sunshineray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 8,578
- Reaction score
- 67,422
Unless LE asked them not to talk to media.With all the media coverage you would think the people who picked him up would come forward with their story.
JMO
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unless LE asked them not to talk to media.With all the media coverage you would think the people who picked him up would come forward with their story.
JMO
Paul and Margaret cannot speak for themselves, so we have no choice but to wait for independent corroboration regarding their timelines. Alex, on the other hand, is alive and can speak for himself.
In the two links I provided regarding Alex's activities prior to discovering the bodies, one mentions that he checked on his mother as well.
Did Paul state that he only drank alcohol purchased using his brother's ID?
He may be in rehab for something other than substance abuse. Gambling addictions can be very expensive. As can sex addictions.i’m referring to the first part. Where he says “the murders have CAUSED an incredibly difficult time in my life and I have made some decisions I regret.”
i’m reading that as whatever he did, he did it after the murders. Namely, the embezzlement.
I agree with you that the last part implies he has had a long-standing drug addiction, which has grown worse recently, but I don’t believe he has a drug addiction. I think that’s a cover to keep police away from him and explain his behaviors.
So in SC if you have video of an establishment serving alcohol to an underaged person and they then, by their inebriated negligence, keave that establishment and cause a wrongful death, that establishment is not considered culpable at all?Well I decided to go ahead and look up the legal liability of the party hosts and liquor store clerk. It's kind of complicated because there is no explicit law regarding it but the South Carolina Supreme Court did establish a legal precedent regarding civil liability in 2008.
SC Judicial Department
What it works out to is that in a case where a third party is injured by an underage adult, a social host is 20% liable for damages if they knowingly served such a person. It seems that the court affirms a social host has no obligation to stop an intoxicated person from driving. The clerk who sold the alcohol could bear both criminal and civil responsibility if he was aware he was selling to someone underage which is probably why the use of Buster's ID was established (it was probably scanned and electronically associated with the purchase).
Now its quite possible that all the details we know about these specifics were orchestrated from the beginning by people who were well aware of the letter of the law but the facts as we know them seem to absolve anyone but the boat operator of any technical liability.
We don’t even know if he was at the hospital at all, do we?But you mentioned that AM was at the hospital at 9:00 pm. Please don't post this as a fact. We have no idea when AM was at the hospital. He might have been there at 4pm for all we know. I worry others will quote your post as fact regarding the timing.
If AM showed up at the hospital following being shot and they administered pain medication would him being addicted to Opiates mean his tolerance was low and he had to come clean so he could have better pain management? I don't know how Opiates work.
No we don't. But I'd be surprised if he wasn't, since it would be easily checked.We don’t even know if he was at the hospital at all, do we?
The plaintiff originally sued multiple parties - among them that establishment in Beaufort - and subsequently removed several of those parties from the suit, which likely means settlements were already reached with all those parties no longer listed as defendants.So in SC if you have video of an establishment serving alcohol to an underaged person and they then, by their inebriated negligence, keave that establishment and cause a wrongful death, that establishment is not considered culpable at all?
He may be the first person AM calls because he believes everything AM tells him. Probably not, but could be. AM’s assumed alibi for the murders came out of Randy’s mouth, not LE. The circumstances leading to AM’s head shot came from Randy, not LE. I assume Randy is a bright enough lawyer to know public lies can come back to haunt you. So I wonder if he knows what’s coming out of his mouth is a bunch of spoon-fed malarky. To some degree his statements remind me less of an attorney than a trusting brother. If that’s the case (and I’m not saying it is or isn’t—only Randy and AM know) he’s in the middle of a nasty awakening and I feel bad for him.You can't tell me RM doesn't know anything. He's always the first person AM calls.
