SC - Paul Murdaugh & mom Margaret Found Shot To Death - Alex Murdaugh Accused - Islandton #25

[justtrish]

Also interesting, Alex texted and called Maggie many times that day. She didn't call him back or text him back (in the info we have from 6ish on) He then says, "Paul said you are getting a pedicure" so Alex knows that Maggie has talked to Paul, but she isn't calling him back. When Alex said call me, Maggie called Paul instead. I'd have to look at the times, but it was very close right after Alex is trying to reach her. Seems she didn't want to talk to him.

 

[General wooster]

MOO: Curious that PM's cell phone was left at the scene, though not in its normal containment; whereas MM's phone was removed from the immediate area. Even a little more curious: AM went for a drive immediately thereafter and could have pitched that cell phone a number of places where it would never have been found. By contrast the phone is found a few hundred feet from the front gate, on a road with only a couple of driveways, a couple of residences....

I've done a rapid review of today's testimony and the detail timeline and I think I have read the thread since as well: But I thought there was an element missing out of Mr Rudoski's testimony and cross: It seemed the prosecution got all the way to establishing that MM's phone left the kennel area and ended up on the side of the road in the right time frame for it to be with AM in the Suburban but the location data for that few minutes never indicated that it was actually moving in tandem with the Suburban: the available data indicated the phone jumped from the immediate kennel area to the roadside where it was found the next day, without a directly associated timeline.

IMO its still reasonable inference that it moved with the Suburban....and if there was data that made its movement coincide with that of the Suburban there would be not much left for the prosecution to establish. So did I miss something that specifically made that point?

Closing statement by prosecution connects the dots of the evidence. Right now they are offering exposition.

 

[clearskies1]

Is the jury allowed to ask for copies of reports that were presented & discussed during the trial? I seem to recall that from the Mark Redwine case.

They should be able to get anything that was admitted as evidence in the trial. If it wasn't admitted into evidence they won't get it.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

He didn’t have time to shower upon returning from Almeda. He drove in at 10pm and left to drive to the kennels at 10:05:06. And he was making calls to Maggie during those 5 minutes. Sicko ******.

I don’t know the whole alleged timeline well, but might the defendant have showered at the place where he visited his ailing parent? Before then returning to the scene of the slaying? MOO

 

[Cindizzi]

MOO: Curious that PM's cell phone was left at the scene, though not in its normal containment; whereas MM's phone was removed from the immediate area. Even a little more curious: AM went for a drive immediately thereafter and could have pitched that cell phone a number of places where it would never have been found. By contrast the phone is found a few hundred feet from the front gate, on a road with only a couple of driveways, a couple of residences....

I've done a rapid review of today's testimony and the detail timeline and I think I have read the thread since as well: But I thought there was an element missing out of Mr Rudoski's testimony and cross: It seemed the prosecution got all the way to establishing that MM's phone left the kennel area and ended up on the side of the road in the right time frame for it to be with AM in the Suburban but the location data for that few minutes never indicated that it was actually moving in tandem with the Suburban: the available data indicated the phone jumped from the immediate kennel area to the roadside where it was found the next day, without a directly associated timeline.

IMO its still reasonable inference that it moved with the Suburban....and if there was data that made its movement coincide with that of the Suburban there would be not much left for the prosecution to establish. So did I miss something that specifically made that point?

I don’t know if you’ve seen this or if it helps answer your questions.
It’s the 43 page condensed version of the timeline. I think the full version is 88 pages- not sure what’s left out of this one.

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/postandcourier.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/6/2b/62bdba22-aefb-11ed-a88c-538e3291ccb1/63efd9a2ea409.pdf.pdf

 

[Edvis]

The best question to date:

DH: Do you carry a rectal thermometer?

Coroner: no I borrow one from the EMTs.

Makes me pucker thinking about it lol.

 

[Boodles]

In discussing the email from the jurors, Judge Newman was clear that he always chooses the foreperson and this case was no different. He left it by stating he knows it's done differently in other places but not in his courtroom.

It sounded to me like the jurors had informally decided on a foreperson and assumed they would make it formal at deliberations. Maybe someone’s ego was bruised. I hope power dynamics don’t become an issue.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

IMO its still reasonable inference that it moved with the Suburban....and if there was data that made its movement coincide with that of the Suburban there would be not much left for the prosecution to establish. So did I miss something that specifically made that point?

The phone would only be recording step-like movements, so if it's sitting in the car it's not going to be recording movement. Our phones don't record steps while we drive. There was though a correspondence between when her phone's orientation moved and when he called her.

I also think the evidence shows he may have picked up Paul's phone after the 911 call, when he heard a call or a text to that phone from Rogan. That's when he tried to call Rogan.

 

[clearskies1]

I don’t know the whole alleged timeline well, but might the defendant have showered at the place where he visited his ailing parent? Before then returning to the scene of the slaying? MOO

No. There was a caretaker at his ailing parent's house. She would have known if he was showering.

 

[LaborDayRN]

They should be able to get anything that was admitted as evidence in the trial. If it wasn't admitted into evidence they won't get it.

Thank you!!

 

[Seattle1]

Agreed.......

I think MM was late to come around but she was beginning to see the cracks.

IMO, she wanted a new residence away from Hampton (found a place - Hilton Head) but after AM said not doable at this time, the compromise was a remodel at Edisto.

 

[clearskies1]

I hate to bring this up.... the $600K that was AM was looking to get from Palmetto State Bank in relation to Moselle -- would Maggie need to sign anything for that to happen?

 

[Luna20]

So Alex calls Maggie several times then just immediately after he dumps her phone he sends the text that he is going to see Em BRB..

I also noticed Maggie checks find my phone while driving to Moselle that evening. Is that something that she can use to check on Paul and Alex?

All those calls Alex makes on his way to his moms. I see he called JMM. I want to believe nobody else is involved, but this is the perfect time to say hey I am putting some evidence out at moms, go get it.

Em BRB?

 

[Spartygirl]

They'll have the handy timeline back in the jury room with them. Not sure they even need any other exhibit.

Right-- between the timeline and IMO, the snapchat with AM's voice on it with Paul and Maggie's when he said he was "napping" and then at his moms house, when clearly he was there at the kennels with them right before they were murdered.

IMO--those 2 items are all they need.

 

[Seattle1]

Wonder if it's the same with Buster and the rest of them. It's quite the leap of faith to have family members testify when they are just learning these details. I know there is little to no chance, but it would be great if we had a Perry Mason moment favoring the prosecution while the defense is on direct with a family member.

From what I'm hearing between Court TV and Law & Crime from inside the courtroom, if not Buster, it sounds like his girlfriend has experienced some upsetting, lightbulb moments.

 

[Love Never Fails]

IMO, what's most unfortunate here is that PM was only age 19 when he crashed the boat he was piloting while intoxicated (BAC 3x legal limit), and instead of immediately sending PM to (much-needed) rehab, and praying on the community how all of the under-age friends had a deadly lapse in judgment that they will live with forever, the Murdaughs immediately chose the path of cover-up (as only available to the powerful family).

On the other hand, had they raised PM that regardless of his family name, to be accountable and take responsibility for his actions, I think it would have gone a long way here and there would have eventually been forgiveness.

And it's incredibly insulting that the parents then had the nerve to blame the community for shunning them when they brought any ill feelings on themselves by going so far as to blame an innocent party for the crash! There were several witnesses onboard! What? Does the Murdaugh name overrule living witnesses?

PM being so intoxicated to allegedly have no memory of him driving the boat isn't the same as PM being innocent of crashing AM's boat which resulted in the death of Mallory Beach. MOO

I couldn’t agree more. I see that so much now, even teachers not wanting school children to accept responsibility. Failure is not an option. PM needed to take that responsibility with his community and be a better person. But hey, with a dad spending thousands a week on drugs for himself, PM was never going to learn any good things. What was MM teaching PM at this point?

 

[passionflower]

JMOO no one had a reason to kill MM only AM. Paul favored mom. Buster will defend AM all the way. Best dad never angry etc. Everyone plotting against his dad, my take on this. Interesting

 

[Boodles]

Also interesting, Alex texted and called Maggie many times that day. She didn't call him back or text him back (in the info we have from 6ish on) He then says, "Paul said you are getting a pedicure" so Alex knows that Maggie has talked to Paul, but she isn't calling him back. When Alex said call me, Maggie called Paul instead. I'd have to look at the times, but it was very close right after Alex is trying to reach her. Seems she didn't want to talk to him.

Good observation!

 

[Love Never Fails]

It sounded to me like the jurors had informally decided on a foreperson and assumed they would make it formal at deliberations. Maybe someone’s ego was bruised. I hope power dynamics don’t become an issue.

I had never heard of a judge deciding on a foreperson. It doesn’t matter either way, imo, but it did seem strange. I hope it doesn’t turn the jury against the judge. He seems so fair.

 

[Boodles]

From what I'm hearing between Court TV and Law & Crime from inside the courtroom, if not Buster, it sounds like his girlfriend has experienced some upsetting, lightbulb moments.

Can you elaborate?