ADVERTISEMENT

⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️

Honestly thought in the beginning the prosecution was going to have to convince me that it was him without doubt

Now it is the defense needing to prove to me somehow that all this could have happened without AM being a part if it

They have to convince me why all these coincidences happened
-He was there but did not do it? Lied about being there
-There were random guns so happened to be left exactly where Paul and Maggie were after Maggies was talked into coming to the house
-AM changed clothes, clothes were completely dry like they had just come out of the dryer (words of investigator), but he was sweaty
-He immediately appears to be covering tracks calling the guy who PM sent the video too asking if he received it just after the murders

To me the prosecution has uncovered motive between finances, upcoming boat trial, potential rocky marriage, etc. They have placed him there when he said he was not, given a timeline that lays out dout, and uncovered lie after lie than Alex told in statements and questioning

To me, now it is up to the defense to throw some sort of curve ball to the prosecution to create doubt but right now the prosecution has me believing that there is basically no way he was not in someway involved

I have seen much of the testimony but certainly not all. I expected the Sister to tell the jury that Maggie was on the outs with Alex and she was wondering if she should get a divorce. That didn’t happen; her closest confidant basically said they had a good marriage, not perfect, but good.

The only weird testimony about their marriage was the house keeper saying she found Maggies wedding ring under the seat of the Mercedes.

I have missed evidence of their marriage being on the rocks? Everyone that is asked seems to indicate they were over the moon in love with one another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrayCourtStomp
What were the fireworks today?
Just getting to this but many have shared since. Dale and Maggie's testimonies specifically. Maggie stated that Griffin was the one that called her and told her Alex had been shot and been fired for stealing money. Judge asked Griffin if that was true and he said it was "hearsay". Defense did not do well yesterday.
 
They have to convince me why all these coincidences happened
-There were random guns so happened to be left exactly where Paul and Maggie were after Maggies was talked into coming to the house
Not only two guns there, but two guns similar to what they have in the home and shoot on their property. Seems unlikely.
 
I have seen much of the testimony but certainly not all. I expected the Sister to tell the jury that Maggie was on the outs with Alex and she was wondering if she should get a divorce. That didn’t happen; her closest confidant basically said they had a good marriage, not perfect, but good.

The only weird testimony about their marriage was the house keeper saying she found Maggies wedding ring under the seat of the Mercedes.

I have missed evidence of their marriage being on the rocks? Everyone that is asked seems to indicate they were over the moon in love with one another.

yeah there is definitely contradiction there. Missed the sister yesterday...gonna need to watch today.

But it seems they were not staying together. I wonder how common it is for her to go stay at Edisto without him. And why she did not want to come to Mozelle
 
no it showed that if Dale left the hose meticulously hung, then it was on the ground when Paul filmed the dog

when the police arrived after the murders the hose was hung but not like Dale had done it “bunch of kinks in it” and the “nozzle not where I leave it”

so after they are killed WHO would hang the hose

I get that defense was trying to show water on ground and not a clean up job

but hose hung after murders shows more of a cover up and STILL the possibility that Alex cleaned up
That makes sense bc like you said “who” would hang the hose up. Someone who knew the hose was usually hung up, possibly meaning they had intimate knowledge of the area and activities, aka Alex.

I definitely think the state has presented a lot of evidence that leads one to believe it was Alex but definitely waiting for them to tie it all together for the jury in closing arguments.
 
That makes sense bc like you said “who” would hang the hose up. Someone who knew the hose was usually hung up, possibly meaning they had intimate knowledge of the area and activities, aka Alex.

I definitely think the state has presented a lot of evidence that leads one to believe it was Alex but definitely waiting for them to tie it all together for the jury in closing arguments.

they need to bring in the TI team to consult them the night before the closing arguments IMHO
 
yeah there is definitely contradiction there. Missed the sister yesterday...gonna need to watch today.

But it seems they were not staying together. I wonder how common it is for her to go stay at Edisto without him. And why she did not want to come to Mozelle
Sister said that the locals had become hostile after Beach incident and that everyone was treating them, especially Paul poorly. Said that Maggie was staying at Edisto to get away from all that.
 
yeah there is definitely contradiction there. Missed the sister yesterday...gonna need to watch today.

But it seems they were not staying together. I wonder how common it is for her to go stay at Edisto without him. And why she did not want to come to Mozelle
I’m definitely interested to see if we’ll hear anything of the alleged divorce Maggie was wanting. If there was proof of that, I think a jury easily makes a conclusion he could kill his wife in cold blood. I’d imagine there’s someone on the jury that finds it hard to believe a father would kill his beloved son in that fashion.

But as the prosecution presents more concrete evidence, it’s hard to come up with a theory that doesn’t have Alex pulling the trigger or, at the very least, within ear or eye shot of the killings and doing nothing.
 
Sister said that the locals had become hostile after Beach incident and that everyone was treating them, especially Paul poorly. Said that Maggie was staying at Edisto to get away from all that.

Gotcha...makes sense actually. First thing that does for the defense
 
  • Like
Reactions: my95GTHO
I have seen much of the testimony but certainly not all. I expected the Sister to tell the jury that Maggie was on the outs with Alex and she was wondering if she should get a divorce. That didn’t happen; her closest confidant basically said they had a good marriage, not perfect, but good.

The only weird testimony about their marriage was the house keeper saying she found Maggies wedding ring under the seat of the Mercedes.

