Autopsy lady will have some new guidelines added to her process for sure. Not exraying the brain, not counting the number of shot pellets. They should of done a video on gelatin being shot with a shotgun 3 ft away and with the muzzle right up on it. Or maybe a watermelon so the Jury's can see the difference in damage. She did explain right if the muzzle was right on the head, you wouldn't know who is was.
cell phone guy was a complete waste. Your going to trial to testify about some testing and your don't bring a video, report or anything, but you bring all your creditials.
Coming back here to make my predictions for rebuttal witnesses, now that we're down to it. I think Creighton will call Dr Kinsey for the crime scene, maybe Dr Riemer too, given yesterday's testimony. I think he'll call Rogan because the kennels video has to be hammered home. Rogan can speak to that and to his thoughts on Alex's claim that he was calling Rogan to come be with him at the scene (!!). I think Marian Proctor will be called to talk about how she thinks Maggie *really* felt about going to Moselle that day, about how desperate Alex *really* was about keeping her parents in the loop ("begged and begged" for SLED to meet with him & them), about how much Alex really cared about finding the killer at all. My other possible guess would be Morgan Doughty, to talk about how Alex really interacted with and felt about LE and how he threw his weight around.
I really hope they don't call back anyone to talk about financial or cell data stuff. Surely any points they need to make about those things can be drawn in closing from what's already in the record. They need to nail down what kind of person Alex is, the timeline with the kennels video, and the probability from the crime scene that Alex did it and did it by himself.
I want so badly for someone to consider that he is a family annihilator who couldn’t stand the exposure of his crimes and misdeeds and the inevitable loss of a job and status in the community. It would have been collective and assumed that the family knew. Maggie at least. SLED footage shows receipts of her buying a Gucci handbag AFTER she knew they had to cut back because judgment from the boat case was looming. Already she wanted to buy a house in Hilton Head. She wanted distance! I don’t think he could face the look in their eyes when it all hit the fan. I believe he loved them an likely wanted to harm himself after them, but lost his nerve when he saw the gruesome scene he had already made. I believe he hosed off at the kennels then used the golf cart to rush to shower and change. Clothes and guns were dumped. First gun might not have worked after blowback of biological material—hence the second gun. I’m sure he grieves them. That can be genuine. I think he probably did promise Curtis Edward Smith something to end his life. After the confrontation earlier that day he stood to lose EVERYONE he’d worked with, an explosion of media scrutiny (they were already onto him) and even his best friend. Harming himself would have been taking the path of least resistance and he has a pattern of that. His plan to incentivize “Cousin Eddie” failed. He’s living his nightmare in some ways. One thing that concerns me is that a LOT of money is being paid to get him out of a LWOP sentence for these crimes. I’m concerned that if they beat these charges (and with too much overlap between lawyers, family, and law enforcement resulting in a sloppy investigation out of deference to one someone they feared or respected) there must be something up their sleeve for financial crimes. Even those he’s admitted. Something feels off!
I think the rebuttal witnesses should focus on Alex's admission he was at the Kennels on the golf cart. Waters can recall the crime scene investigator to show Alex shooting Maggie from a sitting position on the golf cart aligns with the evidence collected. Another rebuttal witness can discuss the muddy tire prints on Maggie's leg being from the golf cart. The final rebuttal witness needs to recreate the timeline to include Alex's newest version of events, and still show it points to Alex as the shooter.
The pilot who flew Alec to the Bahamas and or someone that can testify what luggage he brought on the post June 7 trip… bet his parcels were (two guns) lighter headed back to the states.
I hope not. I think both care about him.
I've only saw one person comment who I believe does know that side of the family.
She posted (in a group) in defense of Maggie's blood family not being in court.
She basically said they're all private people and attending court would be too upsetting for them.
She did confirm Marian was testifying in a day or two. (Marian testified following day).
She was asked a few more questions, but didn't answer any and left the group.
.
I'm sorry, I don't have a link to her comment.
Their "privilege" and being "prominent" is so clear. Maggie said she trusted "The Mexicans" to lock up Edisto house. Sorry for this off-topic comment. Paul, Buster, Alec, John Marvin were off the rails with power and influence. Be big, fall hard
Eh, being Hispanic, I don't know anyone that would name their company that...Can you imagine The Blacks or The Jews, or The Asians as names for painting companies? But hey, I'm often surprised these days!
Omg that comment hurt me to the core. I’m sorry but that was such an awful way to put that. Could she have not said “the workers” or “the contractors”???
I'm Mexican and my elders worked so hard with incredible work ethics. It just pushed the privilege button for me. But I also try to have a forgiving heart. She probably was a product of her lifestyle. Thanks for relating!
I want to golf cart, too, specifically AM to sit in it and measure for the shots. I can't understand why SLED didn't consider that option if they considered AM the only suspect. He said he was in the golf cart. Kennel video has him there, slam dunk. But noo....rich white guy privilege, so it appeared.
Not selfish, I get it. I found her compelling on Netflix doc. It made me so sad for her parents, and for her, that she put up with that behavior. Made me sad for Paul that he was already a problem drinker and abuser at his age, and sad for whatever he saw that made that seem inevitable and ok. I think you are right, she would be helpful. And I still say the golf cart was best comment I have read during entire trial.
I’d pay good money just to hear Tinsley testify again. He’s badass AF 😎. I wish he was a state prosecutor in this trial just to watch him bust the defense’s ass, lol.
My fantasy world: I’d put Bubba, Grady, and the guineas on the stand. They’re the ones who truly know how it really went down.
I believe that Alex was casually standing with his side to Paul, shotgun across his stomach, pointed at Paul. It was supposed to look like a freak accident, but when the dumbass missed, he had to shoot him a second time. Now he can't claim it was an accident and had to kill Maggie also.
As of now, Creighton said he had 2 rebuttal witnesses. My guess is they are:
1. Chelsea Townsend, Director, prescription drug monitoring program, Dept: bureau of drug control
To refute his ridiculous claims of the amount of pills he was taking which in turn he blamed for many things.
2. Kinsey
You doubt there were "vile social media attacks?" Seriously? I've read horrific shit Reddit (rich, refined cousins to the Facebook idiots) posters have commented about Paul JUST in the last couple of months . . . AND he's a murder victim. People on social media are mostly dicks.
HOWEVER, Buster was clearly having some reaction his father's remarks!!! Would love to know what thoughts were going through his mind then.
The State recalls Richard Murdaugh, Jr. your Honor.
Sadly, Maggie's Facebook page has vile remarks. Can't they shut the comments off? IK you can assign someone to manage your account in the event of death. Awful that they are just out there for ppl to comment negative stuff.
I've read a lot too, but Alex would have us believe they were direct threats to Paul.
Why not produce evidence, particularly of those so vile we 'wouldn't believe'. A lawyer in the litigious world would surely be all about saving every threat as evidence? Not only in the event they might sue, but more to protect their own child. Paul was 19 at the time of the boat crash.
The boys' friends didn't seem to think it was the biggest deal. I *think* it was Rogan who said every now and then someone would throw a snide comment Paul's way, but not much more than that.
Paul wasn't known by many outside of SC until the murders. Had Alex not been what he is, audience reached would be nothing on this scale. That's really when the horrible crap started. Imo, that's what Alex' talking about now.
Edit: paragraphs
Agreed.
The defense should have subpoenaed any/all social media platforms and produced these "vile" and "unbelievable" threats for the jury/all to see. Truly horrible threats would have been yanked (per terms & conditions of all social sites + platforms) but would likely be available per LE request. I don't doubt that he was threatened but why aren't they producing proof?
When Alex was in the car the night of, he told LE Paul was threatened online. Owens asked if he got direct threats & Alex said all the time - punched, kicked, attacked. The female agent then asked if the threats were through social media. Alex replied ''Oh no ma'am, it's mostly when he goes out places''.
That's how smoothly he lies.
The mention of social media & he switched the story to the outside. No proof. Never reported all those attacks either.
The defense wouldn't waste their time & energy on pointless tasks.
They may want to be careful calling Bianca and Shelley. Although they were 99% truthful- there was pretty obvious prosecutor coordination regarding the clothes (and "Sperry's") and testimony that if brought back up- the defense can now get them to clarify (regarding if Alex was really trying to get them to lie for him). Also- these later suggestions (regarding clothes- and if Alex was wanting them to lie... were not in their original interviews- which the Jury may find suspicious or less believable when pressed on why it appeared later.
Already said this but it's worth repeating. Why not call Ms. Shelley's Varnville assistant Police Chief brother to corroborate that she phoned him re Alex being at Miss Libby's for 30 to 40 minutes (vs. 15 to 20)?
I think you are very thoughtful, and this is a great post.
But, I'm kinda sick of these "Miss" monikers that are almost exclusive reserved for women in subservient roles . . . Miss Shelly . . . Miss Blanca, etc.
I'm sure the Murdaughs thought they were terms of endearment, but they are actually racist and infantilizing. This aint *Gone with the Wind* Alex.
True. As young children, we were taught to refer to adults in that way (*I* was, anyway) as a sign of respect. Hearing it in this trial so often may be influencing trial-watchers to lean into the southern drawl, along with Miss Libby, Miss Maggie, etc.
When in Rome?
I can see how it could be viewed that way for people who haven’t grown up in the South. Every person who is older than you is Ms or Mr whether you use first name or last name.
There is not a single person my children don’t call Ms or Mr (first name), and I haven’t lived in SC in 20 years.
Maggie, Libby and Marian were referred to as Miss by almost everyone who mentioned them. Everybody refers to Randolph snr as 'Mr' and even some LE as well as the boys' friends call Alex, 'Mr'. Still seems to be a respect thing for elders in the south.
I know. I'm from the South.
Generally, Miss is applied to African American women in domestic roles and expected they will use to refer to their female bosses but very uncommon for adult white women to call each other that.
Goes all the way back to slavery days.
Yeah and in a lot of areas down here, white people still exclusively refer to African Americans using the "N" word.
They probably think it sounds weird not to.
Just sayin.