Why not? Everyone takes pics and recordings now to release to media for dollars. In a case as big as this I couldn't see why a couple of people in a, lets say, lower median income area, would not talk to MSM about it. Fox, Daily Mail and other channels would pay for an interview with them. So why haven't we heard from them since it would be to the Murdaugh families benefit since it would back up AM's story. They could even tell us whether it really was a superficial VS serious entry, exit wound. If they saw another vehicle in the vicinity. You would think RM or Griffin would be setting up their interview themselves.
JMO
Ok so they settled out of court to spared their business prolonged attention. Thanks for your answer, it calmed me down about it, a bit.The plaintiff originally sued multiple parties - among them that establishment in Beaufort - and subsequently removed several of those parties from the suit, which likely means settlements were already reached with all those parties no longer listed as defendants.
The Mallory Beach wrongful death lawsuit apparently initially named four defendants, the gas station/convenience store, the bar, and a married couple. Family of teen killed in Lowcountry boating incident files wrongful death lawsuitSo in SC if you have video of an establishment serving alcohol to an underaged person and they then, by their inebriated negligence, keave that establishment and cause a wrongful death, that establishment is not considered culpable at all?
Older brother steps in to help younger brother, probably have had that dynamic all their lives.He may be the first person AM calls because he believes everything AM tells him. Probably not, but could be. AM’s assumed alibi for the murders came out of Randy’s mouth, not LE. The circumstances leading to AM’s head shot came from Randy, not LE. I assume Randy is a bright enough lawyer to know public lies can come back to haunt you. So I wonder if he knows what’s coming out of his mouth is a bunch of spoon-fed malarky. To some degree his statements remind me less of an attorney than a trusting brother. If that’s the case (and I’m not saying it is or isn’t—only Randy and AM know) he’s in the middle of a nasty awakening and I feel bad for him.
JMO
According to the deposition of one of the kids on the boat, one of the owners of the party house was a principal of a school. When I read that I just could not fathom a principal of a school letting underage kids drink at his house.
JMO
Yes the store and the bar being caught on video, strong evidence in my mind. Thanks for your answer.The Mallory Beach wrongful death lawsuit apparently initially named four defendants, the gas station/convenience store, the bar, and a married couple. Family of teen killed in Lowcountry boating incident files wrongful death lawsuit
At some point, Paul's grandfather was also named as a defendant. The bar, the couple and the grandfather were then removed from the suit. 3 defendants removed from Mallory Beach wrongful death lawsuit | WSAV-TV
Well I decided to go ahead and look up the legal liability of the party hosts and liquor store clerk. It's kind of complicated because there is no explicit law regarding it but the South Carolina Supreme Court did establish a legal precedent regarding civil liability in 2008.
SC Judicial Department
What it works out to is that in a case where a third party is injured by an underage adult, a social host is 20% liable for damages if they knowingly served such a person. It seems that the court affirms a social host has no obligation to stop an intoxicated person from driving. The clerk who sold the alcohol could bear both criminal and civil responsibility if he was aware he was selling to someone underage which is probably why the use of Buster's ID was established (it was probably scanned and electronically associated with the purchase).
Now its quite possible that all the details we know about these specifics were orchestrated from the beginning by people who were well aware of the letter of the law but the facts as we know them seem to absolve anyone but the boat operator of any technical liability.
Not me. If I were driving along and found someone who had been injured I would stop and help. But regardless of circumstances I’d have zero interest in being publicly identified let alone make a public statement. That said, I seldom post on SM and value my privacy, so I’m atypical.With all the media coverage you would think the people who picked him up would come forward with their story.
JMO
Two things I note about this, it does not list rifle wounds as a contributing cause of death and the onset of death is listed as seconds to minutes rather than instantaneous so we might assume that the wounds were not catastrophic, perhaps fired from some distance. That is if the coroner even makes a distinction between instantaneous and "seconds to minutes"
I also was a little surprised at cremation. I would have expected the Murdaughs to be the burying types.
Hmmmmm.....guess we will be seeing "stay tuned, more to come".Suggest you pop some popcorn before reading this one
Murdaugh Murders: Embezzlement Claims Raise Stakes Of True Crime Drama