SC - Paul Murdaugh & mom Margaret Found Shot To Death - Alex Murdaugh Accused - Islandton #28

[Cindizzi]

IMO- Zero chance AM testifies. State has to prepare for everything given the hype. One would assume they've already prepared...but

I don’t think AM will testify.
But CW is definitely prepared IMO

 

[sunshineray]

Ah. So 2% were persuaded away from "guilty" so far, during the defense.

Where is this poll for voting, I can't find it on their website? If you know, TIA

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I agree, hope the prosecution is saving that for their "closing arguments", and they are letting it sink in with the jury/probably everyone in AM's circle without seeming to be too "heavy handed" about the testimony of several people saying they were sure it was AM's voice on the video at the kennels at that time?

It seems there is a lot of tiptoeing going on, sadly, for the victims, at this trial, and there could be so much at play with circumstantial evidence, cultural expectations and politeness, and giving way to people close to AM and his family's ability to process things, including their denial and that AM is "innocent until proven guilty" for their murders (even if he is a crook in other ways), and "witnesses" who know him being allowed to come up to speed and make what they will of the evidence, that it's not going to behoove the prosecution to come right out and say what they believe until the end. And even then, I'm guessing, AM will never be made out to be the "bad guy".

JMO

The prosecution can't just bring up the issue of Alex at the kennels. They've established that with the video and the testimony about the voices but most of these witnesses have nothing to do with that aspect of the case. If AM takes the stand, he will face questions about his whereabouts from the prosecution, but only after the defense gets their version of events on the table. The prosecution doesn't get to "say what they believe" until closing arguments.

 

[sunshineray]

The prosecution can't just bring up the issue of Alex at the kennels. They've established that with the video and the testimony about the voices but most of these witnesses have nothing to do with that aspect of the case. If AM takes the stand, he will face questions about his whereabouts from the prosecution, but only after the defense gets their version of events on the table. The prosecution doesn't get to "say what they believe" until closing arguments.

The prosecution can say what they believe by way of their questions to the defendant. The jurors aren't stupid, I'm sure they'll be able to follow along, MO

 

[mrjitty]

Unless he can concoct some vaguely possible version to explain all the loose ends, i've come around to the idea he can't testify

It's going to be too obvious that he's just listened to all the prosecution case and then come up with a brand new story never told before.

He's going to have to tell the jury about his last moments with his wife and son at the crime scene ....

 

[sunshineray]

Unless he can concoct some vaguely possible version to explain all the loose ends, i've come around to the idea he can't testify

It's going to be too obvious that he's just listened to all the prosecution case and then come up with a brand new story never told before.

He's going to have to tell the jury about his last moments with his wife and son at the crime scene ....

Yes and how he wrangled Bubba and got that chicken out of his mouth and then made it back up to the house and flopped down on the couch, passed out cold (for a 15 minute nap) in less than 4 mins (so he heard nothing acoustical, except his tv show) because 4 mins after he yelled "Bubba" on that video PM was dead. I can just hear it now, he heard shots but thought PM was just having a time of it putting that injured chicken out of it's misery. Just some thoughts.

 

[Ray_of_hope]

"According to a news release from the Colleton County sheriff’s office, an “unidentified male caller” telephoned the courthouse’s main switchboard at some point after noon and claimed there was a “bomb in the judge’s chamber.”

As the courthouse was being cleared, SLED agents and Colleton sheriff’s detectives “began working to identify the caller” – and were able to trace the “target phone” to the Ridgeland Correctional Institute in Jasper County. There, officers of the S.C. Department of Corrections (SCDC) located a cellular device in the possession of an inmate named Joey Dean Coleman.
Murdaugh Trial: Arrest Made In Courthouse Bomb Threat - FITSNews

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

The prosecution can say what they believe by way of their questions to the defendant. The jurors aren't stupid, I'm sure they'll be able to follow along, MO

Yes, if AM testifies, but I think the initial question/discussion on here is why they have not hit that subject hard via the other witness’s.