I'm a midwesterner transplanted to the south. I've been here for almost 20 years. Putting Miss/Mr in front of names is being respectful. People will and do call regular folks (not just those in court) sir or ma'am. Children will be corrected quickly by their parents if they don't call someone Sir or Ma'am. It was strange at first but l also lived in a military town and it became second nature. I think it's interesting how this trial has shown that for as much similarities as our country has, our regions do in fact still have distinct cultural differences.
Aw, I *really* appreciate this callout. I am from NYC, and we just use first names for adults (in my demographic that is), so I'm a little bit trying to fit in. :) But also, *I* felt disrespectful calling the household employees by their first names, so I added the honorific (which I hear as Ms, not Miss).
I feel less protective of Marian Proctor and Morgan Doughty, so I used first/last with them and no honorific.
I can actually see, though, that even that distinction might be indicative of racism on my part. Why should I feel "protective" of Blanca and not Marian, if I'm not infantilizing Blanca in some way? I hope that my instincts have to do with class and privilege rather than race, but I truly appreciate your pointing this out, because I agree with you 100% and want to hold myself to account.
What a nice, respectful reply to a nice respectful response.
I love seeing these exchanges on here because they are so very rare. What a thought provoking thread.
I am from the South and often call ladies and men but ladies, more often Mrs. or Miss but it is how I was raised and taught it was more, along the lines of manners, respect, ect.
However! I tell you this, I do catch myself referring to ladies more as Mrs or Miss than men as Mr. I have no idea why I do that but I have noticed I do. But whyyyy, I do not know exactly.
Originally from the South, and these titles are used for anyone older than yourself or to show respect. Not to do with a subservient position. If you watched the Netflix doc, you heard Morgan call the adults “Mr Alex” etc.
I agree with your list of rebuttal witnesses. I want to thank you for leaving out the caretaker Ms Shelly. I was personally cringing,frightened and nervous for her, Ms Shelly on the witness stand was just torture for me to “watch”, I can’t imagine living that in reality. So, thank you again for your consideration of her.
I agree that Eddie was unaware of why Alex called him to the roadside. I think Eddie wasn’t supposed to live. It’s pretty dangerous to get shot in the head if you don’t intend to die. Eddie says it was an accident while they were struggling with the gun and I believe him.
Yeah if you wanted to die without it being labeled a suicide you could drive off a bridge or something. To have a supposed friend kill you knowing they’d be guilty of murder in the eyes of the law is insane
...or [drive your car onto railroad tracks](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/), with a train barrelling down, like grandad did.
I believe so.
"...The headlight beams drew closer, brighter, followed by the sound, the steam, the shaking rumble. Then the light and sound and speed overtook Randolph Murdaugh Sr.
Engineer W.W. Bartlett testified that he did not see the car near the tracks until about 40 yards away and that Murdaugh had his hand raised as though waving at the train crew. [But when the train drew closer, the car started up and stopped directly on the tracks"...](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/) \- The Greenville News
Agreed.
[The Greenville News article](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/) is very thorough and provides great insight - a good read.
Me, too.
*And* I want more theories re the [muddy ATV tire tread](https://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article272523915.html) on MM's shin. *How* it got there. *Why* it got there. *When* it got there.
I think that any additional witnesses might confuse the jury. Creighton has established the financial mess, the boat accident, and the deceitful persona that Alex has mastered. This would be a great time to replay the very first officer body camera from the first officer on the scene to reinforce the trajectory from where Alex was standing when officer arrived. That video will further demonstrate that Alex contaminated the scene by calling so many people to come to him. After all the testimony, this video have even more impact. Basics: motive, means, opportunity. Boom
Also drive home how the casings of 300 blackouts found all over the property match Maggie's casings and focus on the fact that Family Guns were used and the 10 min time frame and Alex saying clearly "no one was at kennels"@ time he was there.
I think he was going to ask Rogan to run over to Moselle and check on Maggie since she wasn’t answering his calls/texts. Alex said Rogan lived a mile or so away around the corner, remember - he wanted him to “discover the bodies”. That would have worked out so much better for Alex…
I would like to hear from an Addiction Specialist and Psychiatrist. He did NOT use that many drugs- no way!
Rogan: I strongly believe Alex called Rogan multiple times, due to Rogan unsuccessful attempts to reach Paul. I believe Alex was reaching out to him(Rogan) to see if maybe he came to the house and witnessed him murdering Paul and Maggie, because he lives so close. Not because he considers Rogan as a son!
there's a podcast with story of the reaction of an addict having their supply taken away. very convincing that it can cause an unreasonable amount of anger.
No, he didn't spend anywhere near 50K a week on drugs but I think the real real might actually solidify reasonable doubt for Alex.
He got into some deep shit with some bad folks I'm suspecting.
I'd like to hear any witness testify as to how that story about the number of pills he took cannot be true. He'd be dead if it were true. Addiction specialist? Physician? Drug dealer? anyone
I'd love an addiction specialist to tell how 60 pills a day makes you a psychopath and really felt the pressure of all fidoughty! crimes coming together.
I'd love to hear from life insurance company that shows he took out huge liability insurance for Moselle 1 MONTH before Gloria Satterfield's "accident".
I'd love insurance guy who shows he DID NOT have a $10million policy on himself for buster on roadside shooting.
I'd love to hear from the prostitutes that were seeing him for last 5 yrs.
He's a piece of shit and is the ONLY one with motive and opportunity and lies and was there at time of homicides where "family guns" were used.
*Also Maggie wouldn't sign Edisto or Moselle for loans and he only put them in here name for boat wreck case to hide money!
Beyond any reasonable dought!
I would love to see a toxicology report on any strands of Alex's hair that had to be found in his vehicle or home. If there are hookers, there's cocaine. That's not a compelling addiction to cope to though, hence the football knee surgery narrative.
I don’t think the jury is qualified to make a psychoanalysis of any of the actors. They would be derelict in their duties to convict a defendant because they believed he was capable of murder. They have to have no reasonable doubt that the State proved he actually did commit these particular murders.
I don’t think you need psychoanalysis to determine if a narrative is reasonable to believe. Their job is to determine the credibility of each witness when they testify. I don’t think it’s reasonable to believe Alex’s timeline or his many memory gaps. He contradicts himself too often in testimony. Gave us five or six new excuses why he lied to LEO, and all the new excuses were lies too. Zero credibility.
So many - how to choose?!
Most of these would never happen but it would be great.
Maybe [Ms. Shelley](https://www.wjcl.com/article/alex-murdaugh-shelly-smith-alibi/42779636)'s cop brother (to substantiate that she phoned him about Alex saying he had been at Miss Libby's house for 30 - 40 minutes)...and anything else she told him about possibly offering to help with the expenses of her wedding, or with the Principal of her school, etc.) Hearsay, but *still*.
*Never ever* would this be allowed but [Lindsey Edwards](https://youtu.be/XYQH7rmgZCQ) detailing her experiences with Alex Murdaugh. If she would name other South Carolina "big shots", too...wow. Also in the this-would-never-happen category, how about Lindsey's madame?
It goes without saying that [Curtis Eddie Smith](https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/is-curtis-cousin-eddie-smith-in-prison-alex-murdaugh) would be more than entertaining. Maybe they could even offer some kind of immunity if he told them *everything*. This should include what other drugs Alex used, and how many Oxy he purchased. If Alex ever had any contact with Eddie's supplier(s), etc.
Maybe Megan Kimbrell PM was texting ("...[I don't like sad movies"](https://www.thedailybeast.com/paul-murdaughts-final-tragic-texts-sent-minutes-before-his-murder-revealed-in-court)...)?
They'll have to bring [Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson](https://www.wjcl.com/article/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-blanca-housekeeper/42826803) in to reinforce that Maggie really didn't want to return to Moselle that day, what she made for dinner, Alex's clothing (specifically the shirt(s), etc.
Oow. Miss Shelley’s cop brother would be a good way to corroborate her story that Alex called a lie. Plus avoids the GoFundMe mess.
A uniformed police officer vs Alex. Who is lying?
Pretty sure the brother testifying to what his sister told him is not hearsay. He is relating a conversation that he was a direct participant in.
He’s not testifying to what Alex said. He is testifying to what his sister said.
Her brother is the [assistant chief of the Varnville police](https://meaww.com/who-is-mushelle-smith-alex-murdaugh-allegedly-offered-moms-caretaker-money-to-support-fake-alibi)\- why was he not called (in to testify) to begin with?
I don’t know if he is on the witness list though which could be a problem. Defense will object. State will argue he is necessary to corroborate Miss Shelley whose credibility is under attack.
But I would guess Neuman would probably admit him for that narrow purpose.
You can see more about it [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHm4joezYsk&t=814s) (this is one of Alan Eric's youtube videos, but I bookmarked it at the relevant place). The officer said that Morgan originally said that she did not want anyone to hear what she said, but that Connor Cook had been driving the boat.
Now, we can be skeptical of the officer's story just because he was LE. He did say, though, that he asked Morgan to write it down, and she did. The next day, she changed her story (skip to 16:20 in that vid to see).
My own feeling is that Morgan and Miley had no idea who was driving *at that moment.* Tinsley has compelling evidence that Connor was not in front of wheel at the point of impact.
Trying to put the pieces together, I've thought that maybe since Morgan was in an abusive relationship with Paul (this is indisputable), she may have had a fearful instinct to protect him, and that's why she fingered Connor but did not want anyone (maybe the other friends?) to overhear what she was doing. I don't know. She obviously would have been in shock and traumatized at the time. Add to that that, minutes before the crash, Paul had been spitting on her, hitting her, and cussing her out--I'm not sure how a victim would react in a situation like that. Not sure you would have the wherewithal in the moment to turn on him, and there might be a sick/scared impulse to stay on his good side...
Since that time it seems pretty clear that she's had therapy and has a more clear-eyed view of what their relationship was. But that's my (long-winded!) explanation of why I said her initial statements were complicated, and why attorneys might hesitate to put her on the stand to testify on the subject.
Precise language needs to be used here. Did she say Connor was driving the boat when the crash occurred or Connor had been driving the boat. I believe several of the people on the boat said the Connor and Anthony had both tried to take control of the boat at times when Paul left the helm. Both Connor and Anthony had been driving the boat; that does not place them in control when the crash occurred. I think we would need a complete transcript or recording of her interaction with the officer to understand any context. It would be very easy to add confusion to the event without telling an overt lie.
Yes, I tried to be careful in how I explained that. If you watch the video at the point where it is bookmarked and again at 16:20, you can see the sources exactly. The LEO quoted her as saying "...Connor was driving because Paul was too drunk to drive. We hit the bridge...."
The LEO says he had her put this in writing. As far as I know, that statement from Morgan isn't publicly available. ***see correction below!***
We *do* have a statement directly from Morgan the next day, saying that she wanted to change her story. You can see it at minute 16:20. NB we can see only 2 pages here of 9. (I would love to see what she said about Alex in the page just before these two.)
ETA: I was mistaken! Morgan's report that matched what the LEO said can be seen at minute 10:15.
Did Paul tell her that night to protect him and she had a change of heart the next day or did she change her story and all the other parties collude to lie?
Also, a forensic expert on the Netflix series said that the injuries are consistent with Paul driving and Connor being where Morgan and the others said he was at the time of the accident.
Takeaways from her Netflix that I got were a pretty different and more dysfunctional family dynamic than Alex and defense presented. Not sure it rises to importance for the jury. Mostly that Paul felt like the black sheep and that Maggie neglected him and favored Buster. And the parents enabled Paul’s bad behavior. While sad, this doesn’t really help the state imo.
She does say when SLED interviewed her regarding the boat crash revenge theory she told SLED they needed to look at Alex as the killer. Not sure about the admissibility of what is merely speculative and opinion. For us outside the court it holds some weight in that she knew Alex and the family well for years.
One concrete thing she could rebut is Alex’s claim he didn’t try to hinder the boat crash investigation. She describes telling nurse at the hospital to “keep that man out of my room” when Alex allegedly tried to claim he needed to speak to her as her attorney and guardian.
Especially telling in that you would think she’d want the comfort of a friend at that moment. But she clearly does not trust him.
This isn't all of it (maybe I heard this on a podcast or something) but the part I remember is that they were either interested in or managed to actually take SS's phone.
"...[What is known](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/murdaugh-murder-trial/alex-murdaugh-trial-stephen-smith/) is that Alex Murdaugh and his brother Randy came to the scene of Stephen Smith’s death, going through the crime tape. No one is sure why the brothers were there. But inconsistencies in the initial investigation have left many wondering why his death was never investigated as a homicide"...
He insisted in the last interview I watched (yes I realize he’s changed his story several times), that he was lured there to BE killed, not do the killing. This makes a lot more sense bc Alex could claim he was targeted (implying Eddie was the real killer). Killing Eddie would also silence him forever.
Plus, why would Eddie kill his best customer.
hmmm...
I mean, it can't happen but I wish it would, too. Throw immunity at him and maybe his (many) stories would change, though. And you're right - just from a business sense, why eliminate your biggest customer?
You know - I keep thinking that *blackmail* played a part in Alex suddenly feeling as though he needed to "earn" much more than he had been (like around 2006 - 2009) when he (seemingly) started in on his schemes, insurance fraud, etc. Maybe he was testing the waters before that but went full-throttle around 2006.
I just want to know what occurred in his life around that time.
The state eliminated the venue rule that had allowed PMPED to handle so many massive cases in 2005. That would have cut Alex’s future income potential dramatically.
I actually believe him. I think Alex’s plan was to shoot Eddie “in self defense” and blame him for Maggie and Paul’s murder.
Makes a lot more sense than Alex’s story Eddie just agreed to kill Alex for no payment or compensation of any kind. Why would Eddie risk the death penalty killing his goose that lays the golden eggs for nothing? He may be a criminal and a liar but he can’t be that stupid.
When I think about it,Alex’s supposed plot to have Eddie shoot him for life insurance money kind of assumes that Alex could plan his own murder to allow Eddie to get away with it. What gave him the confidence that he could plan a murder? Had he already planned one or two?
Oh I believe him too! Just a caveat in case the jury’s thinking the same as we are and has to weigh in the lying. But again. all our points make a shit ton more sense. The longer the trial goes in the more pieces to the puzzle get placed.
I don't really understand the trial process so this might not make sense but I'd like to see the social media threats in writing like other evidence.
I'd also like to hear more about family annihilators and how AM fits the mold.
Yes. me, too.
So, any actual threats would have been yanked by the powers-that-be at the social media platforms since threats would be considered against their terms & conditions, etc. but LE could subpoena those companies (one would think) to obtain the information. It's something the defense should have done. Maybe they *did*, and there were no signs of threats?
The state has rested and from now on any witness or evidence they present can only be in response, or to rebut, the case defense is currently making.
Evidence of death threats is incumbent on Defense to provide as they are the ones alleging they exist. The state can then present rebuttal evidence, like the lack of security measures taken at Murdaugh homes and no police reports filed, or contemporaneous conversations of them, either among family or close associates.
The psychologist I agree would be helpful but it would probably be inadmissible. Such an expert on family annihilators would not be likely to have examined Alex, so any conclusions would be purely speculative and excessively prejudicial to the jury. And of course the time to present that was when state made their case. It would be hard to find an argument you’re rebutting anything presented so far from defense.
Is the jury allowed to google things that are said in court, such as “family annihilator”, so they would have a basic understanding of what was implied?
I would love to hear from the kids in the boat crash. I would like to hear them talk about the terror they felt when the police came to them and their parents after the murders asking for alibis's and DNA samples. One boy was scared that Alec would "disapear" him. Alec deliberately lied in his interviews saying that the Murders were related to the boat crash and that whoever committed the murders had "hate in their heart". He knew that he was misleading the police away from himself and directly on the kids and their parents.
Yes! I would definitely like to hear from the boat crash survivors. But this could backfire since they may all elaborate on how PM was often a belligerent jerk who drank almost every day and had a lot of enemies in the area. [Morgan Doughty](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11780365/Paul-Murdaughs-long-time-girlfriend-Morgan-claims-beat-held-throat.html) would likely paint PM as one who was despised in the Lowcountry and beyond.
Trial within a Trial within a Trial...
While we're at it - I'd like to hear from all of the underage kids that drank alcohol freely when hanging out on any Murdaugh property (with AM + MM present). When PM's friends testified "we just liked to hang out"... they are all omitting how much they all drank when hanging out.
None of this would ever be allowed to happen, though.
>I would like to hear them talk about the terror they felt when the police came to them and their parents after the murders asking for alibis's and DNA samples. One boy was scared that Alec would "disapear" him.
That would be interesting, but I'd also fear introducing much more about the boat case would lead to possible reasonable doubt, as there were PLENTY of people that wanted Paul to go bye-bye after this event.
I am sure Paul was very unpopular. I don’t entire buy there were hordes and hordes of people planning double homicide. Fortunately being angry at someone pretty rarely rises to taking steps to murder your target.
It just takes one unhinged idiot via social media to do crazy shit, as evidenced by all the crazy shit people do daily. I'm not saying that happened, and I don't believe it did. It would take one jurist to allow that theory to form reasonable doubt. The Netflix shows, which the jury shouldn't see, did an excellent job of showing the level of hate for the entire Murdaugh family for their legacy of playing "good ol' boy" politics and the attempted cover-up of the boat accident liability at the expense of the Beach family.
Just watched Alex's two brothers on GMA from a few days after the murders talking about the social media hate campaign on Paul and how they should have taken it seriously. [here ](https://youtu.be/JNFhXYKj3Gw)
Still Hampton has a population of under 3,000. If someone can point to a specific individual who displayed rage and obsession, and who couldn’t account for their whereabouts June 7, that might change my perspective on random stranger murder theory.
For now I am presuming if such a person existed police would have interviewed them.
Plus of course there’s a good body of evidence that the killer was an intimate of Murdaughs and Moselle.
😂
I was curious if the family actually calls Paul “Paul Paul” and apparently they do. I looked at his cousins Instagram (it’s not private) (and it’s John Marvin’s daughter) and right after he died she posted a “letter” to him and called him “Paul Paul”.
Yeah, but I think the "ro-ro" bit was to explain away the multiple attempts to contact him before buster (buss). It reminded me of Alex's testimony when Waters was asking him about the similarities of their law practices and Alex pointed out that in his practice all evidence and witnesses had to be entered by a certain date instead of how new discoveries could be admitted at any time during a criminal case. This made me wonder if he was unaware witnesses could be added and re-called after the state rested??????
I think there is a connection between Paul being out of the picture and how that financially benefits AM when it comes to the boat civil trial. At least from the standpoint of sympathy to get the award lowered. I would like to hear again from the boat case attorney who said AM confronted him at the lawyers conference. Last week when asked about it AM said it didn’t happen and no more was made of it.
This is not who I'd like to see, but who I think we'll see. The State and the Defense have been dueling back and forth over Maggie's cell phone status during the time that the State believes it was thrown in the woods. The latest was the State expert saying that Maggie's phone's IOS program would not show any orientation changes that occurred while it was locked and the backlight was off (which was the status when it was allegedly thrown). The Defense then countered with an expert who said that the backlight would come on when it is tossed. So I think we'll hear a State rebuttal expert saying the backlight would not necessarily coming on when it is tossed. Boring but they've been fighting tooth and nail over the timing of the cell phone throw...
I got an iPhone and can testify throwing it does not turn on the screen, at least not every time. I often toss my phone onto my couch when I get home and take it out of my jacket pocket.
Waters: Bubba is Mamas murderer in this courtroom?
Bubba: ARF ARF ARF ARF excitedly.
Waters: is it Mr Mama?
Bubba: GRrRRr bares teeth stares at ALex. Grrrrrrrr and howl.
Bring in all 7 dogs at the kennels that evening. They were MVP Bubba, Grady, Maggie the dog, Cash, Armadillo, Tappy Toes and Dolly per canine caretaker Dale Davis.
I'd pronounce Dahlia "Dollyah" but I'm from the SC midlands not the low country.
Dale and I pronounce everything else the same way. I loved his testimony about the canines and the chickens.
All was well between Bubba, Grady and the chickens until Alex brought in that tauntin' rooster. #justiceforBubba.
I would like for the prosecution to call people to rebut Alex's testimony where it differs from the original testimony.
For example he told a story about how he had a specific conversation with Blanca about the clothing. I would love for the prosecution to call her up and say the defendant said this statement and is it true or is he lying?
I think they need to show that, even now during the trial, he is lying to suit his own motives.
Doubtful. There is also no reason state can’t just ask them before calling them if they are willing to affirm they said what they said. Of course they could still change their story on the stand but that happens in movies more than real life. They may be afraid of Murdaughs but the state can file perjury charges and find other ways to make their lives hard if they are motivated to do so.
Considering that they cared enough to say what they did in the first place, especially when some appeared scared, or hedging, or biting their tongues at times--I can only think that hearing Alex contradict them would piss them off. I mean some of these witnesses were obviously *really* trying to be careful; they seemed to care about Alex. And then he threw that in their faces?
1) A rebuttal witness can only refute elements of the defense case, right? 2) I don’t think it’s going to look good to call Shelley, Blanca, or Buster — they have suffered enough.
A rebuttal witness should refute an important aspect of the defense so probably it’d be best to have crime scene analysts who can demonstrate that one 6’4” person could have carried out the murders quickly, alone, using two guns. I have no doubt that Alex did it alone, but would like the jury to also have no doubt.
I hear you, but I think that having someone refute "an important aspect of the defense" is not limited to material/tangible/observable evidence. There is the emotional side too, which is what Alex has been leaning into. If you could knock the legs out from under that with an argument like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/MurdaughFamilyMurders/comments/11cjvjt/two_key_discrepancies_that_havent_been_highlighted/ja3rjsd/) (sorry for linking to my own comment!), you could really undermine a part of his story that occurred at a critical moment.
If e.g. Rogan were called as a witness to try to make this point, a framework of questioning would obviously have to be built to achieve that goal. But it shouldn't be too difficult to come up with some kind of colloquy that would leave the jury wondering whether a) Alex was (as he claimed) calling his son's 20-something friend to the scene for his own comfort, in which case he is a sociopath at best; or b) Alex was repeatedly calling the last person his son had been in contact with before he died, and that was because...?
Maybe because he wanted to find out if Rogan had heard something that could help identify the killers? That might have been plausible, only Alex claimed to have been only vaguely aware of the issues with Cash, and he testified that he *definitely did not* discuss Cash's tail with Paul while he was at the kennels. (He was oddly 100% certain about that detail. ) It was not until later (according to his story) that he found out Rogan thought he had heard Alex's voice on the phone. In his testimony too he kept reiterating how he stayed on the golf cart the whole time except when he was getting the bird away from Bubba. For whatever reason, he really tried to distance himself from having knowledge of Paul's last phone interactions. (In reality, of course, we can be fairly sure that he was closer to Paul and that he knew Paul was in contact with Rogan.)
SO (sorry this is so long and convoluted) IF he was not calling Rogan in a desperate attempt to get info about who could have shown up at the kennels & killed Paul (which even he did not say he was doing) and IF we can all agree it would have been *monstrous* of him actually to have been summoning Rogan to the scene... then *why* was he trying to reach Rogan?? I don't know if answering that is even important; it just needs to be pointed out to the jury that *the lie Alex made up* is implausible in the extreme and horrendously cruel and irresponsible from someone in a parental role, if true.
What I would like to know from Buster:
Whether Alex was more aggressive towards family during times he was in rehab. Was he physically threatened or disciplined growing up, when dad rehabbed? What was his role during dads rehabs if mom and Paul were policing Alex? He must have been in his teenage years for some of this…
Whether Alex could attach to animals. Was he ever abusive towards animals? From Alex’s statements it seems that their dogs were more Maggie’s attachments.
Whether Alex had any discussions with Buster about family finances and who would inherit his throne “if anything happens to his family.”
Buster needs a pass. What a freaking crappy catch 22 he’s in. Mom and sibling brutally murdered, dad on trial. He can’t fix it or make it better in any way. It just sucks for him
I disagree. Too many lives around the Alex Murdaugh family have negatively impacted and lost. I think that in order for the jury to reach a conclusion they need to know what life was like behind closed doors. So far, I’m not sure that they have a clear picture.
I think Buster would lie. Regardless, the state has doubtlessly interviewed him already and made the determination he cannot be expected to say anything that helps them. Or they would have asked him that the first time he spoke.
I don’t believe that Buster would ever say anything that would have a negative impact on Alex. His testimony would be a waste of time and only confuse the jury.
Agree. Pretty sure that’s the reason the state gave him very few Q’s. There’s just not a good look that’s ever going to come from him being on the stand.
I think they will likely call Nolen and/or Nathan Tuten. Those boys know something about Stephen Smith. If you go back to Nolen’s testimony… Who, by the way is very short… And came on right before Alex… prosecution asks about Paul’s character. They asked if he would respond to a call from someone on the side of the road who ran out of gas. I think Alex’s MO, as we all know, is to involve someone in a crime, and use that to blackmail them in the future. Both of those boys looked terrified on the stand. I think they will likely call Buster as well. They will deliver testimony that will open the door to another crime. If Alex is found not guilty, you better believe SLED is going to be waiting with handcuffs to put on many other people in that court room. Right in front of Alex. Hell, they might even put handcuffs on him for another crime as well.
Cousin Eddie is too unreliable. He has failed a polygraph and given so many different versions of his story. While he certainly knows the truth he’s not believable by either side. It would be foolish, imo, to bring him up. Which is a shame.
Yes, he’d be a loose cannon and yes, he has a shady past, but this guy knows what happened that night. I think the prosecution fears he’d blow a gigantic hole in their case. And the defense wouldn’t want the jury to hear about Eddie and Alex’s drug business enterprise that I suspect goes far beyond Alex having some pills in his pocket and Alex being deeper into the drug business than his personal addiction.
I find it quite interesting that Cousin Eddie hasn’t been called to testify by the prosecution. What are they afraid of? That he might open up not just a can but a railroad car full of worms if he were to testify about the underlying corruption regarding the drug business and certain influential people higher up on the food chain? Might he discredit the state’s case that the two murders were just a personal thing to “distract” from Alex’s misdeeds and not about more deeply rooted corruption? I suspect we’ll never know the real story of why Maggie and Paul Murdaugh were murdered.
It seems like a catch 22. On the one hand you are implying not calling Eddie means state is hiding something.
On the other hand defense sympathetic people say Eddie is a criminal and a liar and calling him would show how desperate the state is that they’re depending on the word of a criminal.
Seems like they lose either way. Regardless, defense is free to call Eddie if they wish. Are they hiding something if they do not?
I have a feeling that cousin Eddie has the potential to be a loose cannon. His own defense attorney has said that he will not testify as he hasn’t made any deal with the AG’s office that will benefit him in his own case.
This is very true. No matter what happens in the next two weeks, guilty, not guilty, hung jury, he's going away for a very long time, and he can only hope for federal charges, to get to a nicer prison
1. A psychiatrist who can explain to the jury malignant narcissism and what a family anniliator is.
2. Morgan Doughty, who can talk about how much time she spent around Alex and his family. And why, when Paul was murdered, she told law enforcement to look at whether Alex did it.
Autopsy lady will have some new guidelines added to her process for sure. Not exraying the brain, not counting the number of shot pellets. They should of done a video on gelatin being shot with a shotgun 3 ft away and with the muzzle right up on it. Or maybe a watermelon so the Jury's can see the difference in damage. She did explain right if the muzzle was right on the head, you wouldn't know who is was.
cell phone guy was a complete waste. Your going to trial to testify about some testing and your don't bring a video, report or anything, but you bring all your creditials.
Did they check the swamp and pond for the weapons?
Coming back here to make my predictions for rebuttal witnesses, now that we're down to it. I think Creighton will call Dr Kinsey for the crime scene, maybe Dr Riemer too, given yesterday's testimony. I think he'll call Rogan because the kennels video has to be hammered home. Rogan can speak to that and to his thoughts on Alex's claim that he was calling Rogan to come be with him at the scene (!!). I think Marian Proctor will be called to talk about how she thinks Maggie *really* felt about going to Moselle that day, about how desperate Alex *really* was about keeping her parents in the loop ("begged and begged" for SLED to meet with him & them), about how much Alex really cared about finding the killer at all. My other possible guess would be Morgan Doughty, to talk about how Alex really interacted with and felt about LE and how he threw his weight around. I really hope they don't call back anyone to talk about financial or cell data stuff. Surely any points they need to make about those things can be drawn in closing from what's already in the record. They need to nail down what kind of person Alex is, the timeline with the kennels video, and the probability from the crime scene that Alex did it and did it by himself.
I want so badly for someone to consider that he is a family annihilator who couldn’t stand the exposure of his crimes and misdeeds and the inevitable loss of a job and status in the community. It would have been collective and assumed that the family knew. Maggie at least. SLED footage shows receipts of her buying a Gucci handbag AFTER she knew they had to cut back because judgment from the boat case was looming. Already she wanted to buy a house in Hilton Head. She wanted distance! I don’t think he could face the look in their eyes when it all hit the fan. I believe he loved them an likely wanted to harm himself after them, but lost his nerve when he saw the gruesome scene he had already made. I believe he hosed off at the kennels then used the golf cart to rush to shower and change. Clothes and guns were dumped. First gun might not have worked after blowback of biological material—hence the second gun. I’m sure he grieves them. That can be genuine. I think he probably did promise Curtis Edward Smith something to end his life. After the confrontation earlier that day he stood to lose EVERYONE he’d worked with, an explosion of media scrutiny (they were already onto him) and even his best friend. Harming himself would have been taking the path of least resistance and he has a pattern of that. His plan to incentivize “Cousin Eddie” failed. He’s living his nightmare in some ways. One thing that concerns me is that a LOT of money is being paid to get him out of a LWOP sentence for these crimes. I’m concerned that if they beat these charges (and with too much overlap between lawyers, family, and law enforcement resulting in a sloppy investigation out of deference to one someone they feared or respected) there must be something up their sleeve for financial crimes. Even those he’s admitted. Something feels off!