I have missed evidence of their marriage being on the rocks? Everyone that is asked seems to indicate they were over the moon in love with one another.
I think the visit to a divorce att was an unsubstantiated rumor that became one of the “facts” of the case.
 
yeah there is definitely contradiction there. Missed the sister yesterday...gonna need to watch today.

But it seems they were not staying together. I wonder how common it is for her to go stay at Edisto without him. And why she did not want to come to Mozelle

the weird thing was the sister said she had to talk Maggie into going to Mosell that night. It is almost like there is something going on but no one will talk about it. Was surprise the State didn’t ask, ”why did you have to talk her into going”?

She loved the beach and like to spend the summers there is what they claim and Alex can’t because he has to work.
 
And explain how there isn't any physical evidence: footprints, tire tracks, cell phone data, fingerprints, DNA; of anyone else being at the site.
well - funny you say that - as they were arguing a motion outside of the jury and also discussing the timing of the rest of the trial, the state said likely to end tomorrow - defense said they have an expert in shoe print evidence flying in to testify

likely about the footprint that was on top of Maggie's in the dirt flooring of the shed area

I think it was a law enforcement person - but defense going to say it was a footprint different from Maggie/Paul/Alex and THUS, it was the real killer

"if the footprint don't fit then you must acquit"

trying anything possible
 
the weird thing was the sister said she had to talk Maggie into going to Mosell that night. It is almost like there is something going on but no one will talk about it. Was surprise the State didn’t ask, ”why did you have to talk her into going”?

She loved the beach and like to spend the summers there is what they claim and Alex can’t because he has to work.

it is just over an hour drive from Edisto to Hampton. Not an awful commute to work if they really wanted to be together
 
well - funny you say that - as they were arguing a motion outside of the jury and also discussing the timing of the rest of the trial, the state said likely to end tomorrow - defense said they have an expert in shoe print evidence flying in to testify

likely about the footprint that was on top of Maggie's in the dirt flooring of the shed area

I think it was a law enforcement person - but defense going to say it was a footprint different from Maggie/Paul/Alex and THUS, it was the real killer

"if the footprint don't fit then you must acquit"

trying anything possible

they said it was gonna likely end tomorrow....no! What the hell am I going to do with my office days now

My new island has become an amazing work spot with a tremendous easy view of the trial.
 
they said it was gonna likely end tomorrow....no! What the hell am I going to do with my office days now

My new island has become an amazing work spot with a tremendous easy view of the trial.
just the prosecution
 
A lot of circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution. Maybe overwhelming.

Will it be enough for a murder conviction?
 
A lawyer's job is not to determine whether the client is guilty or innocent and not defend him if he is guilty. Most lawyers don't ask the client if they committed the crime for the reason the client could not testify if the client admitted the crime. Believe it or not I almost never knew whether my client committed the crime he was charged with. Often times I reached a conclusion, but it was never because my client admitted it.

Yea but it's kinda easy to see this guy did it.

Why all the theatrics?

Just get it over with and lets move on.

This is why the judicial system is soooooo backed up.

So inefficient. I don't think you have to jump this far overboard to protect someone's rights.
 
This interview with SLED on 8.11.21 is quite interesting. This is when they first bring up to Alex about the snapchat video with the tree and the clothes he was wearing. He also just mentioned in the interview that he and Maggie had no plans to go see his parents that night, which I believe has been proven false during the trial as he worked to get Maggie to come to Moselle that night to visit them.
 
This interview with SLED on 8.11.21 is quite interesting. This is when they first bring up to Alex about the snapchat video with the tree and the clothes he was wearing. He also just mentioned in the interview that he and Maggie had no plans to go see his parents that night, which I believe has been proven false during the trial as he worked to get Maggie to come to Moselle that night to visit them.
Getting saucy!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: nmerritt11
This interview with SLED on 8.11.21 is quite interesting. This is when they first bring up to Alex about the snapchat video with the tree and the clothes he was wearing. He also just mentioned in the interview that he and Maggie had no plans to go see his parents that night, which I believe has been proven false during the trial as he worked to get Maggie to come to Moselle that night to visit them.
Man this is getting good haha.
 
Yea but it's kinda easy to see this guy did it.

Why all the theatrics?

Just get it over with and lets move on.

This is why the judicial system is soooooo backed up.

So inefficient. I don't think you have to jump this far overboard to protect someone's rights.
If you are ever sitting in that chair, you will be thankful for it.
 
yes I did leave that out...my guess is it burned in the shed but who knows. Another option is if there were 2 shooters which is possible, they could have disposed of them

But most definitely another mystery
You have a link to this burning shed story?
 
Getting saucy!!!
I have a feeling this interview will be damning for Alex in the eyes of the jury. Apparently this is the interview that led Duffie Stone to recuse his office from the case. Investigator is just dropping bombs on Alex in this interview.

Also the interview they first bring up to Alex the video Rogan Gibson received from Paul that Rogan is able to identify Alex's voice after he said he hadn't gone back down to the kennels.

Edit: SLED was not aware of the video of the dog but had talked to Rogan Gibson who had recognized Alex's voice from the phone call with Paul right before the video was taken. Still proving Alex was down at kennel's after he said he wasn't.
 
Last edited:
yeah there is definitely contradiction there. Missed the sister yesterday...gonna need to watch today.

But it seems they were not staying together. I wonder how common it is for her to go stay at Edisto without him. And why she did not want to come to Mozelle
Edisto vs backwoods Colleton County. Pretty easy to figure out why she makes that coastal choice
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT