Did he not use that to imply he washed the golf cart off or was I going crazy and heard stuff.
⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️
- Thread starter OldMTPTiger
- Start date
If he had splatter on his clothes, he would get it on the cart riding back.
Probably washed himself and golf cart using it. But the timeline of it being on the ground while the video putting him at the scene of the crime within 2 minutes of killing his family doesn't mean much to me. Anybody, save the big fella who called the dog tappy toes, could have put it up,
Not if he changed before he got in it. he could have ridden nekkid for all we know. Remember, he told Marian the killer planned it for a long time.
I honestly thought about him riding naked but it’s also unlikely the blood would be on the rear to even get in the cart.
Splatter on the cart wouldn't mean AM shot them...just that there was residue on the cart.
He had the time until 906 when he left
he had an additional 4-5 minutes at house when he arrived back from M’s before going to look for them - WHY NOT GO STRAIGHT TO KENNELS?
he also had about 15-20 minutes while they responded to his 10:06 - 911 call -
Because you would expect them to be back at the house by then. I’m not saying I wouldn’t have gone by there in my way out but I most assuredly wouldn’t on the way back. I would go to the house expecting them to be there.
Few random observations regarding Alex's testimony.
Golf cart:
May have missed it but I don't think it was ever established how Paul and Maggie got to the kennels that night. What was established through various witnesses was that it was rare for any of them to walk to the kennels. It was almost always car/truck, golf cart, or bicycle (for Maggie).
I think the lack of transportation at the kennels may be telling. Would Paul and Maggie have walked right past the golf cart and walked to the kennels? (Alex testified always sat/charged by the front steps and I believe he said in at least one of the interviews that he didn't know how they got down there.) It's another piece of the story that doesn't make sense.
it seems more likely that Paul, Maggie and Alex rode on the golf cart together to the kennels. And if they rode together, would Alex have taken the golf cart himself and left Maggie/Paul down there?
Bubba/Edisto:
I believe Alex testified that Maggie was planning to return to Moselle the night of the murders, and was never planning on staying the night in Edisto because she didn't take Bubba the dog with her.
I question that for a few reasons:
1. Maggie was getting some work done at the Edisto house that day. I believe remodeling or redecorating.
2. I believe Maggie had one or more appointments in Charleston that day.
3. Bubba was a kennel dog
A kennel dog in the house with contractors or decorators is not what I would do if I had other options. A kennel dog in the house while I'm away at appointments is not what I would do if I had other options.
Even if Maggie usually took Bubba with her to Edisto for overnight stays, the circumstances of this Edisto trip seem less than ideal for that to have happened.
Kennels:
To this day, Alex is clearly agitated about having to go to the kennels that evening to help Maggie/Paul with whatever they needed help with. He mentioned that it's always chaos at the kennels and confirmed it was that evening too. He testified that he got in and out of there because of the chaos forcing him to work. Maybe nothing to that but it stuck out to me that what the kennels were a sore spot for Alex even prior to the murders. I thought Waters had Alex on the ropes here when the judge ordered a break.
Alex's new alibi:
AM is a story teller. That is apparent in his telling of the new alibi. He goes into great detail in certain spots. He spoke of the exact spots Paul and Maggie were standing when he arrived at the kennels. He spoke in detail of how Bubba was proud when he caught a chicken and would prance around and show off. He also spoke in detail about how Bubba would get chickens as a game but not to kill, and how he would get Bubba to release a chicken, and how he would put the chicken up so it could 'come to'.
The details of those parts of the story are in contrast to the lack of details provided from when him left the kennels to when he left the house to go visit his mom. He 'got out of there'. He couldn't recall generally what he said to Paul and Maggie before driving to golf cart back to the house. He couldn't recall generally what he was doing while taking all those steps at the house. He couldn't recall what 'getting ready' entailed.
As Waters hit on, Alex had all the details for the parts of the new alibi that were convenient to his story, but nothing in the parts that were not.
If I'm on the jury, I'm couldn't give much weight to Alex's testimony. He's proven to be non credible.
Golf cart:
May have missed it but I don't think it was ever established how Paul and Maggie got to the kennels that night. What was established through various witnesses was that it was rare for any of them to walk to the kennels. It was almost always car/truck, golf cart, or bicycle (for Maggie).
I think the lack of transportation at the kennels may be telling. Would Paul and Maggie have walked right past the golf cart and walked to the kennels? (Alex testified always sat/charged by the front steps and I believe he said in at least one of the interviews that he didn't know how they got down there.) It's another piece of the story that doesn't make sense.
it seems more likely that Paul, Maggie and Alex rode on the golf cart together to the kennels. And if they rode together, would Alex have taken the golf cart himself and left Maggie/Paul down there?
Bubba/Edisto:
I believe Alex testified that Maggie was planning to return to Moselle the night of the murders, and was never planning on staying the night in Edisto because she didn't take Bubba the dog with her.
I question that for a few reasons:
1. Maggie was getting some work done at the Edisto house that day. I believe remodeling or redecorating.
2. I believe Maggie had one or more appointments in Charleston that day.
3. Bubba was a kennel dog
A kennel dog in the house with contractors or decorators is not what I would do if I had other options. A kennel dog in the house while I'm away at appointments is not what I would do if I had other options.
Even if Maggie usually took Bubba with her to Edisto for overnight stays, the circumstances of this Edisto trip seem less than ideal for that to have happened.
Kennels:
To this day, Alex is clearly agitated about having to go to the kennels that evening to help Maggie/Paul with whatever they needed help with. He mentioned that it's always chaos at the kennels and confirmed it was that evening too. He testified that he got in and out of there because of the chaos forcing him to work. Maybe nothing to that but it stuck out to me that what the kennels were a sore spot for Alex even prior to the murders. I thought Waters had Alex on the ropes here when the judge ordered a break.
Alex's new alibi:
AM is a story teller. That is apparent in his telling of the new alibi. He goes into great detail in certain spots. He spoke of the exact spots Paul and Maggie were standing when he arrived at the kennels. He spoke in detail of how Bubba was proud when he caught a chicken and would prance around and show off. He also spoke in detail about how Bubba would get chickens as a game but not to kill, and how he would get Bubba to release a chicken, and how he would put the chicken up so it could 'come to'.
The details of those parts of the story are in contrast to the lack of details provided from when him left the kennels to when he left the house to go visit his mom. He 'got out of there'. He couldn't recall generally what he said to Paul and Maggie before driving to golf cart back to the house. He couldn't recall generally what he was doing while taking all those steps at the house. He couldn't recall what 'getting ready' entailed.
As Waters hit on, Alex had all the details for the parts of the new alibi that were convenient to his story, but nothing in the parts that were not.
If I'm on the jury, I'm couldn't give much weight to Alex's testimony. He's proven to be non credible.
even if they haven’t answered any calls or texts since AM left the house?
and he knew they weren’t at house when he left
you touch on something that may be telling or may just be words
AM’s use of “chaos” in testimony and also when talking to SLED in statement 1 or 2
AM’s use of “fooling” with the dogs - says it multiple times
Chaos and Fooling are derogatory in nature
Chaos is appropriate when talking about the scene of the murders for someone who happens upon it - but the specific use of those words for someone shows a TELL
The devil is in the details and their are many words to use but he relies on similar words in an awkward way
who knows but just a riveting look at the fall of man
AM said he thought Paul took the truck. There were apparently several vehicles that were “farm trucks” that were used for work and those would be used to ride around the property. They had a white F250 i think, is what he said Paul used.
I am not so sure Maggie didn’t walk. There is some suggestion that after Maggie arrived there was an argument and it was heated, likely over drug use or maybe the large Gucci purchase (or whatever it was). There was a receipt for $1400 or something like that had the purchase circled. Money problems, drug problems, Alex was a boiling mess.
Maggie left to go to the kennels to “get some air” and then Paul followed not long after. Alex said something in either the second or third interview and then caught himself. This is mostly conjecture but could explain how Maggie arrived at the Kennels and then Paul.
Your are correct that AM exhibits almost a step by step recollection for some things and total fuzziness for others. Alex is not a credible person and I would think the Jury can see it.
Numerous people testified that Maggie was not planning to come to Mosselle that night. Her sister said Maggie did not want to go, but she talked her into it. I am sure the fact that AM’s dad was on his death bead had a lot to do with it. Marian said that was her biggest regret, talking Maggie into going.
I think the reason Maggie didn’t take one of the dogs to Edisto is because she was planning to be there for awhile, but that is just a guess.
It is all about context. The entire family was prolific phone users, glued to the ear types. They almost never wouldn’t take a call when the phone rang, didn’t matter what they were doing, they stopped to answer the phone, in the middle of a conversation, deposition, it didn’t matter.
With that context, a number of missed calls would be outside the normal expected response and should present some cause for concern. Maybe not a 4 alarm fire or anything, but enough to exit past the kennels on the way to Alameda instead of the main drive. He couldn’t take an extra 30 seconds to stop by and say, hey I am leaving. He called twice with out answer before he left for Alameda, I don’t recall how many times on the way back.
I am the same way. I spend almost 8 hours a day looking at my phone according to it. I miss calls and go an hour sometimes and don’t pick it up. And yea even while carrying in conversations. That’s not unheard of or abnormal.
They live in the middle of no where
this isn’t the city
there was constant communication between them and possibly a plan for Maggie to go with him
Even if your logic is mainstream, When he got back from Almeda then why did it take so long to leave the house to go down to Kennels?
I appreciate your banter because this is what could happen with 1/12 or more jurors
I’m even more confident in guilty now. Cellphone data has him at the scene of the crime when the victims phones lock for the final time. The murder weapons have been proven to belong to the Murdaugh family.
No one broke into the family home to ‘borrow’ murder weapons in order to murder everyone except Alec. Hes still alive and unharmed while being at the scene.
Theres my position.
No one broke into the family home to ‘borrow’ murder weapons in order to murder everyone except Alec. Hes still alive and unharmed while being at the scene.