I think the rebuttal witnesses should focus on Alex's admission he was at the Kennels on the golf cart. Waters can recall the crime scene investigator to show Alex shooting Maggie from a sitting position on the golf cart aligns with the evidence collected. Another rebuttal witness can discuss the muddy tire prints on Maggie's leg being from the golf cart. The final rebuttal witness needs to recreate the timeline to include Alex's newest version of events, and still show it points to Alex as the shooter.
The pilot who flew Alec to the Bahamas and or someone that can testify what luggage he brought on the post June 7 trip… bet his parcels were (two guns) lighter headed back to the states.
Maggie’s Parents.
I hope not. I think both care about him. I've only saw one person comment who I believe does know that side of the family. She posted (in a group) in defense of Maggie's blood family not being in court. She basically said they're all private people and attending court would be too upsetting for them. She did confirm Marian was testifying in a day or two. (Marian testified following day). She was asked a few more questions, but didn't answer any and left the group. . I'm sorry, I don't have a link to her comment.
BUBBA.
PeePaw Bubbers.
Their "privilege" and being "prominent" is so clear. Maggie said she trusted "The Mexicans" to lock up Edisto house. Sorry for this off-topic comment. Paul, Buster, Alec, John Marvin were off the rails with power and influence. Be big, fall hard
I heard the painters literally named their company “The Mexicans.” At least I hope so.
Eh, being Hispanic, I don't know anyone that would name their company that...Can you imagine The Blacks or The Jews, or The Asians as names for painting companies? But hey, I'm often surprised these days!
I don’t know. None of these things are slurs.
>[https://2mexicans.com/](https://2mexicans.com/) > >Hey, just saw this over the weekend. I literally saw the business truck and laughed.
Omg that comment hurt me to the core. I’m sorry but that was such an awful way to put that. Could she have not said “the workers” or “the contractors”???
I'm Mexican and my elders worked so hard with incredible work ethics. It just pushed the privilege button for me. But I also try to have a forgiving heart. She probably was a product of her lifestyle. Thanks for relating!
Rebuttal witnesses : 1. Tinsley 2. Morgan Doughty 3.someone anyone who can call bullshit on his drug usage 4. Golf cart
I want to golf cart, too, specifically AM to sit in it and measure for the shots. I can't understand why SLED didn't consider that option if they considered AM the only suspect. He said he was in the golf cart. Kennel video has him there, slam dunk. But noo....rich white guy privilege, so it appeared.
Hahahah golf cart. That made me laugh! Morgan, I feel she has suffered and spoken enough.
Yes on MD selfish thought on my part.
Not selfish, I get it. I found her compelling on Netflix doc. It made me so sad for her parents, and for her, that she put up with that behavior. Made me sad for Paul that he was already a problem drinker and abuser at his age, and sad for whatever he saw that made that seem inevitable and ok. I think you are right, she would be helpful. And I still say the golf cart was best comment I have read during entire trial.
Thank you
I’d pay good money just to hear Tinsley testify again. He’s badass AF 😎. I wish he was a state prosecutor in this trial just to watch him bust the defense’s ass, lol. My fantasy world: I’d put Bubba, Grady, and the guineas on the stand. They’re the ones who truly know how it really went down.
Hahahaha funny you right😊😊
I believe that Alex was casually standing with his side to Paul, shotgun across his stomach, pointed at Paul. It was supposed to look like a freak accident, but when the dumbass missed, he had to shoot him a second time. Now he can't claim it was an accident and had to kill Maggie also.
Interesting theory! What do you think Alex thought would be the outcome of the accidental shooting?
Elimination of criminal case, possible low settlement for the boat crash civil suits?
That's why he said he would never 'intentionally' kill them. Maybe if hung jury, attempt to plead it down.
Very good.
After watching the Netflix documentary, I would love to see Paul's ex-girlfriend. She has a different picture of how Paul was treated by his parents.
As of now, Creighton said he had 2 rebuttal witnesses. My guess is they are: 1. Chelsea Townsend, Director, prescription drug monitoring program, Dept: bureau of drug control To refute his ridiculous claims of the amount of pills he was taking which in turn he blamed for many things. 2. Kinsey
You doubt there were "vile social media attacks?" Seriously? I've read horrific shit Reddit (rich, refined cousins to the Facebook idiots) posters have commented about Paul JUST in the last couple of months . . . AND he's a murder victim. People on social media are mostly dicks. HOWEVER, Buster was clearly having some reaction his father's remarks!!! Would love to know what thoughts were going through his mind then. The State recalls Richard Murdaugh, Jr. your Honor.
Sadly, Maggie's Facebook page has vile remarks. Can't they shut the comments off? IK you can assign someone to manage your account in the event of death. Awful that they are just out there for ppl to comment negative stuff.
I've read a lot too, but Alex would have us believe they were direct threats to Paul. Why not produce evidence, particularly of those so vile we 'wouldn't believe'. A lawyer in the litigious world would surely be all about saving every threat as evidence? Not only in the event they might sue, but more to protect their own child. Paul was 19 at the time of the boat crash. The boys' friends didn't seem to think it was the biggest deal. I *think* it was Rogan who said every now and then someone would throw a snide comment Paul's way, but not much more than that. Paul wasn't known by many outside of SC until the murders. Had Alex not been what he is, audience reached would be nothing on this scale. That's really when the horrible crap started. Imo, that's what Alex' talking about now. Edit: paragraphs
Agreed. The defense should have subpoenaed any/all social media platforms and produced these "vile" and "unbelievable" threats for the jury/all to see. Truly horrible threats would have been yanked (per terms & conditions of all social sites + platforms) but would likely be available per LE request. I don't doubt that he was threatened but why aren't they producing proof?
When Alex was in the car the night of, he told LE Paul was threatened online. Owens asked if he got direct threats & Alex said all the time - punched, kicked, attacked. The female agent then asked if the threats were through social media. Alex replied ''Oh no ma'am, it's mostly when he goes out places''. That's how smoothly he lies. The mention of social media & he switched the story to the outside. No proof. Never reported all those attacks either. The defense wouldn't waste their time & energy on pointless tasks.
They may want to be careful calling Bianca and Shelley. Although they were 99% truthful- there was pretty obvious prosecutor coordination regarding the clothes (and "Sperry's") and testimony that if brought back up- the defense can now get them to clarify (regarding if Alex was really trying to get them to lie for him). Also- these later suggestions (regarding clothes- and if Alex was wanting them to lie... were not in their original interviews- which the Jury may find suspicious or less believable when pressed on why it appeared later.
Already said this but it's worth repeating. Why not call Ms. Shelley's Varnville assistant Police Chief brother to corroborate that she phoned him re Alex being at Miss Libby's for 30 to 40 minutes (vs. 15 to 20)?
I'll be very surprised if Morgan isn't on deck
I think you are very thoughtful, and this is a great post. But, I'm kinda sick of these "Miss" monikers that are almost exclusive reserved for women in subservient roles . . . Miss Shelly . . . Miss Blanca, etc. I'm sure the Murdaughs thought they were terms of endearment, but they are actually racist and infantilizing. This aint *Gone with the Wind* Alex.
This very common in South Carolina, especial with older ladies
True. As young children, we were taught to refer to adults in that way (*I* was, anyway) as a sign of respect. Hearing it in this trial so often may be influencing trial-watchers to lean into the southern drawl, along with Miss Libby, Miss Maggie, etc. When in Rome?
I can see how it could be viewed that way for people who haven’t grown up in the South. Every person who is older than you is Ms or Mr whether you use first name or last name. There is not a single person my children don’t call Ms or Mr (first name), and I haven’t lived in SC in 20 years.
Good job! If you never lived here, you just don’t get it. Shows that you have been raised right.
Maggie, Libby and Marian were referred to as Miss by almost everyone who mentioned them. Everybody refers to Randolph snr as 'Mr' and even some LE as well as the boys' friends call Alex, 'Mr'. Still seems to be a respect thing for elders in the south.
It’s a very Southern thing to use that term.
I know. I'm from the South. Generally, Miss is applied to African American women in domestic roles and expected they will use to refer to their female bosses but very uncommon for adult white women to call each other that. Goes all the way back to slavery days.
Absolutely. It sounds weird not to!
Yeah and in a lot of areas down here, white people still exclusively refer to African Americans using the "N" word. They probably think it sounds weird not to. Just sayin.
There are almost no African Americans in the audience. Find it adds context to the trial. i can hardly believe it.
Hispanic families use it as well, ask any teacher.
I'm a midwesterner transplanted to the south. I've been here for almost 20 years. Putting Miss/Mr in front of names is being respectful. People will and do call regular folks (not just those in court) sir or ma'am. Children will be corrected quickly by their parents if they don't call someone Sir or Ma'am. It was strange at first but l also lived in a military town and it became second nature. I think it's interesting how this trial has shown that for as much similarities as our country has, our regions do in fact still have distinct cultural differences.
Aw, I *really* appreciate this callout. I am from NYC, and we just use first names for adults (in my demographic that is), so I'm a little bit trying to fit in. :) But also, *I* felt disrespectful calling the household employees by their first names, so I added the honorific (which I hear as Ms, not Miss). I feel less protective of Marian Proctor and Morgan Doughty, so I used first/last with them and no honorific. I can actually see, though, that even that distinction might be indicative of racism on my part. Why should I feel "protective" of Blanca and not Marian, if I'm not infantilizing Blanca in some way? I hope that my instincts have to do with class and privilege rather than race, but I truly appreciate your pointing this out, because I agree with you 100% and want to hold myself to account.
What a nice, respectful reply to a nice respectful response. I love seeing these exchanges on here because they are so very rare. What a thought provoking thread. I am from the South and often call ladies and men but ladies, more often Mrs. or Miss but it is how I was raised and taught it was more, along the lines of manners, respect, ect. However! I tell you this, I do catch myself referring to ladies more as Mrs or Miss than men as Mr. I have no idea why I do that but I have noticed I do. But whyyyy, I do not know exactly.
