⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️

[syarbor]

Well that would be an incredibly stupid argument for the defense to make. If he had "attempted suicide" by gunshot - whether self inflicted or not - he'd be dead. Alex has been around guns his entire life. Nobody, and no juror, is going to believe that was a suicide attempt.

Motive is unusual here, but that's because we look at it through our own lens of not being a narcissistic sociopath. The prosecution is building a very good case, though I admit they're going too deep into the financials and they risk losing the jury on a lot of the details. Motive is clear if you consider pretty much only the following:

- Seckinger confronted Alex at work on the murder date about the missing $792,000. At this point, Alex knows the jig is up and the walls are closing in. In his own warped sense of reality, he thinks he can still fix everything if he can just buy some more time. He always has.
- Tinsley testifies that he would've discontinued his pursuit of Alex's assets if public perception was that Alex did not commit the killings. Alex knew this very well. He wanted and desperately needed public sympathy.


But forget about motive, because the state doesn't have to prove it anyway. The evidence points to Alex and only to Alex. If we assume Alex is innocent, then we must also assume the following:

1. Someone wanted to kill both Paul AND Maggie. (This pretty much eliminates any boat case vigilante)
2. The killer learned on June 7th that Paul and Maggie were going to be at Moselle that night, when neither of them were primarily staying there.
3. The killer was able to stay out of Alex's view at 8:55, and kill both Maggie and Paul within a maximum of 4 to 5 minutes of Alex leaving their side.
4. Alex left Moselle at 9:06. So they were killed while Alex was at Moselle, but Alex heard no gunshots.
5. Alex wanted Maggie to go with him to his mom's, and even called and texted her before he left. But he didn't ride by the kennels, where he admits Maggie loves to go, because ....?
6. The killer or killers accessed the property (most likely on foot), while carrying two long guns instead of hand guns.
7. The killer wanted to kill Maggie and Paul, but did not wish to kill Alex.
8. If Alex knows the killer, he remains unwilling to tell law enforcement even though the bad guys have already killed his family and he is currently at risk of being convicted of their murders.
9. All of the blackout 300 shell casing evidence testimony is either a huge coincidence, or witness is lying about the casings around Maggie matching other casings on property.
10 Both missing 300 blackouts were stolen but were not reported to law enforcement.
11. Alex lied about his whereabouts leading up to and during the murders because of brain fog maybe? Drugs?
12 Alex called Rogan Gibson 5 times after discovering the bodies, but does not call Buster, because Alex just really likes Rogan Gibson a lot.
13. Alex offers to pay for caretaker's wedding and help her get a better job because he is kind.
14. Alex changed clothes, and shoes, after checking bodies for pulse and handling Paul's phone.
15. Housekeeper lied during testimony about Alex telling her in August 2021 what shirt he was wearing on June 7.
16. It's normal for Alex to visit his invalid mom at 9:30 PM on a Monday for 20 minutes
17. Alex had enjoyed some target shooting that day while wearing the clothes he was in when LE arrived. This left the GSR.
18. The state planted GSR in the blue jacket

Agree.

Also for #3, for AM not to be involved, we must assume that he left the scene almost immediately after the kennel video was taken.

In that video, Alex is saying "come here Bubba" to the dog that had the chicken in its mouth. Alex was in active pursuit but hadn't caught Bubba yet. It did not appear that Maggie was in pursuit of Bubba based on the video. Paul certainly was not.

Keeping in mind, at least one witness testified that Bubba the dog was stubborn with a bird in mouth and often took time to get the dog to release.

Also keeping in mind that we know someone eventually got ahold of Bubba and returned him to his kennel because that's where he was when police arrived. Police video also showed chicken carcass on top of some object and not on the ground where a dog would've left it.

So for AM not to be involved, he would've needed to stop pursuit of Bubba/chicken immediately after the video was taken and return to the house. Maggie and/or Paul would've had to pick up the pursuit of Bubba, had him release the chicken, and return Bubba to his kennel all before their killer showed up.

 

[Tiger Guru]

Just because a jury convicts an innocent person, that doesn't mean the jury "got it wrong." All manner of things can affect the outcome of a trial, including but not limited to lawyer and witness performance and judge's rulings. The jury makes their decision based on the evidence, as best they can. It is a good system, not a perfect system.

