Is Alex Murdaugh guilty ?

[CockofEarle]

The main damming evidence so far has him at the crime scene 4 minutes before they were shot, But not sure that's enough to get all 12 jurors to convict.

I luv a good lynching.

 

[Kill.Team6]

I luv a good lynching.

HI, YA BOYS!

 

[Cocky99]

I absolutely think that he murdered them. I don’t know that he did it with his own hand. Probably paid Cousin Eddie or someone else to do the job.
There are so many scenarios. And I don’t think we will ever know exactly how it happen

-The son could have shot mom for wanting to leave dad. Dad comes in and shoots son.

-Or son flips out on mom, mom feeling threatened shoots son. Then dad comes and shoots mom.

- or what I think happened. Dad lures Maggie to talk about divorce. Dad shoots Maggie. Paul comes, dad shoots with different gun. Multiple firearms were readily available.


Money and reputation is one thing more important than family to some people. His wife was leaving him. Money problems. The dynasty was falling around him. He was losing his ability to control everything around him.
1- the death of the housekeeper
2- the death of the gay man

and then 3- the death of Mallory Beach began to catch everyone’s attention. She was a pretty USC student. Her family probably doesn’t have the money or influence the Murdaughs have. But enough to ask questions and light a fire under SLEDs butt Even then Paul, who caused the accident, was not going to be held accountable criminally. They still had civil suits to worry about

This is going to be a Tiger King level Netflix drama one day.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

I absolutely think that he murdered them. I don’t know that he did it with his own hand. Probably paid Cousin Eddie or someone else to do the job.
There are so many scenarios. And I don’t think we will ever know exactly how it happen

-The son could have shot mom for wanting to leave dad. Dad comes in and shoots son.

-Or son flips out on mom, mom feeling threatened shoots son. Then dad comes and shoots mom.

- or what I think happened. Dad lures Maggie to talk about divorce. Dad shoots Maggie. Paul comes, dad shoots with different gun. Multiple firearms were readily available.


Money and reputation is one thing more important than family to some people. His wife was leaving him. Money problems. The dynasty was falling around him. He was losing his ability to control everything around him.
1- the death of the housekeeper
2- the death of the gay man

and then 3- the death of Mallory Beach began to catch everyone’s attention. She was a pretty USC student. Her family probably doesn’t have the money or influence the Murdaughs have. But enough to ask questions and light a fire under SLEDs butt Even then Paul, who caused the accident, was not going to be held accountable criminally. They still had civil suits to worry about

This is going to be a Tiger King level Netflix drama one day.

Nothing has come out "yet" about a divorce. Heard some rumors prior to the trial but everyone so far has painted a picture of a loving family. The only thing the house keeper said about this Friday was Maggie confided in her that she was concerned about the money issue from the boat crash and she thought Alex was not telling her everything. I thought it also odd that the house keeper found Maggie's wedding ring under the seat of her car when she cleaned it. It had been impounded and she picked it up. Another missed thing from SLED. Why didn't they find the ring? If he gets off, alot of this will come back to sloppy sloppy police work.

 

[Tngamecock]

Without even seeing the defense yet, I believe the jury will either be hung or not guilty. The prosecutions window for everything is about 12 - 15 minutes. During that time, they say he got two weapons, shot his son twice with a shotgun (literally blew his own son's head off), walked through any lingering shot gun smoke, took the other rifle and shot his wife 5-6 times. He then somehow wrapped up both long rifles (or otherwise hid them sufficiently that the police could not find them)(and there was no place around the kennels to hide them) and then walked/trotted the 150+ yards (possibly while carrying said long guns) to the main house, he goes inside to get his phone, then goes back outside and gets in his car and drives to see his mother, all while calmly leaving voice messages to his wife, leaving ZERO dna or GSR in the house or vehicle. Now, during this time, someone has picked up Maggie's phone several times (the orietation changed to portrait when Alex called at 9:06)(My guess is Maggie glanced at the phone (not long enough to activate the camera), saw it was him and didn't answer as she had literally just seen him 4 minutes before, she was probably semi-annoyed as she was busy fiddling with the dogs). I think it happened between 9:07 and 9:31 (see below) which is well after he left. There is uncontradicted is evidence and testimony that he was at his mothers during this time. Maggie's phone is found the next day about .5 mile down the main road in the opposite direction of where Alex was going to see his mother. Alex's car records show that he went straight to/from his mothers. Again, he did all of this while not getting ANY DNA (blood/brains) or GRS anywhere on his shoes, clothes body, house, and vehicle. They are saying he committed the perfect murder, first time out, all in a matter of minutes, Using common sense, who on this board has ever done anything perfect their first time, let alone something as tramatic as killing your wife and son (especially in the manner they were killed). My guess is that two people were hired to kill Paul (Maggie was in the wrong place). They parked on the main road, took the short walk through the woods to the dog kennel, waited for Alex to leave, and a little after 9:00 (about 30 minutes after sunset) killed them both. They then took Maggies phone (as it had been going off) and dropped it in the woods on the side of the road as they went back to their vehicle. When the phone hit the ground at around 9:31:44 it "mysteriously" actived and is never activated again until it is found by the police the next morning. The vehicle was far enough down the country road, in the dusk, that it would not have been seen by someone pulling out of the driveway.

