Franklin Comes Alive! said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

& him being on video with the victims 4 minutes before they were murdered?

---

Please post both of their times of death as determinend by a coroner or medical examinier.

And do so with a link now. I missed that in the trial. What did the prosecution prove was the time of death? With medical evidence? Like real evidence, not when someone's phone went dead because battery ran out.

Actual eidence.

---

It's all in the cell phone records….

Very simple timeline to follow…. The video of him at the kennels moments before the phones go silent is the smoking gun…


Alex even gives the prosecution a freebie by taking Maggie's phone, slowing down to chunk it, & speeding up after tossing it



https://www.wjcl.com/amp/article/murdaugh-murders-timeline-evidence/42846491



I mean we can all play dumb & say the evidence isn't perfect but it's obvious he's the murderer, or at a minimum he was there when it went down


Glad he's going to a violent prison

---

Even if the TOD was as easily determined as you're making it out to be (and it isn't, it's at least a 27 minute time window in reality) the fact is that they got a double murder conviction without ever placing EITHER of the murder weapons in Murdaugh's hands, without a single witness, and without ever proving he was actually present the moment they were killed. They crafted a narrative based on circumstantial evidence and the jury filled in the gaps with assumptions. Relatively reasonable assumptions in most cases, but assumptions nonetheless. Their best evidence frankly was his lifetime of nefarious and illegal behavior, and I said from the start they were going for a "lifetime achievement award" of sorts from the jury here.

Look, I said he almost certainly did it or hired someone else too. I'm not dense. I'm just saying that this was an INCREDIBLY weak case in the hierarchy of double murder convictions. And one in which there was never really much doubt to boot.

Just watched the Netflix documentary on this. Crazy chain of events.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Franklin Comes Alive! said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

& him being on video with the victims 4 minutes before they were murdered?

---

Please post both of their times of death as determinend by a coroner or medical examinier.

And do so with a link now. I missed that in the trial. What did the prosecution prove was the time of death? With medical evidence? Like real evidence, not when someone's phone went dead because battery ran out.

Actual eidence.

---

It's all in the cell phone records….

Very simple timeline to follow…. The video of him at the kennels moments before the phones go silent is the smoking gun…


Alex even gives the prosecution a freebie by taking Maggie's phone, slowing down to chunk it, & speeding up after tossing it



https://www.wjcl.com/amp/article/murdaugh-murders-timeline-evidence/42846491



I mean we can all play dumb & say the evidence isn't perfect but it's obvious he's the murderer, or at a minimum he was there when it went down


Glad he's going to a violent prison

---

Even if the TOD was as easily determined as you're making it out to be (and it isn't, it's at least a 27 minute time window in reality) the fact is that they got a double murder conviction without ever placing EITHER of the murder weapons in Murdaugh's hands, without a single witness, and without ever proving he was actually present the moment they were killed. They crafted a narrative based on circumstantial evidence and the jury filled in the gaps with assumptions. Relatively reasonable assumptions in most cases, but assumptions nonetheless. Their best evidence frankly was his lifetime of nefarious and illegal behavior, and I said from the start they were going for a "lifetime achievement award" of sorts from the jury here.

Look, I said he almost certainly did it or hired someone else too. I'm not dense. I'm just saying that this was an INCREDIBLY weak case in the hierarchy of double murder convictions. And one in which there was never really much doubt to boot.

---

No on should go to jail based on a lifetime achievement award.

This is literally why 403 exists

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_403

I do believe that he more likely than not committed the murders or Was involved in them.

However, the states timeline is shaky.

So he is 6'5, 250-275lbs, 55yo and out of shape. We have his complete whereabouts from when his family was unquestionably alive and he was laughing and joking about the dog with a bird in its mouth. Video started at 8:45pm, lasted 1 minute. Son kept checking texts until 8:50pm when phone was at 1%

Then we know that Alex is at home at 9:02 and walking around (almost 300steps in 4 minutes).

Alex calls Maggie at 9:04 to tell her he is going to check on his mom. Then again at 9:06. No answer, so he sends a text. At 9:06, he starts his car and drives to mom's.

