PAUL & MAGGIE MURDAUGH: South Carolina vs. Alex Murdaugh for Double Homicide of wife & son *GUILTY*

1623728103817.png
This case is being kept pretty quiet, no major details released to speak of (other than it does say there were two different guns used), but no info regarding who found them, who called 911, very little else.

Of interest, the grandfather died just a few days after these murders and it sounds as if he was ill from various articles so probably not unexpected. I think of the typical motives, did grandpa have a big estate? How big in the overall family of grandpa's on down? They sound like a pretty well known family and a powerful one in their state, more on that in the article.


www.postandcourier.com

Questions abound in SC Murdaugh killing. Among them: Should prosecutor step aside?

Several days after two members of a prominent Hampton County family were fatally shot, questions about what happened still vastly outnumber answers.
www.postandcourier.com www.postandcourier.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
GrandmaBear said:
If there is ANY mitigation, I'd say just that he is pleading guilty to all charges would be his only small saving grace. I expect sentence to be a seroius one watching all this. We will see what he says.

I am starting to gather this is a sentencing hearing? Is it? With impact statements and arguments? I started watching after it was going on for a bit.
Click to expand...
This article gives an account of Lafitte, Murdaugh and Fleming.

Lafitte - seeking a trial date for his state charges. Judge delayed setting a date.

"Newman also presided over a status hearing for former Palmetto State Bank CEO Russell Laffitte and the 21 state charges he is facing.

Laffitte was convicted in November on six federal charges and sentenced to 84 months in prison in August. He was also ordered to pay $3.55 million in restitution. In court documents filed Aug. 8, Laffitte appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from the sentence handed down Aug. 1.

Lawyers have yet to agree on a trial date for Russell Laffitte over 21 state charges."

Murdaugh - seeking a trial date

"A judge has set the date for the state trial of Alex Murdaugh on scores of financial crimes.

Judge Clifton Newman said convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, who faces more than 100 financial crimes, will go on trial for those charges on Nov. 27, which is the Monday after Thanksgiving.

Murdaugh previously agreed to plead guilty to federal charges he stole millions of dollars from clients, according to court records. That federal court hearing is scheduled for Sept. 21."

Fleming - sentencing for his state charges.


www.live5news.com

Fleming sentenced, Murdaugh trial date set in Beaufort Co. court

A judge has sentenced the former South Carolina attorney who pleaded guilty to state charges ranging from breach of trust with fraudulent intent, money laundering and criminal conspiracy.
www.live5news.com www.live5news.com
 
Last edited:
From your article. Yes Judge Newman is their bane isn't he. And Waters is right, it is 2023. Get with it Pooter. The public has a right to know and enough has went on in the low country behind closed doors and been gotten away with.

The professionalism is there that should be there by the prosecution and judge with not a word or hint of the bullsh*t in the murder case and juror tampering claims. Business as usual. AS IT SHOULD BE.

“To try to try this case in less than a year after the verdict came in in the other case...don’t we need to calm down a bit? Where are you going to get a jury? Mars?” Harpootlian said.

Newman, the same judge who presided over the nearly six-week murder trial earlier this year, said the indictments were issued across many counties home to people capable of serving on a jury. He said he would not presume that jurors could not be assembled.

Lead state prosecutor Creighton Waters argued the pending charges against Murdaugh remained a “top priority” and needed to be dealt with as soon as possible.

“We are in 2023, the reality media environment is what it is,” he said. “Unless we say that the judicial system can’t function because of publicity, that just leaves nothing left to happen. That is the reality we live in.”

Murdaugh has been indicted for taking $8.8 million in legal settlements from clients who were badly injured or the families of those killed on the job. Victims included the family housekeeper who died in a fall at the Murdaugh home. He is also accused of stealing nearly $7 million from his law firm over a nine-year period during which he made almost $14 million.

Other charges relate to an eight-year drug ring and money laundering scheme that prosecutors say involved $2.4 million in checks written to a friend who used some of the money on a painkiller distribution network.

