SC - Paul Murdaugh & mom Margaret Found Shot To Death - Alex Murdaugh Accused - Islandton #26

[detectivewannab]

Three people went out to the kennels together and minutes later, only one walked away, AM.

Great closing argument!

 

[Batman's Mommy]

I can’t see Alex getting on the stand against Waters, I just can’t.

Stranger things have happened. IMO, if AM decides to testify, he has decided that the jury is against him, and he can sway them in some way. I noticed on Friday that instead of just glaring at the jury members, he had started smiling when they entered. IIRC, this was also when he was furious over the judge not ruling in his favor for the directed verdict, but I could be wrong.

I'm not sure which behavior is the most menacing, AM glaring at them or smiling in a blind fury... This is just my observation.

JMO. moo

 

[BUF]

August 2022

Dick couldn’t have a more fitting name.

A reporter asked him a question outside after court…he then raises his arm and points his index finger right at her, then says no comment.


Over this 3 day break…

Dick is probably prepping Buster for when he testifies

Waters is probably getting his questions ready if AM decides to testify

Judge Newman is probably enjoying his 3 day break from this circus

 

[Walela]

August 2022

Thanks for posting this. This is very entertaining.

 

[Batman's Mommy]

IMO, AM seemed like he was "speeding" when LE arrived at Moselle on June 7, 2021. He was pacing, couldn't stop talking, was sweating (and wiping his face with his shirt). It could have been an adrenaline rush, it could have been amphetamines, it could have been pain pills (I have known people addicted to opioids that sometimes acted like this, but I think every individual has their own reaction to various medications... moo.), it could have been a multitude of things. We will never know. AM wasn't tested for anything that night other than GPR.

JMO. moo

 

[Batman's Mommy]

IMO, the most fitting description of AM's behavior, in my lay person's mind, is Machiavellian.

JMO. moo

 

[10ofRods]

This really made me see things in a different light. I appreciate you for that and for all your insightful posts. I suppose in my dream world, there would be no prisons because there would be no crimes. I grew up in an area where i lived safely in the countryside and people obeyed the laws. And our small community were all poor. We just loved our neighbors. Imagine that.

Thinking there are people like Murdaugh or Watts or Morphew or Koghberger or all the mothers who abuse and kill their children really makes my blood boil. I cannot understand evil. I remember watching the Scott Peterson trial. When he was given the death penalty I stood up and shouted, even though i was home alone. I was so angry with him for killing his wife and baby. And then, i felt bad inside that I was glad to see someone get the DP. I appreciate all our law enforcement but I could never do that job. Never.

Thank you for your great post.

You are so sweet. I grew up in a similar world! But it wasn't until I started working alongside LE that I truly began to realize just how hard their job is and how humane most of them are - or were, when they started their jobs. I became quite obsessed with law and crime when it intruded on my life in the form of the Manson family (which was unfolding not too far from my sane, safe environment). Then, a friend of the family was killed by Joe DeAngelo (EARONS/GSK) but none of us knew that at the time. And I moved to the SF Bay Area when I was 18 - it blew my mind (I was extremely naive about crime). Just in time for the Santa Cruz area serial killers, Zodiac and

But it was the tales from young policemen when I was teaching at the police academy that I finally heard. And of course, going into the jails (most of my work was at the "good jail" and not the intake jail - but I really needed to see the bad jail for myself).

Have you ever read In Cold Blood? In that true story, the wife of the local sheriff has to take care of one of the two jailed murderers. Like you, she's a good person. So she worries about the inmate and makes him his favorite food. I have to say I'm just not that nice - but so many people are exactly that nice.

::internet hug::

 

[Knox]

It's complicated. There are performers who are known to use both an opiate and an upper before going on stage. There are people who use both for long periods, and have their use down to a science. After a respite in opiate use, many people who are addicts report a rush or burst of energy right after using again. This is sought after.

Many of us would not have that response. Some of us have opiates (prescribed) that we never used. There are likely genes involved in this, because other people are so into opiates that they steal people's prescriptions. I know doctors, nurses, lawyers, judges, police, sheriffs, professors and many others who have used opiates because of perceived benefits. The blurb below is about heroin, but contains a statement about oxycodone.

Overview | National Institute on Drug Abuse

Heroin is a highly addictive opioid drug, and its use has repercussions that extend far beyond the individual user. The medical and social consequences of drug use—such as hepatitis, HIV/AIDS, fetal effects, crime, violence, and disruptions in family, workplace, and educational environments—have...

nida.nih.gov

From that page:



A little too much, though, and the person may get drowsy (the "nods"). So they often use more than one drug for the exact effect they are seeking (polypharmacy).
View attachment 404076
That's from this site:

What Does A OxyContin (Oxycodone) High Feel Like? | Oxycontin Abuse & Addiction

OxyContin is a long-acting formulation of the drug oxycodone, which is an opioid used to treat pain. Taking too much can cause a high and lead to abuse.

www.therecoveryvillage.com

Which also explains that people who use the same drug for pain do not get this feeling. It's what the addict feels. It also explains how the addict processes their pills so as to get around the built-in time release (which doesn't allow much of a high).