We are supposed to believe that in 12 minutes, fat, old Alex strung out on thousands of dollars worth of Oxy…

* Shoots his son with a shotgun.
* Puts down the shotgun and picks up a 300BLK
* blows wife away with the 300BLK
* Disposes of the guns where no one can ever find them
* Changes clothes
* Disposes of his clothes where no one can ever find them
* Drive the electric golf cart a >1200ft (1/4 mi) from the kennel to the house (but according to Bing, it isn't really a straight line with the trees and stuff planted on what once was a runway.
* clean all evidence off the golf cart
* Shower
* Cleans all blood, DNA, and gun shot residue off his body (normal washing won't clean garage off the body and he had none on his hands despite all those shots
* Start the truck and drive to mom's house.
* Talk to Dad, son, brother, and best friend starting at 9:08 - none say he sound frantic or worried.



Remember, the state's case said that he was asked where the check was at work that afternoon, so he decided to kill his family that day… because reasons. Sure, killing them would not do anything to help him at all, but he was asked where a check was, so gotta blow your sons head off, right?

I just don't see how a guy like him could do that in that timeline.

Also, his wife's phone was never moving with his phone and he was like a half mile away from it when state says it was tossed out. Again, the state destroyed the evidence of that.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Franklin Comes Alive! said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

& him being on video with the victims 4 minutes before they were murdered?

---

Please post both of their times of death as determinend by a coroner or medical examinier.

And do so with a link now. I missed that in the trial. What did the prosecution prove was the time of death? With medical evidence? Like real evidence, not when someone's phone went dead because battery ran out.

Actual eidence.

---

It's all in the cell phone records….

Very simple timeline to follow…. The video of him at the kennels moments before the phones go silent is the smoking gun…


Alex even gives the prosecution a freebie by taking Maggie's phone, slowing down to chunk it, & speeding up after tossing it



https://www.wjcl.com/amp/article/murdaugh-murders-timeline-evidence/42846491



I mean we can all play dumb & say the evidence isn't perfect but it's obvious he's the murderer, or at a minimum he was there when it went down


Glad he's going to a violent prison

---

Even if the TOD was as easily determined as you're making it out to be (and it isn't, it's at least a 27 minute time window in reality) the fact is that they got a double murder conviction without ever placing EITHER of the murder weapons in Murdaugh's hands, without a single witness, and without ever proving he was actually present the moment they were killed. They crafted a narrative based on circumstantial evidence and the jury filled in the gaps with assumptions. Relatively reasonable assumptions in most cases, but assumptions nonetheless. Their best evidence frankly was his lifetime of nefarious and illegal behavior, and I said from the start they were going for a "lifetime achievement award" of sorts from the jury here.

Look, I said he almost certainly did it or hired someone else too. I'm not dense. I'm just saying that this was an INCREDIBLY weak case in the hierarchy of double murder convictions. And one in which there was never really much doubt to boot.

---

No on should go to jail based on a lifetime achievement award.

This is literally why 403 exists

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_403

I do believe that he more likely than not committed the murders or Was involved in them.

However, the states timeline is shaky.

So he is 6'5, 250-275lbs, 55yo and out of shape. We have his complete whereabouts from when his family was unquestionably alive and he was laughing and joking about the dog with a bird in its mouth. Video started at 8:45pm, lasted 1 minute. Son kept checking texts until 8:50pm when phone was at 1%

Then we know that Alex is at home at 9:02 and walking around (almost 300steps in 4 minutes).

Alex calls Maggie at 9:04 to tell her he is going to check on his mom. Then again at 9:06. No answer, so he sends a text. At 9:06, he starts his car and drives to mom's.

We are supposed to believe that in 12 minutes, fat, old Alex strung out on thousands of dollars worth of Oxy…

* Shoots his son with a shotgun.
* Puts down the shotgun and picks up a 300BLK
* blows wife away with the 300BLK
* Disposes of the guns where no one can ever find them
* Changes clothes
* Disposes of his clothes where no one can ever find them
* Drive the electric golf cart a >1200ft (1/4 mi) from the kennel to the house (but according to Bing, it isn't really a straight line with the trees and stuff planted on what once was a runway.
* clean all evidence off the golf cart
* Shower
* Cleans all blood, DNA, and gun shot residue off his body (normal washing won't clean garage off the body and he had none on his hands despite all those shots
* Start the truck and drive to mom's house.
* Talk to Dad, son, brother, and best friend starting at 9:08 - none say he sound frantic or worried.



