Yep. If he planned it, and he was there, no difference in pulling the trigger or not.
The timing on the 911 call isn't accurate. It was 17 seconds on the first 911 call, which he dialed 9111. He corrected and dialed the correct 911 within a few seconds after. It was not a 40 second ordeal. He connected to 911 20 seconds after putting his car in park, including the failed attempt after 17 seconds.Per various newspaper accounts of the testimony ... "However, during cross-examination, the defense pointed out that at the time Murdaugh drove past the area where Maggie's phone was found, he didn't slow down."
"GPS data from Murdaugh's SUV and cellphone data also shows Murdaugh tried to call 911 but misdialed less than 20 seconds after he arrived at the kennels where the bodies of his son and wife were, a short distance from their home. After about another 20 seconds, Murdaugh completed the emergency call and told the 911 operator he checked them to see if they were alive."
Also, the "short" distance from the hosue was a couple of football fields away...
Charles Mansion rotted in jail for being the mastermind. Same will happen here
I’m sorry but that’s just not how the judicial system works
Can to explain it, counsel? If he planned it, and was there, it’s absolutely the hand of one is hand of all. What say you?
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 have been saying the same..... The CFO that testified about the missing funds should have been terminated the same day as Alec.
Circumstantial and direct evidence hold the same weight.
If I remember my Crim Law correctly, that is typically used against those involved in the commission of a separate felony where one of the perpetrators kills someone.....such as three people commit armed robbery and one suspect shoots and kills someone....all three are then accomplices to the murder not just the one that pulled the trigger.
Because its simple math/physics, therefore you need an engineer. You know the "end" point (where the bullet was found) and the trajectory (based upon holes in the wall, etc.) and you connect the dots and extrapolate that point out. There was nothing to "reconstruct". What would the firearm/shotgun expert testify to? The witness used SLED's own evidence/data and simply applied the science. The glaring question is why didn't SLED do that. They had all of the data since 8/21 (or so). The defense had to file motions to get the prosecution to turn the data over, which finally occurred in 10/22. My guess is SLED did the math and most likely gave a "verbal" report to the DA. The DA didn't like the answer as it didn't fit their narrative, so it was understood SLED was not to complete/write the report. Once a "report" (or anything) is in writing, it is subject to Brady and MUST be turned over. Since they had the data, they had to turn over the data. But, since there was no "report" making a conclusion about the data, there was no report to turn over. The SLED data showed that the gun angle could not have come from someone 6'4". I can assure you that if the SLED data showed it was consistent with someone 6'4" the DA would have absolutely presented that evidence as part of their case in chief. The fact that the DA CHOSE not to reveals a lot about the case. My $0.02.
Mugsie Bogues, who played in the NBA, was 5'3". Kevin Hart is 5'4". The comedian Rob Schneider is 5'3". Al Pacino is 5'6" (when he was showing off his "liitle friend" the trajectory was probably someone about 5' tall). Based upon "google" the "average" male mexican is 5'5". Alex and Cousin Eddie were involved in some serious drug dealing....No! They are saying there are two 5'2 shooters.
Couldn't all of this be questioned by simply raising the notion that we don't know if the victims were standing, sitting, kneeling, bending over, etc. when the shooting occurred?
Normal bullets can't curve or go around corners. They tend to go in a straight line. Per the experts tesitmony yesterday (contrary to the questions/arguments from the DA), there was nothing in the SLED reports showing ricochets or deflections. He simply testified concerning his opinion as to the trajectory of the bullets. The positions of the bodies were irrelevent to his testimony. A different witness will have to superimpose the bodies to correspond the various bullet holes and whether the deceased were standing, leaning, kneeling, etc.
In my mind, it would be easy for a juror have a "reasonable" suspicion of guilt and "go with it" and vote guilty, considering its not a death penalty trial, and he's going to jail anyway for financial crimes.
www.facrimelab.com
In my opinion the needle doesn’t have to be moved. The state still has work to do. The only evidence they have brought forth just shows that he was there at the time of the murders. That’s it. There isn’t any evidence that leads to him pulling the trigger. That’s what they have to prove and In my opinion they haven’t. The defense doesn’t have to prove a dang thing.
This is really where I am. I've watched *some* of the trial, and some of the news stories. It doesn't seem like the state has presented any hard evidence that he pulled the trigger. Now, as noted, why would an innocent man have lied so much about so many things? But that doesn't prove he shot anyone. I think this one could easily go either way - And I, for one, won't be surprised, either way.