"Feel more happy." "Less discouraged." "Things...more pleasing."

For some people, that would certainly feel like a fire in the belly, a kind of invincibility. However, I believe that it's highly likely AM was self-medicating for other symptoms (not physical pain - but perhaps psychic pain).

IMO.

Great explanation, thank you!

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

What I've watched does not agree with what you just said. moo

Here's examples: How many times did DH/the defense "opened the door” for prosecutors to introduce evidence??
2? 3? 4?

And when the judge closed the door on the roadside fiasco, the next day he "reversed" that decision, saying the door had been "opened by the defense".....again.

I've seen bumbling, mubling, listened to incoherent sentences and I've watched him almost fall asleep at his desk.

He's been chastised by Newman for not letting witnesses answer. The Judge has also had too interject telling DH he could not testify (only the witness could).

And his, in my own opinion, condescending disposition towards women witnesses makes me sick. I would imagine all those women jury members feel the same.

Do I see a different defense headed to the courtroom? No. DH is who he is and we've already seen it...

MOO

Although it is impossible to go through a decades long career and not make mistakes, in my opinion all you stated could still be orchestrated and deliberate. Trying to control how the witness answers, etc., they know what they are doing. As to the gargantuan mistakes of opening the door to previously excluded testimony, I have to wonder if that was not deliberate too for future appeals, ineffective counsel. These lawyers are too experienced to make this many major mistakes but anything is possible. MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

DH’s cross examination technique is to ask question to witnesses about things they aren’t really privy to, make them unsure and confused. The prosecution should have done a better job of objecting to this.
—he asked a first responding officer why he didn’t look in the house. When the officer responded he wasn’t assigned to be at the house, DH made it sound like he had done something horribly wrong
—More recently he wanted to ask medical questions to a SLED investigator. When the investigator wouldn’t play his game he had a temper tantrum.
Explain to me how this serves justice. Getting a guilty client off serves no one.

 

[clearskies1]

Realistically, anyone coming to kill people on the property would have their own weapons. Without Alex, or someone in the know, how would a stranger know that Paul and Maggie would be on the property, or Where? AM called them both to be at the property, according to multiple people testifying.

Right. The post I was responding to asked what the defense might argue. I’m not saying I buy it. They’ve got to argue something.

 

[10ofRods]

Don't forget the death of Ms Satterfield(body to be exhumed?), and the High School boy that Buster knew, found dead in the roadway, very suspicious, and still being looked into as well. Many unexplained deaths around that family. MOO

Absolutely.

It's like this weird Land of Oz/a nightmare that doesn't finish. it is, perhaps, one extra reason why AM relied on opiates to numb his guiltier/darker thoughts.

IMO

 

[10ofRods]

Right. The post I was responding to asked what the defense might argue. I’m not saying I buy it. They’ve got to argue something.

I appreciate your attempt, because I'm flailing.

 

[BeachSky]

Dick couldn’t have a more fitting name.

A reporter asked him a question outside after court…he then raises his arm and points his index finger right at her, then says no comment.


Over this 3 day break…

Dick is probably prepping Buster for when he testifies

Waters is probably getting his questions ready if AM decides to testify

Judge Newman is probably enjoying his 3 day break from this circus

Why does everyone in court act afraid of him? He insults & talks over the SLED witness, talks back to the judge, jokes to the jury like it’s a party at his house.
I could not get past how he dodged the onstar diagrams & speed charts(on cross) by changing the subject to AM’s medical records!
He’s that uncle you reluctantly invite to the family dinner ..because if his mouth is moving he’s insulting someone. JMO

 

[Walela]

Although it is impossible to go through a decades long career and not make mistakes, in my opinion all you stated could still be orchestrated and deliberate. Trying to control how the witness answers, etc., they know what they are doing. As to the gargantuan mistakes of opening the door to previously excluded testimony, I have to wonder if that was not deliberate too for future appeals, ineffective counsel. These lawyers are too experienced to make this many major mistakes but anything is possible. MOO