He faces an additional nine counts of tax evasion for allegedly ducking just under $487,000 in state income taxes. Convictions would carry up to five years in prison for each count.
 
This is an updating link that is now on the Fleming defence re sentencing.

Now the Satterfields' lawyer speaks.



The convicted killer attended a status conference before Judge Clifton Newman in Beaufort County on Thursday morning where his financial crimes trial date was set for 27 November.


The case will focus on the millions of dollars he stole from the family of his dead housekeeper Gloria Satterfield – part of the 101 state charges over his alleged financial crimes.

Two former friends and alleged co-conspirators in his financial crimes – former Palmetto State Bank CEO Russell Laffitte and former attorney Cory Fleming – are also appearing in court.

The court appearance comes as the deadline is looming for the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office to respond to a bombshell motion filed by Murdaugh’s attorneys last week in which they demanded a new trial and accused Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill of pressuring jurors to return a guilty verdict.

The AG’s office had 10 days to respond to this motion – giving them until Friday.

RECOMMENDED​

KEY POINTS​

8 minutes ago

​

The court first heard from a fellow lawyer who recalled Ms Pinckney forgiving Fleming at his federal sentencing and that he responded: “Thank you, I don’t deserve it.”
He emphasises that Fleming is contrite.
The next speaker is a former paralegal of Fleming’s who emotionally recalls their time working together and their shared faith.

Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 20:04
18 minutes ago

Court resumes​

Court is back in session with Judge Newman back on the bench.
He will now hear character references from friends and family of Fleming and then a statement from him.
Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 19:54
51 minutes ago

​


South Carolina lawmaker smiles and shakes hands with Alex Murdaugh in court
Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 19:21

1 hour ago

Court breaks for lunch​

The court breaks for lunch.
Fleming will address the court and others will speak on his behalf when court resumes at 2.45pm
Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 18:30
1 hour ago

​


Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 18:21
2 hours ago

Defence speaks for Fleming ahead of sentencing​

Defence attorney Debbie Barbier speaks for Fleming and disputes some of the details of Mr Waters brought up — specifically that her client did not know Murdaugh was stealing all of the money and that he has acknowledged his guilt.
She argues that no one should be punished twice for the same crime.
Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 18:09

2 hours ago

Prosecution asks for consecutive sentencing for Fleming​

Prosecutor Creighton Waters wants consecutive sentencing for Fleming as independent accountability is warranted.
He argues that lawyers should not get “one-stop shopping” for victimising multiple clients over a decade, alluding to the federal sentencing.

Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 17:52
2 hours ago

​

After Mr Bland wraps up, Justin Bamberg addresses the court. He is the attorney for Pamela Pinckney, the mother of Hakeem Pinckney (see below) who was left quadriplegic after a crash, and niece Natasha Thomas who lost vision and suffered extensive injuries. Mrs Pinckney was also horribly injured and is still dealing with her own injuries.
Fleming was indicted and pleaded guilty in federal court for the Satterfield case but not for the Pinckney case due to the statute of limitations. There has been no punishment or accountability in the Pinckney case so far.
Mr Bamberg gives powerful testimony about the true long-lasting impact of Fleming’s crimes. Believes Fleming is regretful but not remorseful. He asks for stiff punishment for both the Satterfield and Pinckney crimes.
Oliver O'Connell14 September 2023 17:47
2 hours ago

What happened to Gloria Satterfield?​

Gloria Satterfield died in February 2018 following a mysterious trip and fall at the Murdaugh family home on their 1,700-acre Moselle estate in South Carolina.
Satterfield worked for the Murdaugh family for more than 20 years as their housekeeper.
She was found at the bottom of the steps leading into the family’s home one morning in February 2018.
She never resumed consciousness and died from her injuries three weeks later on 26 February.
At the time, Murdaugh claimed that she had tripped over the family’s dogs and hit her head, and her death was regarded as an accidental fall.
However, her death certificate cited her manner of death as “natural” and no autopsy was ever carried out.
Murdaugh claimed he would bring the wrongful death suit against himself on behalf of Satterfield’s sons.
In reality, the insurance company paid out $4m in a wrongful death settlement over Satterfield’s death. Murdaugh and Fleming then allegedly stole the money for themselves with the housekeeper’s sons not getting a dime.
<p>Gloria Satterfield died in a ‘trip and fall’ at the Murdaugh home in 2018</p>

