⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️
- Thread starter OldMTPTiger
- Start date
You believe he killed them but you are almost keeping score between the state the defense as if it is a boxing match. You currently have the sate ahead on blows.
There is no burden of proof beyond the individual juror believing that Alex killed them. The belief needs to be based on eliminating a reasonable alternative to his guilt.
If you were to vote not guilty you should be saying I just don't think there is enough evidence to convince me he did it.
My question - if the motive is the issues that developed that same day (found out dad was terminally ill, financial issues, etc.), then that would remove the scenario of someone else doing this. I don't see it being realistic that he was able to call someone, get their buy-in, and plan a murder of 2 close family members in a matter of hours. That would have taken more thought/time and likely would have been more well thought out.
I think the independent disgruntled person is more likely than a planned murder set up by Alex. I think all signs point to Alex pulling the trigger, which still has plenty of question marks.
The jury will deliberate through the weekend. it's undetermined if they will be sequestered once they begin deliberations.
Totally respect your desire to keep an open mind and give the defendant some benefit of doubt. That's what the jury should do.
But in the end, if you believe he's guilty: he's guilty. The state must have presented enough information to get you to that point.
The state can't present evidence it doesn't have. Not having it may not be the state's fault. It just may not exist.
Last edited:
You started with "my question-" but then never asked it. What is your question?
An "independent disgruntled person" is possible, I suppose. But highly unlikely. Keep in mind that if you were to believe this person committed the murders, then you'd have to believe they attempted to frame Alex by using his 300 blackout. But then, why did they take the gun with them? They would've left it by Maggie.
it still boggles my mind how you could blow through as much money as AM did during all this, in this amount of time
And claim in court not to know where it went.
Is it wrong to hope for at least a hung jury to see Mandy Matney's head explode?
Good lord I tried to listen to her podcast with her, Liz something or other and an attorney Eric Bland. Even when they are right, they are worse than Baghdad Bob.
Good lord I tried to listen to her podcast with her, Liz something or other and an attorney Eric Bland. Even when they are right, they are worse than Baghdad Bob.
I don't think he did. I think that money is sitting in an offshore account somewhere.
Because, although these disgruntled people were able to come in and out without leaving a trace of dna or tracks, they also came unprepared (didn’t even bring guns for goodness sakes). So, being unprepared like they were, they knew they would find guns to do the job, but didn’t bring gloves and didn’t want their fingerprints on those guns discovered.
It’s obvious!!
"How does AM keep the hamster wheel going?"
"He steals"
Method One: "He steals. Anyway he can"
😅
"He steals"
Method One: "He steals. Anyway he can"
😅
And 36% of today’s society could see a video of the murder and would still doubt.
Should've let our guy Tinsley run this closing Waters is dropping his name/testimony so much.
Closing did not start out as strong as I had hoped but it still was not awful if I am a juror
-It proved that Alex cares about himself, his money, his lifestyle and the family legacy. All of those things were about to go away and he would do anything to protect himself including murder
-They proved that lying and deceit came natural to him. He could do it without missing a beat
-The timeline shows he was out of time and the only way to fix it was to create a major distraction to take the attention off him and to keep the boat case from happening that was about to destroy the things that mattered most to him. And because of the case, Paul and Maggie likely now knew about the financial troubles and were going to have to endure it. So if they are gone, he gets more time, more money, and everyone feels sorry for him and he starts conning them again.
Now they have to do a good job going through the timeline and making the jury believe that there was no way anyone else could have been on that property and he was the only one at the kennel. That is the tricky part especially because of the rain and the hose pipe situation that the area could have had others footprints washed away but I do not think the defense can prove that he was not at least with the killers.
He was there...there is absolutely zero way he could have found bodies, checked pulse, tried to roll Maggie over, and made the 9-1-1 call in less than 20 seconds seconds with no blood on his hands
There is no way it is coincidence that he slowed down at the exact spot that the phone was found and then sped up immediately after.
There is no way the murders was coincidentally within minutes of him being at the kennels
There is no way he was not making all those phone calls to do anything but cover his ass. And calling Paul's friend that he took the video for was "coincidental" checking to see if he had the video. He was trying to see if it could place him there.
As the prosecutor said, use common sense
He was there, no other suspects, he did not tell just one lie...the entire story that he told multiple times did not have hardly any truth to it. Common sense tells you that all the lies were cover up. He thought he could use the things he loves most: himself, his money, his lifestyle, and his family name to cover it up and no one would dig deep enough to make him a suspect but they did and then the lies started unraveling one after another after another
To me, I am voting guilty heading into the rest of this trial if I am on jury and have zero problem with it because he did it, hired someone to do it, or knows who did it.
