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...
Tresir said:
I was under the impression a GJ was convened for the wiretapping and ethics violation earlier in the year no?
Click to expand...
Probably. Sounds right. I don't recall, there are so many cases in this "one", side cases, murders, financials, jury tampering, clerk's son, clerk, other parties with financial crimes and on and on. I thought Daybell and all the players and crimes and husbands and more were hard to hold the info in head on through the years but this one approaches that and may even surpass at some point in some ways. Lots of players in both, lots of cases, etc.

Delphi is enough too and a mess but at least that one still mostly relates to just the one case/crime and original courtroom players, judge, Allen, prosecutors defense, no matter how hard defense has tried to "sn*w" with other stuff and Os and leaks and suicides.

Still just these three even are plenty to keep up with and recall everything on. It's a full time job in itself lol.
 
Gee that's a long interview and I have only got to around 44 minute mark so far and will have to come back to it. My comments so far at that point, I don't believe they didn't discuss or argue about the boat crash. This was a serious incident and involved them all in some way. Buster is making relatively light about it. Like "no they didn't discuss it". Come on. Makes me doubtful about all he is saying. Will come back to listen to the rest later.
 
Tresir said:
Ok have watched all of it now. He mentions two guns being used - did we know that? Would be interested in others impressions.
Click to expand...
Yeah we knew they were killed with two different guns. From day one I figured he was trying to make it look as if it was more than one perp. I still do and have never changed that opinion.
 
So judge asked for briiefs for upcoming evidentiary hearing. State filed theirs under seal, Murdaugh and defense did not seal theirs.

 
Last edited:
She is explaining what happened today really well. Sounds like a big win for the State for the most part. Judge is going to ask the questions, not the attorneys. NOTHING after conviction matters or will apply. Emails of Becky Hill will NOT be allowed. Subject matters and questioning is going to be strictly limited. And a lot more.

 
Judge says to Poot this is NOT the trial of Becky Hill is not about her herself and she is not being tried. She put Poot in his place. And you know, it isn't. It is about the jury and the verdict and whether there was tampering.

Lee isn't in agreement with all the judge decided, I differ some.

Defense lost on almost all things in how THEY wanted it to go.

It doesn't mean it isn't about Hill at all but this is not a trial on charges or investigation of Hill which may come about separately of course.

There's a lot more in this. It isn't dull considering it is about court procedure for the upcoming hearing with the jurors, etc.

Also I gather Hill can take the 5th alhough whether she does is debatable.
 
Article about the evidentiary hearing here too.

Link below.

www.cbsnews.com

Judge makes Alex Murdaugh's quest for new murder trial harder

A jury found Alex Murdaugh guilty last year in the murders of his wife Maggie and younger son Paul.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com

From the link.

Alex Murdaugh faces a steep uphill battle in his push for a new murder trial after a state judge on Tuesday limited witness questioning and set a high burden of proof surrounding accusations that the court clerk tampered with the jury during last year's sensational proceedings.
Even if Murdaugh's lawyers prove that Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill told jurors not to believe his testimony and pressured the jury into reaching a guilty verdict, they must also demonstrate that she did so with prejudice against Murdaugh, former South Carolina Supreme Court Justice Jean Toal ruled.

Toal also said she will not ask about other wide-ranging accusations of wrongdoing against Hill, including that the elected official misused public funds and plagiarized parts of her new book on the Murdaugh saga. Toal took over the request for a new trial after the judge overseeing the case, Clifton Newman, recused himself late last year.

Hill has sworn that she did not ask jurors about Murdaugh's guilt and never suggested that he committed the murders. State police are investigating the jury tampering and misuse of office allegations against Hill but have not charged her with any crimes. Her attorneys did acknowledge last month, however, that she had submitted a BBC reporter's writing to her co-author "as if it were her own words."

Evidentiary hearings beginning Jan. 29 will include Hill and the deliberating jurors. The judge will not seek testimony from Newman. She also expressed doubt that she would admit thousands of Hill's emails as exhibits.
"I'm very, very reluctant to turn this hearing about juror contact into a wholesale exploration about every piece of conduct by the clerk alleged to have been improper on its own, indicative of her characteristics or personality, or anything of that nature," Toal said.
"This is not the trial of Ms. Hill," she later added, emphasizing that the inquiry is focused on the court clerk's interactions with jurors and the jury's ability to impartially reach a verdict.

Murdaugh is serving life imprisonment without parole after a jury found him guilty last March of killing his wife, Maggie, and younger son, Paul, in June 2021. He also faces an additional 27 years after pleading guilty in November to stealing millions of dollars.
Toal's narrow rules were tougher than those sought by Murdaugh's lawyers during the Tuesday hearing, held to determine the scope of the three-day evidentiary hearing later this month. Attorney Jim Griffin argued that prejudice should be assumed. The state carries the burden of proving that "unauthorized third-party communication" such as Hill's alleged interaction was "harmless," Griffin said.

Toal sided with the state, noting that the court has an affidavit from only one deliberating juror who swears that outside contact occurred. She said she wants to hear specific evidence about how the juror perceived Hill's alleged comments. Toal struck another blow to the defense by blocking questions about what effect the jury tampering alleged by Murdaugh's lawyers might have had on jury deliberations. She will ask jurors only about its possible impact on their final conclusion, not how they reached their decision.
"No one — not myself or anyone else — is going to be asking a juror about the specifics of their deliberation," Toal said.
State prosecutor Creighton Waters had asked Toal to prevent a "far-ranging fishing expedition" into the post-trial revelations of Hill's plagiarism and wiretapping charges against her son. Waters said conversations with jurors and clerk's staff indicate the verdict was not influenced by anything "unprofessional or untoward."

Defense attorney Dick Harpootlian argued that Hill's new book — which is currently unpublished "for the foreseeable future," according to her legal team — is relevant because it establishes a motive. He said Hill told an assistant during the trial that a guilty verdict would be good for her book sales.
Toal reprimanded the longtime lawyer for his continued suggestion that Hill sought to enrich herself by pushing jurors toward a guilty verdict.
"I hope that's the last time you're gonna repeat that until I ask for that again," Toal said at one point. "Let's move on from that."

The evidentiary hearings will be on the record and held in open court. Court television cameras will be allowed but cannot focus on the testifying jurors, who will be referred to by their number and not their names. Toal also expressed openness to other ways of ensuring the jurors' privacy, such as obscuring their faces during testimony.

A lawyer for two jurors asked that Toal deny news outlets entry into the courtroom to limit the "litigative stress" on his clients. Attorney Joe McCulloch suggested that Toal avoid the "distraction and the imposition" of the news media by allowing journalists to instead watch the examinations elsewhere on a livestream.
"No damage would be done to the right of the public to know and participate in the proceedings," he argued, to no avail.
 
Last edited:
I should add that Lee said in her video that the judge's decision will likely be the last word on this. She said while they can and likely will appeal if this does not turn out with a new trial for Murdaugh, the ISC appointed this judge to reach a determination and handle this matter and she said its very doubtful they would go against the one they themselves appoint and trust to make a determination on this. I am paraphrasing.

I agree with most of her decisions as to the rules for the hearing. I think the scope of this should come down to just what if any effect this had on any juror's decision or the jury's decision for the most part. Poot in his initial PC threatened and inflated with a lot of smoke and hot air imo, and he threatened the jurors. The judge imo has dialed it into what the issue is and what is necessary for just this issue and determination.

We had all this extraneous stuff thrown at us by Poot and Griff much of which is irrelevant to the dialed in issue. For instance, the egg juror does not come into play as she made no vote as to his guilt and was not a part of the decision. Poot also threatened jurors but note the judge is protecting them with their numbers still.

There is a lot of sh*t now about Hill and about her son but that's a separate thing and there are no charges against Hill either at this time. What matters is if any juror's decision was affected by Hill, etc. or if the jury's decision and deliberations were. is how I take it and that seems right to me.

Poot has but one lone juror basically. Lee did say that the investigation by SLED and interviewing jurors had some things that could add maybe a bit of weight/support to that one lone juror but not likely a lot.

Lee seemed to disagree that the judge doing the questioning is the right thing but I'm not sure I agree with her on that. I'm no attorney though of course.

If I remember right, I am not off to be able to watch this one and I wish I was/could.

The judge is doing this in sunlight and allowing cameras for all to see how it is conducted and that I of course agree with and think should always be the case.

Anyhow it is going to be an interesting number of upcoming weeks in many cases.

@Tresir did you see that the 4th Gilgo murder has now been charged for Brainard Barnes? And they now have nuclear DNA results on all five hairs?
 
GrandmaBear said:
I should add that Lee said in her video that the judge's decision will likely be the last word on this. She said while they can and likely will appeal if this does not turn out with a new trial for Murdaugh, the ISC appointed this judge to reach a determination and handle this matter and she said its very doubtful they would go against the one they themselves appoint and trust to make a determination on this. I am paraphrasing.