Gloria Satterfield died in a ‘trip and fall’ at the Murdaugh home in 2018
(Provided)
Rachel Sharp14 September 2023 17:30

2 hours ago

​

Eric Bland, attorney for the Satterfields tells the judge that he will hear how good a guy Fleming is and notes that good guys sometimes commit crimes. He says the judge must sentence the crime as well as the man as the law profession has been stained by his action.
“I’ve been suing other lawyers for 30 years. Never seen a case where the lawyers took every single dollar. But that’s what Fleming and Murdaugh did. Every single dollar.”
Mr Bland goes over a number of other examples of violations and irregularities in how Fleming handled and filed the Satterfield case to show the depth of the conspiracy and the criminal behaviour.
He says Fleming and Murdaugh sat on the $4.3m settlements knowing that Gloria Satterfield’s son Brian, a vulnerable adult, was being put out on the street because his mom’s trailer was being foreclosed on.
Mr Bland calls it “blatant thievery”.


www.independent.co.uk

Murdaugh trial latest: State finds ‘significant disputes’ in jury tampering claims

Follow updates after convicted killer appears in court on financial fraud charges
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
Last edited:
I was watching the live earlier but when it got to the defense of Fleming my computer started hanging. I heard a fair bit of his attorney but tired to refresh it and lost her. Didn't watch it again after, had things to do,s still do, but all I saw was worth watching... Big time.
 
Again the specific timing of the defense's filing about jury tampering and all the other stuff going on before and right after stands out to me.

I'd also guess it will bring Fox Nation documentary watches, book sales and more. Gee.
 
I've got no time to cover it all but just caught a bit tonight too and the hearings today were explosive and Poot going against Judge Newman and more. If someone gets a chance it would be good to update it and share details. Bland was awesome this morning and more about the victims, etc.

Major dramafest in SC and also Judge Newman shut another attorney down who tried to interject when his client had nothing to do with the one hearing and so on. You can be they know of the recent jury tampering, etc. claim but have to hold court with the very attorney raising heck etc.

Even though it is dramatic and even amusing I am not amused. I don't think Judge Newman is either. I haven't even seen it all but have seen enough that yeah, someone should watch it all and share their take. i wish I could.
 
Fleming gets 20 years. I bet Lafitte is worried now.


Separate article about the banker. His lawyers are desperately trying to keep him out of jail.


Murdaugh is back in court on 21st Sept for his federal charges and the date was set for Nov 27th for the state charges.

independenttribune.com

Alex Murdaugh makes his first appearance in court since his murder trial

Some of the 101 total charges brought against Murdaugh will be heard at a trial beginning the week of Nov. 27.
independenttribune.com independenttribune.com
 
Last edited:
Tresir said:
Fleming gets 20 years. I bet Lafitte is worried now.


Separate article about the banker. His lawyers are desperately trying to keep him out of jail.


Murdaugh is back in court on 21st Sept for his federal charges and the date was set for Nov 27th for the state charges.

independenttribune.com

Alex Murdaugh makes his first appearance in court since his murder trial

Some of the 101 total charges brought against Murdaugh will be heard at a trial beginning the week of Nov. 27.
independenttribune.com independenttribune.com
Click to expand...
Privileged white men who steal and who thought it awesome to have connections I'm sure like Alex who ruled the kingdom sure get pale and panicked when they realize YES they TOO can go to prison and yes, they ARE criminals. These families were SUFFERING and losing HOMES etc. while they sat there using money they didn't even KNOW was paid or existed. You know it would be one thing to steal from a money making employer or from someone NOT a victim (still wrong) but what they did cause direct damage to these people who were already VICTIMS. They affected their day to day life, their stress, their ability to survive and house themselves, etc. PUKES. ALL of them.

