The best was after lunch...probably last 2 hours of testimony. Good stuff.
⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️
- Thread starter OldMTPTiger
- Start date
He is terrible human being, but I am willing to admit Alex isn’t stupid enough to suggest that there was no possible way someon was in the woods waiting for him to leave. I think he simply meant no one was visibly present.
Look he is telling lie after lie, but that is a pretty easy one to keep straight.
It was in reference to AM saying dogs were in the woods, etc.
Waters asked if dogs were barking or on alert..."doing what dogs do"
dogs would have known if another person was there and AM repeated that no one else was there.
I see no way there is an acquittal. Hung jury? For sure, I suspect that 9 to 10 are sitting on guilty and 2-3 are on the fence with just not quite being there.
If I am on the Jurry, I ask who was it then? The defense can’t even give you a realistic alternative to Alex being the murder. There is enough evidence with out a defense to say he is guilty (either pulling the trigger himself or being apart of it and there when it happened).
So the defense needs to give reasonable doubt and they haven’t in my view.
The "jury" was in a local restaurant. I have no idea if they were flown in from across the nation. I mentioned that they were 6 women...maybe even said white. I have no idea their level of intelligence. The TV people wanted dissenting opinions among the jury but they had a hard time getting them.
I submitted that info for the hell of it...I did not imply that it was representative of an actual jury.
I've thought all along that it will be a hung jury. And I also think AM is a murderer.
I'm not right or wrong I'm just telling you what happened during the trial!
They got Capone that way. State and Feds can go after him for not paying income taxes on the stolen money.
You may be right in how it is perceived by the jury. I wouldn’t perceive that to be a blatant admission that no one else could have killed my wife and son.
He’s a self-admitted liar, drug abuser and is a small town attorney.
If there’s ever been a mold for pathological liar, he’s the prototype.
I may have missed this. Has he ever been asked what happened to his blue shirt and shoes he was wearing earlier in the day? Heard mention of pants being washed but not the shirt he was wearing in the tree video. Can’t imagine the state not making more of an issue of these items.
I would assume this would/could be witnesses that have previously testified? Possibly Mag's sis to refute AM's testimony that Mag's decision to come to Moselle on that fateful day was not precipitated by any request on his part? I also believe the housekeeper testified as well that Mag told her she came b/c of AM's urgings.
Could the state call a defense witness, ala AM, for additional questioning?
I am not sure what you fixed, your post doesn’t make sense.
No, you are saying he the shooter is 5' 2". If not, then what is the cutoff for how tall the shooter could have been? 5' 6"? 5' 8"? Whoever did it had to do it from an angle that was lower than what they actually are and if that is the case, that would put 6' 4" in that range.
Your original post on this topic stated you thought it was a big mistake by Alex and potentially a key moment where he inadvertently admitted he was the killer.
I am suggesting the Jury may not see it that way. Maybe they will.
If i were on the jury, I don’t think I would. I would simply assume he meant that there wans’t a 4th or 5th person present (that he was aware of).
Last edited:
At this point, if I’m the prosecution, I’d call him as a rebuttal witness at this point concerning the roadside deal and maybe he goes off on what he knows about Moselle. Maybe enough jurors believe some of what he says and that gets you at least a hung jury and possible retrial. Worse case with a hung jury is the cloud of suspicion is still hanging over Alex head.
Not that it matters buy my original post read "that was a big moment"
I implied nothing.
You inferred the rest.
Why is the defense on the hook to prove innocence? It's the job of the prosecution to prove his guilt. Not trying to be an ass and I do think he is involved BUT I just have not seen enough evidence that points me in the direction of saying "Alex for sure did this". Also it is not the defense teams job to find the killer.
I just would want to see ONE piece of evidence that locked him in. Anything, like gun residue on hand, blood spatter, a text saying the job is done, some physical evidence showing there was a fight between the son and dad, evidence that the guns used were AM’s and they were locked away where only he could access them, video evidence, or just about anything else. I just don’t think it’s completely out of the realm of reality that someone waited just to kill the kid, out of anger/vengeance. It’s not much different than the housekeeper situation honestly. So many, many signs point to Alex having something to do with that? Yes! Will he be found guilty? Hard to see that happening right now.
