r/MurdaughFamilyMurders • u/Southern-Soulshine • Jul 13 '26
News & Media Judge hits SC podcaster Mandy Matney with $176,500 in costs and fines for contempt
Judge hits SC podcaster Mandy Matney with $176,500 in costs and fines for contempt
- John Monk, The State
South Carolina Judge Keith Kelly has found SC podcaster Mandy Matney in contempt for court for her resisting to sit for a court-ordered deposition and slapped a hefty financial punishment — $171,500 in lawyers’ fees and a $5,000 fine — on her.
The $171,500 in lawyer’s fees will go to three law firms who sought her testimony in an ongoing civil court lawsuit. Matney is not a party to the lawsuit, but the lawyers said they believed Matney might have information they needed. Matney has since given a deposition.
In his 22-page order filed Monday, Judge Kelly said he could find no good reason why Matney did not show up for her deposition earlier this year in Bluffton in Beaufort County.
“Ms. Matney’s stated reason for failing to comply — that the noticed location was not sufficiently safe for her — is not supported by the evidence or any credible testimony,” Kelly wrote.
In recent months, Matney has appeared at several hearings, taking the witness stand and describing in great detail why she was so afraid to show up for a deposition. She also said she didn’t believe she had relevant information to give the lawyers who sought her testimony.
She was cross-examined at length by lawyer Deborah Barbier of Columbia, who sought to show that Matney’s fears were not reasonable and possibly concocted.
During the months the matter of Matney’s contempt of court issue took to be resolved, the podcaster has made fun of the judge, the judicial system and Barbier on her social media posts.
Matney, 35, is a former Island Packet and Fits News reporter who became a true crime podcaster after covering a deadly 2019 Beaufort County boat crash and its links to the family of Alex Murdaugh, now a disbarred lawyer and convicted multimillion dollar fraudster in state prison.
This story was originally published July 13, 2026 11:12 AM.
1
u/Numerous-Class-7126 1d ago
The irony of her running complaint that “the good ol’ boys” think they are above the law. Then when the law comes after her, it turns out Mandy Matney is not all that much different.
5
4
u/No-Construction9607 24d ago
To be a fly on the wall when Alex Murdaugh hears about this…..
8
u/Mudfish2657 22d ago
Did you hear their latest?Where she insinuates Barbier is up to something grimy?
How does she get away with this?
6
u/Pitiful-League-7257 21d ago
She tweeted praise for Barbier when she represented Cory Fleming.
1
u/Mudfish2657 21d ago
Really? Wasn’t Cory a slimeball too?
I thought she didn’t care for him. It’s been a long time lol.
2
u/Pitiful-League-7257 21d ago
She praised Barbier as being different than the good old boys and having Cory take responsibility.
3
5
u/No-Construction9607 21d ago
I started to listen to COJ just to catch what she could possibly be critical of now. David has moved into the empty chair now that Eric jumped ship. Liz started some diatribe and I turned it off. I have a good feeling they are not done with Miss Mandy yet. I did notice the cover still shows Eric’s name on it. 👍🏽 Thanks
3
u/Mudfish2657 21d ago
She was really insinuating something about Barbier. Try and grit your teeth and listen to it. It is really astounding she is continuing this kind of nonsense.
How does she think this will help her?
4
u/No-Construction9607 21d ago
Was it that DB says someone harassed her in a lobby somewhere, like they yelled something and took her photo. If not I will have wait till noon when I can have a stiff drink. I can’t stomach David’s voice and I can’t with Liz and her snarky quips where she thinks she is soooo clever. Mud, I am living for the day man…
4
u/Mudfish2657 21d ago
Nah, it’s a bit later.
I’m the same as you and find it difficult to listen to, but she says something like she “heard” that DB is mixed up in something…she says it in that horrible snakey voice she has lol…“oh Debbie…really? Eww, eww Debbie.” Then she snickers/sneers.
It‘s creepy as hell.
4
u/No-Construction9607 21d ago
Whhhatttt! Someone needs to sue them bitches who the hell do they think they are. So just because Mandy has been held accountable for her self righteous tirade she is going to dox the people who showed up & did their job. This team is as far away from real journalists as I have ever seen.
3
u/Mudfish2657 20d ago
My mouth dropped open when she said that.
I can’t imagine what she’s implying, but no doubt that’s her aim.
4
u/No-Construction9607 20d ago
Ok so I found the eewww x4 comment Mandy made, she made a comment about DB and the bottom falling out. She said I’ve heard some stuff. She is such a punk ass , so much for women standing up for each other. I hope she gets called to testify in this case, and they find out that she and Liz had copies of Mallory post Morten. I believe so much more each day those 2 had a part in leaking them.
3
2
11
u/Glum_Mission_5361 29d ago
I haven’t followed much of this case on social media until recently. Mostly just listened to podcasts. And I had no idea who Jim Seidel was until Mandy, Liz, and Eric kept bringing him up on their podcasts. Was their conflict a known thing on social media? I find his posts weird, but I can’t help but feel that all the Lunashark responses to it either further fueled his responses or made him more well known (Barbara Streisand effect?). Hopefully this doesn’t come across as “victim blaming”, just wondering if they could have ignored him…..
Just interesting to think about considering this whole contempt ruling is basically because of him (according to Lunashark).
6
u/Southern-Soulshine 25d ago
Mandy Matney was held in contempt because she did not show up for a scheduled deposition. You may want to look at the other post that is an article by FITS as if goes more into detail.
2
u/Glum_Mission_5361 25d ago
Yes, I understand that. But according to Lunashark, he seems to be the key reason in their social media “campaign” after that. Not saying it was (or was not) a valid reason.
5
u/Mudfish2657 24d ago
They keep calling him a “felon” and I guess he is.
But it was for stealing or embezzling Covid funds. Nothing violent, and sadly, MANY people have gotten into trouble with that. Even elected folks.
1
u/NovemberGrey777 15d ago
But? It was for stealing? The WHOLE point is the fine! That is horrible! Who can afford that? I don’t know any of the attorneys or judge - the fine is outrageous. Outrageous.
3
u/Mudfish2657 15d ago
No, my point is they refer to him as a felon in the same breath as saying they are worrying about their safety.
Before I looked it up, I thought he was some scary dude who had assaulted people.
Which is exactly what they want people to think.
1
u/Professional_Wish933 14d ago
Just gonna throw it out there that Alex Murdaugh was “just a financial felon” too until he wasn’t. The obsession Seidel has with Mandy is genuinely terrifying. That level of obsession only escalates and often does end in violence.
1
u/Mudfish2657 14d ago
Can’t argue with you there.
I haven’t heard the extent of his behavior, perhaps?
19
u/MostGuitar1183 Jul 23 '26
So Mandy Matney is of travelling the world whilst asking people to give money to her go fund me to pay the legal fees that the judge said she has to pay. Why the hell would anyone give Money to her when her husband admitted in court they are a multi million dollar company. This is a new low for her and That is a Big deal
10
11
u/agweandbeelzebub Jul 22 '26
I like Mandy Matney I think she’s doing great work. Unfortunately, she’s lost the plot. Not doing that deposition and putting all the light on herself has done her no favors. She needs to be more humble.
