SC - Paul Murdaugh & mom Margaret Found Shot To Death - Alex Murdaugh Accused - Islandton #16

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Prosecutor (partial) opening statement:

Waters said that although Murdaugh claimed he was never at dog kennels at the family's estate, the voices of Murdaugh, his wife and his son can be heard on cellphone video taken by Paul Murdaugh around 8:45 p.m. on June 7, 2021 near where the alleged murders took place. He said minutes after that video was taken, Murdaugh shot his son with a shotgun and then shot his wife with a rifle inflicting "catastrophic damage."

www.usatoday.com

Opening statements given in former South Carolina attorney Alex Murdaugh's double murder trial

Attorneys delivered opening statements Wednesday in the trial of ex-lawyer Alex Murdaugh, who is charged with killing his wife and son.
www.usatoday.com
 
I’m totally confused.

Why did M arrive at Moselle so late if the purpose was to visit her dying F-in-L in a hospital? Even if she thought he was in a local hospital, the timing seems strange to me. Especially if she was telling friends that A. was ‘up to something.’

Time between arrival, ingesting food, and heading to the kennels reveals no cosy family dinner. She is almost immediately down at the kennels.

Is A contending that he was asleep when she arrived? Sometimes I wonder if there was one more victim than he intended. I used to think Paul was collateral damage, but A did not want to reveal his finances in P’s civil trial. Did he go down to the kennel to kill P not knowing M had arrived? She appears, takes off, and he has to kill her too.

Something is just off in these scenarios. I doubt we will ever know the truth…because only the chaotic mind of the killer contains his real plans.
 
sunshineray said:
Yes he said that then said something like, that's where she always goes. She loves the dogs etc...so not that he eyeballed her there jyst that was a common place for her to be and he took it for granted. That's how I interpeted it. JMO
Click to expand...
Predictability! Known fact with human nature we become more set in our ways including daily rituals. We give away almost everyday without ever realizing it, habit's and such for some out there use this for good or evil purposes. The suspect had a darn good idea of this and took note to employ this in their plan but giving some wiggle room for the unexpected except possibly the son being on the scene as well. The police on hand taking note of vehicles in the area, ATV included, personally I'm the guy who's going around not only looking at them but putting hands on feeling for any heat from the hood's motors and so on, warmth can tell a story as well. Not just what we hear from the suspect or see but what we feel, even smell.
 
Solicitor Duffie Stone's decision to not recuse himself for the first two months of the the Murdaugh investigation is addressed in this article:

"The [recusal] statement was issued just days after FITSNews founding editor Will Folks published a shocking report where sources alleged that Stone has consistently attempted to steer investigators away from any theory that might implicate members of the Murdaugh family, according to FITSNews sources.

In the days following the murders, Stone’s investigators were even caught on camera chatting with a Murdaugh family member at the crime scene — which appears to be a hugely controversial breach of prosecutorial ethics and etiquette.

There were also reports that Stone and his investigators were running a “shadow investigation” in an effort to hold the statewide law enforcement agency “accountable” for the results of its probe."

www.fitsnews.com

Murdaugh Murders update: Prosecutor Duffie Stone Finally Recuses Himself

After Paul and Maggie M Paul Murdaugh and his mother Maggie Murdaugh were found murdered in Colleton County, Duffie Stone finally recused himself.
www.fitsnews.com www.fitsnews.com
 
stmarysmead said:
I’m totally confused.

Why did M arrive at Moselle so late if the purpose was to visit her dying F-in-L in a hospital? Even if she thought he was in a local hospital, the timing seems strange to me. Especially if she was telling friends that A. was ‘up to something.’

Time between arrival, ingesting food, and heading to the kennels reveals no cosy family dinner. She is almost immediately down at the kennels.

Is A contending that he was asleep when she arrived? Sometimes I wonder if there was one more victim than he intended. I used to think Paul was collateral damage, but A did not want to reveal his finances in P’s civil trial. Did he go down to the kennel to kill P not knowing M had arrived? She appears, takes off, and he has to kill her too.

Something is just off in these scenarios. I doubt we will ever know the truth…because only the chaotic mind of the killer contains his real plans.
Click to expand...
According to the prosector, AM's MM's and PM's voices can be heard on Paul's video of his friend's dog shortly before the killings. So AM seemed to know she was there before any attack started. JMO.
 