Last night some of us were sitting around and talking about this while my son-in-law was out side in the cold feeding horses. I brought up the scenario that what if one of the neighbors was killed right now. The cops could try to say my son-in-law did it because we didn’t see him And we certainly didn’t know what he was doing for those few minutes. However, it’s hard to see the motives, there would be no physical evidence, and you could really craft the timeline and the events to tell many different stories. Unless I am missing some thing, I have yet to hear a fantastic reason as to why AM would take out his son. If he did do that, I suspect the wife was collateral damage at a slightly later time due to her running out and getting involved or something.
Jurors are instructed to begin a trial assuming there is reasonable doubt. The prosecution must build the case and present evidence to take it over that threshold. It seems like most on here have it completely backwards. so far, they have shown that he is a huge cheat and liar so (like Michael Cohen, for example) anything he says going forward has to basically be ignored. If I am on that jury, i am basically ignoring 100% of what Murdaugh says - it’s meaningless. Instead, i would be laser focused on the timeline, evidence presented, and testimony supporting the prosecution (outside of AM). In my heart, i would want to find him guilty but I would have to have something very logical to hang that on, not just “gut feel” or hatred for AM.
A guilty verdict sits on their conscience? RUKM? Dad blows his troublesome son’s head off and shoots the wife who is on the verge of auditing finances and divorcing him and you think a a rational person who voted guilty is going to have trouble with his/her conscience? Excuse me?
Who feels guilty about trying to assure this thoroughly bad man is locked up in the interests of justice?
Alex Murdaugh has not given anyone a second thought in a very long time. The jury that votes him guilty should feel as proud as any soldier who ever served the USA. I hope we can recognize such jurors at a Clemson football game.
When In the trial did they show she was about to divorce him?
You must be one of the people alex cheated and stole from. You have brought way too much emotion into this. You’re adding things into your thinking that haven’t been shown in trial.
It was originally but two dropped off for Covid and were replaced with 2 alternates and do not know how it stands now
Original jury was also 10 caucasians and 2 blacks
Not only did Waters ask him, he threw it back in his face, proved that his reasons were made up later, and rubbed his lying face in it.
It was the best moment of “drama” in the entire trial.
Well has certainly not been mentioned.....She was living separate from him at the beach house
Yes particularly with how much he interacted with them over his career and the fact Alex had a badge and used it when convenient. they showed him wearing it at the hospital after the boat accident and acting like he was law enforcement.
The Murdaughs ran the county — and had for one hundred years.
But he said he was scared of law enforcement?
Heck, he was acting all chummy and “howyadoing” with them just minutes after they arrived at the murder scene.
Hey Tom, read any post I’ve made here - I think he is guilty and that it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I’m commenting on the jury “of his peers.” How a juror votes can be impacted by evidence, courtroom showmanship, personal emotion, and more.
So yes, someone who is on the fence and borderline convinced based on the trial itself (look at this thread for how wide opinions can vary) may ultimately decide based on their own emotion or the weight they perceive they’d carry. Especially having been swooned by a narcissist on the stand.
A trial this long, this intense, with the crimes and charges this hard are, I guarantee every single juror is emotionally invested and impacted. And they’d rather not be, but they weren’t given a choice. I’m speaking from experience having sat on a jury for6 days for a case that was extremely hard to stomach.
They aren’t. I would submit that the prosecution has presented enough evidence that he is guilty. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum. The defense attempts to constantly raise credible doubts about the evidence and then even call their own witnesses, it is very much a see saw type of thing In reality.
I don’t view this as a slam dunk case from a technical point of view, I view it overwhelmingly against the defendant because of the volume of evidence of him being at the crime scene, lied about being there at the time of the murder, he is a thief and stole millions. This crime, had he succeeded, would likely have prevented that theft from being uncovered, which i believe was the original goal. Weapons used were his, science says they are and they are missing. Clothes he was wearing from that day are missing. You know i have never lost an entire set of clothes including shoes, I don’t know anyone who has.
It is the defenses job to raise credible doubts to the evidence supporting AM’s guilt. I don’t believe they have and the fact they can’t says something to me.
All valid points. I think the defense's angle of pill addiction is going to cause some pause for several jurors. We all have addiction within our circle, be it family or friends. I think that sympathy avenue could play a big role in a vote or 2 of not guilty.