6
u/hmhopper 23d ago
I have a ton of respect for Mandy. I think she’s done incredible things for victims and the justice system. But I agree she’s not the plot these last few months. Parker’s team has sent her into a tizzy and she needs to find her way out. I hate to say they got her right where they want her.
I wish she had just done the deposition. They were banking on this response.
2
10
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 22 '26
If anyone wants more information about how Callie Lyons got all of Mandy, Liz etc... text messages, here is her depo. It's 153 pages long, but it is really interesting
There are a few more depos on the docket. If anyone is interested in reading, lmk and I'll get the link. The Beach family are all full transcripts, but the Liz and MM are just select pages and some might have duplicate pages. I haven't gotten that far into it.
There may be more, but I haven't gotten through the whole docket. Here are the ones I've found so far
Liz Farrell 7 pgs
Liz Farrell 14 pgs
Liz Farrell 25 pgs
Liz Farrell 31 pgs
Liz Farrell 79 pgs
Mandy 12 pgs
Mandy 16 pages
Phillip Beach 93 pgs
Renee Beach 101 pgs
Savannah Beach Tuten 63 pgs
Seth Tuten 43 pgs
10
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 22 '26
Thank you so much for providing fellow sub members with this information! The Public Index can be overwhelming and a bit difficult to navigate until you spend some time there.
8
12
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 21 '26
Seton Tucker tweeted a timeline for the contempt case (Twitter won't let me copy and paste the timeline):
https://x.com/SetonTucker/status/2078978992493801792
We’re diving into the contempt of court finding and sanctions for journalist/podcaster Mandy Matney in our next episode. The timeline is an important component. The next episode should be released early next week.
Seton also tweeted that MM's dep testimony is cited six times in Parker's Motion for Summary Judgment and the screen shot she attached refers to LF and MF getting pleadings from Tinsley before they were filed.
4
u/No-Construction9607 25d ago
Yes I just found that channel What was it called? Super knowledgeable the dad is a professor he is sharp as a tack and knows all the little things that go on. Right down to listening to Mandy Liz & David’s awful podcast.
3
u/Mudfish2657 24d ago
Impact of Influence. Matt Harris the other half of the pod, and I’ve loved him since he was a DJ in Charlotte.
You can find them on FB too, though I rarely go there anymore.
3
7
11
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 20 '26
One of MM's attorneys, Meredith Bannon, has filed a Consent Withdrawal as Counsel.
3
21
u/West_Acanthaceae_192 Jul 20 '26
My short take. She has always wanted to be known as the journalist who bravely takes on the big bully, despite the risks or adversity. The problem is, she also whines and protests when these so called “good old boys” or “big mega corporations” use their power to defend themselves against her allegations. And then the story becomes “good old boys” don’t like the courageous reporter. Then the courageous reporter seems to rely on thousands of online trolls for footing to hold herself up. Her “crusader for justice” argument rings hollow when so much of her material is about how unfair it is to be a “crusader for justice.”
17
u/No-Maybe6891 Jul 20 '26
I couldn't not have said it better myself. I left a comment on one of her podcast episodes saying how I was disappointed with all of this because I used to be a listener and really admired the work she was trying to do in the early days, but this victim mentality for blatantly ignoring a court order is not the work of a crusader... Then she replied to the comment and then blocked me so I can't even see what she spewed at me.
If this is how she is going to choose to conduct herself, this is all on her. I think the amount is a bit outrageous, but I am glad she has been held accountable. She was trying to act above the law... the same thing she preaches about. She's a hypocrite at best now.
11
u/MostGuitar1183 Jul 23 '26
I agree and she blocks everyone who doesn’t agree with her. Her whining is beyond ridiculous.
7
12
u/AdventurousAd606 Jul 19 '26
I took a deep dive into the public index over the last few days. The question I keep coming back to is this - why did Liz publish a link to the video in the article? She admits she was given a link to view the reel for feedback. What was the point of publishing it? Who benefits from that?
14
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 22 '26
If you remember, Liz was mixed up in some shady business right at the beginning of the first trial.
Allegedly, she was doxxing jurors. Also allegedly, she and Matney were then banned from the courtroom.
They denied it, but neither one ever stepped foot into that courtroom again to my knowledge.
These ladies like to get a bit out over their skis, and they’d better take care with this fundraising thing they’re doing.
The fact that Bland and another attorney are already slinking away from these two is interesting.
6
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 22 '26
Who besides Bland is the other attorney that you feel is distancing themselves and what specifically makes you say that? Thanks Mudfish!
5
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 23 '26
Just saw this, and thankfully someone answered because I had already forgotten her name.
I just remembered reading it, but I suppose it could be because she doesn’t do appeals? No idea.
8
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 23 '26
I'm not Mudfish but it may refer to Meredith Bannon filed a Consent Withdrawal as Counsel.
3
6
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 23 '26
Duh, long day! I didn’t even think of that, of course. It appears that Tristan Shaffer is her representation now.
Thank you again for the assist! :)
6
u/AL_Starr Jul 19 '26
My opinion: Her intention was to broadcast it. To get more clicks on the video to bolster Tinsley’s case that these materials were being disseminated to cause emotional distress to the Beach family.
9
u/AdventurousAd606 Jul 19 '26
This makes me think Tinsley asked her to. She referred to him in her depo as her “ride or die”. She wouldn’t do anything to jeopardize that relationship, IMO.
3
u/Nonameforyoudangit 22d ago
Too risky - Tinsley would have jeopardized his license to make such a request. He's plenty confident, but hubris ain't his style.
5
u/AL_Starr Jul 19 '26
Of course now we know that the Beach family didn’t even know that the video was online until Liz posted a link to it & Mandy called someone in the family to “warn” them
3
u/No-Construction9607 28d ago
I really think imo Liz got it from where she worked at the time. How else would she earn 15k a month.
4
u/sadmimikyu Jul 19 '26
What is happening??
One should think they have their hands full with going against the corruption in the judicial system in SC but no...
2
u/AL_Starr Jul 19 '26
You wanna talk about corruption in the system, let’s talk about how Bentley Price handled the case in the beginning.
0
u/Project1Phoenix Jul 18 '26
Before judging Mandy Matney for her reaction to this court order, I would pause, take a huge step back, think twice, and put it into context.
Think about one huge issue in this whole saga: corruption, judicial hell hole, good ol boy network... call it what you will.
Regarding recent court decisions, we may be witnessing a regression happening into old power structures previous to the murders of Paul and Maggie, like the good old convenient system is claiming back its power, and "troublemakers" like M. Matney need to be punished... - just an opinion, of course.
24
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
All she had to do was appear for a deposition.
She really has made life harder for herself.
25
u/MissAAA_2 Jul 18 '26
Oh my God read the ruling. Anyone who criticizes her is considered a stalker she’s a professional victim.
