Alex Murdaugh Denied New Trial

6,445 Views | 56 Replies | Last: 25 days ago by Im Gipper
Tex100
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:33p, 1/29/24
AG
Judge said the juror's weren't influence by the court personnel who said they made 100K on their self published book which no longer is for sale after part of it was determined to be plagiarized.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/clerk-denies-jury-tampering-alex-murdaugh-seeks-new-trial-hearing-rcna136161

OTOH

https://www.thedailybeast.com/juror-admits-her-guilty-verdict-was-influenced-by-alex-murdaugh-trial-clerk-becky-hill
Reply Quote
1 edit
ErnestEndeavor
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:43p, 1/29/24
I'm not shocked by the decision but the judge used South Carolina precedent to put the burden on the defense to prove the jury was influenced, while Federal precedent in that circuit puts the burden on the state to prove that they weren't influenced. This was a big argument in the hearing a few weeks ago.

This is going up to federal court and I think the Feds will tell South Carolina to change their standards and we will have yet another hearing.

And it wasn't just the court clerk having conversations about the trial with some jurors and trying to tell some of them not to trust AM on the stand. A juror was dismissed in the middle of trial after a false report was made about her discussing the case with someone. That report seems to have come from information provided by the clerk. They were allegedly trying to pick off a potential holdout.

The judge also named the foreman of the jury instead of letting the jury pick.

And the biggest problem with this case is the introduction of the financial testimony despite it having absolutely no nexus to the case other than the prosecution stating they think it could have been motive. It should have never been admitted as it was far more prejudicial than probative.

The lead detective in the case also admitted to lying to the grand jury about forensic evidence.

As much as I think this guy was a scumbag the state's case was weak.
Reply Quote
11
2 edits
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:45p, 1/29/24
AG
Followed that trial everyday.

Alex is a real POS. But they never came close to proving he killed his wife and son. Zero evidence he was involved.

Did he maybe know about it? Hard to say. Maybe he did but he did not benefit from it in any economic way.

Having watched the trial, don't think he personally did it.
Reply Quote
23
AgCat93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:49p, 1/29/24
AG

Reply Quote
7
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ErnestEndeavor • 7:03p, 1/29/24
AG
AtticusMatlock said:
I'm not shocked by the decision but the judge used South Carolina precedent to put the burden on the defense to prove the jury was influenced, while Federal precedent in that circuit puts the burden on the state to prove that they weren't influenced. This was a big argument in the hearing a few weeks ago.

This is going up to federal court and I think the Feds will tell South Carolina to change their standards and we will have yet another hearing.

And it wasn't just the court clerk having conversations about the trial with some jurors and trying to tell some of them not to trust AM on the stand. A juror was dismissed in the middle of trial after a false report was made about her discussing the case with someone. That report seems to have come from information provided by the clerk. They were allegedly trying to pick off a potential holdout.

The judge also named the foreman of the jury instead of letting the jury pick.

And the biggest problem with this case is the introduction of the financial testimony despite it having absolutely no nexus to the case other than the prosecution stating they think it could have been motive. It should have never been admitted as it was far more prejudicial than probative.

The lead detective in the case also admitted to lying to the grand jury about forensic evidence.

As much as I think this guy was a scumbag the state's case was weak.
South Carolina law allows a judge to select a foreman. Really weird, I know.

And the SLED effort here was very weak and flat out dumb in how they treated a crime scene with a double murder. Alex calls in the 911 call. He's present at the scene of the crime. Bag his hands. Ask for his clothes.

When at the nearly end of the trial, GM out of nowhere suddenly had GPS records on AM's Suburban? After saying they did not? And those records supported AM's innocence?

Yeah, not buying that the state AG knew about that early on. They lied and buried it.

Alex deserves to be in prison for his financial crimes. For life.

Double murder? Not yet. Need more proof and the state AG does not have that.
Reply Quote
9
Old Army Ghost
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:04p, 1/29/24
a jury of his peers disagreeds with you
Old Army has gone to hell.
Reply Quote
14
taxpreparer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 7:14p, 1/29/24
AG
Glad you are back.
Reply Quote
17
Ghost91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 7:38p, 1/29/24
aggiehawg said:
Followed that trial everyday.

Alex is a real POS. But they never came close to proving he killed his wife and son. Zero evidence he was involved.

Did he maybe know about it? Hard to say. Maybe he did but he did not benefit from it in any economic way.

Having watched the trial, don't think he personally did it.