I have been half listening to the trial for the past 2 days. What stands out for me about the defence strategy is criticize the investigators. There were tire tracks, it rained, the tracks were neither photographed nor preserved. Because police vehicles and officers were at the night-time crime scene, they compromised the crime scene. There were foot prints in the dirt, they were not preserved but were photographed. Officers were at the scene to identify evidence and some did enter the shed next to Paul's body to place evidence markers. A phone was not put in a special bag that would prevent remote erasing. Officers did not wear protective booties outside in the rain at the farm. Ridiculing investigators and raising irrelevant points gives the impression that Alex is choreographing his defence - a Mr Bigshot who thinks he is smarter than everyone in the room. None of these points makes any difference in the big picture.

The investigation is being criticized at every opportunity. Hopefully jurors can see past that convoluted criticism to connect the dots between the evidence. Three people were at the kennels at 8:45, within minutes 2 were dead. The third person spent the next hour creating an alibi before phoning 911 at 10:05. Cell phone records will tie it together, so it's likely that cell phone evidence will be most heavily criticized.

Alex told police his motive for killing Paul on the night of the murders - it was revenge against his own son for turning his life upside down with the drunken boat accident. Maggie was killed for money.
 
otto said:
I have been half listening to the trial for the past 2 days. What stands out for me about the defence strategy is criticize the investigators. There were tire tracks, it rained, the tracks were neither photographed nor preserved. Because police vehicles and officers were at the night-time crime scene, they compromised the crime scene. There were foot prints in the dirt, they were not preserved but were photographed. Officers were at the scene to identify evidence and some did enter the shed next to Paul's body to place evidence markers. A phone was not put in a special bag that would prevent remote erasing. Officers did not wear protective booties outside in the rain at the farm. Ridiculing investigators and raising irrelevant points gives the impression that Alex is choreographing his defence - a Mr Bigshot who thinks he is smarter than everyone in the room. None of these points makes any difference in the big picture.

The investigation is being criticized at every opportunity. Hopefully jurors can see past that convoluted criticism to connect the dots between the evidence. Three people were at the kennels at 8:45, within minutes 2 were dead. The third person spent the next hour creating an alibi before phoning 911 at 10:05. Cell phone records will tie it together, so it's likely that cell phone evidence will be most heavily criticized.

Alex told police his motive for killing Paul on the night of the murders - it was revenge against his own son for turning his life upside down with the drunken boat accident. Maggie was killed for money.
Click to expand...
And the closing argument goes to @otto.

Well done. Remove the noise.

JMO
 
BUF said:
www.fitsnews.com

'Murdaugh Murders' Saga: Alex Murdaugh's Clothes From Night Of Murder Are Missing - FITSNews

More missing evidence?
www.fitsnews.com www.fitsnews.com
Click to expand...

When we saw the bodycam video yesterday of Alex at the crime scene, it seemed unlikely he had worn the tshirt and baggy old shorts while visiting his mom, having a family dinner, etc. We've seen him enough to know he likes to dress well, even in casual attire. So, that's the big question: where are the clothes he was wearing that night? When did he change? Did he take those clothes with him to his mother's house? If he disposed of them elsewhere (in a dumpster, in the swamp, etc), wouldn't he have disposed of the raincoat, too? Lots of questions. I realize Fitsnews is speculating here, but its possible LE did retrieve all or part of them? IDK, we'll find out.
 
otto said:
I have been half listening to the trial for the past 2 days. What stands out for me about the defence strategy is criticize the investigators. There were tire tracks, it rained, the tracks were neither photographed nor preserved. Because police vehicles and officers were at the night-time crime scene, they compromised the crime scene. There were foot prints in the dirt, they were not preserved but were photographed. Officers were at the scene to identify evidence and some did enter the shed next to Paul's body to place evidence markers. A phone was not put in a special bag that would prevent remote erasing. Officers did not wear protective booties outside in the rain at the farm. Ridiculing investigators and raising irrelevant points gives the impression that Alex is choreographing his defence - a Mr Bigshot who thinks he is smarter than everyone in the room. None of these points makes any difference in the big picture.

The investigation is being criticized at every opportunity. Hopefully jurors can see past that convoluted criticism to connect the dots between the evidence. Three people were at the kennels at 8:45, within minutes 2 were dead. The third person spent the next hour creating an alibi before phoning 911 at 10:05. Cell phone records will tie it together, so it's likely that cell phone evidence will be most heavily criticized.

