Neil Gordon spent months working alongside Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill on a book about the Alex Murdaugh murder trial. Now, with Hill a convicted criminal and the murder verdict she helped taint thrown out by the South Carolina Supreme Court, Gordon is speaking publicly about the red flags he says he should have caught sooner.
Gordon, who co-authored "Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders" with Hill, told The U.S. Sun that Hill's behavior during their collaboration raised concerns he now views through a sharper lens. His account adds a new layer to a case that has already exposed one of the most brazen episodes of courtroom misconduct in South Carolina history.
Hill was the county clerk assigned to oversee evidence and the jury during Murdaugh's 2023 murder trial. That role gave her extraordinary access to jurors and sealed materials. She used it, the state's highest court found, to push jurors toward a guilty verdict while simultaneously angling to profit from the outcome.
The South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously overturned Murdaugh's double murder conviction, ruling that Hill's conduct "irredeemably tainted" the trial. The justices did not mince words.
"Hill placed her fingers on the scales of justice, thereby denying Murdaugh his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury."
The court called her actions "breathtaking," "disgraceful," and "unprecedented in South Carolina." Fox News reported that Hill told jurors not to be "fooled" by Murdaugh's defense and instructed them to "watch him closely" and "look at his actions." Those comments, directed at the people deciding whether a man would spend the rest of his life in prison, came from the official responsible for safeguarding the trial's integrity.
Hill's motivation was not subtle. She co-authored a book about the very case she was overseeing and hoped a guilty verdict would boost sales. Breitbart reported that the justices specifically identified Hill's book ambitions as a driving force behind her improper influence on jurors.
Gordon's role as co-author puts him in a unique position. He worked closely with Hill during and after the trial, and his willingness to identify warning signs now offers a rare insider perspective on how a public official allegedly weaponized her office for personal gain.
Hill did not limit her promotional efforts to the book itself. She used her public office position to push the project through social media and documentary deals, blurring the line between her sworn duties and her commercial interests.
Hill eventually pleaded guilty to four charges: obstruction of justice, perjury, and two counts of misconduct in office. AP News reported that the charges stemmed from Hill showing sealed crime scene photographs to journalists and then lying about it under oath to Judge Jean Toal.
In her guilty plea, Hill acknowledged her failures.
"There is no excuse for the mistakes I made. I'm ashamed of them and will carry that shame the rest of my life."
But her admission opened a broader credibility problem. Attorney Dick Harpootlian, who represents Murdaugh, pressed the point directly: "If Becky admittedly perjured herself in the jury tampering hearing held by Judge Toal, what else could she have lied about?"
That question hangs over every aspect of the original trial. A juror from the original trial has since fought for records in the jury tampering probe tied to Hill's conduct, suggesting the fallout extends well beyond Hill herself.
The overturned conviction does not mean Murdaugh walks free. He remains imprisoned on a 40-year federal sentence for stealing from clients, along with concurrent state sentences for financial crimes. Murdaugh has admitted to being a thief, a liar, an insurance cheat, and a bad lawyer. He has adamantly denied killing his wife Maggie and younger son Paul.
The defense team seized on the Supreme Court's ruling. Murdaugh's lawyers issued a statement noting that the court "rightly described her conduct as 'breathtaking,' 'disgraceful,' and 'unprecedented in South Carolina.'" They argued the ruling confirmed what they had long claimed: that Hill's interference attacked Murdaugh's credibility and his defense at its core.
One detail the defense has consistently highlighted is the absence of physical evidence tying Murdaugh to the killings. No DNA or blood evidence was found on Murdaugh or his clothes, despite the fact that the killings occurred at close range with powerful weapons. The New York Post noted this forensic gap as a significant factor in the defense's argument for a new trial.
The defense team has already begun shaping a retrial strategy that leans on alternate suspects and the DNA evidence question, signaling they intend to fight the case on fundamentally different ground the second time around.
Gordon's decision to speak publicly matters because it fills in gaps about Hill's mindset and behavior that court filings alone cannot capture. A co-author sees the person behind closed doors, during late-night editing sessions and casual conversations. The red flags Gordon describes suggest Hill's sense of entitlement and disregard for boundaries were not limited to the courtroom.
Investigators have not publicly confirmed whether Gordon's account will factor into any further proceedings against Hill or into the upcoming retrial. But his testimony underscores a pattern: Hill treated the Murdaugh trial as her personal stage, and no one in a position of authority stopped her until the damage was done.
Not every juror agrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion. At least one juror from the original trial has called the decision to toss the convictions "crazy," insisting the verdict reflected the evidence rather than outside influence. That tension between the jurors' lived experience and the court's legal findings will likely surface again if and when a new trial moves forward.
The Murdaugh case has always been a story about institutions. A powerful legal family allegedly abused its position for decades. A county clerk abused hers for book sales. And the system that was supposed to check both of them failed until the South Carolina Supreme Court stepped in.
Gordon's account is a reminder that the warning signs were visible to people close to Hill long before the court acted. The question now is whether the legal system will hold itself to the standard it claims when Murdaugh's retrial begins.
When a courtroom officer treats a murder trial as a business opportunity, the verdict is not the only thing that gets corrupted. Public trust takes the hit, and no appellate ruling can fully repair that.