Remember, the state's case said that he was asked where the check was at work that afternoon, so he decided to kill his family that day… because reasons. Sure, killing them would not do anything to help him at all, but he was asked where a check was, so gotta blow your sons head off, right?

I just don't see how a guy like him could do that in that timeline.

Also, his wife's phone was never moving with his phone and he was like a half mile away from it when state says it was tossed out. Again, the state destroyed the evidence of that.

---

Having not followed the case closely a few questions to your items. To me his demeanor right before the shooting is irrelevant. If he was willing to kill his son and wife he's a psychopath and him acting like everything is normal isn't that strange. He could have used two guns to make it look like there were 2 shooters. He could have taken weapons with him and left at his parents along with clothes to dispose of later.

Do we know how close the shooter would have been. Why are you assuming he would have blood on him along with the golf cart?

Per the state medical examiner, the shotgun blast to his son's head was from 2 to 3 feet away. The defense expert said it had to be much closer and from a different angle due to the brain ejecting from the skull. Possibly even a contact shot. Either way there would've been significant spray of blood and tissue.

The wife's gunshot wounds were from a little more distance.

This is a simulation based solely on the state pathologist's, Riemer, report.

This is not saying Alex Murdaugh did this. Its supporting the timeline and the wounds according to the investigation. Do you agree with this reenactment?

CREDIT: AZyet on TIKTOK#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughMurders #murdaughtrial #MurdaughFamily pic.twitter.com/s9EpcIiyw8

— Reality Rise (@LovelyVegas28) February 24, 2023

Several issues with that as if it was Alex, he was shown approaching the feed room from the Moselle Road side, not the residence side. Also, the shot from behind to Maggie that went supposedly through her breast and then up into her head was disputed by defense experts and frankly his explanation made much more sense that the wound to her breast was a secondary wound from a bullet that entered her head and traveled down and originated from the front of her.

Also, the angle on the second shot to Paul is likely wrong.

Quote:

---

To me his demeanor right before the shooting is irrelevant. If he was willing to kill his son and wife he's a psychopath and him acting like everything is normal isn't that strange.

---

I don't know that he has been diagnosed as a psycopath and don't know how anyone could be laughing and joking with his wife and kid, then seconds later for no reason, blow them both away.

Quote:

---

He could have used two guns to make it look like there were 2 shooters.

---

Can you think of any non-sniper multiple killing ever where a single shooter used multiple long guns? That's not a normal thing. The state's case was that he decided to do that in the few hours between work and the murders. He came up that plan on the spot? A shotgun and pistol or rifle and pistol, sure. A shotgun and AR? That isn't something you see ever.

He decided to commit the murders and planned the perfect cover up to destroy and remove all evidence in just a couple hours while high? That's a lot to assume.

Quote:

---

He could have taken weapons with him and left at his parents along with clothes to dispose of later.

---

Maybe, but it presents more problems:

* His mom's caregiver lived there, didn't like him, and had full reign of the house.
* His dad was in his last days and multiple people were in and out of there all the time.
* There had been group texts from other family members about going there to visit his mom the following day.
* Transporting the guns/clothes runs the risk of getting evidence into the suburban
* Transporting the guns/clothes runs the risk of getting evidence into mom's house
* Transporting the guns/clothes to a house where the person living there doesn't like you and will unquestionably find out about the murders and leaving them there runs the risk of that person snooping around to the places you went when you arrived the night of the murders. Not like his late-stage Alzheimer's mom is going to tell the caregiver no.

Quote:

---

Do we know how close the shooter would have been. Why are you assuming he would have blood on him along with the golf cart?

---

State's witness said the shotgun blasts were 2-3 feet away. Multiple witnesses said there would be significant blood splatter on the shooter from that distance. There was a baseball sized piece of skull that was found by Paul's uncle the next day that police didn't even find. That's how much everything exploded. Paul's brain was found at his feet.