If found guily, I believe the judge has committed reversable error on several issues and any verdict will be overturned on appeal. Not sure how an attorney,(who by the way has/had a significant lawsuit against the defendant) who is a witness under subpoeana, can pay another witness who has testified, but also still under subpoena, for her testimony. Not sure how that is not witness tampering (even if after the fact). It will be interesting to see the cross examination today. I would not be surprised if a complaint has not already been filed with the Bar against that attorney.

My $0.02...

Good analysis. The timeline to me is and could be way wider than 15 minutes. All these witnesses are guessing at times on days where they didn’t know something horrendous was going to happen. Most can remember only approximate times on things like that. Think if you can tell exactly what time you ate lunch yesterday or what time exactly the doctor came into your room even though your appointment was at 1:00 (don’t include the ones where you waited forever and got pissed).

If his cell signal was awol during that period and the helper’s 15 minutes at his moms instead of 45 is correct…he’s guilty. For whatever reason this man was deeply in debt…and people desperate do strange things

 

[Anon1671602102]

Nothing has come out "yet" about a divorce. Heard some rumors prior to the trial but everyone so far has painted a picture of a loving family. The only thing the house keeper said about this Friday was Maggie confided in her that she was concerned about the money issue from the boat crash and she thought Alex was not telling her everything. I thought it also odd that the house keeper found Maggie's wedding ring under the seat of her car when she cleaned it. It had been impounded and she picked it up. Another missed thing from SLED. Why didn't they find the ring? If he gets off, alot of this will come back to sloppy sloppy police work.

I’ll bite, what does a wedding ring in a car have to do with his guilt or innocence?

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

I’ll bite, what does a wedding ring in a car have to do with his guilt or innocence?

Maybe nothing. It was odd enough for the house keeper to bring it up. Could be an issue with the marriage that pointed toward a motive. Same with other odds things she noticed with his clothing. I was expecting the state to continue questioing the housekeeper about things Maggie confided in her other than money worries but they didn't go down that path. This whole case is based on circumstantial evidence which includes any thing out of the ordinary.
Also, we've heard from Paul's friends and Alex's friends/colleagues what a great relationship they all had but we haven't heard from any of Maggies' friends. Yet.

 

[SirSpur]

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.

I think the states motive is crap. He killed his wife and son to be a distraction from his financial crimes. What a crock.

If he did kill them I think it would be more because they met and his wife and son threatened to expose him and he killed them out of anger and an attempt to keep his secrets. We'll probably never know the real motive but you don't kill your wife and son as a distraction. Especially the way it was done. That was personal and anger driven.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

I'm curious if they'll bring in the 911 dispatcher and break down that call. I was listening to a podcast several months ago and the host had a voice tech filter out some of the background noise. You could clearly hear Alex's voice saying "Paul why did you have to get involved in this"

 

[Anon1671602102]

Maybe nothing. It was odd enough for the house keeper to bring it up. Could be an issue with the marriage that pointed toward a motive. Same with other odds things she noticed with his clothing. I was expecting the state to continue questioing the housekeeper about things Maggie confided in her other than money worries but they didn't go down that path. This whole case is based on circumstantial evidence which includes any thing out of the ordinary.
Also, we've heard from Paul's friends and Alex's friends/colleagues what a great relationship they all had but we haven't heard from any of Maggies' friends. Yet.

Just don’t think an unworn ring is a sign of anything. My marriage is completely fine and I never wear a ring. I’m not just saying that either. I can’t stand to wear rings.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

Just don’t think an unworn ring is a sign of anything. My marriage is completely fine and I never wear a ring. I’m not just saying that either. I can’t stand to wear rings.

Women are usually a bit different w/wedding rings. Like the house keeper impied this was very odd for Maggie

 

[Anon1671602102]

I'm curious if they'll bring in the 911 dispatcher and break down that call. I was listening to a podcast several months ago and the host had a voice tech filter out some of the background noise. You could clearly hear Alex's voice saying "Paul why did you have to get involved in this"

You likely were listening to a carpetbagger named Mandy matney who has been awful for this case.

 

[Anon1671602102]

Women are usually a bit different w/wedding rings. Like the house keeper impied this was very odd for Maggie

Just doesn’t add anything to the case if I were on the jury. I also would vote not guilty if it ended the today. The state has not proved their case and they won’t because they can’t.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

Just doesn’t add anything to the case if I were on the jury. I also would vote not guilty if it ended the today. The state has not proved their case and they won’t because they can’t.

No one knows if they can or not. Let's hope the jurors remain open minded. We haven't heard from all the people that will be testifying. We haven't heard from the lead SLED investigator. We haven't heard the 3rd interview with Alex.

 

[Prestonyte]

I think the states motive is crap. He killed his wife and son to be a distraction from his financial crimes. What a crock.

If he did kill them I think it would be more because they met and his wife and son threatened to expose him and he killed them out of anger and an attempt to keep his secrets. We'll probably never know the real motive but you don't kill your wife and son as a distraction. Especially the way it was done. That was personal and anger driven.

Silencing witnesses, with incriminating information. who threaten to expose you is usually an excellent motive.
His poor character, drug use and lifelong expectations of being above the law are major factors contributing to this event taking place.

 

[CWW]

Women are usually a bit different w/wedding rings. Like the house keeper impied this was very odd for Maggie

But when you live on the coast…it is very easy to loose one’s rings. Better to not wear them.

 

[SirSpur]

Silencing witnesses, with incriminating information. who threaten to expose you is usually an excellent motive.
His poor character, drug use and lifelong expectations of being above the law are major factors contributing to this event taking place.

I agree. Just saying that he didn't kill them to be a distraction as the prosecution is claiming. He killed them to protect himself because they threatened to expose him. Of course just a guess, who knows.

 

[Cocky Jeff]

I think the murder weapons are buried with his father. Dig up the grave.

Knowing this crazy man, each weapon buried with the body it killed.

 

[Cocky Jeff]

I’ll bite, what does a wedding ring in a car have to do with his guilt or innocence?

Killed her. Took it. For money.

 

[SILVERSPUR-rier]

I still think it was someone who wanted the criminal matter to not go to trial as damning/embarrasing evidence of the "good ol boy" network would have come out. They had no idea of the financial issues and Maggie wasn't supposed to be there....

 

[007cock]

Was OJ guilty.. Yes but walked.. Same here..

 

[Deleted11512]

Was OJ guilty.. Yes but walked.. Same here..

Yep. they have yet to provide ANYTHING that would stand up to the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". The only hurdle Murdaugh needs to clear is the discrepancy in his alibi.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

The judge disallowed the roadside shooting testimony form Cousin Eddie...This case is over....Alex will wriggle out of the murder charges and likely cop a deal on the financial charges....Spend 15-20 in Prison

 

[Deleted11512]

The judge disallowed the roadside shooting testimony form Cousin Eddie...This case is over....Alex will wriggle out of the murder charges and likely cop a deal on the financial charges....Spend 15-20 in Prison

He closed today by saying he was reversing his decision. Cuz Eddie is fair game now!

 

[Prestonyte]

He closed today by saying he was reversing his decision. Cuz Eddie is fair game now!

Wouldn't it be justice for Murdaugh to be taken down by a "relative" he hired. Just like a movie

 

[CWW]

Wouldn't it be justice for Murdaugh to be taken down by a "relative" he hired. Just like a movie

For some reason, at the end of the day…I think the defense WANTED Eddie to testIfy. Some say the 3rd interview they showed Wednesday was damning…so perhaps the defense thought bringing in Cousin Eddie might muddy the waters again. They seemed to intentionally bring him up.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

Cousin Eddie needs to wear a helmet cause he's getting ready to "be thrown under the bus."

Also speculation Alex might testify but that would be the dumbest courtroom move since the prosecution brought out the "bloody glove" in OJ's trial.Jackie Chiles would never make that mistake!

 

[Backyard Archer]

Ironically in my mind a failed polygraph points to him telling the truth....Harpootlian got the polygraph results of Cousin Eddie admitted in discovery..Eddie was asked "Did you shoot Maggie and Paul? Do you have knowledge of who did?" He answered no to both and apparently failed the polygraph....Which leads me to believe he knows who did it.....However, i realize this will not be admitted.Still makes you wonder what Eddie knows or has been told.

Polygraphs are bunk science. There's a reason they're not permissible in court.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

Why give them then? Apparently somebody thinks there of some value.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

Why give them then? Apparently somebody thinks there of some value.

I think they can be of value. If Alex was actually taking a test during his 3rd interview, he might seem to be truthful when asked "did you kill Paul" but untruthful when asked "do you know who did". This could point investigators in another direction. The video placed Alex near the kennels about the time they were murdered. If he didn't do it, he has to know who did.

 

[SILVERSPUR-rier]

I think they can be of value. If Alex was actually taking a test during his 3rd interview, he might seem to be truthful when asked "did you kill Paul" but untruthful when asked "do you know who did". This could point investigators in another direction. The video placed Alex near the kennels about the time they were murdered. If he didn't do it, he has to know who did.

So, you leave a grocery store and 10 minutes later it is robbed. Do you know who robbed it? You were at the grocery store "about the time" it was robbed... Maggie read a text at 8:50. Her phone showed 59 steps at 8:55. Her phone was changing orientation at 9:06, when Alex was calling/texting her from his car on his way to his mom's house. Her phone was not near Alex's or his phone during this time. Maggie's phone display turns on at 9:31 (my guess is when the real killers threw the phone on the side of the road), while Alex is at his mom's. my $0.02.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

So, you leave a grocery store and 10 minutes later it is robbed. Do you know who robbed it? You were at the grocery store "about the time" it was robbed... Maggie read a text at 8:50. Her phone showed 59 steps at 8:55. Her phone was changing orientation at 9:06, when Alex was calling/texting her from his car on his way to his mom's house. Her phone was not near Alex's or his phone during this time. Maggie's phone display turns on at 9:31 (my guess is when the real killers threw the phone on the side of the road), while Alex is at his mom's. my $0.02.

I can't believe people actually think he wasn't involved. The problem is proving it. SLED botched this investigation because of who he was.

 

[Backyard Archer]

Why give them then? Apparently somebody thinks there of some value.

Scare tactic by the police to try to get you to confess. "Tell the truth because this machine will know if you're lying." Results aren't allowed in court whether you pass or fail, but a confession is gold.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

You don't think it serves as a way to possibly eliminate suspects? If I'm law enforcement and Cousin Eddie fails a lie detector when asked Did you kill Maggie and Paul? Do you know who did? If he fails that then I start looking hard at Eddie and what he might know.That can't be used as evidence but can help concentrate your efforts in a certain direction.

 

[jbmont]

Three people were at the kennels at the time of the murders. Two of them are dead and one of them lied about it.

So hell yes he's guilty. Convicted? I'm not nearly as sure of that.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

The Onstar evidence from the night of the murder is tough on Alex...Looks like he was just at his mother's house for a short time when he said he was there 40 minutes.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I'm sure everyone believes he did it, but the prosecution's gotta prove it. So far, the best they've done is show he's a scuzzy guy and that it's feasible that he did it. The prosecution has brought a mountain of circumstantial evidence, but I believe the defense has managed to create at least reasonable doubt in each case. Is he guilty? Probably. Should he be convicted based on how our legal system works? Probably not.

The jury may decide he's distasteful enough to just convict him though.

It would be tough to be juror in this case and have to try and separate what you think and believe from what's been demonstrably proven.

 

[SILVERSPUR-rier]

The Onstar evidence from the night of the murder is tough on Alex...Looks like he was just at his mother's house for a short time when he said he was there 40 minutes.

According to On-Star, his car, parked at the house, started at 9:04. At 9:06 he is calling/texting his wife. He gets to his mothers at 9:22. He leaves his mothers at 9:43. He gets back to the house at 10:01. He drives to the kennels at 10:04. At 10:07 he calls 911. Again, someone was moving Maggie's phone at 9:06 (when he was calling her) and last "activated" at 9:31. Her phone was no where near Alex.

I can easily see where someone would say "I left the house around 9:00 to go check on my mom. It takes about 15 minutes to get there and 15 minutes to get back. I was back home a little after 10:00. Therefore, I was at my moms probably 30 minutes or 40 minutes." His statement was taken well before the on-star info was known.

I would have been more surprised if he was accurate, as that would lend to the fact that he was purposefully paying super close attention to the time. I would say no one knows to the minute where they have been/going on any given day. We all know it takes "about".... Like me driving home from work could take 18 minutes or 27 minutes, depending on traffic. How long it took me to drive home yesterday, I couldn't tell you with any degree of certainty, but about 20-30 minutes....

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

You're forgetting he has proven he has been untruthful on many things in this case....Proven to be so.....At this point I tend to NOT give him the benefit of the doubt,but I'm not on the jury....

 

[Prestonyte]

I'm sure everyone believes he did it, but the prosecution's gotta prove it. So far, the best they've done is show he's a scuzzy guy and that it's feasible that he did it. The prosecution has brought a mountain of circumstantial evidence, but I believe the defense has managed to create at least reasonable doubt in each case. Is he guilty? Probably. Should he be convicted based on how our legal system works? Probably not.

The jury may decide he's distasteful enough to just convict him though.

It would be tough to be juror in this case and have to try and separate what you think and believe from what's been demonstrably proven.

Since it seems he will be serving time on the financial crimes anyway and this is not a death penalty case, I can see where a juror would just "go with it" and convict on these charges as well.