Mags also sent Paw Paw a text to that effect and then he asked what was for dinner…
⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️
- Thread starter OldMTPTiger
- Start date
You are ignoring the evidence presented in this trial. Yes, there is a reasonable argument that Owen lied to grand jury. Yes, defense will use that. Yes, their use of that information may well be effective with the jury. But Alex has been charged with murder and here he sits.
Evidence in a criminal trial can arrive at any time, even during trial. The fact that onstar data arrived late is not relevant. And the state requested it long long ago. Do you disagree with that?
You say "take those away and I can't possibly see how anyone could indict..." This almost leads me to believe you are trolling. The state had proof Alex was there at 8:45, lied about that, and extremely strong evidence they died at 8:49. That is going to bring charges every time, as it damn well should. Let the jury decide.
Name you one circumstance, I know who did it and I’m messed up real bad with them. If I tell what I really know I risk the rest of my family dying or myself. Further more. It’s not my job to connect the dots. It’s the states job to connect them for me.
That makes no sense. If that bad guy has killed 66.66% of your family, what incentive do you have to keep quiet? You are grasping at straws to keep from convicting. You are being contrarian for entertainment, or trolling.
It's not your job to connect the dots? Are you arguing that a juror is not expected to use his or her brain? This is laughable.
It is the states job to connect the dots for you? Really? I thought you were in the cheap seats here on TI like the rest of us.
You have now posted the following two statements in this thread:
"I don't care that Alex lied."
"It's not my job to connect the dots."
You are not credible.
Of course I have. You find it, print it here and then you can attack the source. It is not my job to even show you the dots much less connect them for you.
(My snarky tone is not personal, btw. That's just how this particular medium works.)
Sure you have. Keep it a secret from us.
There could be someone on that jury just like me. You don’t know. Which is why I have said hung jury.
How many calls, texts, web browsers opened did Alex make before calling Buster after 911. Im thinking he waited quite a while before calling his only living son and letting him know someone just brutally murdered his family.
Defense has Donna Maddox on their witness list. She is a psychiatrist who commonly works with defense attorneys on mental health issues. Wonder if they will call her?
I know some have mentioned hand of one/hand of all, but the jury will not get an instruction on that as there has been no testimony from either side concerning accomplice liability.
Imagine where this case is if they couldnt get into Paul’s phone. Without Paul’s phone, Alex is probably still denying that he was down at the kennels.
Defense has Donna Maddox on their witness list. She is a psychiatrist who commonly works with defense attorneys on mental health issues. Wonder if they will call her?
I know some have mentioned hand of one/hand of all, but the jury will not get an instruction on that as there has been no testimony from either side concerning accomplice liability.
Imagine where this case is if they couldnt get into Paul’s phone. Without Paul’s phone, Alex is probably still denying that he was down at the kennels.
You don’t represent the facts in the case truthfully at all.
They knew he was lying about the murders early in the investigation. There were significant differences in the things Alex said between all 3 interviews he willing gave to SLED. Had evidence long before the grand jury was every convened for this that he was lying and there was plenty enough evidence to get an indictment.
The thing Owens lied about was the type of shot in the shot gun in other guns found in the house. The difference between bird shot and buck shot. It was not significant in the grand scheme of things and I suspect it was simply an oversight, but maybe it wasn’t. Regardless, it doesn’t matter to the case at all. It is not a “major piece of evidence” in this case as you assert.
The Murdaugh’s ran a hunting lodge, they hunted year round for about everything and anything you could hunt. So they had all types of ammunition for every occasion on site.
You state the “only other piece of significant evidence was only brought to the state’s attention during the trial.“ That is simply not true.
The state received the evidence during the trial but had asked for it many many months prior. GM was subpoenaed for the data they had on AM’s car and they did not respond with the data. They either sent very little or basically said they didn’t have anything a long time ago.
This is what the State expected (apparently it is well known that the car companies don’t respond to these things very well or very often) so the state had the black box essentially hacked to extract the data with the help of the FBI i believe.
Only after the trial had started and is gathering national attention and it is stated in the media that GM refused to respond, which is what was said in court, did they all the sudden produce on star data that corroborated the data the state already had. The on star data was much more detailed and gave them speed and other things they didn’t have.
The on star data aligned perfectly with the extracted data from the black box as well as the cell phone data they already had. It bolstered the existing evidence and was one more source showing Alex lied repeatedly.
You basically act like there were only two pieces of major information in the entire case that was presented to the grand jury and one was lied about and the other came after the fact and was “stumbled on”. Both of your assertions are misrepresentations of the truth.
