In a surprising turn of events, several jurors involved in the trial of convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, who was found guilty of the shooting deaths of his wife and son, have come forward with claims of potential jury tampering. The jurors' testimonies were given during a court hearing on Monday, where they were questioned about alleged comments made by Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill that may have influenced their conviction.

The first juror to be questioned, referred to as Juror Z, stated that Clerk Becky Hill had told them to closely watch Murdaugh's actions and made it seem as though he was already deemed guilty. Juror Z admitted that this did affect her vote to find Murdaugh guilty. However, in later questioning, she clarified that her fellow jurors' influence played a more significant role in her decision.

Several other jurors who were called for questioning denied hearing any comments about the case from the clerk and stated that their verdicts were solely based on the testimony and evidence presented during the trial. One juror mentioned that Hill did mention to "watch his body language" before Murdaugh testified, but it did not change their mind.

The hearing took an unexpected twist when a bailiff revealed that some jurors had accessed the Court TV live feed on their cellphones during the hearing's recess, potentially overhearing the first juror's testimony. Despite this setback, the judge remained determined to proceed and ensure the jurors' testimonies were recorded.

The hearing was called in response to allegations of tampering by Murdaugh's attorneys. They argued that potential misconduct, including the clerk's alleged comments warning jurors not to trust Murdaugh's testimony, may have unfairly influenced their verdict. However, Judge Jean Toal has set a challenging standard for the defense, ruling that they must prove a direct correlation between the alleged tampering and the jurors' change of mind to find Murdaugh guilty.

The defense's argument focused on the subtle influence that can occur in such cases and how it can still jeopardize a fair trial, even if jurors do not openly state that their verdict changed due to external factors. They criticized the limitations set by the judge, including barring potential witnesses, such as the trial judge and court workers, from testifying about Hill's conduct.

The judge also restricted the line of questioning regarding Hill, preventing lawyers from addressing criminal investigations into her office, potential collaboration with her charged son, or accusations of plagiarism in her book on the case.

Legal analysts, including CBS News' Rikki Klieman, noted the rarity of jurors being ordered to testify. Klieman emphasized the judge's intent to focus solely on whether the court clerk's actions influenced the verdict.

Attorney Eric Bland, representing five jurors, expressed confidence in their just verdict. Meanwhile, Clerk Becky Hill, in a sworn statement, denied any tampering with the jury.

Though Murdaugh appeared at the hearing in a prison jumpsuit, even if he were to receive a new murder trial, he would remain incarcerated as he is already serving a 27-year sentence for theft. His lawyers, anticipating regular appeals, intend to challenge the fairness of his murder trial, particularly regarding the extensive testimony on his financial crimes.

As the unusual hearing unfolds, the impact of the jurors' testimonies and potential jury tampering allegations will undoubtedly play a crucial role in determining the next steps in this high-profile case.