Background
Ashley Grayson, a Dallas-based social media influencer, offered Olivia Johnson and Brandon Thomas $80,000 to kill Grayson’s former boyfriend and two women who had criticized her online. Johnson and Thomas pretended to accept the proposal while collecting evidence. During a FaceTime call that Johnson secretly recorded, Grayson offered additional money to expedite one of the killings. Johnson and Thomas later falsely claimed that they had fired at a target’s home, after which surveillance footage captured a meeting where Grayson’s husband gave Thomas $10,000.
A jury convicted Grayson of conspiring to use interstate-commerce facilities in the commission of murder for hire, while acquitting her husband. The Sixth Circuit initially affirmed, relying on circuit precedent recognizing a “clean hands” exception that permitted the government to use a communication unlawfully intercepted by a private party without government involvement. After the Solicitor General told the Supreme Court that the precedent had incorrectly recognized that exception, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the Sixth Circuit’s judgment, and remanded for reconsideration.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth Circuit again affirmed Grayson’s conviction. Without deciding whether Johnson recorded the FaceTime call for a criminal or tortious purpose or whether the recording was inadmissible under the Federal Wiretap Act, the court assumed that admitting it was error. The court nevertheless held that any error was harmless because it had fair assurance that the recording did not substantially sway the jury’s verdict.
Independent evidence established Grayson’s participation in the scheme. Johnson testified that Grayson solicited the murders before the recorded call; Thomas corroborated significant portions of that account; text messages showed Grayson’s reluctance to discuss the “business plan” in writing; surveillance footage and testimony documented the $10,000 payment; and Grayson admitted during a recorded FBI call that she had said her online antagonists deserved to die and that she would pay to have something happen to them. Although the FaceTime recording likely influenced the jury to some degree and featured prominently in the prosecution’s presentation, it reinforced rather than created the government’s case. The court also reinstated the portions of its earlier opinion rejecting Grayson’s jury-instruction challenges.
Key Takeaways
- The Sixth Circuit assumed, without deciding, that the secretly recorded FaceTime call was inadmissible under the Federal Wiretap Act.
- Admission of the recording was harmless because testimony, texts, surveillance evidence, the cash payment, and Grayson’s own FBI statements independently supported the conviction.
- The Supreme Court’s remand did not disturb the Sixth Circuit’s earlier rejection of Grayson’s jury-instruction challenges.
Why It Matters
The decision avoids resolving whether the Federal Wiretap Act permits a “clean hands” exception when the government did not participate in an unlawful interception. Instead, it illustrates that even a recording emphasized throughout a criminal trial may constitute harmless error when the remaining evidence provides a strong, independently corroborated basis for conviction.