SC - Paul Murdaugh & mom Margaret Found Shot To Death - Alex Murdaugh Accused - Islandton *Guilty* #42

[Jurisprudence]

Eric Bland
@TheEricBland

It is our profound honor to be representing two of the jurors from the Murdaugh murder trial. Dick suggested that the jurors should lawyer up and that’s exactly what our new clients have done. They stand ready to participate in any proceedings that may follow, but we will ensure that they will not be harassed in that process. EB

Lol. He's so thirsty moo. This is good though. Because if there was jury tampering, it doesn't matter if 12 jurors were tampered with or only 1 was tampered with. He knows this.

All jmo

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Probably because logic dictates that "anyone else" wouldn't include the Clerk of the Court, the judge, or any other court personnel.

jmo

What? Is that where true, then they wouldn't be mentioning it now neither.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Eric Bland
@TheEricBland

It is our profound honor to be representing two of the jurors from the Murdaugh murder trial. Dick suggested that the jurors should lawyer up and that’s exactly what our new clients have done. They stand ready to participate in any proceedings that may follow, but we will ensure that they will not be harassed in that process. EB

Are these any of the four?

 

[Jurisprudence]

Eric Bland is making a fool of himself imo. He appears to harbor a personal grudge and has basically told the world by Tweet in not so many words that another motivation for injecting himself into this case is the chance to level a defamation suit against them. Come on. Just let the process play out. Let the Court of Appeals hear the case and rule. Stop trying to turn this into a circus and notoriety for you.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

What? Is that where true, then they wouldn't be mentioning it now neither.

You asked why jurors didn't go to the judge and "tell on the Clerk". My response was "probably because she was the clerk - a member of the court, and a person of authority in charge of the jury."

That's all

 

[Jurisprudence]

have you seen this opinion anywhere? if it is “informal” is it not released to the public? Thank you

Her co-author has done more than enough to earn a subpoena imo lol.

jmo

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/realrileybenson/status/1699885086873964934?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[kittythehare]

Eric Bland
@TheEricBland

It is our profound honor to be representing two of the jurors from the Murdaugh murder trial. Dick suggested that the jurors should lawyer up and that’s exactly what our new clients have done. They stand ready to participate in any proceedings that may follow, but we will ensure that they will not be harassed in that process. EB

I'm having to choke back a reply to that one and it ain't easy..

 

[Jurisprudence]

Listening to the Prosecutors YouTube channel, they thought it was because the jurors saw her as an extension of the judge, as she was the person they had to go through to bring up any issues they had to the judge. So they didn’t think she was an ‘anybody‘ who counted.

I highly recommend listening to the whole show to see how a current and ex federal prosecutor see the issue and during the last 1/3 or so of the show they bring a defense attorney on board To see how he sees the issue. As an aside every attorney I’ve watched or listen to on this latest filing (the Prosecutors, Crime talk, Lori Hellis) all agree this is a very serious issue and if proven by a preponderance of evidence, AM will get a new trial. They also agree AM is guilty.

they focus mostly on the affidavit of Juror 36 being the most serious and not the egg lady.

MOO

Agree. This is very serious. And, it has nothing to do with whether AM is guilty or not guilty - that needs to be set aside, and given the highly emotionally charged nature of this case, it appears that this is impossible for some people to do - including Eric Bland.

The issue before the Court of Appeals is jury tampering and potential violation of a defendant's constitutional rights. It has to do with an allegation of jury tampering, not with whether he deserves a new trial for some other reason. Indeed the appeal has been set aside pending the outcome of this new matter. And, if jury tampering happened, it must be corrected. The case must be tried right. While it might be hard for some to see right now, this is a good thing. This is what we should all not only want, but demand.

jmo

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

You asked why jurors didn't go to the judge and "tell on the Clerk". My response was "probably because she was the clerk - a member of the court, and a person of authority in charge of the jury."

That's all

And she still is a member of the court, so the same "logic" would still apply.

Anyway, nobody here can know what happened until when and if they ever testify.

 

[kittythehare]

Agree. This is very serious. And, it has nothing to do with whether AM is guilty or not guilty - that needs to be set aside, and given the highly emotionally charged nature of this case, it appears that this is impossible for some people to do - including Eric Bland.

The issue before the Court of Appeals is jury tampering and potential violation of a defendant's constitutional rights. It has to do with an allegation of jury tampering, not with whether he deserves a new trial for some other reason. Indeed the appeal has been set aside pending the outcome of this new matter. And, if jury tampering happened, it must be corrected. The case must be tried right. While it might be hard for some to see right now, this is good that this is under consideration. This is what we should all not only want, but demand.

jmo

Nobody wants to sit through that interminable trial ever again.
If it didn't affect the actual verdict it's not gonna happen.
A new trial, I mean.
I hope.

 

[Gardenista]

I'm having to choke back a reply to that one and it ain't easy..