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

Yes and how he wrangled Bubba and got that chicken out of his mouth and then made it back up to the house and flopped down on the couch, passed out cold (for a 15 minute nap) in less than 4 mins (so he heard nothing acoustical, except his tv show) because 4 mins after he yelled "Bubba" on that video PM was dead. I can just hear it now, he heard shots but thought PM was just having a time of it putting that injured chicken out of its misery. Just some thoughts.

Since their “acoustic expert” testified that you could not have heard the gunshots from inside the house I think AM will say the whole TV napping story was a
lie because as the husband, he knew he would be a suspect, drugged state or whatever they come up with. From living in the country and hearing shots all the time, I don’t believe the acoustic testimony that you could not hear the shots from inside the house. I think AM added the napping detail as to to not only explain why he didn’t go but also why he did not hear the shots because he has heard shots before while in the house. The expert testimony gave him an out, now just has to explain the lie. MOO

 

[mrjitty]

I knew I would be a suspect doesn't really explain why he would lie about being at the Kennels.

If he was innocent, then he knew he had a rock solid alibi.

My issue with it, is why does the lie begin to build in the very first minutes? Before he would know the parameters and have any reason to lie? It just doesn't make any sense ... for all he knew, the villains might be caught within the hour.

You would stick hard to the facts you know you can prove. I was at the kennels and left. And I can prove it.

 

[BrownRice]

When Barbara Mixson was testifying (for the defense, as their witness) about how she's worked for AM's parents/the Murdaugh family for 42 years, AM and DH looked at eachother with a "wow, is that right? Yup! She trumps 'em all and really knows me" kind of look, like who could possibly question the woman who helped "raise" him, she has so much "cred".

Then when she responded to the defense questions about how dear he is to her and that she "loves him just like one of her own children", AM just "lit up like a Christmas Tree", which was the only time during this trial he had that kind of "happy face" listening to testimony about him, he was just beaming like a little kid who was forgiven for getting into the cookie jar, IMO.

I think it was pretty weak (for one person who's known him much of his life to attest to his "goodness") and the defense's case presented thus far has been underwhelming, but wouldn't put it past him (AM) to "hitch his wagon to that star" and think it would be his final curtain call to act out a persona for the jury that he was a "good ole boy" in the eyes of people who knew him well (whom he hasn't screwed over) if he testifies.

All MOO, of course.

Yes, I noticed this too. I also noticed earlier when MB was talking about what a great kid PM was, that it didn’t faze him at all, and he actually leaned over to his atty talking. Was it that he didn’t care or that he didn’t want to hear it? I’d think a dad who lost his child in any manner would grasp on to any mention of his child and beam with pride.

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

I knew I would be a suspect doesn't really explain why he would lie about being at the Kennels.

If he was innocent, then he knew he had a rock solid alibi.

My issue with it, is why does the lie begin to build in the very first minutes? Before he would know the parameters and have any reason to lie? It just doesn't make any sense ... for all he knew, the villains might be caught within the hour.

You would stick hard to the facts you know you can prove. I was at the kennels and left. And I can prove it.

I don’t think there’s any reasonable explanation he can give for the lies other than I killed them so I lied. If he takes the stand though, they will have to come up with something MOO

 

[BeachSky]

Just gonna float this out there just in case it actually happens, which I don't think will but just for giggles... What if Alex gets up on the stand and confesses to everything??

I see him coming up with more like:
I thought Paul killed Maggie ,then himself..
”it was so bad”. I took the guns & hid them to save the family more grief (AM either destroyed guns or can take SLED to them).
I really did nothing wrong except fall on the sword to save my son’s name and my family legacy. I can only attribute my actions to being on drugs and thinking it was murder/suicide. So I staged the narrative away from Paul. No sir, I have no idea what it was - if not a murder/suicide.
I realize my other son needs me. So I am telling the truth now. I am a victim and a good person, sir.
The end.

MOO

 

[Kittybunny]

Like someone on here already said..
AM had a house full of guns, acres & acres of land he could of simply walked out on and ended his misery. But he wanted it all, so it meant taking these 2 souls out.

JMO

Not to mention bags of pills he could've swallowed by the handful.