I understand why you think that, and I ALMOST went that way as well, but then I was reminded that circumstantial evidence is the same as direct evidence in the eyes of the law, and that allowed me to find him guilty of double murder.
Reply Quote
5
ErnestEndeavor
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Old Army Ghost • 7:38p, 1/29/24
Old Army Ghost said:
a jury of his peers disagreeds with you


Juries are only worth what they are allowed to hear. There was also intense public pressure in this case and the clerk of court of all people was trying to influence the verdict. This was not a fair trial.
Reply Quote
5
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Old Army Ghost • 7:40p, 1/29/24
AG
Old Army Ghost said:
a jury of his peers disagreeds with you
LOL. A jury of people who hated him is more like it.

I have zero problem with his financial crimes convictions. But I watched that trial (which you obviously did not) and there was zero evidence linking him to the murders. Zero DNA. Zero gun residue, zero blood evidence, zero GPS phone nor GPS vehicle evidence.

No way to physically connect him to the actual murders even tangentially. Since I was a lawyer who looks at evidence, I wanted to see how AM had done it. Never saw the state AG connect those dots, other than the dubious financial crimes being allowed in (for three days) but only when the jury was instructed that three days of evidence was only to be considered as to "motive."

What horses***.
Reply Quote
11
TXAggie2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ErnestEndeavor • 7:43p, 1/29/24
AG
AtticusMatlock said:
I'm not shocked by the decision but the judge used South Carolina precedent to put the burden on the defense to prove the jury was influenced, while Federal precedent in that circuit puts the burden on the state to prove that they weren't influenced. This was a big argument in the hearing a few weeks ago.
Burden for what aspect of the claim?

The Remmer burden of prejudice applies in federal and state court, but you have to get to Remmer before prejudice is presumed.

In the 4th Circuit, its on the defendant to prove the contact happened and that the contact could reasonably draw into question the the integrity of the trial.
Reply Quote
Old Army Ghost
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:46p, 1/29/24
a jury found him guilty and his appealed has failed

he is guilty as the courts have found him to be

a drug addict who repeatedly lied about being at the scene of the murder isnt believable
Old Army has gone to hell.
Reply Quote
13
Kraft Punk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:52p, 1/29/24
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
Reply Quote
12
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Kraft Punk • 8:00p, 1/29/24
AG
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.
Reply Quote
11
TheAngelFlight
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 8:04p, 1/29/24
aggiehawg said:
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.
Here's 16 minutes of Alex Murdaugh at the trial talking about what he was doing at the dog kennels that evening

Reply Quote
7
1 edit
Ghost91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 8:13p, 1/29/24
aggiehawg said:
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.


What? Yes, he IS.

In the trial, he took the stand and said that he was never at the kennels that day/evening. At ALL.

Then after the Snapchat video was shown - in which you see/hear him plain as day - he RETOOK the stand and admitted that he WAS there and that he had lied in his prior testimony. The testimony that he gave just days before to the SAME jury. Unbelievable.
Of course he spun it to say that he arrived at the kennels two seconds before the video and left two seconds AFTER the video and only lied because it would look bad.

Zero credibility. GIANT circumstantial evidence. Guilty. Done. Go away forever.
Reply Quote
12
ErnestEndeavor
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TXAggie2011 • 8:19p, 1/29/24
TXAggie2011 said:
AtticusMatlock said:
I'm not shocked by the decision but the judge used South Carolina precedent to put the burden on the defense to prove the jury was influenced, while Federal precedent in that circuit puts the burden on the state to prove that they weren't influenced. This was a big argument in the hearing a few weeks ago.
Burden for what aspect of the claim?

The Remmer burden of prejudice applies in federal and state court, but you have to get to Remmer before prejudice is presumed.

In the 4th Circuit, its on the defendant to prove the contact happened and that the contact could reasonably draw into question the the integrity of the trial.


iirc the judge stated at the last hearing that she would apply a South Carolina state court precedent, cannot remember the case.

I believe AM's attorneys argued for Remmer and a more recent federal circuit case out of North Carolina.

Have not had a chance to watch the hearing yet but I'm seeing the judge actually found that the clerk tampered.

Just getting to Gosney's video and he thinks the feds will overturn. He thinks judge used wrong analysis.
Reply Quote
ErnestEndeavor
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Old Army Ghost • 8:20p, 1/29/24
None of his appeals have actually been heard yet. This is a motion for a new trial based on the misconduct by the clerk. The appeals on everything else were put on hold pending this decision.
Reply Quote
3
Old Army Ghost
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 9:53p, 1/29/24
aggiehawg said:
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.
he disagrees with you

"Mr. Murdaugh, is that you on the kennel video at 8:44 p.m. on June 7," defense attorney Jim Griffin asked, "the night Maggie and Paul were murdered?"