The state is proving this case beyond a reasonable doubt, IMO. Some jurors may not convict unless there's video of the killing, and that is their right as a juror. But I would argue that is irresponsible. They are tasked with considering the totality of the evidence and testimony. If they do that here, they will convict.

I agree. It’s an excellent system, the best in the world. It’s not perfect, it just scares the hell out of me to lock someone up that shouldn’t be.

They get it right far more than they get it wrong.

 

[Tiger Guru]

How the heck are all those the jury's fault. There are multiple reasons for this including rogue cops, prosecutors , awful defense and witnesses that misidentify to name a few

Also 925 out of how many trials.

It is a very good system but not perfect. Certainly wish it was but with humans involved mistakes happen

I know. It’s not perfect, I guess just saying it would really weigh heavy on me if I were one of those 11k. That would suck.

 

[castlesl]

I agree with a lot of what you point out, but dang that doesn’t seem like much time to ditch clothes, clean up, and leave no clothing evidence behind.

He didn’t need to clean up anything other than himself. He wasn’t trying to hide the crime scene. Literally probably took all his clothes and shoes off and put them in a garbage bag outside the house. Went in and quickly showered and changed. 10 minutes tops is all he needed. Grabs the garbage bag and wraps guns up in something and throws them all in the car and off he goes.

 

[tigerjimp]

I agree with a lot of what you point out, but dang that doesn’t seem like much time to ditch clothes, clean up, and leave no clothing evidence behind.

He had over an hour to do this. I think it was premeditated, so he also had a plan. An hour is plenty of time.

 

[santee]

I know. It’s not perfect, I guess just saying it would really weigh heavy on me if I were one of those 11k. That would suck.

Certainly would if there are no outside circumstances like I mentioned .

 

[CLEMSON96JDH]

He had over an hour to do this. I think it was premeditated, so he also had a plan. An hour is plenty of time.

How did he have an hour?

 

[santee]

He had over an hour to do this. I think it was premeditated, so he also had a plan. An hour is plenty of time.

Not an hour but he had more than enough time...he is there waiting his chance and would only take a few minutes and then time for a quick shower.

Feel he is guilty and likely premeditated. Laugh at defense saying , well they all seemed to be getting along well as a family minutes before. What the heck does that mean. He is not gonna come in guns blazing. He is gonna be calm and wait for the right moment. This guy is evil and crooked and a master manipulator. That is what the prosecution is bringing out. Also, the whole family dynamics changed over the past few years.

He is also a narcissist. Those who think he could not sink to kill his family are just stupid.

In addition, how many lies has he been caught in/proven in this trial ? If innocent why would he even need to lie? To me his mom's caretaker and his family's helper should have changed anyone with doubts mind. Alex tried to manipulate them and their memories. Certainly stung the defense as they quickly asked for a mistrial.

Now the fact the police allowed her to enter and clean the house the next morning as Alex CALLED her and asked her to do is appalling .

The VOLUME of circumstantial evidence in this trial if people are listening is overwhelming.

 

[Woody1405]

The criticism of the jury system is wrong. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives. If I as a lawyer was operating in a non-jury system I would spend all of my money, time and effort entertaining and golfing with local judges. With juries I can’t do that.

 

[LUV DEM TIGERS]

I’m not making a decision yet, but the prosecution continues to add facts toward his guilty. Hopefully they can tie it all together for the jury is a coherent closing argument.

One thing from today: what sort of vile human leaves their dinner pots and dinner dishes on the stove and in the living room for the housekeeper to clean up the next morning??

You know, when I read that it floored me. But after I thought about it, that just shows how self entitled they were. Hell, if they could have, they would have hired someone to wipe their ass.

 

[ClemsonGentleman]

Just because they stopped using their phones doesn't mean the murders happened immediately. They could have been busy chasing dogs, feeding dogs, cleaning out the dog pens, talking to each other, arguing with Alex, pleading with their assailant/s etc. There could have been a period of time between stopping using their phones and the actual gunshots.

Whatever happened to the rumor of the alleged mistress?

 

[kell9941]

Just because they stopped using their phones doesn't mean the murders happened immediately. They could have been busy chasing dogs, feeding dogs, cleaning out the dog pens, talking to each other, arguing with Alex, pleading with their assailant/s etc. There could have been a period of time between stopping using their phones and the actual gunshots.

Whatever happened to the rumor of the alleged mistress?