On another topic, I am 100% sure that AM is guilty of this and all his heinous crimes, but I am really nervous about the verdict. Between various posters here, who just cannot fathom this level of evil, and those who need some kind of physical proof, like someone's blood on Alex, plus, of course, the possibility that a member or two of the jury are in the defense's pocket or are unduly influenced by the Murdaugh name, sign me up for the Nervous Nellie car on the Crazy Train!

 

[Edvis]

I was wondering if it was the other way around -- that he intended to ditch both phones but got distracted after setting Paul's phone down on his body. On his body is just such a weird place to put it. I guess another possibility is that he didn't think anyone would be able to guess his super-secret birthday password.

Possible as well and his thoughts started to unravel. should I take them? leave them?.

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

I see him coming up with more like:
I thought Paul killed Maggie ,then himself..
”it was so bad”. I took the guns & hid them to save the family more grief (AM either destroyed guns or can take SLED to them).
I really did nothing wrong except fall on the sword to save my son’s name and my family legacy. I can only attribute my actions to being on drugs and thinking it was murder/suicide. So I staged the narrative away from Paul. No sir, I have no idea what it was - if not a murder/suicide.
I realize my other son needs me. So I am telling the truth now. I am a victim and a good person, sir.
The end.

MOO

Very good guess, I bet you are right moo

 

[Kittybunny]

I think it’s 50/50 that AM will testify. I think he wants to.

I worry that his “cunning” and manipulative behavior can convince at least one, if not more, jurors. I do believe he has far better than average lying skills, and he obviously has relationship/schmoozing skills (as false or hollow as they turned out to be).

He will play up the horror, his shock, trauma, drug impacts, tears and, most importantly, the “I loved my wife and son - I could never have hurt them” angles. And it still ruminates through my mind: HOW could he have blown his son’s brains out? STILL! And intellectually, I completely believe he did it. But emotions are a different animal. If given an out, wouldn’t some people eagerly latch onto any excuse to convince them that SODDI?

He might be a good enough con man to sway the jury. As much as I’d love to see Creighton rake him over the coals, CW can’t know for sure what AM has concocted. And he’s had a very long time to devise his counterpoints to the evidence. He could have some twisted notions to throw everything off kilter. Although I think CW is brilliant, excellent, and superb at thinking ultra fast on his feet, he obviously can’t know those notions, for sure, in advance. That scares me.

As much as I want to hear AM’s “story” (aka lies), I hope he does not testify. I believe chances for conviction are better if he doesn’t.

I am right there with you on this one, I really hope he does not testify. I think he could easily con a juror who was on the fence, or convince one to switch sides. Many of us here are very familiar with the charming sociopath narcissist, but the ordinary juror might not be, and fall for the drug-addled, traumatized, loving family man version of AM.

 

[Edvis]

It was the evening caregivers who said it was rare for him to visit in the evenings, the daytime caregivers said he stopped by almost daily. I don’t think either were lying or misrepresenting. It was SS, the evening caregiver who testified he tried to encourage her to say he was there for 40 minutes the night of the murders. MOO

Agreed AM's side show alibi act was traveling around planting seeds in others heads.

 

[Edvis]

Just gonna float this out there just in case it actually happens, which I don't think will but just for giggles... What if Alex gets up on the stand and confesses to everything??

Love Fairy Tale Storys, helps me sleep like a baby but think AM is going to ride that pale horse right off the cliff.

 

[Tanager]

Possible as well and his thoughts started to unravel. should I take them? leave them?.

I think he may have been considering using MM's phone to call himself during alibi time at mom's house to make it look like she was still alive. That seems to be a common strategy with other murderers with a close relationship to the victim. Maybe he could not remember her password or he realized that every moment her phone was not being answered was highlighting the real timeline or his route so he chucked it. I think PM's phone had to stay on scene with an explanation, as soon as AM got blood and DNA on PM's pocket. I also think it could be part of AM inserting more chaos into the evidence to suggest 2 shooters, nevermind the fact that a stranger would not chuck 1/2 phones. AM does not have to manufacture evidence to point at someone specific, he just needs to confuse the jury with random information that they can't weave into a cohesive story.