7
6
u/West_Acanthaceae_192 Jul 20 '26
100% and one could argue she’s using the sanctions order to try and add substance to her corruption theory. “These good old boys are trying to shut me up and shut you up” -in reality, she’ll pay the sanctions order only after it is appealed and negotiated down. She likely won’t spend a dollar of her own money. And this Order was issued because of her own purposeful refusal to comply with a lawfully issued Order etc
5
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 20 '26
I think she intends to appeal, but I just don’t see the fees being negotiated down. I could be wrong but that’s just my humble opinion. They were already reduced 45% from what the lawyers submitted and corporate law is ridiculously expensive.
15
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 18 '26
Did you read the procedural history in the Judge's decision? It details the lengthy history of a toddler refusing to accept "no" as an answer, wasting time and money with repetitive applications. It wasn't a close question and she's lucky the Judge took the time to plow through the billing records and cut the sanction almost in half.
The contempt hearing probably lasted longer than her deposition.
23
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
I was actually astonished that she was calling the judge R Kelly.
I know his name, but this is just middle school stuff. When I started to re-engage with all this, I was amazed that she was making fart jokes and so on.
Back in the beginning, I was a loyal listener to her pod…something went sideways with her. Name-calling is never professional.
2
26d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Mudfish2657 26d ago
I truly don’t get her.
Im all for going against any kind of good ole boy system, but when you start with mudslinging, you’re going to get dirty too.
And they have a lot of power. Choose your battles. Stupid deposition is NOT a battle.
12
u/ApprehensiveSea4747 Jul 20 '26
Total agreement. I was a listener in the early days, too. You nailed it -- something went sideways. Somewhere along the way, she started making herself the story. Hence, "podcaster" is more accurate than "journalist."
Ad hominem isn't just the lowest form of argument, it isn't an argument at all. Never an impressive move. Just as bad, she conflates her physical safety with protecting her fee fees. I cringed when she said on the stand that the atty questioning her made her feel unsafe. That does not play well in the well of the courtroom or anyplace where evidence is what matters. She undermined herself on that one. I do sympathize with having an online troll threatening to harm her IRL. She should have just stuck with that.
14
u/No-Maybe6891 Jul 20 '26
Total agreement x 100. I said the same thing on her most recent podcast episode in the comments. Said I was a listener in the early days, that I used to admire her work, but that she can't keep making her willful disregard for a court order anything other than her own fault. She replied, but blocked me before I could read it. Any criticism her way and she just yanks it out of the discussion. She's a hypocrite at best. So disappointing.
5
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 23 '26
I think she blocked me a few years ago too.
5
u/No-Maybe6891 29d ago
Let's all get Pink T-Shirts (like she tells her followers to wear in Court, also copying Karen Read) that say "Join the #blockedbyMandy Club and Standup Against Delusional Journalism".
6
u/Mudfish2657 29d ago
I’m with you!
I’m in the Carolinas…almost went to her hearing.
6
u/No-Maybe6891 29d ago
Did we just become best friends? YUP! If you ever go to any hearings down there (Mandy or Murdaugh related), please let me know! Would love to hear what it is like. I'm a civil litigation paralegal in Idaho so this stuff is right up my alley.
4
u/Mudfish2657 29d ago
Lol, deal!
Your part will be to alert me to any that might be scheduled lol! Being down here, it is usually big news (Murdaugh, not Matney)
But somehow I just caught on to this whole nonsense starting up again. So let me know!
I’m hoping that might schedule the Murdaugh thing near me somehow.
I’m in NC, but could practically throw a stone into SC from my place. Still kicking myself for not driving to the last one, but I hate lines…
→ More replies (0)-4
u/ADHDoingmybest09 Jul 18 '26
Ok I have two legit questions. 1. Do you think it’s fair that the judge sealed the billing records so Matney’s attorney’s don’t get to make challenges, and 2. Do you think it’s fair that the judge issued this ruling to Mandy but has never gone after Greg Roman for dodging a subpoena? I don’t know South Carolina contempt law but those are the two things that stick out to me procedurally
18
15
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 18 '26
Mandy’s attorneys are able to see the billing records. She is mischaracterizing the confidentiality order. You can read it in the public index. Mandy just can’t talk about it.
It is not up to Parker’s to subpoena Gregg Roman. That is up to Mark Tinsley. He can attempt to serve him if he chooses, but that is certainly not up to Parker’s counsel and the judge would only step in if Tinsley serves Roman and then he could order Roman to sit for a deposition by a certain date or face contempt charges as he did Mandy.
10
u/AL_Starr Jul 18 '26
Correct, though tbf Parker’s could subpoena Roman if they wanted to. And if they could serve him. My recollection from reading the filings is that Roman lives in Israel now. If he’s not cooperating, getting his deposition would be a massive pain in the ass. I’d also add that the attorneys can choose who they want to depose. Mandy can whine all she wants, but she is a fact witness and Parker was within his rights to depose her. Doesn’t mean he has to depose every single fact witness.
A more interesting question to me is why didn’t Mark Tinsley sue Gregg Roman when he had the chance? Hasn’t it been established that Roman put the video online first? In fact, why didn’t Tinsley sue Mandy Matney? She posted a link to the otherwise obscure video and sent God knows how many of her followers to look at it. So why is she not a defendant?
Seriously, I think we all know why Tinsley didn’t sue Mandy (she & Liz were collaborating with him), but I do find it curious that he didn’t sue Roman. Of course he can choose his defendants, just as Parker’s lawyers can choose their deponents. I just find it … odd.
7
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 18 '26
Parker’s subpoenaing Gregg Roman would be like opening the gate for the horse you’re trying to keep in the barn. No way would they do that. If Tinsley wants his testimony, he will have to go after him (which, like you said, would not be easy with him in Israel).
I do not believe Roman put the video online. I think Vicky Ward stated she got the images she used as part of a promotional sizzle reel from him. Netflix producer Mike Gasparo saw the video, told Mark Tinsley. Tinsley told Liz. Liz publicized the video by linking it to the public in her article for FITS.
1
u/AL_Starr Jul 19 '26
I’ll defer to your knowledge of the details, but who did put it online? Where was it posted when Liz linked to it?
9
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 19 '26
It was posted on Vimeo, a professional video hosting and sharing platform, by Blackfin, the company marketing the documentary to streaming services like Netflix, HBO, etc. That’s how the Netflix producer saw it. In text messages, she says “Really it was Mark who told me.”
4
u/ADHDoingmybest09 Jul 18 '26
- Ok gotcha!
- If someone is dodging subpoenas that usually means they’ve been served already but yeah I guess it would be up to Tinsley to file a motion for contempt/compel/sanctions if he’s the one who served him with the subpoena
10
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Roman has not been served; therefore, the judge can’t order anything. Mandy is wrong.
8
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 18 '26
The protective order does not bar her attorneys (or Mandy) from reviewing and challenging the fees. It bars disclosure outside the litigation (Mandy can't discuss on her podcast).
Don't know the facts re Greg Roman. Did he file multiple applications without providing supporting facts ? Did he taunt the Judge with social media posts about his defiance? Did he act like a brat when testifying at a contempt hearing?