Evidently it was just that, a rumor.

 

[Clemblack]

Just because they stopped using their phones doesn't mean the murders happened immediately. They could have been busy chasing dogs, feeding dogs, cleaning out the dog pens, talking to each other, arguing with Alex, pleading with their assailant/s etc. There could have been a period of time between stopping using their phones and the actual gunshots.

Whatever happened to the rumor of the alleged mistress?

Sure, it is possible they were killed later than 8:50. But the evidence shows they were VERY likely killed at that time. Paul was in constant, frequent conversation with multiple people on his phone. Rogan asked Paul to take a video of the dog and send it to him. Paul took the video at 8:45, but never sent it, and never checked another message on his phone after 8:49. Every witness has testified that Paul was always on his phone. Alex himself, when questioned by LE where Paul's phone usually was, responds "in his hand." All of this tells me he's almost certainly dead at 8:50.

The positions of the bodies tells me they never interacted with any assailant. If they did, they'd likely have been executed right beside each other. The evidence shows that Paul was ambushed and completely caught of guard, then Maggie ran and was gunned down. This was not a situation where they were held captive and/or interrogated.

I have seen no evidence of a mistress. But maybe we will.

 

[TopGun01]

If I was on the jury, and starting this case with the legal way of innocent until proven guilty I still haven’t been convinced he did it. Yes some strange things involving him close to the time of death but I still haven’t been pushed over that line that he murdered them. But that’s just me

I've been on a good number of juries. The foreman on 2 rape cases. If the jurors are easily influenced by a strong foreman that believes guilt has indeed been established, then AM's team is in trouble. I think that will be the case. I can't understand how logically anyone sees the defendant as innocent? Regardless of smoking gun, he's lied too many times and his presence at the scene moments before is all I need to know.

 

[JITIGER]

The criticism of the jury system is wrong. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives. If I as a lawyer was operating in a non-jury system I would spend all of my money, time and effort entertaining and golfing with local judges. With juries I can’t do that.

So in a jury system world the best thing to do is have the power to be able to do favors for many people(perhaps through a family member who has significant prosecutorial clout) and help them out of minor legal situations and then when those people happen to be on a jury and the law firm on one side is related to the prosecutor that jury is likely to be more favorable. Additionally if you happen to be a lawyer whose law firm has a history of getting large verdicts then some jurors may think “I am going to award a lot of money to this person, because one day I might be suing someone”. The notion that a jury can’t be tainted is not true.

 

[MisterSlappy]

Well that would be an incredibly stupid argument for the defense to make. If he had "attempted suicide" by gunshot - whether self inflicted or not - he'd be dead. Alex has been around guns his entire life. Nobody, and no juror, is going to believe that was a suicide attempt.

Motive is unusual here, but that's because we look at it through our own lens of not being a narcissistic sociopath. The prosecution is building a very good case, though I admit they're going too deep into the financials and they risk losing the jury on a lot of the details. Motive is clear if you consider pretty much only the following:

- Seckinger confronted Alex at work on the murder date about the missing $792,000. At this point, Alex knows the jig is up and the walls are closing in. In his own warped sense of reality, he thinks he can still fix everything if he can just buy some more time. He always has.
- Tinsley testifies that he would've discontinued his pursuit of Alex's assets if public perception was that Alex did not commit the killings. Alex knew this very well. He wanted and desperately needed public sympathy.


But forget about motive, because the state doesn't have to prove it anyway. The evidence points to Alex and only to Alex. If we assume Alex is innocent, then we must also assume the following:

1. Someone wanted to kill both Paul AND Maggie. (This pretty much eliminates any boat case vigilante)
2. The killer learned on June 7th that Paul and Maggie were going to be at Moselle that night, when neither of them were primarily staying there.
3. The killer was able to stay out of Alex's view at 8:55, and kill both Maggie and Paul within a maximum of 4 to 5 minutes of Alex leaving their side.
4. Alex left Moselle at 9:06. So they were killed while Alex was at Moselle, but Alex heard no gunshots.
5. Alex wanted Maggie to go with him to his mom's, and even called and texted her before he left. But he didn't ride by the kennels, where he admits Maggie loves to go, because ....?
6. The killer or killers accessed the property (most likely on foot), while carrying two long guns instead of hand guns.
7. The killer wanted to kill Maggie and Paul, but did not wish to kill Alex.
8. If Alex knows the killer, he remains unwilling to tell law enforcement even though the bad guys have already killed his family and he is currently at risk of being convicted of their murders.
9. All of the blackout 300 shell casing evidence testimony is either a huge coincidence, or witness is lying about the casings around Maggie matching other casings on property.
10 Both missing 300 blackouts were stolen but were not reported to law enforcement.
11. Alex lied about his whereabouts leading up to and during the murders because of brain fog maybe? Drugs?
12 Alex called Rogan Gibson 5 times after discovering the bodies, but does not call Buster, because Alex just really likes Rogan Gibson a lot.
13. Alex offers to pay for caretaker's wedding and help her get a better job because he is kind.
14. Alex changed clothes, and shoes, after checking bodies for pulse and handling Paul's phone.
15. Housekeeper lied during testimony about Alex telling her in August 2021 what shirt he was wearing on June 7.
16. It's normal for Alex to visit his invalid mom at 9:30 PM on a Monday for 20 minutes
17. Alex had enjoyed some target shooting that day while wearing the clothes he was in when LE arrived. This left the GSR.
18. The state planted GSR in the blue jacket

If this isn’t how the closing agreements go I’m going to be extremely disappointed in the prosecution.

 

[TopGun01]

Not an hour but he had more than enough time...he is there waiting his chance and would only take a few minutes and then time for a quick shower.

Feel he is guilty and likely premeditated. Laugh at defense saying , well they all seemed to be getting along well as a family minutes before. What the heck does that mean. He is not gonna come in guns blazing. He is gonna be calm and wait for the right moment. This guy is evil and crooked and a master manipulator. That is what the prosecution is bringing out. Also, the whole family dynamics changed over the past few years.

He is also a narcissist. Those who think the could not sink to kill his family are just stupid.

In addition, how many lies has he been caught in/proven in this trial ? If innocent why would he even need to lie? To me his mom's caretaker and his family's helper should have changed anyone with doubts mind. Alex tried to manipulate them and their memories. Certainly stung the defense as they quickly asked for a mistrial.

Now the fact the police allowed her to enter and clean the house the next morning as Alex CALLED her and asked her to do is appalling .

The VOLUME of circumstantial evidence in this trial if people are listening is overwhelming.

Narcissist and sociopath pure and simple.

 

[nmerritt11]

If this isn’t how the closing agreements go I’m going to be extremely disappointed in the prosecution.

I hope there are closing agreements on a life sentence

 

[gooddogjudge]

This analysis is pretty damning

 

[TigerBo413]

I've been on a good number of juries. The foreman on 2 rape cases. If the jurors are easily influenced by a strong foreman that believes guilt has indeed been established, then AM's team is in trouble. I think that will be the case. I can't understand how logically anyone sees the defendant as innocent? Regardless of smoking gun, he's lied too many times and his presence at the scene moments before is all I need to know.

Congrats on being selected to be in juries. I’ll continue to keep my opinion since that’s the point. I get he’s lied about some stuff but the state still doesn’t have enough evidence to get me to say yep AM murdered them both. My opinion and that’s all that should matter is that’s it’s my opinion. Could give two shits less if you’ve been on a good number of jury’s.

 

[LUV DEM TIGERS]

Just because they stopped using their phones doesn't mean the murders happened immediately. They could have been busy chasing dogs, feeding dogs, cleaning out the dog pens, talking to each other, arguing with Alex, pleading with their assailant/s etc. There could have been a period of time between stopping using their phones and the actual gunshots.

Whatever happened to the rumor of the alleged mistress?

Maybe I misunderstood but I thought "movement of phone" was what constituted the phones going silent. If an iphone is moving it is "recording" to my understanding. Most people carry their phones in their pockets.

 

[Ole Tom]

What was the motive?

whats the motive? Finances? Why not just file bankruptcy? Sell equity in other busine? of proof of guilt is not “no doubt”. Verdi is iffy until it comes in from the jury. If it looks like a duck……..

Saw a guy interviewed who said he served on a big trial and was taking notes. Judge called him into his quarters and told him to stop. Judge told him while you have you head down writing you are not listening or observing.

this makes alot of sense. IMO best thing the jurors can do is pay attention and then afterwards writ a synopsis the best they can each day

Judge was overreaching in my opinion

 

[Ole Tom]

Congrats on being selected to be in juries. I’ll continue to keep my opinion since that’s the point. I get he’s lied about some stuff but the state still doesn’t have enough evidence to get me to say yep AM murdered them both. My opinion and that’s all that should matter is that’s it’s my opinion. Could give two shits less if you’ve been on a good number of jury’s.

