Is Alex Murdaugh guilty ?
- Thread starter Snake006
- Start date
Sorry I brought up that JUSTICE was done PREVIOUSLY in ANOTHER Southern town. What was I, a good ole white Southern born and raised country boy, thinking? Sheesh. There's always one in a crowd. SMH
Last edited:
Or maybe they may be lucky and get the verdict reduced from "guilty as hell" to just "guilty".
Last edited:
I was wrong. I thought for sure it would be a hung jury. Clearly, once he took the stand it came down to does the jury believe him or not and the state's evidence took less significance of the how/why. I do not believe that Paul was killed in the manner argued by the state and more likely shot in the way portrayed by the defense.
At the end of the day, I think Alex's lies caught up with him...At the end he had zero credibility...I think the defense made a mistake by going with the drug dealer as shooter angle.First,the drug gang is located no where near Moselle.That means they would have had to know Paul and Maggie were there that night and Maggie lived at Edisto..Also what hitman or gang doesn't bring their own guns to a murder.Doesn't make sense.
The juror that was dismissed was going to vote not guilty. But fortunately she talked about the case to three people and was dismissed. It was 11-1 guilty but the 1 changed to guilty.
They certainly did not prove that he's a murderer but succeeded in showing that he's a deplorable individual. That was enough.
Judge has sentenced him to life.
Judge has sentenced him to life.
Putting him on the stand was a monumental blunder. As it usually does, it smacked of desperation, and the jury seized upon it. I'll say it straight out, had he stayed in his seat at the defense table, it probably winds up a mistrial. I'm glad it didn't.
As to the guns, I would have thought the defense would have put someone from the blackout manufacturer on the stand to say there are tens of thousand (or more) of blackouts in circulation in the US with the same firiing mechanism that would have ejected the casing leaving an identical markings/indentations. This could have created some doubt that the murder weapon was similar to, but not one of the ones owned by the family. I was also surprised the state didn't try to go to the firing range to pull bullets and then try to compare them to the one found in the body, etc., to see if you could get a match.
My understanding is a shotgun is a shotgun and can't really be traced beyond the guage used as there is no "rifling" to compare. You wonder if Alex used two different loads to add confusion to try to be able to argue the possibility of 3 shooters, since normally a person would not mix loads that way. He didn't plan very well as he should not have used shells that were in the house.
Also surprised he took Maggie's phone but not Pauls. If he had immediately taken/destroyed both on the scene and put the pieces/parts with the guns/clothes, a lot of the evidence would not exist, including the video.
If I was the prosecution, I would move to immediately indict/convict him on the financial charges and try to get a big sentence on those. That way, if this trial is overturned on appeal, the state could choose not to re-try him as he will remain in jail on the other financial charges.
My understanding is a shotgun is a shotgun and can't really be traced beyond the guage used as there is no "rifling" to compare. You wonder if Alex used two different loads to add confusion to try to be able to argue the possibility of 3 shooters, since normally a person would not mix loads that way. He didn't plan very well as he should not have used shells that were in the house.
Also surprised he took Maggie's phone but not Pauls. If he had immediately taken/destroyed both on the scene and put the pieces/parts with the guns/clothes, a lot of the evidence would not exist, including the video.
If I was the prosecution, I would move to immediately indict/convict him on the financial charges and try to get a big sentence on those. That way, if this trial is overturned on appeal, the state could choose not to re-try him as he will remain in jail on the other financial charges.
Alex thought, and still thinks, he is smarter than everyone in the room!
Last edited:
Let this be a lesson to folks: if you're a lying thief with no morals or integrity and deplorable character, you may just end up getting convicted of murder.
Last edited:
you left out the part about thinking you are above the law
I agree with the judge that was a mountain of evidence that says he did it. You don't need video, eye witness, and DNA. There would be a lot of murderers roaming the streets if that was the burden of proof. You just need to prove that it's logical that he's the only one that could have done it. And they did that. I think a big thing that happened was when Waters asked him if the dogs had alerted while they were out. AM said "no, nobody else was there". Uh, ok then. So they put him at the scene, with his weapons, and used his own words against him that nobody else was there. And he lied to everyone the whole way through the investigation and trial of his whereabouts. Just curious, but what would they have had to do to make you believe they proved their case?
And Jim had no points to make other than SLED was not perfect in their investigation, and why would a man kill his wife and son whom he loves very much. Not his fault, he had a herculean effort, and maybe that contributed to the terrible presentation. He was also a family friend, so I'm sure that was very difficult as well.
Well, that and being a murder scene and the murders are presumed to have happened with your guns. I wonder how much differently this would have gone had he just said "yes, I was with them at the kennels just before, but I left to go back to the house b/c it was hot and I didn't want to deal with the dogs anymore. I'll do whatever ya'll need me to do to help find the killers".
