Judge Focuses on Contempt as Mandy Matney Testifies, Armed Husband

Judge Focuses on Contempt as Mandy Matney Testifies, Armed Husband

By James Seidel | CC News Network

SPARTANBURG, S.C. — A contentious courtroom battle over whether podcast host Mandy Matney willfully violated a court order took center stage Monday as attorneys spent hours dissecting her claims of safety concerns, public appearances and refusal to attend a court-ordered deposition.

The hearing, held before Circuit Judge R. Keith Kelly, stems from ongoing litigation involving the Parker boat crash case and Matney’s failure to appear for a March 27 deposition.

During cross-examination, attorney Debbie Barbier aggressively challenged Matney’s assertion that safety concerns justified her decision not to attend the deposition at the noticed location.

Barbier walked Matney through numerous social media posts, public appearances, travel events, podcast activities and courthouse appearances in an effort to show that Matney routinely appears in public despite claiming to fear for her safety in South Carolina.

The questioning frequently focused on whether Matney employed professional security.

Matney repeatedly testified that she does not typically hire private security because she cannot afford it. Instead, she said she relies on her husband, David Moses.

At one point, while discussing a trip to Savannah following the deposition dispute, Matney testified that she was accompanied by “my husband, who was armed.”

Earlier in the hearing, she similarly stated that Moses “arms himself” and serves as her personal security when they are in public.

The testimony came after Barbier questioned why Matney would attend restaurants, bars, rallies and public events without professional protection if she genuinely feared for her safety.

Matney maintained that she often posts photographs and locations days after visiting those places and takes significant precautions regarding personal security.

Judge Narrows Focus to Contempt

Throughout the hearing, Judge Kelly repeatedly steered the proceedings back to the central issue before the court: whether Matney knowingly violated a court order.

When Matney’s attorneys attempted to revisit disputes over leaked photographs and underlying claims in the broader litigation, Kelly repeatedly sustained objections and reminded counsel that the hearing concerned contempt, not the merits of the lawsuit.

“We’re not here about the pictures,” Kelly said during one exchange. “We’re here about contempt.”

Barbier elicited testimony that Matney understood what a subpoena was, knew motions seeking to avoid the deposition had been denied and had transportation available on the day of the deposition.

The attorney also highlighted social media and podcast comments in which Matney reportedly stated she would rather go to jail than attend a deposition with opposing counsel. Matney acknowledged making the statement but characterized it as a joke.

Dispute Over Deposition Location

Matney continued to insist that she was willing to be deposed but objected to the specific location selected by Parker’s attorneys.

On redirect examination, her attorney presented evidence that multiple alternative locations were proposed, including Columbia, Charleston, Savannah and Charlotte.

Matney testified that she remained willing to testify and believed a safer location could have been arranged.

Parker’s attorneys countered that the deposition location had been repeatedly noticed, that no timely objection had been raised and that Matney simply chose not to comply with the court’s order.

Seidel Mentioned During Hearing

The hearing also included discussion of journalist James Seidel, whom Matney identified as someone she feared, but has never met.

Under questioning, however, Barbier established that Matney could not identify any instance in which Seidel had called her, texted her, appeared at her residence or directly threatened her.

The exchange appeared designed to challenge whether alleged concerns involving Seidel played any role in Matney’s decision not to attend the deposition.

The exchange became very clear that in no way Seidel has harassed Matney as she claims, and Matney provided zero evidence to reinforce her “feelings.”

Under South Carolina law, simply feeling harassed, uncomfortable, anxious, or fearful is generally not, by itself, a legal basis to ignore a subpoena or a court order.

The legal question is usually whether there is evidence supporting a recognized legal ground, such as:

• A credible threat of violence.
• Witness intimidation.
• Harassment rising to a legally significant level.
• An undue burden under procedural rules.
• Safety concerns supported by specific facts.
• A protective order issued by the court.

In the Matney hearing, Parker’s attorneys appeared to be making this distinction. They were essentially arguing:

“You may feel harassed, but that does not authorize you to disregard a court order.”

That’s a fairly standard legal argument.

The problem for any witness is that courts typically want objective evidence, not just subjective fear. Matney provided no such objective evidence.

Ruling Expected Later

Judge Kelly did not issue an immediate ruling from the bench.

The hearing concluded after testimony from Matney and arguments from counsel, leaving the court to determine whether her failure to appear constituted a willful violation of its orders and whether sanctions or other penalties are warranted, such as jail.

About the Author

James Seidel

Administrator

About the CC News Network James Seidel: Publisher, Award Winning Journalist, Author. Investigator, Podcaster, Talk Show Host, and Music Producer. The CC News Network is a distinguished media company in the world of South Carolina News, Weather, Sports and True Crime. At the beginning, James Seidel was only known as Crime and Cask and well known for his relentless pursuit of truth and justice in the Alex Murdaugh trial. As a journalist, author, investigator, radio talk show host, and record producer he has made significant contributions to uncovering some of the most complex and high-profile criminal cases of our time.

Visit Website View All Posts