Because the gunshots to Maggie were so much lower than they would have been if Alex had fired it, the state's contention is that Alex fired the AR from the hip. Guy was an extremely experienced hunter from South Carolina and had used guns all his life. I have a tough time seeing him not shoulder the weapon, just out of habit since he has probably been doing that for 50 years. We are supposed to believe that he brought multiple guns to throw off investigators and fired abnormally low with the AR, not shouldering it, so the ballistics couldn't say the really tall guy shot it? That's bizarre. Especially since he came up with this plan at most a couple hours before according to the state - not days, or weeks, or months.

Not a Bot said:

---

Per the state medical examiner, the shotgun blast to his son's head was from 2 to 3 feet away. The defense expert said it had to be much closer and from a different angle due to the brain ejecting from the skull. Possibly even a contact shot. Either way there would've been significant spray of blood and tissue.

The wife's gunshot wounds were from a little more distance.

---

Also, the state pathologist did a ****ty job. She didn't shave the head to look for powder burns around the wound and had no reasonable explanation as to why she didn't do that. She just said that if it was closer than she assumed at first glance, there would be more damage to the face. Yeah, maybe, but still do your ****ing job so you can know for sure.

The part of this story that has always bothered me is how the local and state authorities completely botched securing the crime scene. Apparently, friends, family, and coworkers were trampling all over the kennel area and then, when a SLED agent finally pulled his head out, sent them all to the main house which also should have been considered a part of the crime scene. Had they done their job properly, it would have likely made this more of a slam dunk than it ended up being. Thanks for all of the lies, Alex.

Agree with GS's points. There was either a 2nd shooter in league with Alex, or someone else (likely two someones) killed them. And all of the evidence of his wrong-doings play every bit as much as "the family had enemies with motive" vs the guy just snapping. There's no way he fired the shotgun at close range. There's no way he disposed of the weapons.

I think law is becoming more and more removed from the average person. It's like polo, except 12 people who don't know the rules pick the winner. And the whole thing seems less like an exercise in justice and more about attorneys playing games to win. It leads to juries making decisions based on their sense of what's right.

BBRex said:

---

I think law is becoming more and more removed from the average person. It's like polo, except 12 people who don't know the rules pick the winner. And the whole thing seems less like an exercise in justice and more about attorneys playing games to win. It leads to juries making decisions based on their sense of what's right.

---

Well as people get dumber and dumber they will continually become less objective when it comes to the Jury's actual mandate. Everything is politicized now and people will continue let their emotions seep into everything, including determining the life of another individual. I mean look at the Rittenhouse jury. I believe it was just one woman hanging them up there but the fact that there was even one functioning adult that heard that trial and wanted to convict for murder is absolutely insane. The case never even should have been brought by the state yet someone on the jury still had their foot in the ground on guilty. You just know it was all emotion for that person and their mind was made up before the trial started.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Agree with GS's points. There was either a 2nd shooter in league with Alex, or someone else (likely two someones) killed them. And all of the evidence of his wrong-doings play every bit as much as "the family had enemies with motive" vs the guy just snapping. There's no way he fired the shotgun at close range. There's no way he disposed of the weapons.

---

The different shotgun loads has always bothered me. SLED lied to the grand jury saying they had found other shotguns at Moselle that were loaded with both buckshot and birdshot. In a very odd exchange while testifying, Lead Agent Owen was first asked about a recorded interview with Alex and his lawyer, Corey Fleming, on August 12, 2021. The original request for that meeting came from Alex as he wanted an update on the status of the investigation. And when Agent Owen started asking Alex questions, Fleming tried to terminate the interview saying they were there to hear what Owen had to say only but Alex waived him off and continued speaking with Owen.

Owen tells Alex that SLED had found other shotguns loaded with bot buckshot and birdshot. Alex was confused by that. After playing that clip, Owen was asked by defense counsel, "That was not true, was it?" Owen replies that "trickuration" is an "interrogation technique." Defense counsel then asks if he also "tricked" the grand jury when he told them the same thing? Owen tried to deflect claiming he meant different brand shells not different loads. But defense counsel was prepared with a transcript of his testimony wherein he had clearly said "buckshot and birdshot."

