SC - Paul Murdaugh, 22 and mom Margaret, 52, found shot to death, Islandton, 7 June 2021 #12

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I highly recommend reading the following article. There is a lot of good historical context.


Some names have been abbreviated by me. See the article for full names.

Decades ago, a Murdaugh patriarch was the ‘brains’ behind a Lowcountry criminal enterprise​

BY DAVID LAUDERDALE SPECIAL TO THE ISLAND PACKET AND BEAUFORT GAZETTE
UPDATED MAY 18, 2022 10:57 AM

First of two parts

Minutes after his girlfriend was hurled to her death in a swirling Lowcountry creek, AC spewed expletives about the young Murdaugh man he alleges was driving the boat.“He ain’t gettin’ in no f---ing trouble,” the Hampton County teen blurted toward a Beaufort County Sheriff’s Office deputy in those chaotic wee hours three years ago.

Six young people were in the boat owned by Murdaugh’s father, Richard Alexander “Alex” Murdaugh of Hampton County, then a powerful attorney who also volunteered in the 14th Judicial Circuit Solicitor’s Office that his father, grandfather and great-grandfather ran for 86 years.

After the crash, the Murdaughs went to work immediately with a tried-and-true formula of brute power over the norms of authority.

<modsnip: Copyright law is that no more than 10% of an article may be copied>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BBM

One-time Hampton banker Russell Laffitte, who is accused of helping suspended Lowcountry attorney Alex Murdaugh in a scheme to defraud legal clients, is seeking a reduction in a $1 million bond set recently by a state judge and court approval to move freely across South Carolina.

Laffitte, 51, filed a request Tuesday to cut the bond amount and its requirements that he remain on home detention, a provision that sharply limits his movements. If the appeal is successful, Laffitte could travel around the state.

If the $1 million bond is reduced, his family also could be reimbursed for much of the amount posted to get him out of jail. The judge allowed Laffitte to post 10% of the $1 million, or $100,000.

Laffitte’s lawyers noted that the bond amount and conditions set down by Circuit Judge ARL were substantially stricter than those against Corey Fleming, a lawyer and friend of Murdaugh’s who has also been charged criminally.

A judge set Fleming’s bond at $200,000 without house arrest or monitoring of his movements. If Lafitte’s bond is reduced to match Fleming’s, Laffitte’s family could be reimbursed about $80,000 if only 10% of the $200,000 is required to be posted, an attorney said.

In the request to reduce the bond, lawyer MA said the conditions set by ARL were excessive and unwarranted.

Laffitte is a non-violent person who poses no threat of fleeing Hampton or South Carolina while charges are pending, his attorneys said. The request to reduce the bond said the S.C. Attorney General’s office only asked for a $500,000 bond, not the $1 million the judge set.

Bonds are set for people in criminal cases to make sure they don’t flee in an attempt to avoid prosecution. If an accused person doesn’t show up for trial, that person can lose the bond amount posted.

“Mr. Laffitte has a constitutional right to be released on bail in an amount no higher than necessary to insure his presence at trial,’’ the legal filing said.

The S.C. Attorney General’s office declined comment Wednesday.

Laffitte, from a well-known Hampton banking family, is charged with 21 crimes, including breach of trust with fraudulent intent, computer crime and criminal conspiracy. A one-time chief executive at Palmetto State bank, he was fired by the bank this year.

The S.C. Attorney General’s Office said Laffitte is a friend of Murdaugh, who is charged with an array of crimes connected to a sensational case that has drawn national attention.

Prosecutors say Laffitte, a one-time executive with Palmetto State Bank in Hampton, provided “off-the-books’’ loans to Murdaugh through the bank. Disbursement checks from a client trust account would be made out to Palmetto State Bank, prosecutors said. Murdaugh would take those to Laffitte, who would convert them for Murdaugh’s personal use, prosecutors have said.

Murdaugh has been in jail for months, unable to post a $7 million bond for a long list of charges. Murdaugh is named in 15 separate indictments containing 79 charges against him in schemes to steal some $8.4 million from various alleged victims.

Murdaugh’s wife and son were shot and killed nearly a year ago on their family’s Lowcountry estate.

At the time, the son, Paul Murdaugh, was facing criminal charges as a result of a boating accident that killed 19-year-old Mallory Beach. Alex Murdaugh later allegedly asked a former client to kill him so another son, Buster, could collect on a $10 million insurance payment. Murdaugh survived the shooting.

Laffitte has not been tied to any of those issues, and instead, is an upstanding member of the Hampton community who was unwittingly swept up in Murdaugh’s financial misdeeds, according to his legal team, which includes MA and former U.S. Attorney BD.

The appeal to reduce the bond requirements accused state prosecutors of using information against Laffitte in a recent bond hearing that the government had agreed not to use. That information included statements Laffitte made when interviewed by state and federal law enforcement officials, the appeals said.

Laffitte is “neither a danger to the community nor a flight risk, given the non-violent nature of the allegations against him, his lack of a criminal record and his long-standing and substantial ties to Hampton County specifically, and South Carolina in general,’’ according to the appeal to reduce his bond.

This story was originally published May 18, 2022 12:36 PM.
 