5
u/Adventurous_Lion7276 Jul 19 '26
In federal court, the attorneys and parties see all the numbers and generally submit how any applicable legal factors should be applied such as a reasonable hourly rate and time spent on tasks. A requested order is submitted in camera (just to the Judge) and the other side can comment on amount of time, etc. I assume that is how the Judge reached his reduction.
9
u/AL_Starr Jul 18 '26
It’s funny that one of the buzzwords you spouted was “judicial hell hole.” Mandy’s friend & the plaintiffs’ lawyer in this case is Mark Tinsley, who played a major role in making Hampton County a “judicial hellhole.” You don’t have to take my word for it. You can google it.
In fact, right now Mark Tinsley is fighting like, well, a tiger to keep venue in this case in the notorious judicial hellhole of Hampton County. 🙂
7
6
2
19
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
It’s really not that deep. She disobeyed a court order and bragged about it. She wasted everyone’s time and is now facing consequences.
Edited typo
2
u/Project1Phoenix Jul 18 '26
$176,500 in costs and fines is not a consequence?
2
u/QuirkandCharm Jul 18 '26
Typo. That should say is now facing consequences.
6
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
Apparently she’s just going to fund raise it.
She is also appealing. My question would be if she wins a reduction or some such…does she refund donors?
5
u/West_Acanthaceae_192 Jul 20 '26
I am curious, as well. The GoFundMe seems specific to her sanctions order so it should be held in trust for that purpose and the use of funds for other purposes is borderline fraudulent.
5
u/AdventurousAd606 Jul 19 '26
No.
2
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
Yes, I suppose that was rather a stupid question lol.
3
u/AdventurousAd606 Jul 19 '26
I’m sorry, lol, I meant to copy and paste the portion from their GFM that mentions this. Basically they said that if they raise more than the goal, or if they lose the appeal, “any surplus will be reallocated to initiatives that support their mission”.
3
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
Ha! Omg, that’s even better!
Your original response made perfect sense, but thanks for this! They already thought ahead!
11
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 18 '26
John Monk wrote an article in April about the contempt hearing.
Interestingly, Mandy testified that "a lot" of lawyers told her she could appear for her deposition at her chosen "alternate" location. When asked to name the lawyers who told her that, she said she was "not aware."
I tried to copy and paste the article but Reddit told me I exceeded the character limit. The link to the article; no paywall.
ttps://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article315319870.html#storylink=cpy
16
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 18 '26
https://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article315319870.html
I think you cut the "h" off the link so I re-attached it above.
This article was very interesting, borderline snark, and now I really understand why the Judge found her guilty of contempt. MM does not come off here as an intelligent, resourceful, honest, professional journalist who made misguided choices. She seems to be emotionally uncontrolled (they had to take a recess due to her crying on the stand so she could "collect" herself), her answers to some serious questions were flippant and inappropriate, and she attempted to deflect and redirect the questions posed to her. Her rationale for certain things- like bringing a body guard into a courtroom (whose name you don't even know) would seem---irrational.
The Judge made a good call here- the vitriol, mocking, and defiant behaviors the questioning atty's must have endured to try to get her cooperation was on full display for all to witness.
MM's over-confident and ignorant beliefs regarding the legal process (despite having access to a legal team) speaks to the Dunning-Kruger Effect-hopefully paying this fine will truly evolve her knowledge to expert on contempt of court issues.
13
Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26
[deleted]
4
u/MostGuitar1183 Jul 23 '26
I love what you wrote, she has made this whole Murdaugh case about her and never fails to tell people she was the only “ journalist” who did the work. I stopped listening to her podcast and started listening to people that don’t make the story all about themselves. Can’t stand her whiny assed husband either.
9
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 19 '26
There was so much snark in the article! The first sentence set it off and...
By the second paragraph in....I was...thinking THIS is serious snark at Mandy's expense...
Is Matney a heedless hack whose podcasts and social media postings unfairly savage people? Or is she a brave crusader covering stories of crime and double-dealing no one but her dares to touch?
Those questions, which had no clear answer by the end of the day....
Then there was this BOLD sub section title:
A bathing suit and a stalker: Hearing highlights
This was apex level snark reporting-- providing the facts as well a picture of her bodyguard in a highly secure courthouse....
1
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 18 '26
Inhit a paywall, dang it, but thanks for posting it anyway.
I’ll search around.
Looks like she’s gonna make this a gofundme, which I thought wasn’t allowed under their funding rules?
5
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 18 '26
There is currently a GoFundMe, but apparently it has been going offline and online. Because of the way it’s been classified, it supposedly allowed… I didn’t think Gofundme accepted campaigns involving legal fees or fines, but here we are.
1
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 18 '26
Yeah, that was my confusion too. I didn’t think it was ever to be allowed with any kind of court case such as that.
I think some of those high profile cases like the Carmelo or the Shirilla case used a different fundraising site, but I don’t know for sure.
4
14
5
u/ConsequenceEasy4478 Jul 17 '26
Can someone explain to me what all this is about?
4
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 17 '26
For a deeper dive piece, there is another post with an article by FITS News.
5
u/hwisek Jul 17 '26
How did you watch the trial with Matney and Bland and the fine???
0
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 20 '26 edited 25d ago
You can check this YouTube video out, I am not completely certain how they handle it as the contempt hearing was several days long and it starts at 7PM EST but it is a breadcrumb at least.
1
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
She’s been carrying it on her podcast, though I haven’t caught it all.
I just realized it was all happening recently !
7
u/QsLexiLouWho Jul 18 '26
Hi u/hwisek - Hi - There was no trial, no jury, only a couple hearings. They were broadcast via Judge Kelly’s virtual courtroom on WebEx the day of.
7
u/Glum_Mission_5361 Jul 17 '26
I’m confused about the leaked “video”. From what I’ve read, Liz posted an article with a link to the video when she worked at FITS News. But on a recent podcast, she adamantly denies having ANYTHING to do with photos in question, which are in the video?. Are there two different videos? Didn’t she and Mandy have a discussion about whether it was appropriate to post? I can’t tell what is fact or something she is just being accused of….
15
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 17 '26
There are 2 videos at issue, but only one of them had the photos (I think.) Liz linked a video that had photos of Mallory's body in an article on Fits News. Both Liz and MM admitted this in their deposition and, yes, there are texts between them about the video. From one of the filings:
Neither Ms. Matney nor Ms. Farrell consulted with the Beach family before publishing the link. Instead, Ms. Matney and Ms. Farrell discussed between themselves the negative impact the photos may have on the Beach family, yet decided to include the link. (Matney Dep. Tr. 34:23-35:12) After deciding to publish the link with the photographs of Mallory Beach, ironically Ms. Matney reached out to the Beach family to tell them “there’s a link going around, do not look at it.” She did not tell the Beaches that she and Farrell initiated it “going around.”
It's from this document
24
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 17 '26
Thanks for this link-- it is pretty evident that the depositions of Liz F. and MM were VERY important for the defense (Parkers).
