Was ‘Egg Juror’ unfairly dismissed? Judge to unseal Murdaugh records

Listen to this article

In Brief

• South Carolina prosecutors withdrew their opposition to unsealing transcripts involving dismissed Murdaugh juror Myra Crosby, known as the “Egg Juror.”
• Crosby was removed from the 2023 Alex Murdaugh murder trial after allegations that she discussed the case outside court.
• The records could shed light on the role of former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill, whose alleged jury tampering led to the South Carolina Supreme Court vacating Murdaugh’s convictions.
• Unsealed transcripts may affect Murdaugh’s federal civil rights lawsuit against Hill and any future investigation into jury-tampering allegations.

Who is the “Egg Juror,” and what secrets does she hold in the Alex Murdaugh case? The public may be on the verge of finding out, as behind-the-scenes court records may soon be unsealed.

On Thursday, June 4, the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office filed a motion with the S.C. Supreme Court retracting its objection to the unsealing of “in camera,” or private, conversations in the judge’s chambers which led to the dismissal of Myra Crosby, a juror in the 2023 double murder trial of Richard “Alex” Murdaugh.

On March 2, 2023, the same day that a Colleton County jury found disbarred lawyer-turned-fraudster Murdaugh guilty of murdering his wife Maggie and adult son Paul in 2021 — a verdict that has since been vacated by a May 13 Supreme Court ruling due to reported jury tampering by former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill — Crosby earned a now infamous nickname: the Egg Juror.

Formerly identified only as Juror No. 785, Crosby served as a member of the jury for the entire six-week trial in Walterboro, S.C., only to be called before Judge Clifton Newman just hours before deliberations.

After calling the juror and attorneys into his chambers, Newman announced to the courtroom — and the millions of TV viewers worldwide following this internationally publicized trial — that he had received information about an email alleging that Crosby was improperly discussing the murder trial with people outside the courtroom, and he was excusing Crosby from further service and replacing her with an alternate.

When asked if Crosby had any personal belongings in the jury room, her response – a dozen eggs – sent the true-crime-following audience tittering and led to a nickname that has stuck.

Three years later, Crosby continues to deny that she discussed the trial in public or did anything improper.

Why does the attorney general want to unseal Myra Crosby’s records now?

Newman’s in-camera interview of Crosby was sealed from the public by court order during the trial, and remained sealed during Murdaugh’s appeals process before the appellate court and the Supreme Court, but on Sept. 4, 2024, attorneys for Crosby filed a motion to have those transcripts unsealed in an effort to help clear her name.

Murdaugh’s attorneys did not oppose this motion, but on Sept. 16, 2024, the S.C. Attorney General’s Office filed a motion in opposition, and the records remained sealed.

Thursday’s motion by the State to “Retract Conditional Objection and Unseal and Remove Restrictions as to the In-Camera Hearing Transcript Supporting Juror 785’s removal” may well be granted by the high court now that there is no formal opposition.

Citing a California Superior Court case, the motion states “…openness enhances both fairness and the appearance of fairness…”

In its motion, the State states that opening these transcripts can no longer prejudice Murdaugh’s murder case, which has already been ordered for a potential retrial, possibly in 2027.

“There should be no prejudice to any party at this time,” the motion adds. “Consequently, the scales should now tip to unsealing and removing restrictions.”

Was Myra Crosby targeted for dismissal from the Murdaugh jury?

Former Clerk of Court Hill brought the allegations about Crosby to Judge Newman’s attention, before it was known that Hill was reportedly interfering with jury members.

In a recent Netflix documentary, Crosby said she still struggles with the negative spotlight, avoiding the media and seeking counseling after an onslaught of negative social media comments following her embarrassing dismissal.

Crosby denies speaking about the case to anyone and feels that not only was she wrongly dismissed, but she was also deliberately targeted for dismissal after she made it clear that she had many questions about the circumstantial evidence presented during the trial.

“I can’t honestly say how I would have voted,” Crosby told Netflix viewers.

Had Crosby sat behind closed doors for that deliberation, the Murdaugh verdict may have been quite different. Crosby’s opinion of the case and the evidence presented at trial, such as a video on murder victim Paul Murdaugh’s phone, which placed his father at the scene of the crime, is vastly different from that of other jurors.

“If you listen to the video, they were laughing, they were joking,” she recalled. “It gave me a little bit of pause. How is this video proof that he killed them? During the trial, I was undecided… I had a lot of questions. If I’m going to convict a man of murder, I need a lot more than thoughts and theories. I mean, there’s just a lot of ifs.”

In 2024, Crosby teamed up with a co-author to release a tell-all book sharing her side of the story, “Because Enough Is Enough.”

What impact can the Egg Juror transcripts have on the Murdaugh-related cases?

While the contents of the email and Crosby’s conversation in chambers will likely have no impact on a second Murdaugh murder trial, this new information, if unsealed, could impact two other legal situations.

Hill, who has pleaded guilty to perjury and misconduct charges, has not been charged with jury tampering at this point, despite the Supreme Court’s opinion that she did interfere with the jury, and new evidence could change that.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling, Murdaugh filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Hill, and Murdaugh’s attorneys could use Crosby’s transcripts to their advantage in this civil case if there was any wrongdoing by Hill.