The federal suit alleged fraud against Murdaugh, and conspiracy to commit fraud against all of the defendants (except the United States), and seeks to regain money lost in this alleged financial scheme. Nautilus had provided a $5 million umbrella insurance package to Murdaugh, which covered property, automobiles and boats, but the complaint does not specify exactly how much it paid out in this case.


The suit also seeks the court’s permission to overrule Murdaugh’s attorney-client privilege asserted in a previous lawsuit brought against Murdaugh by the Satterfield estate in order for Nautilus to comply with a Feb. 8 federal grand jury subpoena.

The United States of America is named as a respondent because the United States subpoenaed records from Nautilus regarding coverage it issued to Murdaugh with Grand Jury Subpoena Number 2022-0064. The federal complaint indicated that a federal grand jury investigation is now underway against Murdaugh, an emerging new development amid an abundant background of state grand jury investigations involving the accused attorney.



Continued Below
 
The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) is currently investigating the death of Satterfield as a possible criminal case, among other homicide cases connected to Murdaugh in some way.

In addition to previous allegations made by the Satterfield estate in state court, in the federal lawsuit, Nautilus makes some new allegations, stating that:

- Murdaugh “pressured” Nautilus to settle the claim, threatening a suit for bad faith against Nautilus if it refused to pay policy limits.

- Murdaugh was “abusive” toward the Nautilus adjuster handling the claim and demanded Nautilus pay its full policy limits, threatening that if the case against him were filed and went to trial, he would admit liability and the judgment would be substantial.

- “Immediately following Satterfield’s fall on Feb. 2, 2018, Murdaugh rushed to the scene, arriving before EMS. On March 29, 2018, Murdaugh stated that Ms. Satterfield briefly regained consciousness during which time she stated that Murdaugh’s dogs had caused her to fall. This statement was heard by no one else and is contradicted by Ms. Satterfield’s later statement to hospital staff that she had no idea what made her fall.”

- “On March 29, 2018, Murdaugh claimed Ms. Satterfield was at his property, not to perform work for Murdaugh and his family, but to collect a check for work performed for someone else, thus avoiding a worker’s compensation defense… In fact, she was there to perform work herself.”

- “Murdaugh stated to multiple third parties in Hampton County that he was liable for Gloria Satterfield’s fall and ultimate death, an admission against interest that all but ensured that there could be no challenge to liability, and securing his ability to force Nautilus to contribute settlement funds that Murdaugh and the Co-conspirators stole.”


Much more at link.
 
I guess this is new but the ID network just had a promo about a documentary on the murders airing Sunday, June 19. It’s at 8 I think but I’ll try and catch it again. More pressure can’t hurt.
 
Alex Murdaugh, the South Carolina lawyer who has faced a wave of fraud charges in the year since his wife and son were killed in an unsolved murder, now admits in civil court that he stole $4.3M that was meant for the children of a housekeeper who fatally fell at his home.

 
I know it's only a tiny little thing, not important perhaps, in the bigger picture, but the idea of the family paying Gloria Satterfield, "one of the family", $10 an hour, whilst they lived a very high cost life really gets under my skin. (I am an employer, a small business owner, wages are my biggest cost, but that is below a living wage, surely?)
I have been wondering whether, if the insurance payment was based on AM's fraud, if her sons are at risk of the insurance companies trying to retrieve that money?
 
I know it's only a tiny little thing, not important perhaps, in the bigger picture, but the idea of the family paying Gloria Satterfield, "one of the family", $10 an hour, whilst they lived a very high cost life really gets under my skin. (I am an employer, a small business owner, wages are my biggest cost, but that is below a living wage, surely?)
I have been wondering whether, if the insurance payment was based on AM's fraud, if her sons are at risk of the insurance companies trying to retrieve that money?

I find it highly unlikely that an insurance company would pursue this, even if it theoretically could.....no jury on earth would rule against the Satterfield sons, after what they've been through. And especially not in Hampton County.
 
I know it's only a tiny little thing, not important perhaps, in the bigger picture, but the idea of the family paying Gloria Satterfield, "one of the family", $10 an hour, whilst they lived a very high cost life really gets under my skin. (I am an employer, a small business owner, wages are my biggest cost, but that is below a living wage, surely?)
I have been wondering whether, if the insurance payment was based on AM's fraud, if her sons are at risk of the insurance companies trying to retrieve that money?
BBM- South Carolina doesn't have a minimum wage law so it's what the federal law is, which is $7.25.
 
I know it's only a tiny little thing, not important perhaps, in the bigger picture, but the idea of the family paying Gloria Satterfield, "one of the family", $10 an hour, whilst they lived a very high cost life really gets under my skin. (I am an employer, a small business owner, wages are my biggest cost, but that is below a living wage, surely?)
I have been wondering whether, if the insurance payment was based on AM's fraud, if her sons are at risk of the insurance companies trying to retrieve that money?
its not just you. it chaps my hiney as well. then steals from her kids? cretin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
3,328
Total visitors
3,483

Forum statistics

Threads
602,565
Messages
18,142,631
Members
231,438
Latest member
Heypig06
Back
Top