’s murder charges, reveals some details about Hill’s interactions with Crosby, accusing her of “meddling in events around Juror 785’s dismissal,” but it puts more weight on Hill’s inappropriate comments to the rest of the jurors who remained on the panel than on her role in the removal of the one who didn’t. Hill’s behavior in both cases was egregious, but, whatever the technical reasons for the court’s emphases, her interactions with Crosby almost certainly had the greater impact on the verdict, given that Crosby had strong doubts about Murdaugh’s guilt.
Affidavits cited in the state Supreme Court’s ruling show that the groundwork for Myra Crosby’s removal had already been prepared two days before the Moselle visit. That morning, Monday, February 27th, Hill informed the judge overseeing the case, Clifton Newman, that she’d seen a Facebook post made by Crosby’s ex-husband, Tim Stone, claiming that Crosby had talked about the case while they were out drinking together. That same day, the judge received an e-mail requesting anonymity, also claiming that Crosby had been discussing the case, in this instance with a tenant of Crosby’s while Crosby was delivering a fridge.
Judge Newman asked to see the Facebook post, but Hill was unable to produce it. In its place, Hill produced an “apology” post in which someone named Timothy Stone, who lived in a different state than Crosby’s ex-husband, wrote that he’d deleted an earlier “ugly” post because he’d been drunk when he wrote it and, in his words, “I let Satan control me.” In addition to the incorrect name and state, the apology poster’s profile photo bore no resemblance to Crosby’s actual ex-husband. In her book, Hill claimed that “one of our techies in the clerks’ office” showed her the apology post. (She specifically named an employee in the clerk’s office, though at the time, Hill’s own son, Jeffrey, was the county’s technology director. Later that year, he was charged with wiretapping, and although authorities did not offer more details, local journalists have reported that the alleged wiretapping was meant to monitor the investigation of his mother. The case is still pending, and Jeffrey Hill has maintained his innocence throughout.)
According to the affidavits, the next morning Hill pulled Crosby aside and repeated her claim that she had seen a post by Crosby’s ex-husband alleging that Crosby had expressed views about the case. Again, Hill was unable to produce the post. Crosby informed her that she and her ex-husband had been estranged for ten years and that, far from being drinking companions, she had multiple restraining orders out against him. According to Crosby, Hill then asked her point-blank whether she was inclined to vote guilty or not guilty. “I told her I had not made up my mind,” Crosby said.
Later that day, Judge Newman questioned Crosby in his chambers about the Facebook posts and the anonymous e-mail. Crosby denied discussing the case with anybody. The judge then asked her if she had made up her mind about the case. “I haven’t,” Crosby replied. “I was trying to wait on closing arguments because those are usually pretty good.” It was the proper answer to give, but it may have spurred on those seeking her removal. As soon as she left the room, the lead prosecutor, Creighton Waters, brought up the anonymous e-mail, informing the judge that he now had a name for one of the tenants mentioned in it. With Becky Hill’s Facebook strategy falling apart, it appears that the e-mail had become, effectively, a Plan B.
Crosby’s tenants, Deborah Webb and Clifford Dandridge, were woken that night by agents from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division of the state police (SLED), and were questioned separately before being instructed to appear at the courthouse the next morning. The records of their court appearance remain under seal, but according to Myra Crosby they were held for nine hours, after which they were presented with affidavits prepared by lawyers from the prosecution, which stated that Crosby had talked to them about the case while bringing a refrigerator to their apartment eleven days earlier. Crosby has said that both Webb and Dandridge vehemently denied ever making such allegations, and signed the affidavits without reading them because they were told that they were just transcripts of the information they’d given the SLED officers the night before. These affidavits and police interviews remain under seal, but Crosby herself maintains that she and her tenants discussed nothing more controversial than a recent delivery of pizzas to the courthouse. If this is true, the anonymous e-mailer, who worked at Domino’s with Webb, had inflated a report of some harmless chitchat between Crosby and her tenants into an actionable violation of jurors’ instructions not to discuss the case. (Webb and Dandridge couldn’t be reached for comment.)
