Evidence

Publicly redacted documents available for independent review.

Every card links to the current public version. Cards without an uploaded file are not displayed. Redaction status appears on each card.

How to read these documents

These are public working copies prepared for independent review. Descriptions summarize contents in neutral terms. Nothing on this page asserts that any specific person has been proven to have committed a criminal offense.

The petition was filed on July 20, 2026 and is now pending before the South Carolina Supreme Court. Dates that do not appear on the face of a document are described as "Date not publicly displayed."

Download the Case Packet (PDF)

One printable bundle: case summary, current status, evidence cards, document index, and timeline.

Public documents

Petition

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

Public working copy of the pro se petition Christopher Woody filed on July 20, 2026. The petition alleges that an unauthorized person described in sworn evidence as having official courtroom access entered the jury room during deliberations, and sets out the constitutional grounds for review.

Date: July 20, 2026
Version: Public v.1
Redaction: Publicly redacted.
Status: Filed. Available for independent review.
Size: 109 KB
Source: Provided by the Woody family for public review.

View Download PDF

Affidavits

Juror Affidavits — Publicly Redacted

Publicly redacted juror affidavits. A sworn juror affidavit states that an unauthorized person with official courtroom access entered the jury room during 2005 deliberations and communicated a statement favoring conviction; a second juror corroborates the unauthorized entry. Redactions protect juror identities.

Version: Public v.1
Redaction: Publicly redacted — juror identifiers removed.
Status: Available for independent review.
Size: 1.31 MB
Source: Provided by the Woody family for public review.

View Download PDF

Court Decision

South Carolina Supreme Court — Opinion No. 28329 (Murdaugh, jury-influence remand)

Official South Carolina Supreme Court opinion addressing improper external jury influence and ordering a new trial. Cited here as constitutional context for equal-treatment analysis, not as authority that resolves the Woody matter.

Version: Official — sccourts.org
Status: Official — link to court record.
Source: South Carolina Judicial Branch.

View

Missing from this page

The Christopher Woody affidavit and any later public orders will be added here after administrator upload and redaction confirmation. To avoid broken links, no card is shown for a document until its file is public.