Was that lie concocted because no one would believe a single shooter with three guns? Two shotguns and a 300 Blackout? Remember, from the crime scene, investigators would already have known there were two different types of shot used in killing Paul. And the casings around Maggie's body came from an AR suggesting maybe three guns were used.

Quote:

---

I mean look at the Rittenhouse jury. I believe it was just one woman hanging them up there but the fact that there was even one functioning adult that heard that trial and wanted to convict for murder is absolutely insane. The case never even should have been brought by the state yet someone on the jury still had their foot in the ground on guilty. You just know it was all emotion for that person and their mind was made up before the trial started.

---

Judge Schroeder was a little light about disqualifying jurors who said they would "try to be impartial" instead of saying they would be impartial during voir dire. He wasn't as bad at that as Judge Cahill was during the Derek Chauvin trial but he still allowed people onto that jury that likely should not have been there.

And when it came to draw lots for who were the alternates and the actual jury, Rittenhouse's defense team was crushed when Kyle picked the number of a juror they were pretty sure was a strong not guilty vote. Big hunter and gun enthusiast.

Okay, I'm easily confused but I need someone to help explain this:

Quote:

---

8:49:31 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone is locked and not unlocked until it's found a quarter mile away the next afternoon.

---

Quote:

---

8:55:48 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone takes a snapshot of an open app, Facebook, running in the background.

---

If the phone never unlocks, how does one take a picture of an open app?

mbrooking said:

---

Okay, I'm easily confused but I need someone to help explain this:

Quote:

---

8:49:31 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone is locked and not unlocked until it's found a quarter mile away the next afternoon.

---

Quote:

---

8:55:48 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone takes a snapshot of an open app, Facebook, running in the background.

---

If the phone never unlocks, how does one take a picture of an open app?

---

DA's witness said that at 8:55, someone picked it up and tried to unlock it, activating the camera, which is what called that.

However, Alex and Maggie knew each other's passwords. If he wanted to, he could have unlocked it.

Alex logged into Maggie's account to use Find My Phone to lead police to the phone location, and he asked them to download all the data from it to prove he wasn't the killer and the timelines wouldn't match.

The police did not do that and all GPS data on Maggie's phone was destroyed in police custody.

Do you have a link for that? Would help if I knew the origin.

https://www.wjcl.com/amp/article/murdaugh-murders-timeline-evidence/42846491

However the timeline says the phone didn't unlock. I did skip over some steps in the timeline:

Quote:

---

8:53 p.m.: The orientation on Maggie's phone changes, waking the screen to activate its Face ID security feature. But the phone remains locked, thus implying it is picked up by someone who is not her.
8:53:15-8:55:32 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone records 59 steps.
8:55:48 p.m.: Maggie Murdaugh's phone takes a snapshot of an open app, Facebook, running in the background.

---

That would line up with someone else picking up the phone and it not unlocking, but it does not explain the picture of an open app. I have accidentally taking a screen shot. It's easy to do when either trying to power off or adjust the volume.

Quote:

---

Alex logged into Maggie's account to use Find My Phone to lead police to the phone location, and he asked them to download all the data from it to prove he wasn't the killer and the timelines wouldn't match.

The police did not do that and all GPS data on Maggie's phone was destroyed in police custody.

---

Actually, John Marvin testified that someone had asked him about find my phone app so he went to Buster to ask if they had that. Buster pulled it up on his phone showing the location. John Marvin then took Buster's phone with the location information to the SLED agents still at the scene but they waved him away so he went to a local cop he knew who was at the scene and showed it to him and they hopped into a vehicle to go find the phone. When they located it, that cop called the SLED agents to come get it.

By that time, Alex had provided Maggie's password to SLED and they used it to open her phone, put it into airplane mode but do not turn off the bluetooth connection., nor place it in a Faraday bag.

I watched Lawyer You Know stream about the sentencing again. Judge Newman talked about holding a Notice of Alibi hearing in November of 2022 in which Newman believes he lied. Curious, I went and checked the South Carolina rules on notice of alibi.

