§ 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.

§ 1· 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."

§ 2

Public documents

Petition

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

Public working copy of the petition filed on behalf of Christopher Woody on July 20, 2026. Sets out the alleged jury-room intrusion by a state employee or official with courtroom access, the corroborating juror statement, and the constitutional grounds for immediate review.

Date: July 20, 2026
Version: Public v.1
Redaction: Publicly redacted.
Status: Filed and available for independent review.
Size: 109 KB
Last updated: 2026-07-23
Source: Provided by the Woody family for public review.

View Download PDF

Affidavits

Juror Affidavits — Publicly Redacted

Publicly redacted copies of the main juror affidavit alleging that a state employee or official with courtroom access entered the jury room during 2005 deliberations and told jurors something favoring conviction, plus the second juror's corroborating statement of 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
Last updated: 2026-07-23
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 remanding for a new trial. Cited on this site 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.
Last updated: 2026-05-13
Source: South Carolina Judicial Branch.

View

§ 3

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.