I agree with most of her decisions as to the rules for the hearing. I think the scope of this should come down to just what if any effect this had on any juror's decision or the jury's decision for the most part. Poot in his initial PC threatened and inflated with a lot of smoke and hot air imo, and he threatened the jurors. The judge imo has dialed it into what the issue is and what is necessary for just this issue and determination.

We had all this extraneous stuff thrown at us by Poot and Griff much of which is irrelevant to the dialed in issue. For instance, the egg juror does not come into play as she made no vote as to his guilt and was not a part of the decision. Poot also threatened jurors but note the judge is protecting them with their numbers still.

There is a lot of sh*t now about Hill and about her son but that's a separate thing and there are no charges against Hill either at this time. What matters is if any juror's decision was affected by Hill, etc. or if the jury's decision and deliberations were. is how I take it and that seems right to me.

Poot has but one lone juror basically. Lee did say that the investigation by SLED and interviewing jurors had some things that could add maybe a bit of weight/support to that one lone juror but not likely a lot.

Lee seemed to disagree that the judge doing the questioning is the right thing but I'm not sure I agree with her on that. I'm no attorney though of course.

If I remember right, I am not off to be able to watch this one and I wish I was/could.

The judge is doing this in sunlight and allowing cameras for all to see how it is conducted and that I of course agree with and think should always be the case.

Anyhow it is going to be an interesting number of upcoming weeks in many cases.

@Tresir did you see that the 4th Gilgo murder has now been charged for Brainard Barnes? And they now have nuclear DNA results on all five hairs?
Click to expand...
No I hadn't seen that but am so glad for the victim's relatives that it has finally happened.

Re the juror issue, it does only need one to have had their decision affected by anything Hill said IMO.
 
I see it like this. Even if she did tell the jurors to not believe him, the defense has to prove it swayed the jurors verdict. I don't see that actually happening.
 
Tresir said:
No I hadn't seen that but am so glad for the victim's relatives that it has finally happened.

Re the juror issue, it does only need one to have had their decision affected by anything Hill said IMO.
Click to expand...
I don't understand it quite that way. If I have it right, ONE lone juror claiming it changed his opinion or it affected his decision where all the others say no such thing even happened is not enough necessarily by a long shot. If all other questions and answers from other jurors, etc. show doubt any such thing ever happened, then that juror's claim it affected his decision may mean little as it is in doubt that such a thing was even said to him or occurred.

That's where Lee's video was worth watching in explaining all these things. It isn't that easy and that won't do it from what I understand. One lone juror will not do it by a long shot necessarily.
 
Tresir said:
No I hadn't seen that but am so glad for the victim's relatives that it has finally happened.

Re the juror issue, it does only need one to have had their decision affected by anything Hill said IMO.
Click to expand...
Re LISK, the nuclear DNA is also HUGE on ALL five hairs. I watched Joe Gialcone (spelling?) and all his guests and all were unanimous in that. They all said this is one a very solid case with a ton of evidence (all the cases against CB I mean). The gold standard of DNA is icing on the proverbial cakek of all the stuff they have, half of which we likely don't even know, with cell records and soo very much more.

if you haven't watched the presser, you should. Quite a bit was shared.
 
Cousin Dupree said:
I see it like this. Even if she did tell the jurors to not believe him, the defense has to prove it swayed the jurors verdict. I don't see that actually happening.
Click to expand...
Actually, and I forget why and I also missed the beginning of the video I linked, the burden was one of the things decided and the judge decided the burden was on the prosecutors but I forget for what. I half listened to what I did watch after a long day, backed it up a few times, caught most of what was said from when I turned it on, etc.

BUT yes, the defense having just one lone juror with all the other decisions as to who could question and what could come in is a big deal too. He may get some slight corroboration from a few that SLED questioned but NO ONE that said it affected the decision.

I can't explain it all but that's why I shared her video, she explained it all.

But the burden is on the prosecution and again I forget why or as to what. If you get a chance, watch it, it explains that and all else.

Regardless the big sweeping thing and threats to jurors and what the defense wanted to do here was largely cut off and dialed down to size and what this is about. I honestly expect the same to happen with all the b.s in the Delphi case and all the smoke and blizzards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,009
Messages
241,021
Members
969
Latest member
SamiraMill
Back
Top Bottom