After the verdict in the Erik Maund murder-for-hire trial, this bizarre story finally seemed to have reached an end: Maund and his codefendants all faced mandatory life in prison. But this week, some surprising news came from the federal court in Nashville: Erik Maund may be getting a new trial.
Transcript
Katy Vine (voice-over): Hi, it’s Katy Vine. I wanted to check back in with you to share a development in the case at the heart of our show, The Problem With Erik.
In the show’s last episode, I told you about the weeks Ana and I spent in court, at the trial for the murders of Holly Williams and Bill Lanway. At the end of the trial, three men were convicted of conspiring in murder-for-hire: Bryon Brockway and Adam Carey, who were accused of carrying out the murders, and Erik Maund, who was accused of paying for them.
They faced mandatory life in prison. The only thing left was a hearing where they’d be formally sentenced. Finally this story had an ending.
Except, not quite. This week we got some stunning news: The judge ordered a new trial.
This was a surprise because, after watching the whole trial, I hadn’t seen anything suggesting impropriety.
But according to U.S. District Judge William Campbell, it turns out the jury in the case got to see some evidence it shouldn’t have.
The order is thirty-two pages long, but it boils down to a one-sentence explanation. The judge wrote, quote, “an administrative mistake caused certain exhibits not admitted into evidence to be given to the jury as it began deliberations.”
Here are the specifics: He says that due to the error, the jury saw nine exhibits from the prosecution—text messages, photos, recordings, and bank records—that hadn’t been formally introduced in court. Another exhibit that should have been partially redacted went to the jury without redactions.
Then there were also three exhibits the jury should have received but didn’t. These included some other phone records and texts, and aerial surveillance footage of Erik Maund’s home.
The judge wrote this isn’t the first time this kind of thing has happened, and it won’t be the last. Usually the error is harmless, but in this case, it might’ve made a difference. This, the judge said, amounted to a “structural error” in the case, something incredibly rare.
Interestingly, the order suggests court staff might not have noticed the mistake if it weren’t for requests from media outlets—like Texas Monthly—to get copies of the exhibits in the case.
The prosecution has thirty days to appeal the judge’s order. If they don’t, the court will likely schedule the new trial for sometime in 2025. Until then, Erik Maund and the rest of the defendants remain in prison.
We’ll be watching the case and have more for you here. Thanks for listening.