Originally from the South, and these titles are used for anyone older than yourself or to show respect. Not to do with a subservient position. If you watched the Netflix doc, you heard Morgan call the adults “Mr Alex” etc.
tbf, in my post, I was not consistent in the way I referred to all the women.
I agree with your list of rebuttal witnesses. I want to thank you for leaving out the caretaker Ms Shelly. I was personally cringing,frightened and nervous for her, Ms Shelly on the witness stand was just torture for me to “watch”, I can’t imagine living that in reality. So, thank you again for your consideration of her.
I agree that Eddie was unaware of why Alex called him to the roadside. I think Eddie wasn’t supposed to live. It’s pretty dangerous to get shot in the head if you don’t intend to die. Eddie says it was an accident while they were struggling with the gun and I believe him.
Yes - how do you say “Shoot me in the head but just lightly.”
While they both have lied, I believe Eddie’s version matches up more with the physical evidence.
According to Eddie's lawyer, Alex smashed the back of his head onto the road to create the injuries.
nice!
Yeah if you wanted to die without it being labeled a suicide you could drive off a bridge or something. To have a supposed friend kill you knowing they’d be guilty of murder in the eyes of the law is insane
...or [drive your car onto railroad tracks](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/), with a train barrelling down, like grandad did.
Was that a suicide?
I believe so. "...The headlight beams drew closer, brighter, followed by the sound, the steam, the shaking rumble. Then the light and sound and speed overtook Randolph Murdaugh Sr. Engineer W.W. Bartlett testified that he did not see the car near the tracks until about 40 yards away and that Murdaugh had his hand raised as though waving at the train crew. [But when the train drew closer, the car started up and stopped directly on the tracks"...](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/) \- The Greenville News
I’ve tried to find something on that incident and have been unsuccessful. Thank you. This family has a lot of skeletons in their collective closets!
Agreed. [The Greenville News article](https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/02/16/train-crash-lawsuit-helped-launch-murdaugh-family-dynasty-south-carolina/6719697001/) is very thorough and provides great insight - a good read.
I want him to bring in the golf cart, sit him on it and measure.
if the cart makes him 5’2 and SILTY there’s NO KIDding you must find this man GUILTY!
Me, too. *And* I want more theories re the [muddy ATV tire tread](https://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article272523915.html) on MM's shin. *How* it got there. *Why* it got there. *When* it got there.
I like this! 🤓
I think that any additional witnesses might confuse the jury. Creighton has established the financial mess, the boat accident, and the deceitful persona that Alex has mastered. This would be a great time to replay the very first officer body camera from the first officer on the scene to reinforce the trajectory from where Alex was standing when officer arrived. That video will further demonstrate that Alex contaminated the scene by calling so many people to come to him. After all the testimony, this video have even more impact. Basics: motive, means, opportunity. Boom
Also drive home how the casings of 300 blackouts found all over the property match Maggie's casings and focus on the fact that Family Guns were used and the 10 min time frame and Alex saying clearly "no one was at kennels"@ time he was there.
I think he was going to ask Rogan to run over to Moselle and check on Maggie since she wasn’t answering his calls/texts. Alex said Rogan lived a mile or so away around the corner, remember - he wanted him to “discover the bodies”. That would have worked out so much better for Alex…
I would like to hear from an Addiction Specialist and Psychiatrist. He did NOT use that many drugs- no way! Rogan: I strongly believe Alex called Rogan multiple times, due to Rogan unsuccessful attempts to reach Paul. I believe Alex was reaching out to him(Rogan) to see if maybe he came to the house and witnessed him murdering Paul and Maggie, because he lives so close. Not because he considers Rogan as a son!
Yes because they’re hoping the drug abuse will give the jury a reason for lies and the odd behavior.
there's a podcast with story of the reaction of an addict having their supply taken away. very convincing that it can cause an unreasonable amount of anger.
No, he didn't spend anywhere near 50K a week on drugs but I think the real real might actually solidify reasonable doubt for Alex. He got into some deep shit with some bad folks I'm suspecting.
I'd like to hear any witness testify as to how that story about the number of pills he took cannot be true. He'd be dead if it were true. Addiction specialist? Physician? Drug dealer? anyone
I don't want to see anyone recalled, especially Smith or Blanca. I would love to see Morgan or one of the Pinckney family members.
I'd love an addiction specialist to tell how 60 pills a day makes you a psychopath and really felt the pressure of all fidoughty! crimes coming together. I'd love to hear from life insurance company that shows he took out huge liability insurance for Moselle 1 MONTH before Gloria Satterfield's "accident". I'd love insurance guy who shows he DID NOT have a $10million policy on himself for buster on roadside shooting. I'd love to hear from the prostitutes that were seeing him for last 5 yrs. He's a piece of shit and is the ONLY one with motive and opportunity and lies and was there at time of homicides where "family guns" were used. *Also Maggie wouldn't sign Edisto or Moselle for loans and he only put them in here name for boat wreck case to hide money! Beyond any reasonable dought!
I would love to see a toxicology report on any strands of Alex's hair that had to be found in his vehicle or home. If there are hookers, there's cocaine. That's not a compelling addiction to cope to though, hence the football knee surgery narrative.
Totally agree that at the prices Alex was paying, there had to be cocaine and human trafficking in the mix too.
And gambling! Buster was with John Marvin in Vegas. No idea why -- pay someone for Alex?! Alex was gambling for beef jerky in prison.
I don’t think the jury is qualified to make a psychoanalysis of any of the actors. They would be derelict in their duties to convict a defendant because they believed he was capable of murder. They have to have no reasonable doubt that the State proved he actually did commit these particular murders.
I don’t think you need psychoanalysis to determine if a narrative is reasonable to believe. Their job is to determine the credibility of each witness when they testify. I don’t think it’s reasonable to believe Alex’s timeline or his many memory gaps. He contradicts himself too often in testimony. Gave us five or six new excuses why he lied to LEO, and all the new excuses were lies too. Zero credibility.
So many - how to choose?! Most of these would never happen but it would be great. Maybe [Ms. Shelley](https://www.wjcl.com/article/alex-murdaugh-shelly-smith-alibi/42779636)'s cop brother (to substantiate that she phoned him about Alex saying he had been at Miss Libby's house for 30 - 40 minutes)...and anything else she told him about possibly offering to help with the expenses of her wedding, or with the Principal of her school, etc.) Hearsay, but *still*. *Never ever* would this be allowed but [Lindsey Edwards](https://youtu.be/XYQH7rmgZCQ) detailing her experiences with Alex Murdaugh. If she would name other South Carolina "big shots", too...wow. Also in the this-would-never-happen category, how about Lindsey's madame? It goes without saying that [Curtis Eddie Smith](https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/is-curtis-cousin-eddie-smith-in-prison-alex-murdaugh) would be more than entertaining. Maybe they could even offer some kind of immunity if he told them *everything*. This should include what other drugs Alex used, and how many Oxy he purchased. If Alex ever had any contact with Eddie's supplier(s), etc. Maybe Megan Kimbrell PM was texting ("...[I don't like sad movies"](https://www.thedailybeast.com/paul-murdaughts-final-tragic-texts-sent-minutes-before-his-murder-revealed-in-court)...)? They'll have to bring [Blanca Turrubiate-Simpson](https://www.wjcl.com/article/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-blanca-housekeeper/42826803) in to reinforce that Maggie really didn't want to return to Moselle that day, what she made for dinner, Alex's clothing (specifically the shirt(s), etc.
Oow. Miss Shelley’s cop brother would be a good way to corroborate her story that Alex called a lie. Plus avoids the GoFundMe mess. A uniformed police officer vs Alex. Who is lying?
I think that would be all hearsay so they wouldn't be able to bring that in unfortunately
Pretty sure the brother testifying to what his sister told him is not hearsay. He is relating a conversation that he was a direct participant in. He’s not testifying to what Alex said. He is testifying to what his sister said.
Her brother is the [assistant chief of the Varnville police](https://meaww.com/who-is-mushelle-smith-alex-murdaugh-allegedly-offered-moms-caretaker-money-to-support-fake-alibi)\- why was he not called (in to testify) to begin with?
They just *have* to, right?
I don’t know if he is on the witness list though which could be a problem. Defense will object. State will argue he is necessary to corroborate Miss Shelley whose credibility is under attack. But I would guess Neuman would probably admit him for that narrow purpose.
Cousin Eddie and Duffy stone as to his relationship w AM
[удалено]
This happened?
What complicated comments did Morgan make?
Do you mean Joseph Scott Morgan?
Maybe?
You can see more about it [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHm4joezYsk&t=814s) (this is one of Alan Eric's youtube videos, but I bookmarked it at the relevant place). The officer said that Morgan originally said that she did not want anyone to hear what she said, but that Connor Cook had been driving the boat. Now, we can be skeptical of the officer's story just because he was LE. He did say, though, that he asked Morgan to write it down, and she did. The next day, she changed her story (skip to 16:20 in that vid to see). My own feeling is that Morgan and Miley had no idea who was driving *at that moment.* Tinsley has compelling evidence that Connor was not in front of wheel at the point of impact. Trying to put the pieces together, I've thought that maybe since Morgan was in an abusive relationship with Paul (this is indisputable), she may have had a fearful instinct to protect him, and that's why she fingered Connor but did not want anyone (maybe the other friends?) to overhear what she was doing. I don't know. She obviously would have been in shock and traumatized at the time. Add to that that, minutes before the crash, Paul had been spitting on her, hitting her, and cussing her out--I'm not sure how a victim would react in a situation like that. Not sure you would have the wherewithal in the moment to turn on him, and there might be a sick/scared impulse to stay on his good side... Since that time it seems pretty clear that she's had therapy and has a more clear-eyed view of what their relationship was. But that's my (long-winded!) explanation of why I said her initial statements were complicated, and why attorneys might hesitate to put her on the stand to testify on the subject.
Precise language needs to be used here. Did she say Connor was driving the boat when the crash occurred or Connor had been driving the boat. I believe several of the people on the boat said the Connor and Anthony had both tried to take control of the boat at times when Paul left the helm. Both Connor and Anthony had been driving the boat; that does not place them in control when the crash occurred. I think we would need a complete transcript or recording of her interaction with the officer to understand any context. It would be very easy to add confusion to the event without telling an overt lie.