Alex told police his motive for killing Paul on the night of the murders - it was revenge against his own son for turning his life upside down with the drunken boat accident. Maggie was killed for money.
Click to expand...
BBM

Maggie was lured there. As for Paul, you are so right. I listened over and over.

The first thing he says is boating accident and revenge...

I think he found out from his brother that he was already taking their Dad to the hospital. And I think he found out from his brother Paul was on his way to Moselle to check on a dog for his friend.

I think he closed in on a situation that night that took care of two birds with one stone. Oops I mean two birds with two guns.
 
Betty P said:
When we saw the bodycam video yesterday of Alex at the crime scene, it seemed unlikely he had worn the tshirt and baggy old shorts while visiting his mom, having a family dinner, etc. We've seen him enough to know he likes to dress well, even in casual attire. So, that's the big question: where are the clothes he was wearing that night? When did he change? Did he take those clothes with him to his mother's house? If he disposed of them elsewhere (in a dumpster, in the swamp, etc), wouldn't he have disposed of the raincoat, too? Lots of questions. I realize Fitsnews is speculating here, but its possible LE did retrieve all or part of them? IDK, we'll find out.
Click to expand...
Yes, we’ll have to wait and see what gets revealed in the coming days. I agree that tee shirt and baggy shorts are not something he would seem to wear visiting his mother and going to a hospital visit for his father, etc.

One very interesting thing from yesterday was all the presumptive tests for blood in his vehicle…maybe in transporting bloody clothes? It will be interesting to see if these spots in the Suburban were Paul and Maggie’s blood…also what the GPS tracking from the black box reveals.
 
otto said:
I have been half listening to the trial for the past 2 days. What stands out for me about the defence strategy is criticize the investigators. There were tire tracks, it rained, the tracks were neither photographed nor preserved. Because police vehicles and officers were at the night-time crime scene, they compromised the crime scene. There were foot prints in the dirt, they were not preserved but were photographed. Officers were at the scene to identify evidence and some did enter the shed next to Paul's body to place evidence markers. A phone was not put in a special bag that would prevent remote erasing. Officers did not wear protective booties outside in the rain at the farm. Ridiculing investigators and raising irrelevant points gives the impression that Alex is choreographing his defence - a Mr Bigshot who thinks he is smarter than everyone in the room. None of these points makes any difference in the big picture.

The investigation is being criticized at every opportunity. Hopefully jurors can see past that convoluted criticism to connect the dots between the evidence. Three people were at the kennels at 8:45, within minutes 2 were dead. The third person spent the next hour creating an alibi before phoning 911 at 10:05. Cell phone records will tie it together, so it's likely that cell phone evidence will be most heavily criticized.

Alex told police his motive for killing Paul on the night of the murders - it was revenge against his own son for turning his life upside down with the drunken boat accident. Maggie was killed for money. have no idea they died 2 minutes after 8:45. They used their phone at 8:45 and put it in their pockets when they were done. There’s nothing on the phones that show time of death.
Click to expand...
We have no idea when they died. What evidence has been shown that they died 2 minutes after they used their phones? Bc they weren’t using their phones? If I put my phone back in my pocket at 8:45 after sending a message the fact that it’s idle in my pocket doesn’t make me dead. The phones were not powered off
 
One of the things that I am questioning is this estate-compound-hunting lodge-home of 1700 acres and several buildings and a gun room containing 20-25 guns and ammo, dog runs with kennels where there was at least one other person's dog, and there is not one camera anywhere. Not one. How many people with much smaller properties and possessions have cameras? The kennel/dog run area was a distance away from the main house and it would have made sense to have cameras there so you didn't have to go yet still could keep your eye on things. Were there ever any cameras at Moselle?
 
BUF said:
Yes, we’ll have to wait and see what gets revealed in the coming days. I agree that tee shirt and baggy shorts are not something he would seem to wear visiting his mother and going to a hospital visit for his father, etc.

One very interesting thing from yesterday was all the presumptive tests for blood in his vehicle…maybe in transporting bloody clothes? It will be interesting to see if these spots in the Suburban were Paul and Maggie’s blood…also what the GPS tracking from the black box reveals.
Click to expand...
He said that he touched their bodies then drove up to the house to grab the shotgun. Assuming defense will say that’s when the blood transferred
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 193 more.
Total: 4,496 (members: 194, guests: 4,302)

Online statistics

Members online
194
Guests online
4,302
Total visitors
4,496
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,472
Messages
17,969,410
Members
228,777
Latest member
Jojo53
Back
Top