It makes sense now that Randy did not testify on AM's behalf. John Marvin would apparently follow AM off a cliff. Randy ain't that dumb.There's an awful lot that doesn't add up.
It makes sense now that Randy did not testify on AM's behalf. John Marvin would apparently follow AM off a cliff. Randy ain't that dumb.There's an awful lot that doesn't add up.
Agree. I don't think it's anywhere near as cut and dry as the prosecution's neat little sequence of events.There's an awful lot that doesn't add up.
The Defense moved for a speedy trial, and it was granted.Did they ever explain why they did the murder trial prior to the financial crimes trial Would have avoided the potential for a overturning the verdict due to the judges decision to allow the allegations of financial crimes to be used in the murder trial.
Your opinion is buttressed by his family’s account of a previous occurrence where he immediately called his sister and timidly hid in nearby woods until she arrived.The whole out of gas scenario doesn't add up. First off, who runs out of gas then gets out of the car to open the gas cap and just leave it open? Secondly, his wallet was left in his car. So he ran out of gas, opened the cap, then started walking to a gas station without his wallet?
He was also found in the opposite direction of the closest gas station. If he did run out of gas, i think it's plausible that he called someone to come help him. Potentially Buster. And when he came to help, he took that opportunity. There no reason the cap is off unless someone was getting ready to put gas in it. And if someone was getting ready to put gas in it, doesn't make sense for him to be walking to a gas station, without his wallet. It's just not a logical scenario.
Dr. Kenny McKinsey was a brilliant expert witness. He disputed the defense's expert about the "2" 5'2 shooter theory. They were basing their theory on the victims and suspect(s) being stationary and shouldering the weapon. Dr. Kinsey said this was a very chaotic dynamic crime scene. Evidence suggested both victims and shooter were most likely moving. Regardless of the skill level of a killer, this is not like sitting in a deer stand shooting at an grazing animal. Even trained police officers are very inaccurate in heat of the moment shootings. Plus this was his family.Agree. I don't think it's anywhere near as cut and dry as the prosecution's neat little sequence of events.
I have lots of questions. To me, RAM seems like a bit of a goof - not a hardened, stone-cold murderer. He also seems like an outdoorsman who's probably pretty handy with a gun (there were enough of them around). Why did it take a glancing blow to the chest, and then one through the shoulder and into the side of the head to kill PM? And why did he shoot MM in the gut and thigh first? That's some bad shooting right there...
I have not heard the use of the word unavailing in 50+ years.Appeals will be unavailing.
Dr. Kenny McKinsey was a brilliant expert witness. He disputed the defense's expert about the "2" 5'2 shooter theory. They were basing their theory on the victims and suspect(s) being stationary and shouldering the weapon. Dr. Kinsey said this was a very chaotic dynamic crime scene. Evidence suggested both victims and shooter were most likely moving. Regardless of the skill level of a killer, this is not like sitting in a deer stand shooting at an grazing animal. Even trained police officers are very inaccurate in heat of the moment shootings. Plus this was his family.
The below animation is probably pretty close to what happened. I think Alex most likely had the weapons on the golf cart. Only Alex knows what really happened and he will continue to lie like he's always done.
We'll never know why but I'm 100% convinced that he did murder them bothI actually saw that same video the other day. Kind of chilling to watch it - even though it's just an animation.
Like a lot of people, I too get sucked into the TV show / movie shooting scenes where everyone makes perfect head-shots all of the time. We can only try to imagine the chaos of that evening..... I'm not convinced AM pulled those triggers - maybe he did - but even one of his brothers is saying (NY Times interview) that he doesn't think Alex isn't telling everything he knows. I hope we somehow learn the 100% concrete truth one day.
Thanks.The Defense moved for a speedy trial, and it was granted.
I thought that also. It was going on a while not to be noticed, at the bank and the firm.There's no way his law firm wasn't in on the financial crimes unless they're just so grossly incompetent they didn't notice millions of dollars missing.
I am not convinced he was alone.We'll never know why but I'm 100% convinced that he did murder them both
I would LOVE to watch that played out again. It was must watch TV.His lawyers have requested a re-trial on the basis that the court clerk worked behind the scenes to sway jurors to secure a quick guilty verdict so that she could then write a book about the trial (which she since has and was released 8/1).
They were a Liability.Yes, but I am not sure why he killed his wife and son. We will never know. I think there will be at least one juror who holds out for not guilty. So…I think it will be a hung jury. But some are saying the jury is hanging on to every word of some of the state’s witnesses.
Evidence or hearsay?His lawyers have requested a re-trial on the basis that the court clerk worked behind the scenes to sway jurors to secure a quick guilty verdict so that she could then write a book about the trial (which she since has and was released 8/1).
Affidavits by the jury members. This seems pretty strong to me but I’m not a lawyer. If what they are alleging is true then he deserves a retrial. She knew the juror that got kicked off late was a not guilty vote. Supposedly made up the Facebook post that she could not produce at the time of snitching.Evidence or hearsay?
I've read the Motion. There is enough there for a hearing on the merits. The Clerk needs to answer for her actions under oath.Evidence or hearsay?
What would happen to her if the defense claims are true?I've read the Motion. There is enough there for a hearing on the merits. The Clerk needs to answer for her actions under oath.
She would lose her job at the very least. I'm not well versed on what, if any, criminal charges could be brought against her. But I would think those could follow. I imagine the AG's office is none too pleased right now.What would happen to her if the defense claims are true?
I don’t know her but have been around her a few times. Think she was seeing dollar signs. Hope it didn’t cloud her judgement enough to do what the defense is claimingShe would lose her job at the very least. I'm not well versed on what, if any, criminal charges could be brought against her. But I would think those could follow. I imagine the AG's office is none too pleased right now.
Not certain it was just the dollar signs. I think there was personal animus toward Alex as well.I don’t know her but have been around her a few times. Think she was seeing dollar signs. Hope it didn’t cloud her judgement enough to do what the defense is claiming
Don’t doubt that one bitNot certain it was just the dollar signs. I think there was personal animus toward Alex as well.
Changes a lot. It doesn’t matter what you think the evidence says, only what the jury thinks. Two jurors have signed affidavits that they were pressured to change their vote from not guilty. One presumable firm not guilty was removed because of a Facebook post this very clerk of court said she saw but could not produce it. Judge Newman took her word for it.All Murdaugh and his defense want is another chance to roll the dice with a new jury (nothing to lose) - not sure it changes the outcome because the evidence shows he was there.
New jury likely to produce the same guilty verdict based on the evidence. Rolling the dice, but like I said, nothing to lose.Changes a lot. It doesn’t matter what you think the evidence says, only what the jury thinks. Two jurors have signed affidavits that they were pressured to change their vote from not guilty. One presumable firm not guilty was removed because of a Facebook post this very clerk of court said she saw but could not produce it. Judge Newman took her word for it.