I don't have time, AS usual, but I'd have liked to hear Newman's sentencing speech, etc. on Flembing. Did he allow some small bit of something for the fact he confessed? Even though he only confessed when facing there was proof and only confessed to the "cleanest" version or most basic minor version of his wrongdoings? The guilty pleas imo don't deserve much of a credit other than he did save a trial I guess... And did at least admit some guilt on some level.
 
GrandmaBear said:
Privileged white men who steal and who thought it awesome to have connections I'm sure like Alex who ruled the kingdom sure get pale and panicked when they realize YES they TOO can go to prison and yes, they ARE criminals. These families were SUFFERING and losing HOMES etc. while they sat there using money they didn't even KNOW was paid or existed. You know it would be one thing to steal from a money making employer or from someone NOT a victim (still wrong) but what they did cause direct damage to these people who were already VICTIMS. They affected their day to day life, their stress, their ability to survive and house themselves, etc. PUKES. ALL of them.

I don't have time, AS usual, but I'd have liked to hear Newman's sentencing speech, etc. on Flembing. Did he allow some small bit of something for the fact he confessed? Even though he only confessed when facing there was proof and only confessed to the "cleanest" version or most basic minor version of his wrongdoings? The guilty pleas imo don't deserve much of a credit other than he did save a trial I guess... And did at least admit some guilt on some level.
Click to expand...
I didnt have time to listen to it but just posted the reporting of it. I guess the link will still work if we want to go back to the video. I did notice in the reporting, that they said Fleming was in his striped prison jumpsuit. I thought that was just a striped shirt but that must be what they wear in federal prison in S. Carolina, so we had Fleming in stripes, Murdaugh in orange and Lafitte wearing his civvies and still at large for now.
 
I have been trying to find out when Cousin Eddie is up next. The last thing I have found is that his bond was revoked but then was reinstated (April '23) and he had an ankle monitor but I cannot find anything about if and when he is next in court.
 
There was a LOT of interesting stuff today and naturally I could not watch it all but the things I did see parts of were worth watching. This is coming up and so for anyone who hasn't, I'd think she'd have some pretty good coverage on it all. She will be live in a bit.

 
Ok, the jury tampering - this article sums up the allegations pretty well.

www.independent.co.uk

Will Alex Murdaugh be granted a new trial? Legal expert weighs in

Exclusive: Prominent defence attorney Duncan Levin tells Rachel Sharp that the allegations against court clerk Rebecca Hill are ‘extremely serious’ and that – if true – Murdaugh could and should be granted a new trial
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

In the bombshell 65-page filing, Murdaugh has accused Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill of breaking her oath by allegedly tampering with the jury in the case, pressuring them into returning a guilty verdict against him.

RECOMMENDED​

He claims that she advised the panel not to be “fooled by” Murdaugh’s testimony on the stand or “misled” by the defence’s evidence, pushed them to reach a quick guilty verdict, and misrepresented “critical and material information to the trial judge in her campaign to remove a juror she believed to be favorable to the defense”.
It’s a series of bombshell accusations, supported by affidavits from some jurors, which has propelled Murdaugh and his notorious double murder trial back into the spotlight once again.
So just how serious are these allegations?
And will this now pave the way for Murdaugh – a man convicted of killing his wife and son in cold blood, a man facing another 700 years behind bars on 100 financial fraud charges and a man embroiled in a sprawling saga of mystery deaths – to be granted a new trial?
Prominent attorney Duncan Levin told The Independent that the claims laid out in the court documents are “extremely serious” and, if true, Murdaugh could – and should – be granted a new trial.
“The allegations in the complaint are extremely serious,” he said.
<p>Michael Gunn, principle at Forge Consulting, gives the witness oath by Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill at Murdaugh’s murder trial </p>

