Table of Contents

Judge Denies Russell Laffitte His Request for District-Wide Jury Panel, Citing Lack of Evidence of Bias

By James Seidel | CC News Network

CHARLESTON, S.C. — A federal judge has denied former Palmetto State Bank CEO Russell Laffitte’s request for a district-wide jury panel, rejecting arguments that intense media coverage of his case—particularly by journalists Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell—has tainted the Beaufort Division jury pool.

In a ruling issued Feb. 19, 2025, U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel denied Laffitte’s motion without prejudice, stating that the court found insufficient evidence at this stage to justify a wider jury selection process. However, the judge left the door open for reconsideration if jury selection in May demonstrates an inability to seat an impartial jury in the Charleston and Beaufort Divisions.

Court Rejects Laffitte’s Bias Claims—For Now

Russell Laffitte, whose federal fraud conviction was overturned last year, is preparing for retrial amid what his defense team describes as a toxic media environment. His attorneys argued that self-proclaimed “crusading journalists” Matney and Farrell had so thoroughly poisoned public opinion that selecting a fair and impartial jury in Beaufort was impossible.

They specifically pointed to Matney’s true crime podcast, “Murdaugh Murders,” and Farrell’s “Cup of Justice” as sources of extreme bias, claiming the two have effectively “tried and convicted” Russell Laffitte in the court of public opinion before his new trial even begins.

The motion also included social media posts in which Matney mocked Laffitte, calling him a “doofus,” while Farrell allegedly referred to him as “Russell ‘Can’t Admit Defeat’ Laffitte.” The defense team claimed these statements fueled a mob mentality that has irreversibly damaged Laffitte’s reputation in South Carolina’s Lowcountry.

However, Judge Gergel’s ruling did not accept this argument outright. Instead, the judge ruled that pre-trial speculation about bias is premature and that jury selection itself would be the true test of whether an impartial panel can be seated.

“If the Court’s experience at jury selection in May indicates that a fair and impartial jury cannot be drawn from the Charleston and Beaufort Divisions, the Court will reconsider this motion,” the ruling states.

Media Scrutiny and Ethical Reporting: Crime and Cask Recognized for Balance

While Laffitte’s motion condemned Matney and Farrell’s alleged bias, it praised investigative work by Crime and Cask News, citing its commitment to fact-based reporting rather than sensationalism.

Crime and Cask’s books, including “Defending Alex Murdaugh: Not Guilty by Reasonable Doubt” and “Because Enough is Enough,” were listed as notable sources of balanced coverage amid what Laffitte’s team described as a “feeding frenzy” of media speculation and trial-by-Internet.

Matney and Farrell, who built their brands around the Murdaugh scandal, have frequently been criticized for blurring the lines between journalism and activism. Laffitte’s attorneys argue that their aggressive coverage has created a digital-age “good old boy” system that punishes anyone associated with Alex Murdaugh, regardless of their actual level of culpability.

Broader Legal Landscape: Defamation Lawsuits Mount in South Carolina

Laffitte’s jury motion is just one piece of a growing legal battle against media-driven narratives in South Carolina.

Buster Murdaugh, son of convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh, is suing Netflix, Warner Bros. Discovery, and HBO for defamation, arguing that the media falsely implicated him in the 2015 murder of Stephen Smith despite no official charges ever being filed.
Pastor John Paul Miller of Myrtle Beach has filed 33 defamation and harassment lawsuits, alleging stalking, slander, and reputational damage caused by online personalities.

Legal observers speculate that Russell Laffitte could be next to file a defamation suit against Matney and Farrell, particularly if his attorneys can establish that their reporting actively interfered with his right to a fair trial.

What’s Next?

Jury selection begins in May, and if bias is evident, Judge Gergel may reconsider allowing a district-wide jury pool or moving the trial to another division.
If Laffitte loses his retrial, legal analysts expect him to file a defamation lawsuit, following in the footsteps of Buster Murdaugh and John Paul Miller.
South Carolina’s courts could soon set legal precedents regarding the impact of digital media on fair trials, particularly in the true crime space.

As the legal war against reckless media narratives intensifies, the ruling against Laffitte’s jury request highlights the judiciary’s cautious approach to balancing public perception with due process. Whether Laffitte ultimately succeeds in getting a fair trial—or a media reckoning—remains to be seen.

James Seidel is an investigative journalist and founder of CC News Network. His reporting on the Murdaugh saga has been recognized for its accuracy and depth, including exclusive coverage of sealed documents and juror misconduct allegations.