⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️
- Thread starter OldMTPTiger
- Start date
The defense keeps stating that a father couldn't logically kill his wife and kids like that. My question is which of his actions made logical sense during that time?
He had been scamming people out of millions. He was a drug addict. He "staged" his own suicide. His story has reportedly changed. This was desperate man. Where is the logic in an attorney with extensive knowledge of the legal system doing any of that?
Id like to know where cousin Eddie was at the time. Real logic would suggest the guy willing to "shoot" AM would also be willing to shoot his family if asked.
He had been scamming people out of millions. He was a drug addict. He "staged" his own suicide. His story has reportedly changed. This was desperate man. Where is the logic in an attorney with extensive knowledge of the legal system doing any of that?
Id like to know where cousin Eddie was at the time. Real logic would suggest the guy willing to "shoot" AM would also be willing to shoot his family if asked.
You could use that argument in most murder cases. He sounds guilty to me.
I will say that I don’t feel the prosecutor is as professional as Harpootlian. Maybe I’m just never in a courtroom but it seems he relied too much on theatrics and emotional appeal instead of reason. Is that normal? Just seems like you said and that he doesn’t have the hard evidence he needs
Yeah that was the one area I thought Harpootlian slipped up. Said his car was a couple hundred yards away. You’re hearing all those gunshots from a couple hundred yards and not just “leaving to check on ma”
Went to high school with him. Haven't seen him since. I wish him luck.
He sounds guilty to me but that’s because I listened to the news media. That’s what they do. I’ve never heard the news media defend any citizen. They do that to politicians they like, not citizens.
But that was before I heard the defenses opening statements. Now im not sure.
It’s weird how we trust the media when we want to. Wild just how much persuasion they have over the public. 2020 showed us that, I guess.
Going in, thought he was guilty and shouldn’t be long at trial. Now, I don’t know. Going to have a hard time proving he did it. Otherwise, he’s presumed innocent.
But that was before I heard the defenses opening statements. Now im not sure.
It’s weird how we trust the media when we want to. Wild just how much persuasion they have over the public. 2020 showed us that, I guess.
Going in, thought he was guilty and shouldn’t be long at trial. Now, I don’t know. Going to have a hard time proving he did it. Otherwise, he’s presumed innocent.
Wasn't it you that posted just yesterday that you had no idea that this case was even going on? Now you're giving editorial opinions? LOL
Seems like there was little to no coverage of the trial today on cable news or broadcast tv. I know there were several options on streaming platforms and channels but nothing on cable. Shocking to me. I thought opening statements would have been covered live by cable news but apparently not. So this trial will not be as big as OJ…
He used the timeline of him supposedly only having 12 mins to get from the scene, changed, in his car and leaving. Don’t remember him ever implying they were murdered after he left but I could’ve missed it.
That twelve mins is the time between her phone going silent and his text to her saying he’s leaving
Thanks to all for today’s commentary.
I think it is interesting that some people do not think the CFP selection process is a good enough method to pick the right 4 teams to decide the National Champion in football. And yet most of us are ok with a jury of peers deciding guilt or innocence in a murder trial.
I think it is interesting that some people do not think the CFP selection process is a good enough method to pick the right 4 teams to decide the National Champion in football. And yet most of us are ok with a jury of peers deciding guilt or innocence in a murder trial.
I misconstrued one of your previous posts about never hearing of the family before, my apologies.No, different guy. LoL Good try though
Just say you disagree
Please carry on with any editorial you wish! lol
Hard to see the ballistics bit, his location at the time of the murders, and his alleged tweaking of the story and not conclude that AM at least had something to do with it.
Also will be interesting to hear about AMs phone calls on the way to and from his mother's house. Was it common for him to be on the phone the entire trip to his mother's? Were the conversations typical or out of character?
Also will be interesting to hear about AMs phone calls on the way to and from his mother's house. Was it common for him to be on the phone the entire trip to his mother's? Were the conversations typical or out of character?
He orchestrated a blatantly fake armed robbery of himself in which he suffered a gunshot wound scratch. I’d say he is very much a bumbling idiot.
Ukraine needs a few more billions. That’s what I saw on the news today. Oh, and we’re sending tanks to help as well.
Outside of that and the guy who investigated Trump for Russian collusion being arrested for actually colluding with Russia himself, nothing else much was covered.
I'm really surprised so many people think he may get off after hearing more evidence. All 12 assume he was guilty when they got there, every juror has heard of this case, and now we find out he took detailed steps to try to cover his tracks. If innocent, why was he trying to cover anything up?
Last edited:
I know, I’m joking. I don’t know what to think.l other than I was 99% sure this dude did it until I heard the defense. Now I’m not sure.
I have no idea and have not followed anything at all since he was arrested. I just felt like that was it and he was done. Now, here I am back in this crap and I have no clue. But I’m trying to “presume innocence” and that’s not common actually. But it’s what they swear under oath to do.
Wild for sure
He’s guilty of a lot of things it seems. To me, they painted the picture it’s going to be hard to prove that he’s guilty of killing his family in that manner, in that time frame and never had any notice of it. No GSR, nothing on his clothes, searched his house the night of. Two different guns used in a very short time and no sign of either. No witnesses. Its not impossible that he didn’t do it either. Seems to be the same amount of evidence.
That’s pretty tough
The justice ⚖️ system works only if the constitutional protections are followed. I think we have a fair judge, the attorneys are ready, and the process appears to work. The jury decides the facts, the judge applies the law, and the outcome is to be determined. I'd want nothing more or less for AM than I'd want for myself if ever I'm indicted.
He had help it seems but still did it.
Just to be clear, this is just a trial for the murders correct? None of the financial stuff is included?
Innocent people don’t have to change their alibi.
That’s going to make it hard for the prosecutor to use as motive. Of course that’s all conjecture as well
Don’t see him getting anything worse than 2nd degree. Nothing presented thus far says it was premeditated
With any trial you go through there is lots of evidence and many witnesses and then the judge instructs the jury. This is where a lot of folks walk. After the judge defines "reasonable doubt" that's the easy way out for some jurors to vote not guilty and the defense just needs ONE juror to hold on to that failed logic for a hung jury.
The problem is you can't find 12 people who agree on the definition of reasonable doubt.
The problem is you can't find 12 people who agree on the definition of reasonable doubt.
Last edited:
