Media on Trial?: Alex Murdaugh’s Motion for Change of Venue
Free press or fair trial? These are two of the most basic rights granted by the Constitution of the United States, and “a conflict has developed between the Bench and Bar on the one hand and the press and other news media on the other.”[1] Pre-trial publicity is often cited as a major concern in this conflict as it can bias jurors’ decisions.[2] Often, media influences the public’s perception of high-profile criminal defendants.[3] This means that the media has the potential to impact jurors, and thus, can interfere with a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
Some of the most famous high-profile defendants have cited this conflict as a concern and consequently filed motions for change of venue, including O.J. Simpson and the Oklahoma City Bombing defendants.[4] Simpson’s trial was moved from the Westside to downtown Los Angeles because of heavy media coverage.[5] The Oklahoma City Bombing trial was moved from Oklahoma to Denver because the defendants had been “‘demonized’ in the media” and “there [was] so great a prejudice against these two defendants in the State of Oklahoma that they [could not] obtain a fair and impartial trial at any place…in that state.”[6] Although these are illustrations of successfully granted motions, it is rare that a motion for change of venue is granted because of “judicial efficiency and economy costs.”[7]
Despite the rarity of granting these motions, Alex Murdaugh’s defense team filed a motion for change of venue in his state financial crimes trial.[8] Alex Murdaugh was once a successful South Carolina lawyer who is now serving consecutive life sentences for the murder of his wife, Margaret, and youngest son, Paul.[9] Murdaugh was indicted in July of 2022 and convicted in March of 2023 for the slayings that occurred in June of 2021.[10] In the span of the double-murder trial, Murdaugh was charged with various financial crimes, in both state and federal court.[11]
In the motion for change of venue filed on November 13, 2023, the defense cited “unprecedented media coverage” from the double-murder trial of Murdaugh’s wife and son “which was broadcast live, ‘seen by millions’ and inspired multiple documentaries and two recent movies — publicity which could impact Murdaugh’s ability to get a fair trial.”[12] One of the most popular documentaries was Netflix’s “Watch Murdaugh Murders: A Southern Scandal,” which had the potential to reach more than 260 million subscribers across the globe.[13] Because of the scope of the audience and volume of media coverage, the defense was worried that this “would prevent the seating of fair and impartial jurors for the trial.”[14]
On November 17, 2023, Murdaugh reached a plea deal on the dozens of state charges of financial crimes during a pre-trial hearing where the motion for change of venue was meant to be discussed.[15] While the motion was not explicitly decided, it raises the question of whether a motion for change of venue will ever be granted for high-profile defendants with significant pre-trial publicity, not just locally, but nationally, and even globally. This then makes you wonder if a defendant can receive a fair trial where millions of people have been exposed to media coverage. Should free press override a fair trial? Only time will tell with the continuous and inevitable growth of mass media.
Footnotes