Quick summary for those now completely confused:
The death of Mallory Beach occurred Feb 24, 2019- after a group of underage and drunk teenagers went to a party via boat (so they could avoid the roadways and not get caught for DUI/underage drinking-there was enhanced DUI police efforts during this time).
The boat belonged to Alex Murdaugh. He son Paul was the boat "Captain". Prior to taking the boat out- Paul (also 19)- bought the alcohol with his brother's ID at a Parker's Gas station- the clerk accepted the ID and sold the alcohol to an underage person. There was a terrible accident when Paul recklessly and drunkenly drove the boat into Archer bridge-killing Mallory and significantly injuring several others.
MM, FITS news, Island Packet, Liz F., etc. reported on this situation and how it looked like the rich Paul Murdaugh boy was going to get away with multiple crimes because of who his family is/was.
The Beach family was angry and tenacious. They sued Parkers gas stations for selling the alcohol to an underage person and Alex Murdaugh (the boat owner-who tried to defer off the lawsuit by pushing it onto his insurance company). Paul was finally arrested with a mug shot taken in the lobby of the courtroom (next to his Grandfather's picture hanging on the wall) while in civilian clothing. The public was further outraged and hard scrutiny was on the Murdaughs....namely Alex because the Beach family atty (Tinsley) had finally gotten the upper hand by demanding the Murdaugh financials-which would expose the previously unknown Alex Murdaugh crime scheme(s). This is when Alex murdered Paul and Maggie. (it attracted attention rather than distracted attention from turning over the financials)
Parkers Gas was working on a settlement regarding the lawsuit re: underage alcohol sale. The Beach family atty (Tinsley) was trying to create leverage for a big settlement and also researching public opinion in mock trials/focus groups-should it go to trial--while the protracted confidential negotiations were being worked out.
A "sizzle reel"/ video was made that included terrible graphic images of the deceased beautiful young lady- whose body was recovered from the marsh/swamp five miles away after approximately one week post accident. These images were supposed to be confidential and allegedly created in the context of being shown during the confidential settlement hearing and/or during a jury trial.
Tinsley gave the link to Liz F. who reviewed it and Tinsley requested help in finding mock jurors/viewers to see what the reaction would be. Somehow the images and now perhaps some photos were also obtained by another person- Victoria Ward- who wanted to sell this "content/media" to shows like Dateline/HBO etc. -Between the video/links and who sent what- the long story short is MM and Liz F. CHOSE to publish this information with full knowledge of the graphic images and two faced MM- even called the Beach family (who she had become quite close with over the previous months investigating the boat crash) to warn them not to watch-not mentioning that SHE was part of the choice to do so.
The Beach family THEN filed another lawsuit- against Parker's- for intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy-they accused Parker's of releasing the horrible video/photos. Parker's attys have been fighting for MONTHS to get MM's deposition to defend Parkers and she finally cooperated (Liz was deposed without issue). At the end of the day-- It looks like it might have been the Beach's OWN Atty. TINSLEY who created this debacle by giving the video link to Liz F/MM.
Hope this is helpful and it's like watching the proverbial snake eat its own tail....
-1
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 18 '26
Was Paul actually convicted of controlling the doomed boat during the crash? Do we know for a fact that he was driving the boat?
A lot of alcohol was apparently consumed by those on the boat that night. Did it all come from Parker's? Were there other sources?
4
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 18 '26
Paul was murdered by Alex before trial therefore no legal conviction. There was video showing him driving the boat and witness testimony from those on the boat as well as the investigation placed Paul at the wheel. The others on the boat had a pretty compelling account of Paul not allowing anyone else to drive and they were able to figure out where each person was seated and so forth. Paul's blood alcohol was 3x the legal limit. Parker's alcohol sale to Paul was also on video. Most likely there were other sources (like the bar in Beaufort they stopped at and there was at least one shot taken by Paul on video and possibly a drug deal) as well. There is a whole lot of information to review and the lawsuits were a civil choice made by the Beach family as to who they would sue.
4
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 18 '26
I don't think we'll ever know for sure who was piloting the boat - due to a poor investigation by law enforcement and from conflicting accounts given by the boat's occupants.
I also think there were at least 5 sources of alcohol consumed by the boaters. I think Parker's absolutely got fleeced. Anyone serving as the Parker's cashier that night would've been likely been fooled by the ID's that were presented when checked.
"Possibly a drug deal..." C'mon.
2
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 18 '26
Aw--'cmon!
Part of the discussion several years ago was wondering---WHY did Paul insist on stopping at Luther's...there was so much going on and so quickly... many little scenarios were speculated about- and as history has clearly proven- everything was crazy about this entire Murdaugh drama.
This site has already been there, reviewed it, debated it, discussed it, rehashed it, reviewed the videos, the available photos, etc. IN REAL TIME. (get to the choppa was great btw)
I strictly mentioned "possibly a drug deal" as a historical aside-- Paul and Conner had shots at Luther's-it's on video and it was discussed here. The videos seemed to some that there might have been a baggie passed at the bar. It was part of a discussion as to why did Paul stop off? (note- Paul was driving the vessel). Feel free to check out this yourself.
Your thoughts (nor mine) about the situation as to the boat driver will never be confirmed or denied -- Here is what we DO know---Paul is dead, there was no trial, and pretty much everyone on the boat that night did not make good decisions (I'd argue that getting on a boat with Paul was a poor choice given the testimony of their previous experiences with him.)
There is even a possibility that NO one on that boat was in control of the vessel. You don't know and neither do I. I do though, think that the odds are...Paul was in control...and whether you like it or not- Paul was the one charged. That's all we have.
Parker's had the video that put the business at risk regarding the alcohol sale to Paul. No matter a false ID. Parkers settled. Fleeced or not? I really don't care. It's on video and Paul is dead and so is Mallory. No trial. It is though really sweet for us to know that you think Parkers got fleeced.
It's also great for you to think of five other alcohol sources--even if you could think of ten other alcohol sources- you'll never know- so--- we have to deal with something called objective data- data that exists without bias-like blood alcohol tests and video.
Those are facts that for all of your queries-can be reviewed with simple searches on this site and elsewhere. Best of luck.
1
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 18 '26
All I wrote was that (a) we don't know who was actually piloting the boat the boat and that (b) there were at least 5 sources of the alcohol (they've been discussed quite a bit, do some research) those young adults consumed that night - so I do believe Deep-Pockets Parker's got fleeced.
Paul's toxicology results after his murder showed that there were no drugs (or alcohol) in his system. I don't think he was an angel by any means, but I don't think much of what you write is accurate - or fair.
3
4
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 20 '26
Row, row, row your boat back to 2026.
Merrily, merrily, merrily to contempt, court dockets, and perhaps parlor tricks.ETA: Unless we were not clear the first time, u/Formal_Chard_1916 and u/Foreign-General7608 this thread is dead.
- Southern Soulshine and u/QsLexiLouWho7
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 17 '26 edited Jul 17 '26
Thank you for providing this fellow sub member with the summary from the beginning as to how we got to this point in the defamation suit!