I mean, the crux of the case was that he's guilty b/c why else lie about being at the kennels? I gotta think if he had been honest about that from the beginning there would have been at least one juror vote not guilty. The real lesson is, nowadays it's almost impossible to fake an alibi. If you're gonna kill someone, you better have a good story of why you were there around the time it happened.
He was the only one there when they were murdered. Simple case. Guilty as soon as his alibi got blown up.
The defense should have just put it out there that there were many with motives to kill Paul and Maggie was likely unintended victim,but when they went to the drug dealer defense that became easier to disprove...i.e The guns used and how would they know M and P were there?
Yeah, the phone deal kind of surprised me as well. Why not just put a couple of slugs in those as well? I don't think this was really planned. I think he called mags back to admit to the stealing. He just had that meeting with the CFO of the firm earlier and knew they were going to be digging and find all the other stuff he was doing. Maybe there was a tense exchange, maybe a threat to go to the police, and maybe that just caused him to snap. I think if it were planned the phones wouldn't have ever been recovered. He just freaked out.
We don't know if Alex was the only one there at the time. There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence against AM but there is really no hard proof. I think he killed his wife and son but there are still too many holes.
Paul came back from the grave through the cell phone recording to make sure his father did not get away it - karma/justice!
Yeah, the lies definitely make him look bad, but they don't show he's a murderer. I'm sure he probably did do it, but I'm not sure the jury would have found him guilty based on the murder evidence alone. I think it was murder evidence plus the mountain of evidence showing that he's a dirt bag.
We know by his own testimony. He was the only one there
I'm not convinced that he pulled the triggers. Something smells bigtime, and I think he knows what it is.
The whole thing is just so sad. A rich, well-known, powerful man with a family and a beautiful, beautiful home, ended up on drugs while robbing clients and his company blind, with one child in the midst of a possible wrongful death scenario, another child rumored to be tied to a death. Then to have his wife and one son murdered..... he's either guilty of the murders, or not, either way spending the rest of his days in prison....... just epically sad.
The whole thing is just so sad. A rich, well-known, powerful man with a family and a beautiful, beautiful home, ended up on drugs while robbing clients and his company blind, with one child in the midst of a possible wrongful death scenario, another child rumored to be tied to a death. Then to have his wife and one son murdered..... he's either guilty of the murders, or not, either way spending the rest of his days in prison....... just epically sad.
Too much smell for there not to be something rotten with Alex and the entire family.
There is more to come when all the Alex stuff is done regarding the teen's death on a deserted road.
Alex's trial has brought many things out into the light.
There is more to come when all the Alex stuff is done regarding the teen's death on a deserted road.
Alex's trial has brought many things out into the light.
Ignoring the cell phone evidence and car movements putting him at the scene, and lying about it, as the reason for the jury's decision is crazy. But the appeal is the obvious and expected move.
Fits has been all over this. Apparently the dismissed juror had told people she was a "not guilty" and there's nothing anyone could do to change her mind. She was dug in. Obviously the others weren't.
Yep. Now that he's been found guilty of murder, I'm thinking the state is going to be taking another look at those cases. SCHP has said the whole time that the kid didn't die from being hit by a car, and he was likely dumped there.
I didn’t doubt that. Just telling you what the juror said while being interviewed by nbc
To me, the thing that is crazy/creepy is on the video he seems to be having a normal conversational "tone" when talking to Maggie and the dog. He doesn't seem angry or overly aggravated almost having a playful tone with the dog. Supposedly, within two minutes he brutally shoots his son and wife. I don't know what tone I would be expecting from someone who within seconds was going to kill his wife/son, but that wasn't it.
The other thing I didn't see the defense try to further compress the timeline by pointing out that you have two dogs, who were out of control chasing chickens during the video. How long did it take to get them in the kennel after the video ended. They had to have been kenneled by someone before the shooting took place. Could you imagine how out of control they would have been after all the shooting if they had not been kenneled first. Plus the additional mess when they most likely would have been checking out the bodies, smelling, licking and getting blood all over their paws, etc. Was Alex walking to get the guns, presumably from a golfcart nearby, while Paul and Maggie kenneld the dogs?
I had heard (heresay) that the SLED officers that did the interview with the juror/witnesses may have been the same ones that may have been witnesses in the trial and still been under subpoena. Also, that one of the witnesses was the ex-spouse and may have had an ax to grind. Who, the juge later said "waffled" on the nature of the conversation. Again, complete heresay, but if those officers did the interviews, holy cow that looks odd/suspicous. Let the conspiracy theory commence of SLED's trying to cover their ineptitute...
To clarify I’m not talking about the juror that was kicked off. I’m talking about the first vote of deliberation.
I heard they think she might have been bribed....Perhaps a dozen eggs..?