Cocky, huh? I feel sorry for people who are so self satisfied. Stupid comes to mind.

 

[other1]

Does a jury have access to transcripts of the trial or do they just operate by memory alone???

 

[TigerBo413]

Cocky, huh? I feel sorry for people who are so self satisfied. Stupid comes to mind.

I’m not cocky I’m just acting as if I’m on the jury and voicing my opinion.

 

[gooddogjudge]

Judge was overreaching in my opinion

Leave me outta this.

 

[eubyscott]

Sure, it is possible they were killed later than 8:50. But the evidence shows they were VERY likely killed at that time. Paul was in constant, frequent conversation with multiple people on his phone. Rogan asked Paul to take a video of the dog and send it to him. Paul took the video at 8:45, but never sent it, and never checked another message on his phone after 8:49. Every witness has testified that Paul was always on his phone. Alex himself, when questioned by LE where Paul's phone usually was, responds "in his hand." All of this tells me he's almost certainly dead at 8:50.

The positions of the bodies tells me they never interacted with any assailant. If they did, they'd likely have been executed right beside each other. The evidence shows that Paul was ambushed and completely caught of guard, then Maggie ran and was gunned down. This was not a situation where they were held captive and/or interrogated.

I have seen no evidence of a mistress. But maybe we will.

As more evidence has been introduced, especially this past week, I’m coming to the conclusion that Alex actually pulled the trigger. And when I really think about how the last moments of their lives went down, it’s tough to really think about.

I’ve always thought he was involved but at the beginning wasn’t sure (or maybe couldn’t comprehend) he actually pulled the trigger. But with the evidence it’s hard to conceive anyone else.

 

[Woody1405]

Does a jury have access to transcripts of the trial or do they just operate by memory alone???

If a jury needs it, testimony can be replayed for them.

 

[TopGun01]

Congrats on being selected to be in juries. I’ll continue to keep my opinion since that’s the point. I get he’s lied about some stuff but the state still doesn’t have enough evidence to get me to say yep AM murdered them both. My opinion and that’s all that should matter is that’s it’s my opinion. Could give two shits less if you’ve been on a good number of jury’s.

Whoa man, pump the brakes. We have differing opinions and that's alright. The first time I was foreman (in Atlanta area) on a rape case, I was in my 40's and very critical of circumstantial evidence convicting someone. In fact, on the first vote after a couple of hours of discussions, the vote stood at 10-2 to convict. Myself and and a younger lady were the holdouts preaching that the prosecution had not provided enough direct evidence to prove rape. The following day we voted unanimously to a lesser sexual assault charge.

About 7-8 years ago however, same situation but I thought there was abundant circumstantial evidence and the defendant's attorneys had been unable to suppress tons of prior history where this guy had gotten off lite short of rape convictions. He was a dirt bag and exhibited all the signs of sociopathic behavior. As an older guy with foreman responsibility, I pushed back hard against leniency. My point above was simply to say that barring jury tampering, a firm and confident foreman will assure a guilty verdict based on what evidence has already been presented. In my opinion.

 

[syarbor]

Just because they stopped using their phones doesn't mean the murders happened immediately. They could have been busy chasing dogs, feeding dogs, cleaning out the dog pens, talking to each other, arguing with Alex, pleading with their assailant/s etc. There could have been a period of time between stopping using their phones and the actual gunshots.

Whatever happened to the rumor of the alleged mistress?

The exact moment of the murders is trivial imo because even the defense has acknowledged that AM was on the property at the time of the murders. It's more trivial because AM lied about being at the kennels.

However, the defense is going to continue to try to establish that the murders may have been a few minutes later than the prosecution timeline. They are doing that by suggesting that Paul could've been trying to preserve his phone battery.

I don't buy the battery save theory for 2 reasons: 1) Paul was actively texting and taking videos. You don't take that video if you're trying to squeeze a bit more life out of your battery. If he was truly trying to save battery, wouldn't he have simply had Maggie take the video on her phone? 2) they were at home with easy access to a phone charging capabilities. It's not like they were out on the town and needed the phone to last . He knew he had several minutes of battery life and he knew he could then simply charge it when they got back to the house.