-It proved that Alex cares about himself, his money, his lifestyle and the family legacy. All of those things were about to go away and he would do anything to protect himself including murder
-They proved that lying and deceit came natural to him. He could do it without missing a beat
-The timeline shows he was out of time and the only way to fix it was to create a major distraction to take the attention off him and to keep the boat case from happening that was about to destroy the things that mattered most to him. And because of the case, Paul and Maggie likely now knew about the financial troubles and were going to have to endure it. So if they are gone, he gets more time, more money, and everyone feels sorry for him and he starts conning them again.
Now they have to do a good job going through the timeline and making the jury believe that there was no way anyone else could have been on that property and he was the only one at the kennel. That is the tricky part especially because of the rain and the hose pipe situation that the area could have had others footprints washed away but I do not think the defense can prove that he was not at least with the killers.
He was there...there is absolutely zero way he could have found bodies, checked pulse, tried to roll Maggie over, and made the 9-1-1 call in less than 20 seconds seconds with no blood on his hands
There is no way it is coincidence that he slowed down at the exact spot that the phone was found and then sped up immediately after.
There is no way the murders was coincidentally within minutes of him being at the kennels
There is no way he was not making all those phone calls to do anything but cover his ass. And calling Paul's friend that he took the video for was "coincidental" checking to see if he had the video. He was trying to see if it could place him there.
As the prosecutor said, use common sense
He was there, no other suspects, he did not tell just one lie...the entire story that he told multiple times did not have hardly any truth to it. Common sense tells you that all the lies were cover up. He thought he could use the things he loves most: himself, his money, his lifestyle, and his family name to cover it up and no one would dig deep enough to make him a suspect but they did and then the lies started unraveling one after another after another
To me, I am voting guilty heading into the rest of this trial if I am on jury and have zero problem with it because he did it, hired someone to do it, or knows who did it.
Wolf Gourmet 4-Slice Extra-Wide Slot Toaster with Shade Selector, Bagel and Defrost Settings, Silver Knobs with Black Knob Accessories, Stainless Steel (WGTR124SR)
Visit the WOLF GOURMET Store4.6 out of 5 stars 455 ratings
Amazon'sChoicein Toasters by WOLF GOURMET
Only $479
@Cris_Ard
Aren't you the guy who embarrassed himself yesterday and said you weren't coming back till after the verdict?
either way, yes that close so far is very brutal for Alex. Waters knows that if one or two jurors are having a problem with anything, it is motive.
Agree with nearly all of this, except it's the defense who needs to explain the hose. The hose hurts Alex. And no way he hired it. He would've been long gone from scene. He may be a sociopath, but he is not stupid.
we needed the A Few Good Men Tom Cruise when Alex was on the stand...
Anyone that doesn't believe Dale about that hose is a fool imo.
my point was strictly that it could have been used for clean up as well as eliminating additional footprints
I still truly believe it was 100% Alex and he knew the hose had to be put away because it always was. Just didnt know how to do it
Don't disagree w that. Things I know for 100,Dale stored that hose like it was his job. Bc it was.
I agree. The important thing is getting justice for Paul and Maggie. This is a circumstantial case, so there is no video, bloody fingerprints on a gun, etc.. If one believes that Alex is guilty based on what they have heard or seen, they should vote guilty. Letting Alex go for lack of a video showing him pull the trigger is not justice.
There are so many things that have been presented, including Alex being there within minutes of the murder and lying about it from the start, I would have no problem voting guilty. To me, the evidence that he is guilty is overwhelming. The defense's argument that the shooter was absolutely 5' 2"ish and therefor it couldn't have been Alex, is extremely weak. Moving the shooter backward or forward on the path of the bullet they are using changes the height. Saying they knew exactly where the shooter stood based on where the shells landed when they are scattered over a larger area, is extremely flawed.
The two shooter argument doesn't hold water for me either. If Alex left his phone at the house to hide his tracks, it is a no brainer to use two guns to make it look like there were multiple shooters. And the fact that the guns have been proven to be family guns does not line up with hired shooters or vigilantes, especially since they took the guns with them.
Paul and Maggie are dead. Vigilantes and hired "guns" makes zero sense due to the guns that were used and their disappearance. What other option is there other than Alex, who is documented to have been standing next to Paul and Maggie within minutes of their death?
Voting not guilty because of a need for absolutes is not delivering justice, especially if there is no conceivable alternative for not guilty. There is too much evidence here for there to be a third, IDK therefor not-guilty option.
Power = Money = Influence in local, state and federal venues and not in this type of scenario.
When a career politician leaves office having been paid a civil servant's wage but has millions in the bank post service, it begs the question how those funds were earned? What did the politician "sell/exchange"?
The system is disgusting to honest people. The system is embraced by those who leverage it for their own legal/illegal purposes.
I did not realize Alex's super black eagle 1 12gauge is missing. Ouch.
Exactly. That is what it was used for.
And a random killer wouldn't have put the hose back up. He has no reason to.
