SC - Paul Murdaugh, 22 and mom Margaret, 52, found shot to death, Islandton, 7 June 2021

[MoeInVA]

That usually means murder/suicide or just suicide, doesn't it?

Sometimes but not always. It’s quite baffling isn’t it? If not murder/suicide, then what?

1) could they have just meant that they believe it was targeted and they know their suspect (surveillance video for instance)?

2) Between LE saying there is no public danger and no active search for suspects and the “ring of uniformed law enforcement officers” surrounding the funeral, I wonder if a confessed shooter claiming self defense could have been allowed to attend under some kind of deal while they checked the story out?

3) Or could a shooter have been hospitalized rather than arrested? Just wild guesses to make sense of it.

 

[clearskies1]

That usually means murder/suicide or just suicide, doesn't it?

It's odd. When LE suspects one of those 2 scenarios they usually let that be known early on -- to allay fear in the community. But that obviously hasn't happened here. Don't know what's going on here. JMO.

 

[Warwick7]

"Both speakers noted how close the Murdaugh family was, and Crosby added that Murdaugh III “chose to go to be with them” when he died Thursday"

Chose??

https://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article252050853.html

I agree the police perimeter "when there is no threat to the public" is very odd....

 

[Kittybunny]

That usually means murder/suicide or just suicide, doesn't it?

Not really, unfortunately LE likes to use this phrase all the time, even when they have no idea who has perpetrated a shooting. It can mean it was somebody close to home, or it could mean that they believe that it was targeted and that the general public is not the target. The only time when they seem to actually say there is a danger is when there is a active shooter on the loose who is randomly shooting people. It's really disingenuous but it seems that's the way it works.

 

[MemPat]

<Modsnip>
It would be surprising if a ton of money hasn't been put in the name of the brothers. Since Paul was under 21 and Alex, Jr. was older he could be sued for providing the Driver's License.

 

[Sleuth307]

<Modsnip>
That’s a good question, why BM? I am assuming it’s some legal strategy for whatever reason?

 

[clearskies1]

It would be surprising if a ton of money hasn't been put in the name of the brothers. Since Paul was under 21 and Alex, Jr. was older he could be sued for providing the Driver's License.

Yes. Trying to figure out why Paul wasn't sued.

 

[Gibbo214]

That’s a good question, why BM? I am assuming it’s some legal strategy for whatever reason?

Maybe a trust fund coming to him when he is of age?

 

[taylorss]

That’s a good question, why BM? I am assuming it’s some legal strategy for whatever reason?

IIRC - BM either got the alcohol for PM or PM used BM’s ID ? And do IIRC that the liquor store or distributor is named in the suit? If yes I’d speculate MOO that BM is named because he provides the necessary nexus between the wrong-doers

 

[Bridger]

There’s no doubt why BM was sued—the complaint tells us. The question is why Paul, an adult and the direct nexus for the death, wasn’t. If BM had assets, why didn’t Paul?

 

[Marklhc1988]

If I were an attorney at AM’s law firm I would be ordering an immediate audit of the firm’s financial records.

That's a good call.

 

[Eoj163]

I'm still mulling over the fact that two different firearms were used in the killings. What circumstances could have led to this, other than the obvious likelihood that there were 2 different killers?

I presume that the entire family, and most people they know, were familiar with shooting and likely had firearms, right? (Sorry, I'm Canadian, and I don't know many people who own firearms, but I presume that since this family had a hunting lodge, and since firearms are fairly common in SC, that this would be the case?)

I also am so interested in the two firearms. Yes, a SC native. They would be very familiar with firearms. I also wonder where the weapons were stored and if they were at the lodge already. If they were usually kept in the gun safe at the lodge, if they were in someones truck? If they were usually stored in a safe then I wonder who all knew the safe code. I also think there must be two killers. There would be no other reason for them to use two firearms.

 

[Eoj163]

There’s no doubt why BM was sued—the complaint tells us. The question is why Paul, an adult and the direct nexus for the death, wasn’t. If BM had assets, why didn’t Paul?

BM let Paul use his ID to purchase alcohol because he was older and they looked so much alike. Assuming the family says this contributed to his drunkenness and then Mal's death.

 

[Marklhc1988]

These are my thoughts as well.