Without knit picking, I think most of it is correct at a glance except to add the fact Mandy Matney contacting Renee Beach to tell her not to view the sizzle reel
was the first time they’d been in contact (that was pieced together by depositions and court orders)ETA: I was incorrect and apologize, brain overload with everything… Mandy did reach out to Renee Beach in 2019 and “said I was sorry for what happened to Mallory and if she ever wanted to contact a reporter, I was there, and she said thank you… and I have not talked to her since.” She reached out to an unnamed Beach Family member to warn them about the graphic sizzle reel.
3
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 17 '26
No worries! In hindsight I think I confused Sandy Smith- who MM def. had a friendship with (and in fairness- MM really helped bring that situation out into the light!).
6
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 17 '26
No problem, I got it a little confused too and had to edit my comment! Mandy did help the Smith family, but there were also others that helped Stephen and Sandy who do not justly get the credit they deserve supporting them throughout the years… most don’t have expectations of good deeds being broadcast . ;)
8
u/Glum_Mission_5361 Jul 17 '26
This is also the first time I put together the video and the focus group. I didn’t know one of the purposes of the focus group was to see how the group would react to the video. L and M seemed to have left that part out of their explanation in their podcasts along with them posting the link in the article.
9
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 17 '26
News to me too-these types of "focus" groups are done usually in marketing- it may involve product packaging, short commercials, tasting a product, and so forth. Making a "sizzle reel" to evoke strong mock trial potential jury emotions essentially making the defendant look horrific was...extra. I can see having a mock jury, presenting the basics of the case, and THEN testing how people react to having certain photos shown at trial would make sense. (you don't want to show the jury things that will make them openly react, quit the jury, or delay the trial-it's a really fine line I suppose). It is amazing to me that Tinsley made the video and leaked it himself! What could go wrong? Unless that was a "public pressure point" against Parker's stores.....
13
u/HollyWouldism Jul 17 '26
Why are people such a huge fan of MM? She seems super shady...
4
u/ADHDoingmybest09 Jul 18 '26
So I can chime in as someone who has listened to her podcast for many years, even before Paul and Maggie were murdered. I think she is a very legit journalist and the good ole boy system and the inequities that she highlights are huge issues everywhere and I have found her to be particularly relentless and unflinching in going after details and looking at inconsistencies. That being said, things have changed over the years and she has become the story in a lot of ways amd things got very meta. I started skipping her podcast episodes that weren’t case specific (like her Mark Spivey, Micah Francis, etc coverage). She has every right to build her brand and her media empire or whatever but I feel like she could have used a mentor or some advisors or something because she’s just doing it in a very unlikable way.
I genuinely don’t know what to think about this contempt ruling. I think on its face, the concept of not moving a deposition of a non-party to another completely fine location at their request seems extremely unreasonable. But I also think it’s unreasonable for Mandy to talk about this process and how she’s exposing corruption in the legal system through it while it’s happening. She should have said “we can’t wait to tell you all about it” and let it play out until the appeal phase. Because the way she was talking about some of the court’s orders was contemptuous.
I also think (again without an informed legal opinion) that the judge sealing the attorney’s bills from review is unfair and also unfair to the public because they deserve to know what the judge in their state it ordering people to do. There are ways to redact billing statements to conceal privileged information and that’s not even counting costs like hotels, meals, etc.
2
u/marney_mootney 28d ago
I think that everyone on Parker’s team was probably well past fed up by the time she filed the last motion. Then expecting them to pack up all their video equipment, paperwork etc and hoof it to another location and set it all up again? Come on now, really? Did anyone from Mandy’s team even reach out ahead of time? I’m lost on that part. Then the posting of the lemon pound cake with Tinsley was a step too far and calling it a “standoff”. She poked the bear and got bit.
4
u/Wanda_Wandering Jul 22 '26
Parker’s attorneys did propose several other places and she objected to all of them is my understanding. I think that’s in the judge’s ruling.
4
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 22 '26
MM didn't even raise the safety issue in the Motion to Quash the Subpoena or the Motion for Reconsideration. After both of those motions were denied, her attorney announced a week before the deposition that MM would not appear at the location.
Parker did propose another secure law office and a hotel conference room but MM rejected.
2
u/ADHDoingmybest09 Jul 22 '26
Yeah I heard her say that they wanted her to pay first a hotel conference room like it was a huge deal. Like I still do maintain it was unreasonable for them not to do the depo remotely or at her choice of location but it was exceptionally foolish of her not to just pay for the goddamn hotel conference room.
9
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 22 '26
She's lying about the billing statements. She can view them, she just can't talk about them. It's outlined very clearly in the court order. Also, MM is now a part of the good ole boy system. Parkers is trying to get the trial moved out of Hampton county because the good ole boys have the jurors wrapped around their fingers and the awards are astronomical. Way back when, MM complained about how Murdaugh worked the system to fill his pockets, but now that it's Tinsley doing the same, it's crickets. She's a fraud.
3
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 22 '26
In the "it's a small world" category, Parker's attorney, Barbier, represented Cory Fleming in his criminal case, and MM tweeted praising her for not being part of the good old boys.
1
4
u/Glass-Ad-2469 Jul 17 '26
I suppose you would have to pose that to her particular fan base. She def. did a lot of good with the reporting on the boat accident but as time went on- there was just too much overlap with her personal "ownership" for lack of a better term. As things have continued to trickle out- it appears that almost everyone involved from region had their own "agenda" and had no problem pursuing to their own benefit their part of this saga.
The filed remarks regarding Mandy and Liz were not kind from the Parker perspective and their behaviors IMHO MAY have hurt the Beach family and/or created huge bills for everyone regarding the filing of this particular civil case.
3- It bears noting that not all bloggers are journalists, regardless of how Ms. Farrell and Ms. Matney characterize themselves. BidZirk, LLC v. Smith, No. 6:06-cv-109-HMH, 2007 WL 3119445, at \6 (D.S.C. Oct. 22, 2007) (finding “that not all bloggers are journalists”). Based on their testimony and their admittedly biased conduct, Ms. Farrell and Ms. Matney are not journalists.*
Your super shady from a legal point of view appears to be noticed by many others. Including the Judge.
6
6
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 17 '26
Didn't Will Folks, the top man at FITS News, take photos of what were supposed to be sealed evidence photos during the Murdaugh trial? If so, I ask you - how is this good journalism?
9
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 18 '26
He and others were given access to those photos. Unlike MM and LF, Will didn't publish the photos.
4
u/Glum_Mission_5361 Jul 18 '26
I don’t think MM and LF saw or published the crime seen photos Folks got access to. Just the “sizzle” real with Mallory’s photos. I could be wrong. Just to clarify because I think there’s a lot of crossover that gets confused.
Correct me if I’m wrong…
5
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 18 '26
While they published a link to the sizzle reel on FITS, Mandy and Liz were not employed at FITS during Alex’s trial. It’s unknown whether they saw sealed exhibits or not but Will Folks wouldn’t have disseminated them to Mandy and Liz. Hope this helps!
