Records claim Tammy Moorer’s Facebook posts violated gag order

Tammy Moorer after her arrest for Heather Elvis' disappearance.

CONWAY, SC (WBTW) – Court documents from the Horry County Clerk’s Office show Tammy Moorer, the woman accused of kidnapping Heather Elvis, is accused of violating a gag order through a number of Facebook posts.

Moorer was scheduled to be in court Monday for an obstruction of justice hearing, but the hearing was continued without the prosecution addressing its claims. Court documents reveal what prosecutors say was a violation of a court order for all parties to remain silent about the kidnapping case.

Elvis has been missing since 2013. She was 20-years-old at the time of her disappearance, and even though her body hasn’t been found, police presume she is dead.

In a motion document, Assistant Solicitor of the 15th Judicial Circuit Nancy Livesay claims that Moorer violated the court order in the case and should be held in contempt of court. Livesay claims between June and July comments were posted to Moorer’s Facebook page “regarding the facts of the case, witness’ credibility, and comments about the victim’s family.”

It’s noted within the document that in March 2014, a judge issued a gag order in the case, prohibiting any parties involved from speaking about or releasing documents regarding the case. Livesay documents that Moorer should be required to show why she shouldn’t be held in contempt of court.

The hearing, however, was continued and no new date has been set.

Moorer’s husband, Sidney Moorer, was in court Monday. Sidney Moorer is also accused of kidnapping Elvis and faces an obstruction of justice charge. Sidney Moorer’s defense team requested the hearing Monday morning to make a motion that the obstruction of justice charge be thrown out, but the judge denied that motion.

A second motion was made by Sidney Moorer’s defense asking that an interview Moorer did with detectives in the initial days of Elvis’ disappearance not be allowed as evidence in the case. A judge did not rule on that motion and did not give an expected date as to when he would make a decision.