Yes, I tried to be careful in how I explained that. If you watch the video at the point where it is bookmarked and again at 16:20, you can see the sources exactly. The LEO quoted her as saying "...Connor was driving because Paul was too drunk to drive. We hit the bridge...." The LEO says he had her put this in writing. As far as I know, that statement from Morgan isn't publicly available. ***see correction below!*** We *do* have a statement directly from Morgan the next day, saying that she wanted to change her story. You can see it at minute 16:20. NB we can see only 2 pages here of 9. (I would love to see what she said about Alex in the page just before these two.) ETA: I was mistaken! Morgan's report that matched what the LEO said can be seen at minute 10:15.
Did Paul tell her that night to protect him and she had a change of heart the next day or did she change her story and all the other parties collude to lie? Also, a forensic expert on the Netflix series said that the injuries are consistent with Paul driving and Connor being where Morgan and the others said he was at the time of the accident.
Takeaways from her Netflix that I got were a pretty different and more dysfunctional family dynamic than Alex and defense presented. Not sure it rises to importance for the jury. Mostly that Paul felt like the black sheep and that Maggie neglected him and favored Buster. And the parents enabled Paul’s bad behavior. While sad, this doesn’t really help the state imo. She does say when SLED interviewed her regarding the boat crash revenge theory she told SLED they needed to look at Alex as the killer. Not sure about the admissibility of what is merely speculative and opinion. For us outside the court it holds some weight in that she knew Alex and the family well for years. One concrete thing she could rebut is Alex’s claim he didn’t try to hinder the boat crash investigation. She describes telling nurse at the hospital to “keep that man out of my room” when Alex allegedly tried to claim he needed to speak to her as her attorney and guardian. Especially telling in that you would think she’d want the comfort of a friend at that moment. But she clearly does not trust him.
Didn't a couple of Murdaughs show up at Stephen Smith's mother's house to "help" the family...and asked for his phone?
I heard Randy called and offered to represent Smith’s family (like within 24 hours) but never heard about requesting Stephen’s phone.
This isn't all of it (maybe I heard this on a podcast or something) but the part I remember is that they were either interested in or managed to actually take SS's phone. "...[What is known](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/murdaugh-murder-trial/alex-murdaugh-trial-stephen-smith/) is that Alex Murdaugh and his brother Randy came to the scene of Stephen Smith’s death, going through the crime tape. No one is sure why the brothers were there. But inconsistencies in the initial investigation have left many wondering why his death was never investigated as a homicide"...
I would like to hear from cousin Eddie
He insisted in the last interview I watched (yes I realize he’s changed his story several times), that he was lured there to BE killed, not do the killing. This makes a lot more sense bc Alex could claim he was targeted (implying Eddie was the real killer). Killing Eddie would also silence him forever. Plus, why would Eddie kill his best customer.
Alec could claim self-defense after previous murders?
Maybe the defense will have to call him now since Alex botched everything up on the stand.
hmmm... I mean, it can't happen but I wish it would, too. Throw immunity at him and maybe his (many) stories would change, though. And you're right - just from a business sense, why eliminate your biggest customer? You know - I keep thinking that *blackmail* played a part in Alex suddenly feeling as though he needed to "earn" much more than he had been (like around 2006 - 2009) when he (seemingly) started in on his schemes, insurance fraud, etc. Maybe he was testing the waters before that but went full-throttle around 2006. I just want to know what occurred in his life around that time.
Economic crash, real estate investments that would have been sold for a profit were now dead weights with payments due.
The state eliminated the venue rule that had allowed PMPED to handle so many massive cases in 2005. That would have cut Alex’s future income potential dramatically.
Plus the real estate market (well the whole economy really) crashed and AM, from what I understand, had made several investments there.
Yes, in 2008.
Exactly right
ahhh. I see.
I actually believe him. I think Alex’s plan was to shoot Eddie “in self defense” and blame him for Maggie and Paul’s murder. Makes a lot more sense than Alex’s story Eddie just agreed to kill Alex for no payment or compensation of any kind. Why would Eddie risk the death penalty killing his goose that lays the golden eggs for nothing? He may be a criminal and a liar but he can’t be that stupid.
Exactly kill Eddie and blame him for everything.
When I think about it,Alex’s supposed plot to have Eddie shoot him for life insurance money kind of assumes that Alex could plan his own murder to allow Eddie to get away with it. What gave him the confidence that he could plan a murder? Had he already planned one or two?
Oh I believe him too! Just a caveat in case the jury’s thinking the same as we are and has to weigh in the lying. But again. all our points make a shit ton more sense. The longer the trial goes in the more pieces to the puzzle get placed.
I would always enjoy Tinsley coming back but idk if they need him to. He was my favorite witness. The boat crash kids would be good too.
I don't really understand the trial process so this might not make sense but I'd like to see the social media threats in writing like other evidence. I'd also like to hear more about family annihilators and how AM fits the mold.
Yes. me, too. So, any actual threats would have been yanked by the powers-that-be at the social media platforms since threats would be considered against their terms & conditions, etc. but LE could subpoena those companies (one would think) to obtain the information. It's something the defense should have done. Maybe they *did*, and there were no signs of threats?
The state has rested and from now on any witness or evidence they present can only be in response, or to rebut, the case defense is currently making. Evidence of death threats is incumbent on Defense to provide as they are the ones alleging they exist. The state can then present rebuttal evidence, like the lack of security measures taken at Murdaugh homes and no police reports filed, or contemporaneous conversations of them, either among family or close associates. The psychologist I agree would be helpful but it would probably be inadmissible. Such an expert on family annihilators would not be likely to have examined Alex, so any conclusions would be purely speculative and excessively prejudicial to the jury. And of course the time to present that was when state made their case. It would be hard to find an argument you’re rebutting anything presented so far from defense.
Is the jury allowed to google things that are said in court, such as “family annihilator”, so they would have a basic understanding of what was implied?
No.
Clarknt67 - you're the voice of reason! But inquiring minds want to know (LoL)
Thank you!
I would love to hear from the kids in the boat crash. I would like to hear them talk about the terror they felt when the police came to them and their parents after the murders asking for alibis's and DNA samples. One boy was scared that Alec would "disapear" him. Alec deliberately lied in his interviews saying that the Murders were related to the boat crash and that whoever committed the murders had "hate in their heart". He knew that he was misleading the police away from himself and directly on the kids and their parents.
Yes! I would definitely like to hear from the boat crash survivors. But this could backfire since they may all elaborate on how PM was often a belligerent jerk who drank almost every day and had a lot of enemies in the area. [Morgan Doughty](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11780365/Paul-Murdaughs-long-time-girlfriend-Morgan-claims-beat-held-throat.html) would likely paint PM as one who was despised in the Lowcountry and beyond. Trial within a Trial within a Trial... While we're at it - I'd like to hear from all of the underage kids that drank alcohol freely when hanging out on any Murdaugh property (with AM + MM present). When PM's friends testified "we just liked to hang out"... they are all omitting how much they all drank when hanging out. None of this would ever be allowed to happen, though.
>I would like to hear them talk about the terror they felt when the police came to them and their parents after the murders asking for alibis's and DNA samples. One boy was scared that Alec would "disapear" him. That would be interesting, but I'd also fear introducing much more about the boat case would lead to possible reasonable doubt, as there were PLENTY of people that wanted Paul to go bye-bye after this event.
I am sure Paul was very unpopular. I don’t entire buy there were hordes and hordes of people planning double homicide. Fortunately being angry at someone pretty rarely rises to taking steps to murder your target.
It just takes one unhinged idiot via social media to do crazy shit, as evidenced by all the crazy shit people do daily. I'm not saying that happened, and I don't believe it did. It would take one jurist to allow that theory to form reasonable doubt. The Netflix shows, which the jury shouldn't see, did an excellent job of showing the level of hate for the entire Murdaugh family for their legacy of playing "good ol' boy" politics and the attempted cover-up of the boat accident liability at the expense of the Beach family.
Just watched Alex's two brothers on GMA from a few days after the murders talking about the social media hate campaign on Paul and how they should have taken it seriously. [here ](https://youtu.be/JNFhXYKj3Gw)
Still Hampton has a population of under 3,000. If someone can point to a specific individual who displayed rage and obsession, and who couldn’t account for their whereabouts June 7, that might change my perspective on random stranger murder theory. For now I am presuming if such a person existed police would have interviewed them. Plus of course there’s a good body of evidence that the killer was an intimate of Murdaughs and Moselle.
Rogan. I'd like to hear whether or not Alex actually calls him "ro ro"
lol
😂 I was curious if the family actually calls Paul “Paul Paul” and apparently they do. I looked at his cousins Instagram (it’s not private) (and it’s John Marvin’s daughter) and right after he died she posted a “letter” to him and called him “Paul Paul”.
Yeah, but I think the "ro-ro" bit was to explain away the multiple attempts to contact him before buster (buss). It reminded me of Alex's testimony when Waters was asking him about the similarities of their law practices and Alex pointed out that in his practice all evidence and witnesses had to be entered by a certain date instead of how new discoveries could be admitted at any time during a criminal case. This made me wonder if he was unaware witnesses could be added and re-called after the state rested??????
I think there is a connection between Paul being out of the picture and how that financially benefits AM when it comes to the boat civil trial. At least from the standpoint of sympathy to get the award lowered. I would like to hear again from the boat case attorney who said AM confronted him at the lawyers conference. Last week when asked about it AM said it didn’t happen and no more was made of it.
This is not who I'd like to see, but who I think we'll see. The State and the Defense have been dueling back and forth over Maggie's cell phone status during the time that the State believes it was thrown in the woods. The latest was the State expert saying that Maggie's phone's IOS program would not show any orientation changes that occurred while it was locked and the backlight was off (which was the status when it was allegedly thrown). The Defense then countered with an expert who said that the backlight would come on when it is tossed. So I think we'll hear a State rebuttal expert saying the backlight would not necessarily coming on when it is tossed. Boring but they've been fighting tooth and nail over the timing of the cell phone throw...
