An unusual legal saga spanning nearly two decades in Alaska took a significant turn as Third District Superior Court Judge Thomas A. Matthews dismissed a perjury charge against former District Court Judge Margaret Murphy. The indictment, issued on November 3, 2022, stemmed from a 2005 unlawful hunting case over which Murphy presided in McGrath.

The case, initially involving allegations of illegal hunting, evolved into a convoluted expose of alleged judicial corruption following protests organized by David Haeg, the defendant in the 2005 case. Haeg co-founded the Alaska Grand Juror’s Association, which accused various entities within Alaska’s judicial system of corruption. Consequently, an independent prosecutor initiated an investigation into Murphy’s alleged perjury based on Haeg’s claims.

Murphy’s defense successfully argued that the indictment failed to specify her alleged false statement, a requirement under Alaska state law for criminal indictments. Additionally, Murphy contended that the grand jury that indicted her lost its quorum when a member left the state and refused to continue proceedings, rendering the indictment “fatally defective.”

Furthermore, Murphy’s defense challenged the prosecutor’s instructions to the grand jury, arguing that they were not provided with the proper standard of evidence for a criminal indictment. The defense asserted that the evidence presented was highly prejudicial, primarily consisting of hearsay and unsupported allegations by Haeg.

Although the state’s prosecutor argued that the jurors understood the criminal instructions despite not receiving them, Judge Matthews ultimately dismissed the case, citing the inability to separate out improper evidence due to the unusual nature of the grand jury proceedings. Murphy’s defense also raised concerns about the grand jury considering inadmissible evidence, including an “information packet” distributed by Haeg alleging widespread corruption.

The dismissal highlights the complexity and controversy surrounding the case, with instances of outside influence on the grand jury process, including picketers approaching a panel member off the court’s record.

Despite the dismissal, the case underscores ongoing scrutiny of Alaska’s judicial system and the challenges of addressing allegations of corruption within it.