Once that is raised by the defense, the burden shifts to the prosecution to disprove it. Nor does the defendant have to testify regarding it. Their counsel provides names, addresses, or location of video or other records indicating the defendant's whereabouts at the time, date and location specified in the indictment.

Thus the prosecution's timeline was under question.

Quote:

---

In reviewing other SC attorneys' blog posts about the alibi defense in SC, I found several that stress how you have the burden of proof for an alibi defense.

They are wrong.

Although you must raise the alibi defense and you must produce evidence to support your alibi, once you have raised the defense the burden of proof is 100% on the prosecution to disprove your alibi. For example, a standard jury instruction that is given in alibi cases in SC includes this language:

There is no burden upon the defendant to prove that he was not at the scene of the crime. There is no burden upon the defendant to prove his alibi. The defendant need not prove he was somewhere else.
The burden is on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at the scene of the crime, actually participated in the crime, and was not somewhere else.

Thus, the State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present and committed the crime. The State has the burden of disproving the defendant's alibi defense.

---

LINK

Have to wonder what happened at that hearing that pissed off the judge so much. It couldn't have been the kennel video since the state had that in April of 2022 and are required to give that to the defense.

Quote:

---

The prosecution is then required to give you written notice of the names and addresses of witnesses they intend to call at trial to debunk your alibi defense:

(2) Disclosure by Prosecution. Within ten days after defendant serves his notice, but in no event less than ten days before trial, or as the court may otherwise direct, the prosecution shall serve upon the defendant or his attorney the names and addresses of witnesses upon whom the State intends to rely to establish defendant's presence at the scene of the alleged crime.

Both you and the prosecutor must then continue to inform the other side if you discover new witnesses who will testify as to your alibi or debunk your alibi:

---

Maybe I'm confused, but didn't AM's Notice of Alibi continue to claim that he was asleep on the couch while PM and MM were at the kennels and that he last saw them at dinner around 8:15? He stuck to this alibi even knowing that PM's kennel video existed. Once the witnesses who recognized his voice on the kennel video forced AM to admit to his lie during trial, his alibi was sunk.

AnglerAg92 said:

---

Maybe I'm confused, but didn't AM's Notice of Alibi continue to claim that he was asleep on the couch while PM and MM were at the kennels and that he last saw them at dinner around 8:15? He stuck to this alibi even knowing that PM's kennel video existed. Once the witnesses who recognized his voice on the kennel video forced AM to admit to his lie during trial, his alibi was sunk.

---

I don't think so. South Carolina rules are very specific about a continuing obligation on both sides to disclose anything new regarding alibi evidence. That would include a copy of the kennel video. John Marvin testified that he was played an audio of it but not the video portion around the time Alex was indicted for the murders, so July 2022, IIRC.

Harpootlian and Griffin would have certainly recognized his voice too since they knew him so well for years.

But if I'm wrong and you are correct, colossal blunder on defense counsel's part.

I found and read the Notice of Alibi on FITSNews. Sorry, but I'm not sure how to post it here. It does not state what time he last saw them, only that they were alive the last time he saw them. It then goes on to describe the calls he made and times he arrived at Almeda and returned to Moselle.

Quote:

---

It does not state what time he last saw them, only that they were alive the last time he saw them.

---

Thanks. Okay, that fits with my understanding of how those notices of alibi work in South Carolina. There is a fine line about pressuring a defendant to waive 5th amendment rights when asserting an alibi defense. Him saying he was alone in the house asleep does not fall into the type of alibi that requires a notice to be filed.

BUT OTOH, SLED's failure to properly subpoena the OnStar info from GM when Alex originally and then through his counsel were repeatedly asking about the GPS data from his Suburban exactly is that type of alibi evidence that the defense could point to in such a notice.

So take SLED and the prosecution's failure to secure such information FWIW.

ETA: From the link I posted before about South Carolina rules:

Quote:

---

(4) Failure to Disclose. If either party fails to comply with the requirements of this rule, the court may exclude the testimony of any undisclosed witness offered by either party. Nothing in this rule shall limit the right of the defendant to testify on his own behalf.