"It is," said Murdaugh, conceding he lied to investigators from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division in at least three separate interviews.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/23/us/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-thursday/index.html
Old Army has gone to hell.
Reply Quote
7
chickencoupe16
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Old Army Ghost • 10:02p, 1/29/24
AG
Old Army Ghost said:
aggiehawg said:
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.
he disagrees with you

"Mr. Murdaugh, is that you on the kennel video at 8:44 p.m. on June 7," defense attorney Jim Griffin asked, "the night Maggie and Paul were murdered?"

"It is," said Murdaugh, conceding he lied to investigators from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division in at least three separate interviews.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/23/us/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-thursday/index.html
The issue is that no one could ever prove that it was "minutes before" the murders because no one can prove when the murders occurred beyond a multiple hour gap from the Snapchat video to Alex's 911 call.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chickencoupe16 • 10:06p, 1/29/24
AG
Quote:
The issue is that no one could ever prove that it was "minutes before" the murders because no one can prove when the murders occurred beyond a multiple hour gap from the Snapchat video to Alex's 911 call.
And no blood, nor DNA, nor GSR. You tell me the actual physical evidence that connects him?
Reply Quote
3
BigRobSA
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:10p, 1/29/24
Murtaugh?

He's getting to old for this *****




RIIIIIIGS!
Reply Quote
5
Come Out Roll
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:14p, 1/29/24
AG
If any of you saw the Netflix series on it, it was pretty telling.
The ONLY thing I can't reconcile is the use of 2 guns…..

And the only way I can half-a$$ reconcile is that he was a pretty damn shrewd lawyer - if he figured a way to try and pin this on someone else, that's a pretty damn good way to try and suggest there were multiple people doing this…..
Aside from that, I truly think he killed his son, knowing that there was a guilty verdict on the horizon for his son in the death of that girl on the boat, and that he was " relieving" him of that hardship of going through all of that…..and his wife saw him, tried to run and got capped by him…..
Extremely sad situation…..all caused by him…..
Reply Quote
2
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:14p, 1/29/24
AG
I was still confounded by all the suspicious angles of shots. Then no definitive gunshot was residue that I remember. Sure he lies, it's what he does, but no way he cleans up that fast based on their timeline.

I do believe he knew his family was in real danger or even might have been told. But he can't admit that. He's already scum and is the reason they were murdered.

Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
chickencoupe16
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Come Out Roll • 10:16p, 1/29/24
AG
Come Out Roll said:
If any of you saw the Netflix series on it, it was pretty telling.
Yeah, things do seem pretty telling when you hear only one side of them. That's why those actually interested in knowing the facts watched the trial.
Reply Quote
2
Come Out Roll
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chickencoupe16 • 10:17p, 1/29/24
AG
chickencoupe16 said:
Come Out Roll said:
If any of you saw the Netflix series on it, it was pretty telling.
Yeah, things do seem pretty telling when you hear only one side of them. That's why those actually interested in knowing the facts watched the trial.


Yep, and I watched the trial as well, chief….
Reply Quote
4
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tony Franklins Other Shoe • 10:18p, 1/29/24
AG
Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:
I was still confounded by all the suspicious angles of shots. Then no definitive gunshot was residue that I remember. Sure he lies, it's what he does, but no way he cleans up that fast based on their timeline.

I do believe he knew his family was in real danger or even might have been told. But he can't admit that. He's already scum and is the reason they were murdered.
Yeah. those angles were very odd from a guy that tall, bending down and then staning up and turning away? At the same time?

None of that testimony was logical.
Reply Quote
2
chickencoupe16
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tony Franklins Other Shoe • 10:19p, 1/29/24
AG
Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:
Sure he lies, it's what he does, but no way he cleans up that fast based on their timeline.
Not to mention, if the prosecution is correct, then the only reason Alex was on a tight timeline is because he chose when to murder, when to leave the property, and when to return. So not only does he have hardly any time to clean up, he could have given himself more time to do so and didn't.