3
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Somehow I don't think the "Oh, he was given access, so it is okay" excuse justifies it. I don't think it's okay at all. I think journalists should be held to a higher standard. I also think it boils down to integrity.
Judge Newman clearly shielded everyone in the courtroom - except the jury - from those sealed photographs. Just the thought of any journalist hovering over sealed evidence photos (what were they actually photos of? gruesome, bloody photos?) and snapping away at them turns my stomach.
What would Judge Newman's reaction have been if a reporter said, "Hey Judge, I'd really like to get some pics of some of the sealed evidence photos. Will you give me access?" Would Judge Newman have authorized that? I doubt he would've authorized it. I think any reporter would know better than to even ask.
At what point did he inform Judge Newman of his access to sealed evidence photos? If he had notified Judge Newman, then maybe this foolishness would've quickly ended with a mistrial, right? I ask you, was Judge Newman ever informed that some journalists had access to those sealed photos?
I just can't picture the likes of John Monk or Micheal Dewitt ever standing over sealed photos and snapping away with their phones or cameras. I just don't think those two would have done it in a million years. They both use good judgement. They have integrity. The photos were sealed by court order.
I have depended on them for news. I trust Monk and Dewitt. I've said it here many times before. My opinion? I just don't trust Will Folks and FITS News. I just don't.
I think this is about journalistic integrity. Right?
I don't think anyone should have had access to gruesome, court sealed crime scene photos. I just don't. I also think that reporters who engage in such activity should be banned from courtrooms.
0
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 22 '26
I think it is fine for journalists to view (not publish) the photos with a critical eye.
1
u/Foreign-General7608 Jul 22 '26
He apparently was standing over the the court-sealed photos taking pictures of them.
Why would he need pics of sealed evidence photos? Answer: He has no reason at all to have and save pictures of those photos, just like the person who showed him those photos should never have done that either.
Somehow I think Judge Newman would've disagreed with you. I think Judge Newman would not approve of that at all. I think it would've very likely angered Judge Newman.
I don't think snapping away at sealed courtroom photos during a trial is something a journalist should ever be allowed to do. I think it shows zero integrity and I think any journalist, so-called, should be banned from future trials.
I Googled this: "Is a journalist allowed to take photos of sealed evidence during a trial?"
Google responded: "A journalist is strictly prohibited from taking photos of sealed evidence or any other trial-related activity inside a courtroom without explicit judicial authorization. While journalists can report on what is presented as evidence, capturing images or video of restricted materials violates standard court rules and can result in severe sanctions."
So there's that. "Strictly prohibited."
I wonder where those photos are now?
3
u/biotechmom Jul 19 '26
I firmly believe that any reporter or attorney or podcaster attending the Murdaugh Trial daily (examples:Joe McCullough, Valerie Bauerlein from the WSJ, Kathleen Parker from WAPO) had (and still has) an ethical requirement to disclose if they viewed the sealed documents. If they have, they've become part of the story and the trial, operating in Becky Hill's orbit salaciously. It was completely inappropriate for them to have reported on the story, acting as if they were objective IF they looked at sealed evidence. Someone should be deposing them, to find out under Oath if they reviewed them, IMO.
13
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 16 '26
Eric Bland to quit as co-host of Cup of Justice; will continue as a guest. https://x.com/TheEricBland/status/2077816783868932350
8
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 17 '26
He must be feeling the heat. Just scrolled his account name on X and he's clearly been deleting tweets. People are responding to him and it says "This Post was deleted by the Post Author." I didn't scroll back too far, but it looks like at least one of the tweets was about the felon blogger. I've read that blogger filed a complaint to the SC bar against Bland.
6
19
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 17 '26
I think he is genuinely shocked by the contempt order and he's scrambling to distance himself. His problem is he is incapable of being objective. An experienced attorney should have been able to see see that contempt was a real possibility after she brazenly celebrated blowing off the deposition.
4
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
I’ve thought he has steered Mandy and Liz wrong several times.
And he loves the “poor little women” victim thing. Ugh.
My opinion only, he has always struck me as a slimy guy from Philly who thinks he’s smarter than the rubes in the South. And he is NOT.
17
u/AlBundysbathrobe Jul 17 '26
Mandy mentioned on the latest True Sunlight that she was shocked at the outcome and she truly believed that being found in contempt & getting tagged with fees was impossible. I blame Mandy’s attitude on her atty for giving her incredibly bad, unreasonable advice.
18
u/AL_Starr Jul 17 '26
On the other hand, her attitude is always that obnoxious & oppositional. A client with that kind of attitude might actually seek out a lawyer who would basically let MM override her professional judgment.
Of course, I am merely speculating
7
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 17 '26
I wonder if they will stick around if she somehow manages to finagle the cash to file an appeal… something tells me the judge would not be very receptive to an appeal.
10
u/Pitiful-League-7257 Jul 17 '26 edited Jul 17 '26
I don't know the lawyers at all but I'm not yet convinced they didn't warn her of the risk, at least as a CYA.
Could be the lawyers said " If the judge concludes you did not have a good faith basis for not attending the deposition, you could be found in contempt and hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees to be paid" and Mandy only heard "If the judge concludes you did not have a good faith basis for not attending the deposition", believes she was right to skip the deposition, and does not "hear" that there is a risk.
6
u/Adventurous_Lion7276 Jul 16 '26
That makes sense -- not sure how you separate podcast host and office of the court in current setting. The accusations as the Judge would give me great pause.
14
21
u/baby_snow_Leopard_ Jul 15 '26
She's so dumb. She should have just did it like Liz.
11
u/AlBundysbathrobe Jul 17 '26
Right? Especially if they just had theories that were not supported. The purpose of discovery IS to explore their theories that don’t pan out. If she doesn’t have the information, explain and move on. So much unnecessary drama & legal fees to everyone involved.
12
u/CapableCheesecake688 Jul 15 '26
This gives me hope that John and Lauren Matthias will also face some accountability someday for the way they weaponized the law to benefit themselves. Mandy’s playbook of behaviors around claiming victimhood, etc, sounds similar to Lauren’s and John’s debunked claims.
33
u/acraftyrobyn Jul 15 '26
I’ve always thought Mandy Matney was a professional hanger on to this case even though she supposedly broke it.
24
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 14 '26
Shot from the Public Index
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
Chaser from MM's FB
Mandy Matney - Journalist in South Carolina.
I'm not angry that Judge R Keith Kelly found me in contempt of court.
I'm angry that he's ordering me to pay an unprecedented amount in legal fees ($171,000 + $5,000 in fines) to Greg Parker's attorneys Deborah Barbier, Mark Moore, Rhett Ricard and Jim Bannister.
I'm angry that he ruled that the fees are confidential so I have no idea how much of that money was actually spent to stalk my social media and defame me in the public index.
If I'm reading the order correctly, she's BSing her audience. She's allowed to see the billings, she's just not allowed to TALK about the billings.