“The complaint asserts that an elected state official, the Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill, engaged in deliberate misconduct by tampering with the jury during Mr Murdaugh’s trial for the murder of his wife and son.”
Mr Levin – the former assistant district attorney in the Manhattan DA’s office and prominent criminal defence attorney at Levin & Associates who has represented clients including Harvey Weinstein and Anna Delvey – explained that the accusations could amount to a violation of Murdaugh’s rights.
“If proven true, these allegations not only undermine the integrity of the judicial process but also represent a significant violation of Murdaugh’s constitutional right to a fair trial,” he said.
Now that the motion has been filed, he said that an evidentiary hearing is likely to take place where the evidence for the accusations will be laid out.
If the allegations are proven to be true, Mr Levin said that Murdaugh should then “unquestionably” be granted his request for a new trial.
“The actions described, particularly those of a court official who is entrusted with upholding the principles of justice and impartiality, fundamentally undermine the fairness of the trial and the credibility of the verdict,” he said.
“Tampering with the jury, pressuring them, and interfering with their deliberations are actions that directly violate the defendant’s right to a fair and unbiased jury trial.
“In such cases, the law typically requires the granting of a new trial to ensure that justice is served without the taint of undue influence or misconduct.”
Alex Murdaugh's attorneys demand new trial over allegations of jury tampering
He added: “These actions, if substantiated, could lead to severe consequences for those involved.”
Ms Hill is yet to respond to the bombshell accusations levelled against her and is presumed innocent.The Independent has reached out to her for comment.
But, Murdaugh’s attorneys have suggested that some members of the jury could also find themselves in legal hot water.
Speaking on Good Morning America on Wednesday morning, Mr Harpootlian suggested that jurors should also be seeking legal counsel.
Mr Levin said that it is possible jurors could potentially face legal consequences if the accusations extend to their own misconduct.
“If there is evidence or concerns of juror misconduct, such as receiving outside information, discussing the case prematurely, or being influenced by external factors, jurors could potentially face legal consequences or be called upon to testify about their actions during the trial,” he said.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson has so far only released a brief statement on the motion, saying only that “we are currently reviewing the defense’s latest motion and will respond through the legal process at the appropriate time”.
Murdaugh’s attorneys allege that Ms Hill was driven by fame and a desire to secure a book deal when she allegedly pressured the jurors to quickly return a unanimous guilty verdict against him.
When Murdaugh took the stand, the motion claims Ms Hill instructed the jury to “watch him closely,” to “look at his actions,” and to “look at his movements” on the stand – something at least one juror said they understood to mean that Murdaugh was guilty.
<p>The Facebook post which was said to have been posted by a juror’s ex-husband</p>

The Facebook post which was said to have been posted by a juror’s ex-husband
(THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In the Court of Appeals)
When the defence presented evidence, they were allegedly urged not “to be fooled”.
The motion also claims that Ms Hill had frequent private conversations with the jury foreperson and repeatedly asked jurors for their opinions about Murdaugh’s guilt or innocence.
One of the most damning accusations centres around the dismissal of juror number 785 just hours before jury deliberations began.
According to Murdaugh’s attorneys, Ms Hill “invented a story about a Facebook post to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty”.
Judge Clifton Newman removed the female juror from the panel for allegedly discussing the case with at least three other people outside of the court. The woman then prompted some light-hearted – and widely-reported – relief when she asked to pick up her “dozen eggs” from the jury room before she left.
According to the motion, Ms Hill had gone to Judge Newman on 27 February – the day after Murdaugh testified – claiming that she had seen a post in local Facebook group “Walterboro Word of Mouth” from juror 785’s former husband Tim Stone.
The post purportedly claimed that the juror was drinking with her ex-husband and, when she became drunk, she expressed her views on whether Murdaugh was innocent or guilty.
A follow-up post from an account called Timothy Stone apologised for the post saying that he was driven by “Satan”.
Murdaugh’s attorneys claim that the posts were either fabricated or not written by Mr Stone.
 
I gotta tell ya, I don't know what to think. My instinct is to think it is all b.s. and coercion, bribe or planting of juror(s) by the defense. Of course then I tell myself I am probably biased though as I can stand Alex or his defense team. The fact any of the three of them can talk ethics of another when they have none bothers me to no end and seems so blatantly hypocritical and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. By the three I mean Alec, Pooter and Griffin, all the self entitled privileged less than honest fat cat lawyers (or former lawyer in Alex's case).