The state's case relied so heavily on him being a mastermind that thought out this murder (ie how did he clean up and hide the rifle so well) but so many parts of it would have been done differently by anyone with half a brain.
Reply Quote
3
chickencoupe16
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Come Out Roll • 10:21p, 1/29/24
AG
Come Out Roll said:
chickencoupe16 said:
Come Out Roll said:
If any of you saw the Netflix series on it, it was pretty telling.
Yeah, things do seem pretty telling when you hear only one side of them. That's why those actually interested in knowing the facts watched the trial.


Yep, and I watched the trial as well, chief….
But instead you chose to use the Netflix as your gold standard to prove that Alex did it. Yeah, we believe you, buddy.
Reply Quote
3
TheRatt87
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chickencoupe16 • 6:49a, 1/30/24
chickencoupe16 said:
Old Army Ghost said:
aggiehawg said:
Kraft Punk said:
He's on the Snapchat video hollering minutes before he brutally slaughtered his wife & son

Hope he gets a nice long life in prison before arriving in hell
No, he isn't.
he disagrees with you

"Mr. Murdaugh, is that you on the kennel video at 8:44 p.m. on June 7," defense attorney Jim Griffin asked, "the night Maggie and Paul were murdered?"

"It is," said Murdaugh, conceding he lied to investigators from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division in at least three separate interviews.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/23/us/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-thursday/index.html
The issue is that no one could ever prove that it was "minutes before" the murders because no one can prove when the murders occurred beyond a multiple hour gap from the Snapchat video to Alex's 911 call.

Incorrect. The cell phone data from Paul's & Maggie's phones show almost exactly to the seconds when the murders occured. Paul is on his phone constantly that evening (and Maggie to a lesser degree), including up to and after the Snapchat video. But less than 3 minutes after the Snapchat, Paul's activity ceases, including not reading a text from Rogan (Snapchat recipient) received 36 seconds after Paul's last phone activity. And Maggie's phone activity ceased 29 seconds after Paul's.

But the defense wants you to believe it's just coincidental that both phones ceased activity at that time and/or that Alex left the scene immediately after the Snapchat. The scene he claimed to never be at until the Snapchat came to light. The existence of the Snapchat with Alex on it was his & his defense team's "Oh S*&t" moment.
Reply Quote
12
schwack schwack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 7:22a, 1/30/24
AG
Look who answered the Murdaugh bat signal! I had a feeling you'd jump back on during this - hope you are doing well
Reply Quote
agracer
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Come Out Roll • 9:22a, 1/30/24
AG
Come Out Roll said:
If any of you saw the Netflix series on it, it was pretty telling.
The ONLY thing I can't reconcile is the use of 2 guns…..

And the only way I can half-a$$ reconcile is that he was a pretty damn shrewd lawyer - if he figured a way to try and pin this on someone else, that's a pretty damn good way to try and suggest there were multiple people doing this…..
Aside from that, I truly think he killed his son, knowing that there was a guilty verdict on the horizon for his son in the death of that girl on the boat, and that he was " relieving" him of that hardship of going through all of that…..and his wife saw him, tried to run and got capped by him…..
Extremely sad situation…..all caused by him…..
He knew his wife was nearby. Why would he shoot his son and not realize his wife would hear it and come running?

And why would he kill his son to "relieve him" of that burden. He still has a chance at trail, not guarantee his son is going to prison.
Reply Quote
TexasAGGIEinAR
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BigRobSA • 9:35a, 1/30/24
BigRobSA said:
Murtaugh?

He's getting to old for this *****




RIIIIIIGS!
Somewhere, right now, Danny Glover is walking around with a glock. Whether he needs it or not.
Reply Quote
BluHorseShu
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 1:15p, 1/30/24
AG
aggiehawg said:
Followed that trial everyday.

Alex is a real POS. But they never came close to proving he killed his wife and son. Zero evidence he was involved.

Did he maybe know about it? Hard to say. Maybe he did but he did not benefit from it in any economic way.

Having watched the trial, don't think he personally did it.
Well, I guess that's what makes our system unique. The jurors only have the information they're given, their ability to understand the info and to follow the instructions of the court without prejudice. Guess he could have used you on the jury.


I personally think its next to impossible to have a jury that is not influenced by their own personal biases or preconceived notions of the case all the time. Hopefully good attorneys can ferret them out before being selected, but even in todays climate, many people are going into those pools with an axe to grind.

Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BluHorseShu • 1:28p, 1/30/24
AG
Small town politics. His family had been big dogs in that county for several generations. Can build some long lasting bad blood over that long of a period.

He's going to be in prison for the rest of his life for his financial crimes anyway.
Reply Quote
1
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.