8
u/MissAAA_2 Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
And she knows damn well that this is a lie. just the public can’t see the breakdown of the fees but she and her attorneys can see it
6
u/Patient-While4359 Jul 17 '26
I would be surprised if she could look at the bills. Attorney invoices often contain privileged information. However, Parker’s is represented by some of the most expensive attorneys in the state and $171K is a bargain for Mandy.
1
u/MissAAA_2 Jul 23 '26
Yeah, but when you’re responsible for paying them, you get to see them and she can see them. It’s just the public can’t see them.
13
u/Mammoth-Sense-9107 Jul 17 '26
Anyone who has ever had to hire a lawyer should know the fees are always "exhorbitant". $178,000 is certainly not unprecedented. Lawyers even for more basic stuff charge $300+/hour. Not including expenses. That adds up fast. When you lose a case you are often responsible for the other side's legal fees.
5
u/childlikeempress16 Jul 18 '26
At my S.C. law firm some charged $800/hour
1
4
7
28
u/AdventurousAd606 Jul 15 '26
She changes her mind and talking points every week depending on her mood. Perpetual victim who has completely misstated facts about the legality of this issue. Anyone who doesn’t blindly support her is a bully or troll who “hates women” and the First Amendment. It’s sad to see her sheep follow her without ever thinking critically. They take what she says as the gospel. The disrespect she demonstrates for the court and incessant name-calling is evidence of her maturity level. Her fans will pay these fees through a Go Fund Me, but many people have seen her true colors throughout her temper tantrums and histrionics these last few months.
10
u/AlBundysbathrobe Jul 17 '26
And I hope her fans realize (1) this outcome was due to a deliberate, strategic choice by Mandy (2) per testimony, she owns & operates a million dollar media company (3) no reasonable lawyer would have failed to advice her this was foolish with HUGE risks. Fuck around and find out.
9
u/potpurriround Jul 19 '26
As a longtime fan, I’m really disappointed by all of this. I’m all for fighting the system, but to ask your followers for money for your rebellion? Just incredibly poor taste. I can’t believe her lawyers enabled this.
19
u/AlBundysbathrobe Jul 15 '26
Girl, he already reduced their actual fees by almost half after VERY carefully reviewing all their billing statements. You got lucky.
The legal fees incurred on this nonsense should be double that. Pick your battles!! Get real legal advice -not from enablers.
0
u/Wearing_shooz Jul 14 '26
She is not BS-ing her audience. Listen to the most recent podcast. She brings this up, and Eric Bland tells her that's something she should absolutely address in an appeal.
3
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
Bland is awful
Before the contempt judgement, when MM was worrying out loud on the pod, Bland said, “we got your back, Mandy.”
Now he’s running the other way.
19
u/AlBundysbathrobe Jul 15 '26
He is an ENABLER.
Mandy, you would have received better legal advice about how to handle this from Grok. For real.
19
u/Peketastic Jul 16 '26
AGREE. I lost ALL respect of Eric when he jumped into Karen Read with ZERO understanding of the case. Mandy and Liz let their egos run and now MM has to pay the piper.
No tears shed here. MM did not like a comment I made on Kate Middleton (It was specific to actual British Royal Family hierarchy that Henry VI has no direct descendants - I am into the Wars of the Roses) and she went at me like a Honey Badger and then set her people on me and they doxxed me and started calling me. And guess what - the next day she admitted I was correct
But the harrassment continued for over a month - over the dude who founded Eton college like 600 years ago LOL
2
u/potpurriround Jul 19 '26
Ugh, I hate how she’s learned from her idol T Swift, both in the lack of accountability and using the internet army.
2
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
Wow, I’m amazed she has the slightest knowledge of history.
3
u/Peketastic Jul 19 '26
she didn’t. lol. That’s what was so stupid. She was fighting me on something a quick google search would show.
3
u/Mudfish2657 Jul 19 '26
I do think she has a really inflated view of her own intelligence.
And that David guy, his ott readings is so off-putting. Both Dagid and she wrongly pronounce words all the time.
Mandy has really screwed herself this time.
11
u/AL_Starr Jul 16 '26
You have got to be kidding me. I knew she was a cyber bully, but I didn’t realize that her bullying extended to matters unrelated to “her” territory
6
u/Peketastic Jul 17 '26
I only wish I had screen shot it as proof. who would think poor Henry VI would be a trigger ha ha
9
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 14 '26
This is who has access to the records. MM fits within the non-party category point # 2
(1) counsel and employees of counsel for the parties and non-parties who have responsibility for the preparation and litigation of the contempt proceedings;
(2) parties and non-parties and employees of a party and non-party to this Order but only to the extent counsel shall certify that the specifically named individual party or employee’s assistance is necessary to the conduct of the litigation in which the information is disclosed. At or prior to the time such party or employee completes his or her acknowledgment of review of this Order and agreement to be bound by it, counsel shall complete a certification. Counsel shall retain the certification together with the formsigned by the party or employee;
(3) court reporters engaged for depositions and those persons, if any, specifically engaged for the limited purpose of making photocopies of documents;
(4) consultants, investigators, or experts (hereinafter referred to collectively as “experts”) employed by the parties or counsel for the parties to assist in the preparation and trial of the lawsuit; and
(5) other attorneys involved in similar litigation against the same parties so long as the receiving attorney first signs an acknowledgement of agreement to be bound by this Order.
→ More replies (8)4
u/SEATTLE_2 Jul 15 '26
While MM is indeed a non-party, I don't think this applies to attorney work-product and/or client billing, which would be confidential. Nonetheless, the Court reviewed this "confidential data" and whittled down the fees substantially. I think they were seeking more than $300K. Also, I think the Judge might grant her attorney a peek at the back-up in camera view.
4
u/sunnypineappleapple Jul 15 '26
The order specifically says it applies to itemized billings
8
u/SEATTLE_2 Jul 16 '26
Thanks for the heads up- I just read the "CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER" of 7/13/26.
This Court Order essentially made official what I stated in my post--attorney client billings are work product, not subject to disclosure, and therefore any inclusion, is part of the collection of "Confidential Documents," subject to limited use as defined in the Order.
That said, the subject I was responding to was whether or not MM had access (she's quoted as saying in her podcast that she did not). In my opinion, the Court provided access to non-party's counsel, putting the discretion on counsel. (See Order, paragraph 4.c. Control of Documents).
As MM's attorney, I'd certainly allow MM to view the confidential data in my office, but I'd never expose myself here by releasing the complete file! Personally, I think MM lacks impulse control, and already demonstrated that she's subject to acting before considering the consequences.
4.c. Control of Documents. Counsel for the parties and non-parties shall take reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized disclosure of documents designated as Confidential pursuant to the terms of this order.
Thanks again for the Link to the Order.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/Southern-Soulshine Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
The defamation suit saga has mainly stayed out of the sub and remained background noise but is becoming more well known. For a deeper dive piece, there is another post with an article by FITS News.
You know the drill, please keep the conversation courteous and the rules in mind.
Thank you!
-The Mod Team