Theres my position.
I think you also have to consider that service was "spotty" per Alex. Why wouldn't he just drive by them instead of calling. There's something deeper to the "missed" calls than them just being missed.
This seems like a good time to repost the Twitter link to the "Churchwell Chart" that someone shared about 45 pages ago.
For anyone that hasn't seen it, this lady, Brandi Churchwell, has a timeline (spreadsheet) that ties together all the data for the cell phones and OnStar and includes notes on what was (or might've been) happening. She's also added notes on the related police interviews and testimony. It's good stuff.
For anyone that hasn't seen it, this lady, Brandi Churchwell, has a timeline (spreadsheet) that ties together all the data for the cell phones and OnStar and includes notes on what was (or might've been) happening. She's also added notes on the related police interviews and testimony. It's good stuff.
so explain why right after the murders he call the guy that Paul sent a video to asking if he got the video. Dude was trying to figure out who had what and who knew what
Which is odd don’t you think? Can you write off some of the things if you didn’t have all the others to point to, sure. But you do have all the other things.
Alex begrudgingly placed himself at the scene even though he tried to create an alibi with leaving his phone at the house, pointing to that and lying for years.
A question for @tigerbean.
Morning sir. I'm curious about something. As this winds down and the jury goes into deliberation, can you give me a window into that process? Some of the posts in this thread are highly detailed and you see a lot of particulars/details that are given weight in evaluation of the case. How sophisticated are those discussions between jurors as they are behind closed doors working on a judgment? How data-driven are they? Are the notes/material/evidence submitted to the court during the trial sitting on a table for all jurors to comb through and discuss and review again piece-by-piece, blow-by-blow?
Morning sir. I'm curious about something. As this winds down and the jury goes into deliberation, can you give me a window into that process? Some of the posts in this thread are highly detailed and you see a lot of particulars/details that are given weight in evaluation of the case. How sophisticated are those discussions between jurors as they are behind closed doors working on a judgment? How data-driven are they? Are the notes/material/evidence submitted to the court during the trial sitting on a table for all jurors to comb through and discuss and review again piece-by-piece, blow-by-blow?
So you think he parked his car at kennels, left it and went to house? Doesn’t make much sense
Video wasn't discovered until Paul's phone was unlocked and AM didn't know it existed until 3rd SLED interview. AM likely saw Paul on the phone and saw when Ro-Ro texted Paul and Maggie after the shootings. AM should have continued his gamble that he was in the clear because it raises eyebrows why AM would be calling Ro-Ro. I wouldn't be calling my kids' friends if I discovered their shot up bodies. I'd stick to MY family and close interpersonal circle. I'd also immediately call Buster and get law enforcement over to guard him.
AM's behavior defies commonsense behavior. He's manufactured the scene and manipulated the situation.
So you're not a believer in the 12 yr old,5'2" vigilantes that showed up for their boat wreck justice with no weapons? Noted.
Haha. In his testimony, he said he was 5’2” when he said he was in the golf cart the entire time
So much unintentional humor in this trial makes it great. Ol boy has lied so many times so often that he thinks he can smooth talk his way out of this.
How about his brothers? Are they crooks too? He was calling them as soon as he left the house. Any reason to believe one or both came over to clean up the scene, grab the guns and clothes? Helping to cover up and not tarnish the family name? Were their phones checked for location, On Star, etc?
I keep hearing about the quadriplegic he stole from but don't have the story on that. Cliffs on it?
Also, anyone have the link to the Water's cross of AM where he catches him in a lie at the end? I've heard it discussed here.
Also, anyone have the link to the Water's cross of AM where he catches him in a lie at the end? I've heard it discussed here.
Very reasonable question.
Randy is an attorney and was on scene very quickly, perhaps eyeing things over and getting in the way.
JM recovered the boat after the boat crash...nuff said
They were both on national TV giving an interview very shortly after the murders, and both have been sitting in trial every day.
Edit: @Cris_Ard to your point about "How could one do this?" It's not conceivable to you or I. But look no further than your avatar to see one way it can be done. To @acmnni1 question, perhaps the hit "had to happen" as decided by the 3 brothers (or dying daddy M) who are to carry on the family legacy. The Murdaugh name carries significantly more weight than marriage or anything else. Maybe "it's just business" and after they looked at the totality of everything in play, the decision was made. After all, it was almost the perfect crime.
Last edited:
Imagine getting 12 people to agree to anything
They technically can’t deliberate until the Judge has “given” them the case
I am sure there are a lot of internal “self-deliberations” going on
Some may convict or acquit on the same fact - it’s again a true study of the behavior of humans
Yes the will have access to ANY piece of evidence
They can also ask for any testimony to be repeated via court transcript (NOT the transcript itself but read to them)
This morning the defense asked if the jury can visit Moselle
He said yes as it is appropriate under the rules
so that will be a logistical hurdle but better than a crime scene in downtown Greenville
AM is hoping for at least one, obviously more, but one is all it takes
I cannot see a not guilty but who knows what these 12 individuals think or value in their minds
