Federal Prosecutors Decline Request to Seize Alex Murdaugh's Assets Amid Controversy
Oct 13, 2023, 11:00 AM
· Convicted killer Alex Murdaugh's attorneys have asked federal prosecutors to assume control of his assets from co-receivers appointed by a state judge.
· Federal prosecutors responded, clarifying they have no intention to seize the assets in the state court Receivership currently.
· The state of South Carolina claimed jurisdiction over Murdaugh's assets before the federal government, limiting federal intervention.
· Murdaugh’s assets were put under receivership on Nov. 4, 2021, assigning John T. Lay and Peter M. McCoy as co-receivers.
· Murdaugh's attorneys claim that the receivers have taken control of $2.1 million of his assets and paid out significant amounts to the co-receivers.
· The prosecutors highlighted that the fees charged by the co-receivers were at a "significant discount" and were approved by a state court judge.
· The federal government is authorized to seize up to $9 million for its forfeiture judgment but isn't mandated to do so, and Murdaugh can't force them.
Full Story:
In the latest turn of events surrounding convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, federal prosecutors made it clear on Wednesday that they would not be intervening to take control of Murdaugh’s assets. This response came after Murdaugh's attorneys made an urgent plea to the government, asking it to oversee his assets currently under the charge of co-receivers appointed by a South Carolina state judge.
According to the documents filed in district court, while the government has the authority, through a preliminary order of forfeiture, to seize the assets, they have no current intention to do so. This decision arises due to a legal nuance: the state of South Carolina has already staked its claim over the assets, asserting jurisdiction and therefore hindering federal interference.
The backdrop to this complex financial entanglement dates back to November 4, 2021. In an effort to thwart any potential mismanagement, concealment, or sale, Murdaugh’s assets were placed in a protective receivership. Assigned to this critical responsibility were John T. Lay and Peter M. McCoy as co-receivers.
Murdaugh's defense team has since voiced significant concerns about this arrangement. They argue that an alarming $2.1 million of his assets have been taken over by the co-receivers. Of this amount, they claim $400,000 has already been disbursed to Lay and McCoy, with an additional $253,294 now in the pipeline for release. In court documents, the defense passionately states that such financial maneuvers put "the Murdaugh Funds at risk of substantial dissipation and waste."
Federal prosecutors, in their detailed response, provided a contrasting viewpoint. They emphasized that the charges levied by the co-receivers come at a "significant discount" when juxtaposed against standard fees in such cases. Furthermore, these fees, they stressed, have been greenlighted by the state court circuit judge, with no objections raised by Murdaugh or other potential stakeholders.
Addressing the broader financial framework, prosecutors shared that the government holds the authority to seize an impressive $9 million to meet its forfeiture judgment. However, they clarified that there's no obligation to exercise this right. The court documents succinctly state, "Murdaugh cannot force the Government to seize any assets, particularly assets over which he has either relinquished or been divested of control."
A crucial distinction was made regarding the role of federal and state authorities in managing these assets. The defense's assertion that the government would effectively mirror the actions of the co-receivers was debunked by prosecutors. They elaborated that while the federal system considers some victims as financially "whole", a takeover of the assets from the state could potentially deprive some state victims – those not encompassed within federal crimes – of the opportunity to recover their dues.
This multifaceted financial dispute adds another layer to the ongoing saga of Alex Murdaugh, shining a light on the intricate intersection of state and federal jurisdictions, and raising poignant questions about the guardianship of assets and the rights of victims. As developments unfold, the nation watches closely, waiting to see how justice will be meted out in this high-stakes financial and legal drama.
· Federal prosecutors responded, clarifying they have no intention to seize the assets in the state court Receivership currently.
· The state of South Carolina claimed jurisdiction over Murdaugh's assets before the federal government, limiting federal intervention.
· Murdaugh’s assets were put under receivership on Nov. 4, 2021, assigning John T. Lay and Peter M. McCoy as co-receivers.
· Murdaugh's attorneys claim that the receivers have taken control of $2.1 million of his assets and paid out significant amounts to the co-receivers.
· The prosecutors highlighted that the fees charged by the co-receivers were at a "significant discount" and were approved by a state court judge.
· The federal government is authorized to seize up to $9 million for its forfeiture judgment but isn't mandated to do so, and Murdaugh can't force them.
Full Story:
In the latest turn of events surrounding convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, federal prosecutors made it clear on Wednesday that they would not be intervening to take control of Murdaugh’s assets. This response came after Murdaugh's attorneys made an urgent plea to the government, asking it to oversee his assets currently under the charge of co-receivers appointed by a South Carolina state judge.
According to the documents filed in district court, while the government has the authority, through a preliminary order of forfeiture, to seize the assets, they have no current intention to do so. This decision arises due to a legal nuance: the state of South Carolina has already staked its claim over the assets, asserting jurisdiction and therefore hindering federal interference.
The backdrop to this complex financial entanglement dates back to November 4, 2021. In an effort to thwart any potential mismanagement, concealment, or sale, Murdaugh’s assets were placed in a protective receivership. Assigned to this critical responsibility were John T. Lay and Peter M. McCoy as co-receivers.
Murdaugh's defense team has since voiced significant concerns about this arrangement. They argue that an alarming $2.1 million of his assets have been taken over by the co-receivers. Of this amount, they claim $400,000 has already been disbursed to Lay and McCoy, with an additional $253,294 now in the pipeline for release. In court documents, the defense passionately states that such financial maneuvers put "the Murdaugh Funds at risk of substantial dissipation and waste."
Federal prosecutors, in their detailed response, provided a contrasting viewpoint. They emphasized that the charges levied by the co-receivers come at a "significant discount" when juxtaposed against standard fees in such cases. Furthermore, these fees, they stressed, have been greenlighted by the state court circuit judge, with no objections raised by Murdaugh or other potential stakeholders.
Addressing the broader financial framework, prosecutors shared that the government holds the authority to seize an impressive $9 million to meet its forfeiture judgment. However, they clarified that there's no obligation to exercise this right. The court documents succinctly state, "Murdaugh cannot force the Government to seize any assets, particularly assets over which he has either relinquished or been divested of control."
A crucial distinction was made regarding the role of federal and state authorities in managing these assets. The defense's assertion that the government would effectively mirror the actions of the co-receivers was debunked by prosecutors. They elaborated that while the federal system considers some victims as financially "whole", a takeover of the assets from the state could potentially deprive some state victims – those not encompassed within federal crimes – of the opportunity to recover their dues.
This multifaceted financial dispute adds another layer to the ongoing saga of Alex Murdaugh, shining a light on the intricate intersection of state and federal jurisdictions, and raising poignant questions about the guardianship of assets and the rights of victims. As developments unfold, the nation watches closely, waiting to see how justice will be meted out in this high-stakes financial and legal drama.
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com