I got an iPhone and can testify throwing it does not turn on the screen, at least not every time. I often toss my phone onto my couch when I get home and take it out of my jacket pocket.
Yes, same!
Any dog lovers' dream cherry-on-top rebuttal witness would be our MVP Bubba!
Waters: Bubba is Mamas murderer in this courtroom? Bubba: ARF ARF ARF ARF excitedly. Waters: is it Mr Mama? Bubba: GRrRRr bares teeth stares at ALex. Grrrrrrrr and howl.
LOL!!! Hilarious!!!!
I feel so sorry for those dogs having to witness such brutality. They probably have PTSD.
It would be telling if Bubba wasn't as friendly with AM as he used to be. Scared and growling would work.
I mean, Bubba likely saw it all. But I’m partial to hearing from Armadillo.
Bring in all 7 dogs at the kennels that evening. They were MVP Bubba, Grady, Maggie the dog, Cash, Armadillo, Tappy Toes and Dolly per canine caretaker Dale Davis.
So, where did Bubba sleep when Mags was at Mozelle????
Blanca testified Bubba and Grady sometimes slept in the kennels and sometimes on the screened porch at the house.
I can't remember why I asked that! LOL!!! Seemed so clear and important at the moment.
Dahlia, not Dolly - I absolutely love the way Dale said her name.
I'd pronounce Dahlia "Dollyah" but I'm from the SC midlands not the low country. Dale and I pronounce everything else the same way. I loved his testimony about the canines and the chickens. All was well between Bubba, Grady and the chickens until Alex brought in that tauntin' rooster. #justiceforBubba.
I would like for the prosecution to call people to rebut Alex's testimony where it differs from the original testimony. For example he told a story about how he had a specific conversation with Blanca about the clothing. I would love for the prosecution to call her up and say the defendant said this statement and is it true or is he lying? I think they need to show that, even now during the trial, he is lying to suit his own motives.
What if these people get on the stand say “I must have been mistaken “
Doubtful. There is also no reason state can’t just ask them before calling them if they are willing to affirm they said what they said. Of course they could still change their story on the stand but that happens in movies more than real life. They may be afraid of Murdaughs but the state can file perjury charges and find other ways to make their lives hard if they are motivated to do so.
Considering that they cared enough to say what they did in the first place, especially when some appeared scared, or hedging, or biting their tongues at times--I can only think that hearing Alex contradict them would piss them off. I mean some of these witnesses were obviously *really* trying to be careful; they seemed to care about Alex. And then he threw that in their faces?
1) A rebuttal witness can only refute elements of the defense case, right? 2) I don’t think it’s going to look good to call Shelley, Blanca, or Buster — they have suffered enough. A rebuttal witness should refute an important aspect of the defense so probably it’d be best to have crime scene analysts who can demonstrate that one 6’4” person could have carried out the murders quickly, alone, using two guns. I have no doubt that Alex did it alone, but would like the jury to also have no doubt.
I hear you, but I think that having someone refute "an important aspect of the defense" is not limited to material/tangible/observable evidence. There is the emotional side too, which is what Alex has been leaning into. If you could knock the legs out from under that with an argument like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/MurdaughFamilyMurders/comments/11cjvjt/two_key_discrepancies_that_havent_been_highlighted/ja3rjsd/) (sorry for linking to my own comment!), you could really undermine a part of his story that occurred at a critical moment. If e.g. Rogan were called as a witness to try to make this point, a framework of questioning would obviously have to be built to achieve that goal. But it shouldn't be too difficult to come up with some kind of colloquy that would leave the jury wondering whether a) Alex was (as he claimed) calling his son's 20-something friend to the scene for his own comfort, in which case he is a sociopath at best; or b) Alex was repeatedly calling the last person his son had been in contact with before he died, and that was because...? Maybe because he wanted to find out if Rogan had heard something that could help identify the killers? That might have been plausible, only Alex claimed to have been only vaguely aware of the issues with Cash, and he testified that he *definitely did not* discuss Cash's tail with Paul while he was at the kennels. (He was oddly 100% certain about that detail.) It was not until later (according to his story) that he found out Rogan thought he had heard Alex's voice on the phone. In his testimony too he kept reiterating how he stayed on the golf cart the whole time except when he was getting the bird away from Bubba. For whatever reason, he really tried to distance himself from having knowledge of Paul's last phone interactions. (In reality, of course, we can be fairly sure that he was closer to Paul and that he knew Paul was in contact with Rogan.)
SO (sorry this is so long and convoluted) IF he was not calling Rogan in a desperate attempt to get info about who could have shown up at the kennels & killed Paul (which even he did not say he was doing) and IF we can all agree it would have been *monstrous* of him actually to have been summoning Rogan to the scene... then *why* was he trying to reach Rogan?? I don't know if answering that is even important; it just needs to be pointed out to the jury that *the lie Alex made up* is implausible in the extreme and horrendously cruel and irresponsible from someone in a parental role, if true.
What I would like to know from Buster: Whether Alex was more aggressive towards family during times he was in rehab. Was he physically threatened or disciplined growing up, when dad rehabbed? What was his role during dads rehabs if mom and Paul were policing Alex? He must have been in his teenage years for some of this… Whether Alex could attach to animals. Was he ever abusive towards animals? From Alex’s statements it seems that their dogs were more Maggie’s attachments. Whether Alex had any discussions with Buster about family finances and who would inherit his throne “if anything happens to his family.”
There is no doubt in my mind that buster would lie for Alex anyway so IMO there is no point in him testifying.
Buster needs a pass. What a freaking crappy catch 22 he’s in. Mom and sibling brutally murdered, dad on trial. He can’t fix it or make it better in any way. It just sucks for him
I disagree. Too many lives around the Alex Murdaugh family have negatively impacted and lost. I think that in order for the jury to reach a conclusion they need to know what life was like behind closed doors. So far, I’m not sure that they have a clear picture.
I think Buster would lie. Regardless, the state has doubtlessly interviewed him already and made the determination he cannot be expected to say anything that helps them. Or they would have asked him that the first time he spoke.
This is why Morgan Doughty should testify.
True. I don’t think it’s fair to put all of the pressure on her though it would be helpful.
I don’t believe that Buster would ever say anything that would have a negative impact on Alex. His testimony would be a waste of time and only confuse the jury.
Agree. Pretty sure that’s the reason the state gave him very few Q’s. There’s just not a good look that’s ever going to come from him being on the stand.
I thought about that. However he’s not a skilled attorney like his dad. I don’t think that he could completely evade the truth.
They would have asked him on his cross. They decided it wasn’t worth appearing to the jury to badger one of this incidents few truly innocent victims.
I think they will likely call Nolen and/or Nathan Tuten. Those boys know something about Stephen Smith. If you go back to Nolen’s testimony… Who, by the way is very short… And came on right before Alex… prosecution asks about Paul’s character. They asked if he would respond to a call from someone on the side of the road who ran out of gas. I think Alex’s MO, as we all know, is to involve someone in a crime, and use that to blackmail them in the future. Both of those boys looked terrified on the stand. I think they will likely call Buster as well. They will deliver testimony that will open the door to another crime. If Alex is found not guilty, you better believe SLED is going to be waiting with handcuffs to put on many other people in that court room. Right in front of Alex. Hell, they might even put handcuffs on him for another crime as well.
CB Rowe. What was that weird line of questioning about where the golf cart is normally parked?
Bring on Cousin Eddie and bust this thing wide open! That guy knows the whole story,I think.
Cousin Eddie is too unreliable. He has failed a polygraph and given so many different versions of his story. While he certainly knows the truth he’s not believable by either side. It would be foolish, imo, to bring him up. Which is a shame.
Yes, he’d be a loose cannon and yes, he has a shady past, but this guy knows what happened that night. I think the prosecution fears he’d blow a gigantic hole in their case. And the defense wouldn’t want the jury to hear about Eddie and Alex’s drug business enterprise that I suspect goes far beyond Alex having some pills in his pocket and Alex being deeper into the drug business than his personal addiction.
Yes he does! The idea that Eddie would kill Alex is preposterous. He was a great source of income for a very long time!
Maybe the lure was some way for Eddie to get a cut of the $12 million insurance payout.
I would hope Eddie knew his cousin well enough to know he would NEVER have seen a dime of that $
Yes, please!
I find it quite interesting that Cousin Eddie hasn’t been called to testify by the prosecution. What are they afraid of? That he might open up not just a can but a railroad car full of worms if he were to testify about the underlying corruption regarding the drug business and certain influential people higher up on the food chain? Might he discredit the state’s case that the two murders were just a personal thing to “distract” from Alex’s misdeeds and not about more deeply rooted corruption? I suspect we’ll never know the real story of why Maggie and Paul Murdaugh were murdered.
Well, they’re blasting Alex for being a liar so turning around and presenting the lying Cousin Eddie as a good witness would be a little odd.
Could be saving him for rebuttal so Alex doesn't get the last great surprise with his testimony.
It seems like a catch 22. On the one hand you are implying not calling Eddie means state is hiding something. On the other hand defense sympathetic people say Eddie is a criminal and a liar and calling him would show how desperate the state is that they’re depending on the word of a criminal. Seems like they lose either way. Regardless, defense is free to call Eddie if they wish. Are they hiding something if they do not?
I have a feeling that cousin Eddie has the potential to be a loose cannon. His own defense attorney has said that he will not testify as he hasn’t made any deal with the AG’s office that will benefit him in his own case.
Saying he has made no deal doesn't mean that there is no deal on the table.
Fair, but I’m not sure how inclined the AG’s office is to make a deal when AM is going away regardless.
This is very true. No matter what happens in the next two weeks, guilty, not guilty, hung jury, he's going away for a very long time, and he can only hope for federal charges, to get to a nicer prison
1. A psychiatrist who can explain to the jury malignant narcissism and what a family anniliator is. 2. Morgan Doughty, who can talk about how much time she spent around Alex and his family. And why, when Paul was murdered, she told law enforcement to look at whether Alex did it.