I don't feel AM is going to have any involvement with the deaths, too obvious even for this powerfully connected family. Wasn't there a hearing scheduled or held a few days prior to June 7th when Maggie & Paul were killed? I read that somewhere but don't remember where, so take that as unconfirmed.

Someone may have been convinced justice would never be served and decided to take it into their own hands, JMO. Add- Paul was not a party to the civil case filed by the Beach family. So killing him would not effect the case, it only closes the criminal filing. Maggie would be killed because she could identify the shooter(s).

Your assessment is what I am also thinking. For father to do this would mean 100% caught and he would know that. This is someone fed up with the perceived lack of justice for Ms. Beach and had had enough. 1 thing I am very curious of if this scenario is true is now did the perp(s) know they would be at the lodge.

 

[Marklhc1988]

Makes a good point for two shooters. I've also considered Paul might have came out of the house with a weapon (AR), he was shot multiple times using all the bullets in the shotgun. When Maggie came out to see what was going on, the AR Paul dropped was used to kill her. Just thinking out loud-

Very interesting scenario.

 

[weedemout]

from the islandpacket article 3 years ago.

The Murdaughs had no comment about the lawsuit or the boat crash and its aftermath. The family firm issued a blanket statement for all questions about the boating incident: “Our thoughts and prayers have and will continue to go out to the Beach family, and all the families and friends affected by this tragedy.”

From the NBC news article yesterday

a family lawyer (for the Beach's) told WCBD. "They would like the family and the community to know that their thoughts and continued prayers are with the Murdaughs."

 

[Midwestmom2019]

The alibi that Alex, Paul’s father, was out shooting, it would provide him with an excuse for having GPR on his hands. Hmmmm.

Do different guns leave different residue? I’ve been wondering for several days now.

 

[evilwise]

"Both speakers noted how close the Murdaugh family was, and Crosby added that Murdaugh III “chose to go to be with them” when he died Thursday"

Chose??

https://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article252050853.html

I agree the police perimeter "when there is no threat to the public" is very odd....

Taken out of context, as it is in this article, that quote really could be taken to strongly imply suicide but it might just mean that he chose to be at the hunting lodge that with his family instead of with friends or wherever else he might have been.

The statement that he was shot "multiple times with a shotgun" also suggests it wasn't suicide. Even if someone gave their self both barrels, I don't think that would necessarily be immediately obvious the way it seems this was. We also have law enforcement rumors being reported that it's a "double homicide" and "is possible Paul was targeted and Maggie was there by happenstance".

One possibility that strikes me is that this might actually be a murder/suicide but law enforcement is intentionally planting contrary rumors as a favor to AM. We see cases here all the time that reach a certain point where the families and official sources suddenly go completely silent. It isn't a stretch to imagine that a family will connected to the officials might be able to get a false narrative unofficially leaked as "rumors"

 

[MrsWatson]

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but had the lawsuit gone to mediation or a settlement broached? I ask because liability, both civil and criminal, seems fairly clear cut, at least to me.

 

[Yemelyan]

Taken out of context, as it is in this article, that quote really could be taken to strongly imply suicide but it might just mean that he chose to be at the hunting lodge that with his family instead of with friends or wherever else he might have been.

The statement that he was shot "multiple times with a shotgun" also suggests it wasn't suicide. Even if someone gave their self both barrels, I don't think that would necessarily be immediately obvious the way it seems this was. We also have law enforcement rumors being reported that it's a "double homicide" and "is possible Paul was targeted and Maggie was there by happenstance".

One possibility that strikes me is that this might actually be a murder/suicide but law enforcement is intentionally planting contrary rumors as a favor to AM. We see cases here all the time that reach a certain point where the families and official sources suddenly go completely silent. It isn't a stretch to imagine that a family will connected to the officials might be able to get a false narrative unofficially leaked as "rumors"

I don't think the quote is taken out of context at all. The attorney giving the eulogy was saying that RM III, who was 81 and already ill at the time, "chose" to go to be with Paul and Maggie after their unexpected deaths. It implies that he was in ill health and that he himself felt it was his time, given his grief over the circumstances.

I don't know whether people can consciously "choose" the time that they go when they are old and sick but it is a common sentiment when one or more family members die in succession.