---

Well all defendant's have the right to testify if they wish. So that is a bit misleading about the practical effect of Alex taking the stand during a Notice of Alibi hearing. Right of the state to cross? What about the outstanding financial crimes? Those definitively off-limits during that hearing? With this judge, I wouldn't risk it. Granted not infront of the jury but could have been used later at trial to impeach him? IDK. South Carolina has some quirky laws.

Juror interviews today:

Quote:

---

McDowell, who was selected as a juror even though his brother, a Colleton County deputy, responded to the murder scene and was one of the trial's first witnesses.

---

Good Lord. Article says he told the court during voir dire but no one objected and the judge sat him.


And this nugget:

Quote:

---

We could only consider it as part of the motive," Williams said of the financial crimes evidence. "It helped show he was very convincing and manipulating, and it made sense."

---

Note what the word "motive" actually means to her and she described exactly why the financial crimes evidence was prejudicial.

They said the dog kennel video which showed him at the scene was the biggest piece of evidence along with the fact he lied about it. IMO defense did not do a good job of trying to establish a later time of death and did not hammer the state for simply guessing at what time the murders took place.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/jurors-alex-murdaugh-trial-speak-out-dog-kennel-video-sealed-fate

Quote:

---

Good Lord. Article says he told the court during voire dire but no one objected and the judge sat him.

---

In non-death penalty cases in South Carolina, counsel does not conduct voir dire, the judge does. Counsel cannot talk to potential jurors.

He says he disclosed it and neither counsel objected. Not sure how many strikes they got or if able to object.

Not a Bot said:

---

He says he disclosed it and neither counsel objected. Not sure how many strikes they got or if able to object.

---

The judge should have booted the juror anyway. The sibling of a prosecution witness should have been dismissed for cause by the judge.

As an EXTREMELY casual observer of court cases (one before this one was the Chauvin case), all you lawyer-types chiming in really gives people like me the 'nuts and bolts' of what's going on..

But I gotta tell ya, jurors in these cases really aren't/don't pay attention to the legalese of these cases, or at least so it seems to me..they seem to be more interested in the drama of the situation (more so in the Chauvin case than this one)…..all the technical mumbo-jumbo is not paid attention to….

My $.02….

When your defense is based largely on "the cops did a ****ty job and didn't actually investigate" having a sibling of the cop that did the investigation on the jury is not ideal

I have been, at best a casual observer of this whole s**t show of events so my knowledge on the intricacies of the case are limited.

One question for the lawyers types here, and if this has been brought up previously I apologize, but what, if any, chance does Alex have of pulling off a successful appeal of his conviction? From a layman's perspective it seems as if there is enough wiggle room with timelines and juror selections etc. that there is more than enough "doubt" that this will be in a courtroom again in the future.

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

I have been, at best a casual observer of this whole s**t show of events so my knowledge on the intricacies of the case are limited.

One question for the lawyers types here, and if this has been brought up previously I apologize, but what, if any, chance does Alex have of pulling off a successful appeal of his conviction? From a layman's perspective it seems as if there is enough wiggle room with timelines and juror selections etc. that there is more than enough "doubt" that this will be in a courtroom again in the future.

---

Not a lawyer, only an expert in Bird Law, but I think the appeal will center around procedural errors, such as the judge should not have allowed in financial crimes from over a decade before that had nothing to do with the case because they are more prejudicial than probative.

That he stole a million dollars from a quadriplegic on his death bed is awful, but the quadriplegic died a decade before Maggie and Paul and no one was trying to get that money from him. It had absolutely no bearing on the murders and all the jurors have talked about the financial crimes as part of the reason why they said guilty.

Also, the judge allowed the prosecutor to question the defendant as to why he didn't say things to the police when he was being interrogated or arrested. That could have been a mistrial right there, because you can't grill a guy on why he used his 5th Amendment right to not incriminate himself. The judge not allowing the defense to object to that should honestly get the judge kicked off the bench. But it is South Carolina, where nothing seems to matter like that.

Also, if the defense had an opportunity to object to a juror being the sibling of a state's witness and the defense planned to paint that witness and the witnesses' coworkers as incompetent fools, maybe there is a good case for ineffective assistance of counsel.