This area reeks of corruption and has had decades of it on end as we know. I guess when things are run that way for how long it also could include the clerk as well. I don't doubt there are now serious splits and rifts and each tries to save themselves or separates from the worst ones.

I listen to Eric Bland and how he hints that the jurors he represent are telling a different story and I of course prefer to believe that and that Alex and team are lying or manipulated or coerced or THREATENED jurors themselves. We know he does threaten them publicly even with the need for lawyers and that they themselves may face legal consequences. That is so repugnant to me, people who gave their time and sat on a jury get threatened by a defense attorney and it does make me think he could have well done the same knocking on jurors doors looking like MIB. I mean can't you just picture it? Pooter thinks he is movie material and he creates one by talking about what he acts like are simple backwoods people in Colleton County who live on dirt roads with no amenities, etc. Shows up in his suit and sunglasses and dust covered luxury vehicle demanding answers and threatening the "simple folk" who are used to years of corruption in their area by such types.

He talks as if Clerks do nothing but feed jurors and make hotel reservations which is so far from the truth it is ridiculous.

They are sooooo dislikable. I also think they should be facing issues of "sneaking" out info from Alex for the TV production and using attorney client privilege abusively and why aren't they? As I've said before everything has been timed and planned. They are doing what i'd call an end run for those familiar with football.

That system down there is already soooo stained and this just makes more of a mockery of it and adds more stains AND is causing total distrust of the process of course.

I guess for all of these reasons it bothers me, I hope it be lies and a bunch of baloney, I hope it is found THEY coerced jurors after the fact, etc. Because of all these reasons I know I have bias against them but who can't believe they could be this corrupt? I sure can. It's ALEX and his cronies after ALL.

BUT Becky Hill wrote a book. Unwisely if you ask me. And some of the things in the book seem to line up with some of this, BUT it is interesting this all came about after the book could be read and all Pooter would have to do is take things in it that would seem to ring true because she said things like believing herself that Alex was guilty and more.

You know he covers the fact that he noticed things like her talking with the foreperson, etc. during the trial and why didn't he say something then? I don't know. In the PC he held, he was asked some of these things... Personally I think they waited for the book to come out intentionally to use that to make it seem more believable and discuss THAT with the jurors, etc.

I don't know why I'm wasting thought and time on this.

The thing is, we KNOW one side is corrupt or at least for sure their CLIENT and BUDDY is. They are too, they snuck out info for a TV show, etc. and more. We do NOT know that the "other side" of this is corrupt, Hill and the jurors.

Sigh. I guess we will just have to wait and see what shakes out. Yesterday was VERY interesting AND it was court as usual as if on such thing was going on BUT it was brought up. I am so impressed again yet with Judge Newman. SUCH a professional. Pooter was different than in the trial where I guess he had the disadvantage and was aware he needed to not alienate the jury. Yesterday he was what one would expect of him, all drama and acting as if HE owned the courtroom. Sickening. The prosecutor went back at him. THIS is what I think normally goes on in their courtrooms when these full of themselves corrupt controlling the system attorneys are involved, NOT what we saw at trial.

Ya know they could just give Alex his full 700 years possible or whatever it is on his 100 or more financial crimes... Lol. There ya go again. The fact they talk about the ethics or corruption of anyone else is the pot calling the kettle black. It taints their claims if you ask me. KNOWN liars. Who don't follow the rules themselves. I am talking this out to myself I guess to see where it brings me in these early morning hours.

If Becky Hill did even part of what is alleged, she is one very stupid woman who will have caused major damage. It is though a bit difficult to believe an experienced clerk could be so dumb and clueless to the likes of this bunch.

I know I have bias but I see something as far more likely and the reason it took this long/the timing of it though. They crafted this around what would be believed based on the things we can all see and the book and they simply needed to flip or strike fear in a juror or two. And then they say it repeatedly on the news that the jurors may need lawyers and be in trouble and this is because they couldn't get the majority of them to go along or to lie and this is so they hope they fall in line when it comes time, out of fear and the pressure this is bringing AND the belief it is getting. I think they should ALL run to Bland and not cave to this b.s.

