SC - Paul Murdaugh, 22 and mom Margaret, 52, found shot to death, Islandton, 7 June 2021 #2

[tara83]

Maybe, or maybe the killer(s) left a note on or around PM's body saying "That was for Stephen".

That would seem to be a dumb move by the killer though.It seems more likely he would have just told Paul that before killing him.Why leave that message for the police to find and let them know the motive?With Mallory's death it would make more sense for them to let LE think the killing was related to that.

 

[Cryptic]

.

I'm curious about the timing of the potential civil suit by Connor Cook. Even if he's correct that law enforcement was improperly influenced/involved in a conspiracy to make it appear that Connor might have been the one driving the boat, why would be bring this action now?

So why would Connor seek to bring this case now?

The suit seems very weak.

People under investigation for any crime are perfectly free to present any alternative theory of responsibility at any time. Their attorneys, can seek to question witnesses- and they do not have to show alot of tact as to when they attempt to do so.

Likewise, high end attorneys summoned by speed dial can and do scrutinize and successfully challenge police procedures (blood tests, taking statements from intoxicated people etc.) at will.

All that aside.....

Another forum member presented the real possibility that the lawsuit is a "Sue to Settle" suit (most lawsuits are).

The strength of the case means nothing. Rather, what is important is that it places the defendant under pressure to pay a settlement to end the suit.

As that forum member stated, short and too the point: "Its a page right out of the M law firm playbook". Until a settlement is paid, it remains on the docket as an embarassing distraction.

 

[cvaldez1975]

I can’t think of a recent case where the mugshot featured civilian clothing. I can think of a few with no mugshot, like Ghislaine Maxwell which is a different type of oddities but not any recent in civilian clothing. Preferential treatment is definitely a factor in the M family. While that doesn’t prove a guilty verdict it still sends the wrong message.

in the jails i worked in, most are civilian clothes because they are taken in booking and dressing them out is last. many get bonded or cited too. usually the ones in jail garb are 1. they soiled their clothes 2. clothes taken as evidence 3. they were wildin / in safety / uncooperative.

 

[cvaldez1975]

I've got a pop culture question that I hope someone can answer although it won't solve the mystery of the murders. It's about Paul's nickname, "Timmy".

That name had to come from somewhere. Can anyone think of a character with that name in books, films, television or video games that had a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde split personality? Or perhaps a fictitious character who was a spoiled brat?

on the rugrats? but i dont recall that timmy being a bad boy

ETA never mind, that was Tommy. the fairly odd parents seems much more likely given the age of PM and his peers and being state side.

 

[stmarysmead]

I'm curious about the timing of the potential civil suit by Connor Cook. Even if he's correct that law enforcement was improperly influenced/involved in a conspiracy to make it appear that Connor might have been the one driving the boat, why would be bring this action now? I could see him bringing the case before Paul's death, due to concerns that Paul and/or his lawyers might have tried to point the finger at Connor at trial in an effort to introduce reasonable doubt to a jury. But dimce Paul is now dead, there won't be a trial on the criminal charges, and the civil charges aren't concerned with who was driving the boat (AM and BM are being sued for facilitating PM's purchase of alcohol, which he drank and shared with the others, not on the grounds that PM was driving the boat). And although there is some vague question in the initial statements and even in the depositions as to who was driving the boat at the time of the accident (most of the others believed Paul was driving but couldn't say for sure), no one has ever sought to hold Connor responsible for Mallory's death. So why would Connor seek to bring this case now?

My guess is that the moment was right.

I think there were many people, including those in the legal system, that were unhappy with the M family, fairly or not. These murders have opened a can of worms and this is the perfect time to allow the large audience, looking in, to understand their point of view.

I was once close to a case that received international attention. The defense attorneys were battling a biased media and a corrupt DA. So they began making filings in NC (an open file state) that included actual witness statements, as we saw yesterday. Then blogs and (the few) friendly media could link to actual documents, as we saw yesterday. Thank God, the public became aware of what they did not know and what was massaged to look a different way. They came to understand what was being withheld from them as well…to fit a narrative.

The SS case is getting another look. Those that feel that the way the MB investigation was a travesty, have now put actual witness statements into the public domain.

You read. You decide.

If this were your daughter lying dead in the weeds, would you feel that the investigation was fair to her?

In my opinion, prior to these murders, there may have been fear to come forward. There may have been a sense of helplessness.

But in my opinion, all that is coming out now, has caused a sea change. That’s why this attorney moved now. If nothing else, if he never files, he has gotten actual witness statements out into the public domain. We each can decide from there.

My opinions and uninformed guesses only as always.

 

[Tiff23fr]

This thread is full.

Please continue on Thread #3