Not a Bot said:

---

Juror interviews today:

Quote:

---

McDowell, who was selected as a juror even though his brother, a Colleton County deputy, responded to the murder scene and was one of the trial's first witnesses.

---

Good Lord. Article says he told the court during voire dire but no one objected and the judge sat him.


And this nugget:

Quote:

---

We could only consider it as part of the motive," Williams said of the financial crimes evidence. "It helped show he was very convincing and manipulating, and it made sense."

---

Note what the word "motive" actually means to her and she described exactly why the financial crimes evidence was prejudicial.

They said the dog kennel video which showed him at the scene was the biggest piece of evidence along with the fact he lied about it. IMO defense did not do a good job of trying to establish a later time of death and did not hammer the state for simply guessing at what time the murders took place.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/jurors-alex-murdaugh-trial-speak-out-dog-kennel-video-sealed-fate

---

Paul is on his phone almost constantly with two separate people while he is down at the kennels. Just from 8:40pm on, here is the activity:
8:40:20-8:44:34pm - Phone call with Rogan
8:44:34-8:44:45pm - Facetime with Rogan
8:45:47-8:46:37pm - Video recording of Cash with Paul's, Maggie's and Alex's voices
8:48:05pm - Paul text to Megan
8:48:29pm & 8:48:39pm - Incoming texts from Megan
8:48:59pm - Paul reads both texts from Megan, and no further activity
8:49:35pm (36 seconds later) - Incoming text from Rogan that is never read (battery at 2%; phone dies at 10:34:23pm)

Similarly, Maggie is on her phone regularly, including reading two text messages in a group chat at 8:49:27pm and then there is no further activity.

Given Paul's historical phone usage habits (typical of most 21-year-old males by the way), and his phone usage that specific night, I think it very logical for a jury to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the shootings occurred within a minute of both phones ceasing activity, and that this is not a guess and much more accurate than a coroner's estimated range.

The defense wanted you to believe that both phones ceased activity within seconds of each other and within 3 minutes of the video placing Alex at the murder scene, but that's just coincidence and not indicative of the exact time of the murders. I don't buy it. And neither did the jury.

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

I have been, at best a casual observer of this whole s**t show of events so my knowledge on the intricacies of the case are limited.

One question for the lawyers types here, and if this has been brought up previously I apologize, but what, if any, chance does Alex have of pulling off a successful appeal of his conviction? From a layman's perspective it seems as if there is enough wiggle room with timelines and juror selections etc. that there is more than enough "doubt" that this will be in a courtroom again in the future.

---

Appellate courts are loathe to reverse a jury verdict if there is any reasonable interpretation to support their verdict. Appeals based upon "facts" are rarely successful for that reason.

But here there is a legal question regarding whether the judge improperly admitted the financial crime evidence under the pretext of motive which is not an element of first degree murder. That question is governed under rules 403 and 404. It certainly was prejudicial towards the defendant but was all of that actually probative and related to the murders?

That day, June 7th of 2021, he was asked about one specific case file, the Ferris case and one only. If the judge had simply limited the evidence to that one case, that would have been reasonable and more probative than prejudicial.

But the Judge let everything in.going back years and years before the murders. This is the judge assigned to those cases so he is very familiar with them, maybe too familiar and that affected his discretion. It turned into a trial within a trial.

There was also some prosecutorial misconduct with state's counsel commenting upon and/or asking about defendant's exercise of his 5th amendment rights and attorney client issues asking Alex what he told his lawyers to say in interviews.

Then there are the lies the SLED Lead Investigator told the grand jury about the highvelocity blood spatter on the Tshirt he was wearing that night when there was not and the doscovery of both buckshot and birdshot being loaded into the same shotguns found on the property. Again, not true.

So there are grounds for an applellate court to reverse and remand for a new trial. Will they? I'd say his chances are about 10% to get a reversal. The record will be very voluminous and the appellate courts won't be anxious to wade through it. I watched it live and it was a mess. Trying to read a transcript of the crap show would be mind numbingly boring and hard to follow. The brief's will have to be very specific.