That's the thing too, a few have and I have a feeling there is another side to this that won't be flattering to Poot and the defense. Or I'm hoping so.

The only thing known for sure? This is far from over.

Alex walked into the courtroom yesterday all smiles. There are not words for that man and how disgusting he is. Murderer. Con artist. Sleaze bag. Glutton. Thief.
 
@Tresir

Not sure who else is really following this but I know you are. Sharing for all. This is only about 17 minutes.

The Attorney General has responded. And it's interesting. Imo. I don't think this is cut and dried by a long shot. A handful of things of interest. One is that Sled's and their investigation into these claims so far is NOT corroborating what the defense is saying. There are other interesting thins and new evidence versus jury tampering are two entirely different things and both are discussed. The beginning is also VERY Interesting in that there are things that need to ensure and can't allow like without caution that and with safeguards that are there to make sure a defendant can't pay a juror off AFTER the fact to say they were coerced into their verdict, etc.

Then there are procedural errors by Poot and Griffin. Not so good as they think are they. Had to say that. Things like for one Alex, the appellant has to have filed an affidavit in this and he didn't/they didn't do that part, etc.

Again it is short but interesting.
For the record since you are a "foreigner" lol, the attorney general of the state is the STATE just like the county prosecutor Creighton Waters, same side. They often can try in big cases, assist the county in big ones, etc. Not sure if it is just normal for them to handle something like this or if Waters had them do so as he has his hands full with the financial crimes going on at this very same time even yesterday, etc. Either way they are the top of the State for prosecutors and are the office of such.

i gather this just came out as he did an impromptu show today, first one I've seen with it. So I am sharing his. And he is an attorney so explains it.

Highly recommend. I still want to see the juror's affidavits. How much of that 65 page thing do I have to look at to get to them lol? Haven't had time. Are they at the end? Middle? Any hint of where to save me time will help lol and even then I still won't probably get time to do it before something else happens or butts in.

I almost take this to mean the jurors aren't telling them the same story the defense is claiming. Between the State and Eric Bland, I think this may well not be cut and dried necessarily for any new trial. That's my opinion, not the attorney here or anyone else's...

It may be a reach but maybe not with who we have here but I can see them putting words in jurors mouths AND I can see them presenting a document to sign that they even switched the first pages on OR lying to them about the reason, etc. or whatever. I can see this in this case BECAUSE it is something Alex would do. Look how many people he got signed up to represent or have his buddy represent only to swindle them and lie to his own insurance company telling them they'd be paid etc.

That just brought me a sideways thought out of the blue. Are any of the financial charges insurance fraud? Because they should be.

Anyhow, before I wander sideways on that remark, here it is:

 
Murdaugh must resubmit the motion for a new trial.


Murdaugh, a disbarred personal injury attorney, is appealing his conviction for murdering his wife and grown son. However, last week his attorneys requested that appeal be suspended as they seek a new trial for Murdaugh based on jury tampering allegations.

In a five-page response filed Friday afternoon, State Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office is asking the state court to give Murdaugh’s team 10 days to refile a corrected motion. It lists several “procedural defects” in Murdaugh’s original court motion submitted on September 5, arguing it did not meet the requirements necessary to suspend his appeal and allow his motion for a new trial to proceed in the circuit court.
 
Tresir said:
Murdaugh must resubmit the motion for a new trial.


Murdaugh, a disbarred personal injury attorney, is appealing his conviction for murdering his wife and grown son. However, last week his attorneys requested that appeal be suspended as they seek a new trial for Murdaugh based on jury tampering allegations.

In a five-page response filed Friday afternoon, State Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office is asking the state court to give Murdaugh’s team 10 days to refile a corrected motion. It lists several “procedural defects” in Murdaugh’s original court motion submitted on September 5, arguing it did not meet the requirements necessary to suspend his appeal and allow his motion for a new trial to proceed in the circuit court.
Click to expand...
Pretty much what I watched said the exact same thing as I mentioned. They did not have an affidavit of Alex, they did not have I believe it was a DATE they first allegedly knew of this (I think that is it, there was a date re something) and other procedural errors.