This just furthers my opinion that you are troll or contrarian and have no real care about the truth of this case at all.
Do you have red hair?
I am curious about two things. One, would the dogs barking make enough noise to be heard from the house? There was a lot said about the gunshot, but it seems the dogs would have been barking continuously because of the gun shots. Also, if someone was waiting To shoot Paul and took out Maggie, why was Alex not shot too.
Seriously not trolling at all. I’m giving my honest opinion of the case and where I would stand as an actual juror on this case.
If Maggie wasn't looking for a divorce, maybe it was just in the heat of the moment. Maybe Maggie & Paul had found his pills and took them. Maybe they took a LARGE amount of drugs that was part of a drug deal and could cost him a lot of money or would cause some very bad people come after him.
I don't know, but I don't need to know any of that to think he is guilty beyond a reasonable guilt. That's just me. The gun evidence (that they were guns from his hunt club) and the cell & gps evidence putting him at the scene 2-3 minutes before they were killed is enough for me. There are a lot of unanswered questions, but I don't need those answered.
Last edited:
If you found one, provide a link. I don't care but this "you google it" is just so stupid. And pretty common here in many threads.
So if you deliberated right now, you'd tell the other 11 jurors "I don't care that Alex lied, and it's not my job to connect the dots." And you'd dig in. Got it.
That's not important to me. If I just found my wife dead I would be pretty messed up. It might take me awhile to call her son (my step-son) to tell him she was gone.
As has been mentioned, if he was knowingly "involved" in the murders he is guilty in SC. He does not have to physically pull the trigger to be guilty. How can he be involved without being guilty?
So if after your neighbor was murdered, your son told the police he was no there(at your/their house) even though you knew he was, the clothes you saw him wearing when he went out were missing, and his gun was used in the murder you would think he had nothing to do with it?
I have no idea aboit barking...probably depends on factors such as wind direction, etc.
Playing devil's advocate, if AM is killed the bad guys source of money is gone...not that I believe that scenario is reality.
I know you're a troll, but
You don't even care a teeny little bit about his lie? It wouldn't even be a factor?
Last edited:
And it was mentioned incorrectly. That is not true in sc. The jury has not and will not be read in on “a hand of one is a hand of all” because evidence of that fact has not been introduced. There would have to be evidence of a co conspirators .
Accessory, accessory after the fact and murder are all 3 different charges. Of which the state only charged him with the last one.
When people say SC doesn’t differentiate, they are talking about 1st degree and second degree as it pertains to premeditation.
And I answered. I would dig my heels in on what I believed which I have made very clear. At least I think so. My verdict would be not guilty as a juror.
This is a good point I have not thought about. It seems likely the dogs would be going nuts. He possibly could have heard them while in the house, but almost certainly would have when walking to his car. Why not go see what the dogs are raising hell about when he leaves at 9:06? This is an interesting point.
You are trolling.
You have said you don't care about Alex's lie, that it's not your job to connect the dots, and that you would refuse to deliberate with 11 opposing jurors even when the judge charges the jury that their verdict must be unanimous.
People are making honest posts in this extremely interesting thread, and you're trolling.
My hunting dogs raise bell at deer in the yard. I would probably ignore that as well if it was common for his dogs. Now I have no idea if it was or not .
I’m not saying I wouldn’t have conversation with them. I’m doing that now. And taking in other points. I just haven’t seen anything that changes my verdict. That doesn’t make me a troll. Just because I wouldn’t agree with 11 jurors doesn’t mean I have a duty to change my verdict. You didn’t state that I’m just saying. I’m not sure why me having a different view makes me a troll.
"I don't care about Alex's lie" and "It's not my job to connect the dots" make you a troll. I love to debate, but those two statements aren't reasonable.
And of course, I keep biting. lol
Your definition of reasonable is not logical. There were shells from the murder weapon scattered across different areas of the property. For the murder weapon NOT to be his, you would have to believe that whoever did it, not only used the same type gun AM had, but also decided to run around the property in random areas where the murders were not committed and fired shots in the air for no reason.
My definition of reasonable is not important. I’m speaking from a stand point as if I was on the jury. Therefore the definition is up for me to decide. Again not trolling those are just the facts.
But since you’re telling me my legal definition is wrong, you tell me how he can be found guilty of murder if he didn’t pull a trigger in SC.
Last edited:
You're debating with a person who hasn't seen the evidence presented as a jury would see it. He discusses the case outside of court. His perception of the case has been influenced by media, etc. He's playing by a different set of rules than the jurors are.