 

[TigerTC]

I understand that. Im assuming, he knew the financial stuff was coming to a head. It's likely that he knew he was going down for them. Im just not sure what he gained for brutally murdering his son and wife.

While it wasn't official that he was being investigated, several conversations surely led him to believe they were on to him. Most of the testimonies given indicate that they had begun questioning the funds prior to the murders. Again, I'm just assuming he knew this. I find it hard to believe he was blindsided and panicked and just killed his family in desperation but managed to do it in nearly the most perfect way and planned it all out, which would also indicate he knew in advance if he planned it.

Maybe not, though. Maybe he thought I'm going down anyway I might as well kill everyone in my family.

Conjecture can lead you to any conclusion. And your posts in thus thread are full of unsupported and baseless conjecture.

I am basing my assessment on the actual evidence presented to the jury.

 

[MisterSlappy]

I hope there are closing agreements on a life sentence

Damn fingers Arguments I meant.

 

[santee]

Does a jury have access to transcripts of the trial or do they just operate by memory alone???

They have access and believe they can go back and watch segments if it is recorded. They are given all the help they need to make a decision

 

[other1]

They have access and believe they can go back and watch segments if it is recorded. They are given all the help they need to make a decision

So it's sort of unnecessary for a juror to take notes??

 

[santee]

The exact moment of the murders is trivial imo because even the defense has acknowledged that AM was on the property at the time of the murders. It's more trivial because AM lied about being at the kennels.

However, the defense is going to continue to try to establish that the murders may have been a few minutes later than the prosecution timeline. They are doing that by suggesting that Paul could've been trying to preserve his phone battery.

I don't buy the battery save theory for 2 reasons: 1) Paul was actively texting and taking videos. You don't take that video if you're trying to squeeze a bit more life out of your battery. If he was truly trying to save battery, wouldn't he have simply had Maggie take the video on her phone? 2) they were at home with easy access to a phone charging capabilities. It's not like they were out on the town and needed the phone to last . He knew he had several minutes of battery life and he knew he could then simply charge it when they got back to the house.

Of course they will....they have to think of something and if I am on the jury that is how I would look at it.

However, did he have it on a charger? Pretty sure there would be one in that house as people lived there.

What was the level of charge on the phone when he turned it off ? Can that be determined by examining the phone?

He just happened to turn it off when they were murdered.

 

[santee]

So it's sort of unnecessary for a juror to take notes??

It is most important that they pay attention and hear and see everything that is said and goes on in the courtroom. If they can do that then they can take notes but the average person cannot

It is up to the lawyers to summarize it all, present an exact timeline ,etc. in their closing arguments. The jurors also can have any portion of the trial read back to them

 

[Tiger Guru]

Conjecture can lead you to any conclusion. And your posts in thus thread are full of unsupported and baseless conjecture.

I am basing my assessment on the actual evidence presented to the jury.

It’s just wild that that guy just lured them there to kill them. Maybe he did, but I’m not sure what he gained from it.

He certainly had no idea Paul was taking that video. What’s weird is, I have no idea how they’re going to defend that. Maybe they won’t even try, but that seems crazy.

It’s highly likely that he did it or knew about it. Also, not impossible that he didn’t do it. If he simply said, “I swung by the kennels on my way to mommas and told them I’d be back” this wouldnt be so cut and dry. But I guess they’re doubling down on the fact that he wasn’t there?

Crazy story for sure. I have no idea what to believe but won’t be shocked by any outcome.

What say you?

 

[CUFamily6]

 

[syarbor]

Of course they will....they have to think of something and if I am on the jury that is how I would look at it.

However, did he have it on a charger? Pretty sure there would be one in that house as people lived there.

What was the level of charge on the phone when he turned it off ? Can that be determined by examining the phone?

He just happened to turn it off when they were murdered.

Think you misunderstood. I'm referring to Paul the son. Not Alex the father.

Several times now, the defense has pointed out that Paul frequently ran his phone battery down and would sometimes cut use to preserve the battery for a bit more time.

My point was that I don't buy that Paul was trying to preserve battery life for the reasons outlined in the prior post.

 

[jeffcoat]

View embedded media

Wow. That's extremely detailed.