There is plenty the AG says in their response aside from the procedural errors as well.

As I've said before, I find everything here "timed" and strategized as to timing with the defense. I am wondering what the appeal date was and what the date was of this filing re jury tampering. I mean the "real" appeal on the case, the one they are requesting be suspended as they then on a date motion for a new trial. The dates of each in fact.

Even the AG response agrees IF certain criteria is met and procedural errors with info are corrected that there may be need for an evidentiary hearing but in no way have they agreed with the claims.

As I said early on here, I'm going to wait for this to shake out and the picture has already changed with this response and with Bland representing a couple of jurors. We have heard but one side and I'm sorry but it is the corrupt side.

if I want to be EXTREMELY suspicious and cynical, SOMEONE gets paid for the recent TV show, one juror or another gets PAID now that someone has money to flip and sign affidavits. That SHOW seemed to be their first priority just a week or two ago. And let's be real, paying off a juror is exactly the kind of thing Alex Murdaugh would do.

Talk about tampering, the man tampered with witnesses constantly, showing up at the hospital and doing so in the Beach/boat case.

I'm not saying it is what happened or there is no truth to any of the defense allegations but we don't know. And I am saying if there is one case it is possible in, this one and this man and his corhorts, is the one.

Pooter himself said in the PC HE SCHEDULED when hit with a question that he "witnessed" this or at least the clerk and foreperson etc. more than once alone talking. That isn't to say he could have necessarily KNOWN what was being said but he definitely could have raised concerns about it. I believe it was also said he/they heard "hints" of things going on...

This whole thing kind of smells. At its worst the Clerk could even be involved. By the way did the Fox show have her on....? Not from anything I've heard but then I don't know...
 
GrandmaBear said:
Pretty much what I watched said the exact same thing as I mentioned. They did not have an affidavit of Alex, they did not have I believe it was a DATE they first allegedly knew of this (I think that is it, there was a date re something) and other procedural errors.

There is plenty the AG says in their response aside from the procedural errors as well.

As I've said before, I find everything here "timed" and strategized as to timing with the defense. I am wondering what the appeal date was and what the date was of this filing re jury tampering. I mean the "real" appeal on the case, the one they are requesting be suspended as they then on a date motion for a new trial. The dates of each in fact.

Even the AG response agrees IF certain criteria is met and procedural errors with info are corrected that there may be need for an evidentiary hearing but in no way have they agreed with the claims.

As I said early on here, I'm going to wait for this to shake out and the picture has already changed with this response and with Bland representing a couple of jurors. We have heard but one side and I'm sorry but it is the corrupt side.

if I want to be EXTREMELY suspicious and cynical, SOMEONE gets paid for the recent TV show, one juror or another gets PAID now that someone has money to flip and sign affidavits. That SHOW seemed to be their first priority just a week or two ago. And let's be real, paying off a juror is exactly the kind of thing Alex Murdaugh would do.

Talk about tampering, the man tampered with witnesses constantly, showing up at the hospital and doing so in the Beach/boat case.

I'm not saying it is what happened or there is no truth to any of the defense allegations but we don't know. And I am saying if there is one case it is possible in, this one and this man and his corhorts, is the one.

Pooter himself said in the PC HE SCHEDULED when hit with a question that he "witnessed" this or at least the clerk and foreperson etc. more than once alone talking. That isn't to say he could have necessarily KNOWN what was being said but he definitely could have raised concerns about it. I believe it was also said he/they heard "hints" of things going on...

This whole thing kind of smells. At its worst the Clerk could even be involved. By the way did the Fox show have her on....? Not from anything I've heard but then I don't know...
Click to expand...
The dates of the juror affidavits and the the other enclosures would be the appropriate dates that the defence lawyers became aware of these claims and they mainly have dates in August 2023.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,010
Messages
241,049
Members
969
Latest member
SamiraMill
Back
Top Bottom