KBCraig
NES Member
I loved the ending, from his recorded jail phone call: "Did Netflix put something out about this?"
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Son, 22, of prominent South Carolina legal family found murdered with his mom, 52, was 'targeted' - Murdaugh Trial
- Thread starter Reptile
- Start date
slugworth
NES Member
It’s gonna get him an acquittal.
FrugalFannie
NES Member
I heard a few minutes of the defendant on the stand and thought "this guy is super arrogant and is talking himself into a guilty verdict by over answering the questions." Really sounded like he had rehearsed his lies.
Has the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it? I haven't heard all the other testimony or about any evidence, but I can see where there is doubt.
I read or heard somewhere else that it's the 2 weapons being used that will acquit him. What murderer uses 2 different guns to shoot 2 different people? It doesn't make sense. Now, with that being said, this guy is a lawyer himself, so he'd probably know that would throw suspicion away from him if he did do it. Seems rather complicated to me.
I read or heard somewhere else that it's the 2 weapons being used that will acquit him. What murderer uses 2 different guns to shoot 2 different people? It doesn't make sense. Now, with that being said, this guy is a lawyer himself, so he'd probably know that would throw suspicion away from him if he did do it. Seems rather complicated to me.
SFC13557
NES Member
Yup.
If 2 individuals, with 2 guns kill the wife and son, why would they leave the 2 guns behind then flee?
There's a lack of direct, forensic evidence linking him to the shooting, it's all circumstantial it seems.
But it's all pretty questionable.
There's a lack of direct, forensic evidence linking him to the shooting, it's all circumstantial it seems.
But it's all pretty questionable.
The blackout is missing, and the 12 gauge cannot be positively identified as the shotgun that was used. The Blackout missing has been a huge part of the prosecutors inference of guilt because it was 'replaced' with another by Alex. Shotgun ballistics really don't exist due to the nature of the smooth bore and plastic hull. Matt
Rifle in Alex Murdaugh murder trial remains unaccounted for, prosecutors say
In a major revelation in Alex Murdaugh's double murder trial, state investigators disclosed Jan. 24 they believe they know what gun killed Maggie Murdaugh. They just don’t know where it
Can’t read article….The blackout is missing, and the 12 gauge cannot be positively identified as the shotgun that was used. The Blackout missing has been a huge part of the prosecutors inference of guilt because it was 'replaced' with another by Alex. Shotgun ballistics really don't exist due to the nature of the smooth bore and plastic hull. Matt
Rifle in Alex Murdaugh murder trial remains unaccounted for, prosecutors say
In a major revelation in Alex Murdaugh's double murder trial, state investigators disclosed Jan. 24 they believe they know what gun killed Maggie Murdaugh. They just don’t know where itwww.postandcourier.com
WALTERBORO — State investigators believe they know what gun killed Maggie Murdaugh. They just don’t know where it is.
An expert witness testified Jan. 24 that the murder weapon was a .300 Blackout semiautomatic rifle that had been used before at the Murdaughs’ spacious hunting estate in Colleton County. Ballistic tests showed shell casings found near Maggie’s body had been ejected from the same gun as older casings recovered elsewhere on the property, he said.
And a gun just like it — purchased by her husband, Alex Murdaugh — “can no longer be accounted for,” state grand jury chief prosecutor Creighton Waters told Judge Clifton Newman on the second day of preparations for Murdaugh’s double murder trial. Defense attorney Jim Griffin later countered that one of the .300 Blackout rifles Murdaugh had purchased had been stolen.
Waters’ revelation came as state prosecutors fought to have that ballistic analysis admitted as evidence in their case against Murdaugh, a former Hampton trial attorney whose fall from grace has generated international intrigue.
Murdaugh’s attorneys tried to suppress the “firearms identification” evidence, questioning the State Law Enforcement Division expert’s certainty in matching shell casings to a specific gun. They have spent months seeking to pick apart key elements of the state’s case in their quest to convince jurors Murdaugh isn’t guilty in the June 2021 slayings of his wife and youngest son, Paul.
The evidence is critical to the state’s largely circumstantial case. Not only is the rifle missing, but it is believed that the shotgun used to kill Paul, 22, has not been recovered either.
But Newman sided with prosecutors, ruling SLED forensic analyst Paul Greer presented a firm opinion based on years of experience and training, even after Griffin repeatedly questioned him about his confidence that all the spent casings were ejected from the same gun.
Some of those casings were found near the house at Moselle, as the Murdaugh’s estate is known. Others were recovered from a firing range on the property.
Any further challenges to Greer’s testimony from Murdaugh’s team will have to come during cross-examination when he retakes the stand during the trial, Newman said.
The ruling ended an afternoon of bickering over which experts and evidence can be presented when Murdaugh’s trial advances to opening statements on Jan. 25.
Prosecutors and Murdaugh’s attorneys agreed to a brief cease-fire in their fights over certain elements of the trial.
They said they would wait to hash out their disagreements over the state’s high-impact blood spatter evidence, for example, until prosecutors decide whether to introduce it. Murdaugh’s lawyers have argued the state can’t prove their client’s shirt was spattered with blood as he shot his relatives because Murdaugh’s white T-shirt tested negative for human blood.
The two sides also got no resolution on whether prosecutors can introduce Murdaugh’s myriad alleged financial crimes — he is accused of stealing nearly $9 million from those who trusted him — as evidence against him in the murder trial.
There was a video guy that showed drone video of family friends apparently removing guns from the premises after the double murder...Alex still had the police in his pocket at that point and they believed his story. It wasn't until the insurance money theft came out that the whole thing crumbled. See the Netflix show for details...
Regardless, there is no identified murder weapon in this case. I don't 'netflix' so I can't watch it. If the special came out during the trial, it isn't complete. The 'ONSTAR' information was literally just made available by GM late in the trial.
The blackout is a guess as far as ballistics and brass. They have no rifle to compare it to.
The shotgun cannot be ruled either way.
The guy is an absolute POS but if he gets convicted based on the trial presented so far it is a miscarriage of justice.
ETA: He has no convictions of the financial crimes. With what he has confessed to on the stand he most likely won't stand trial on those crimes. There will be a life altering, freedom ending, plea deal. He is going to jail for the rest of his life.
Going to club-fed as double murderer of your family vs 'financial crimes' are vastly different. He is betting on the latter.
Last edited:
The family basically owned the town, which is why they got away with everything for years. Much was also covered on a Dateline type show in the past.
eboos
NES Member
The fact that he lied, and admitted to having lied about that night, is going to put the nail in the coffin. He is a liar. The prosecutor will remind the jury that he is a liar. The prosecutor will remind the jury that he only admitted to having lied when the lie was exposed. He may as well have google searched "how to dispose of .300 blackout rifle and shotgun after murdering wife and son".
I hate circumstantial cases. Reasonable doubt vs all doubt is a problem for the jury. Watching lawyers closing statements are self-serving by nature but those and jury instructions should be interesting. I'll have to catch up on today's testimony later.
slugworth
NES Member
KBCraig
NES Member
Every case that doesn't involve being caught in the act is a circumstantial case.
No, not at all. There are cases where nobody saw them doing something, but there is direct evidence that ties them to the crime: murder weapon, fingerprints, blood, etc.
Circumstantial evidence is stuff like he was in the vicinity at the time of the murder, he owned a gun like used in the murder but he doesnt have it anymore, or we didn't find any bloody clothes but somebody saw him throw a bag in a bonfire.
buying off some jurors will get him at least a hung jury.
KBCraig
NES Member
No, those are still circumstantial: they are not direct evidence.
Similar threads