IMO, both sides try their best to control the narrative. Questions are structured to elicit a certain response and questions are intentionally not asked..all to present only what they want to present. I have had so many questions that I wish the prosecution would have asked and I don't believe they weren't asked because they were overlooked or the answer wasn't already known. They weren't asked because they didn't fit or enhance the narrative or they didn't want the other side to be able to explore that avenue. I don't know if DH little temper fits are choreographed but I believe his overall method of objecting and his general courtroom demeanor are deliberate. I do believe that opening the door to the roadside incident was intentional. I feel certain that the arguments of not bringing up the drug issue and then opening that door to that themselves was also intentional. The defense really wanted those issues in the record before the jury but didn't want to introduce it themselves as it would look too much like excuses by a desperate defendant. Better to have it look like a mistake and have the prosecution "pounce" on it as another example of dirty deeds. jmo

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

IMO, both sides try their best to control the narrative. Questions are structured to elicit a certain response and questions are intentionally not asked..all to present only what they want to present. I have had so many questions that I wish the prosecution would have asked and I don't believe they weren't asked because they were overlooked or the answer wasn't already known. They weren't asked because they didn't fit or enhance the narrative or they didn't want the other side to be able to explore that avenue. I don't know if DH little temper fits are choreographed but I believe his overall method of objecting and his general courtroom demeanor are deliberate. I do believe that opening the door to the roadside incident was intentional. I feel certain that the arguments of not bringing up the drug issue and then opening that door to that themselves was also intentional. The defense really wanted those issues in the record before the jury but didn't want to introduce it themselves as it would look too much like excuses by a desperate defendant. Better to have it look like a mistake and have the prosecution "pounce" on it as another example of dirty deeds. jmo

Agree, best play is to get those events on the record and present AM as a man who was operating from a drugged state making bad decisions. From the prosecution perspective though, I can see how that could lead to a desperate man who might commit murder.

 

[10ofRods]

Although it is impossible to go through a decades long career and not make mistakes, in my opinion all you stated could still be orchestrated and deliberate. Trying to control how the witness answers, etc., they know what they are doing. As to the gargantuan mistakes of opening the door to previously excluded testimony, I have to wonder if that was not deliberate too for future appeals, ineffective counsel. These lawyers are too experienced to make this many major mistakes but anything is possible. MOO

I am enjoying the conversation between you and @Warwick7.

Sometimes I think the defense looks at it from both perspectives "Maybe this will work to get him off."

But also, yucking it up a bit at the fact that they are setting up so many appeals. Do the Murdaughs have influence at the level of appellate courts? Probably. I have no idea.

At any rate, sometimes people get out on bond while an appeal is underway. Someone posted here that they don't think that AM could be held without bond on the financial crimes (!)

Also, it would be hard to convince me that AM isn't calling a lot of the shots (as weird as they are) in any case.

IMO.

Maybe Alec agreed with his defense attorneys on this very strategy. Or, at least, calling out that older, near-retirement guy on appeal. It would not be the first time in history.

 

[BUF]

Why does everyone in court act afraid of him? He insults & talks over the SLED witness, talks back to the judge, jokes to the jury like it’s a party at his house.
I could not get past how he dodged the onstar diagrams & speed charts(on cross) by changing the subject to AM’s medical records!
He’s that uncle you reluctantly invite to the family dinner ..because if his mouth is moving he’s insulting someone. JMO

Unfortunately, I think that’s his shtick. I wouldn’t say that some are afraid of him but rather don’t know how to respond to his theatrics. There are many who gave back as good as they got…including the judge.

Personally, I can’t imagine living like that.

 

[Seattle1]

August 2022

Perfect.

From the earliest, we have DH gaslighting the AG in court in the first 30 seconds!

"I'm not here to work with anyone..." you got that right, Dick.

The dude makes me tired. JMO

 

[10ofRods]

Why does everyone in court act afraid of him? He insults & talks over the SLED witness, talks back to the judge, jokes to the jury like it’s a party at his house.
I could not get past how he dodged the onstar diagrams & speed charts(on cross) by changing the subject to AM’s medical records!
He’s that uncle you reluctantly invite to the family dinner ..because if his mouth is moving he’s insulting someone. JMO

In some families, they've lost perspective and actually think the entire event is about Uncle.

We just finished reading Saviano's book on Naples at our house and boy was that eye-opening (organized crime is not something I really had lots of data on - no one does; Saviano is now in hiding). Mafia is part personality cult, IMO.

And it is usually based on families and draws strongly on human sentiment about families. Most of my students who have served time for gang membership unwittingly and youthfully got involved via family members (and drugs).

Such families have consiglieres (the defense attorneys) who really want to be insiders, too. I found myself thinking, in this case, "How awful that AM's son was so irresponsible the killed that young woman!" when I should have been thinking, "How monstrous is it, that this family colluded in Paul's criminality and drunken boat-partying?" Which is exactly how I would think if my child had been in that boat. There's been some masterful PR trying to establish that Paul was worthless and/or criminal/bad seed, while the rest of the Murdaugh family was legal and austere.

But instead we have two generations (at least) of drug/alcohol issues, criminal negligence, and now, murder.

My opinion.