Same and I have to do it on almost everything he posts. I've posted my unpopular opinion about him previously lol.

 

[Jurisprudence]

I'm not sure why deliberations would even be necessary after a trial as long as that and with so much damning evidence.
The State proved their case.
Individual jurors had made their own individual assessments, surely?

I really and truly doubt these antics affected their verdicts.

They're OTT for sure and theres lots of role faffing, she's their mother, their interpreter, the voice of the judge and their shepherd.
she would have irritated me.. just sayin'

it will be investigated but if their verdicts were unaffected it will not go for a retrial IMO

I actually thought the state proved a financial crimes case, mostly by his own admission. That trial was whacky. I think they must have protected the record for appeal quite well with the character assassination and financial crimes evidence that was allowed in but even the appeal is now taking a backseat given these new revelations. And, if the jurors are to be believed - under oath, they seem to indicate they had doubts - maybe not about whether he did it, but certainly about whether the state proved its case and met its burden. At minimum, they indicate that they were pressured to render a very speedy verdict (and in one direction), and that they didn't even have ample opportunity to reflect on the evidence and the opinions of the others to see if they might have come out as guilty anyway. It seems the whole problem here is that they were never afforded that opportunity to deliberate meaningfully. It's a problem.

jmo

ETA: The antics of the clerk as you say are extremely serious if true imo, and in no way can be rendered harmless. If they are, I expect this to be appealed further up. jmo

 

[Vern]

Eric Bland is making a fool of himself imo. He appears to harbor a personal grudge and has basically told the world by Tweet in not so many words that another motivation for injecting himself into this case is the chance to level a defamation suit against them. Come on. Just let the process play out. Let the Court of Appeals hear the case and rule. Stop trying to turn this into a circus and notoriety for you.

jmo

Perhaps.

BUT, she has categoricly DENIED these allegations. The investigation shall bear it all out in the end as to wheher or not any tampering has occured (I posted the link to her denial earlier).

As much as "Bland" may be accused of making a fool of himself, I am glad that the other jurors are seeking out counsel - as is their right.

He may not be the only one to end up looking "foolish" at the end of the day as there is a whole lot of people speiling about "Becky with the good hair" on this as if she were guilty without so much as an investigation having yet been done. It's not illegal to write a book. Full stop. She isn't the first to do so and she won't be the last. That has zero to do with whether or not she tampered with a jury or not.

I wonder, what are your thoughts on the presser where DH flat out stated that while at Mosul he watched the Clerk pull a juror to the side and talk to her despite the Judge having advised that there was to be no conversations at Mosul? YET, DH never spoke up or out, never said a word until that presser? Sly. How very ethical of him n'est pas? How absolutely foolish of him that is too - he's now made himself into a witness too if that statement in the presser was factual as far as I'm concerned so should be removing himself from further statements and/or activity on behalf of AM.

Given the foolishness exhibited by the Defence lawyers on this matter and others (using the guise of attorney/client privledge to act as interediaries for media interviews) I'm going to sit back and see what occurs with the investigation and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Jurisprudence]

FITSNews
@fitsnews
·
1m

The S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) is reportedly preparing to release its first public statement on its investigation into allegations of jury tampering tied to the 2023 trial of convicted killer Alex Murdaugh. As soon as we get it, we will share it ... #Murdaughs

How could SLED issue a statement on jury tampering, lolol? Oh boy. Here we go. <-- This is why they need the Federal investigation.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

Perhaps.

BUT, she has categoricly DENIED these allegations. The investigation shall bear it all out in the end as to wheher or not any tampering has occured (I posted the link to her denial earlier).

As much as "Bland" may be accused of making a fool of himself, I am glad that the other jurors are seeking out counsel - as is their right.

He may not be the only one to end up looking "foolish" at the end of the day as there is a whole lot of people speiling about "Becky with the good hair" on this as if she were guilty without so much as an investigation having yet been done. It's not illegal to write a book. Full stop. She isn't the first to do so and she won't be the last. That has zero to do with whether or not she tampered with a jury or not.

I wonder, what are your thoughts on the presser where DH flat out stated that while at Mosul he watched the Clerk pull a juror to the side and talk to her despite the Judge having advised that there was to be no conversations at Mosul? YET, DH never spoke up or out, never said a word until that presser? Sly. How very ethical of him n'est pas? How absolutely foolish of him that is too - he's now made himself into a witness too if that statement in the presser was factual as far as I'm concerned so should be removing himself from further statements and/or activity on behalf of AM.

Given the foolishness exhibited by the Defence lawyers on this matter and others (using the guise of attorney/client privledge to act as interediaries for media interviews) I'm going to sit back and see what occurs with the investigation and let the chips fall where they may.

Disagree. She has not issued a statement. She made the one statement immediately after to the Daily Beast as you linked above but we're waiting for that official statement. There is now a request that they open a Federal investigation into her actions. She is represented by counsel and is probably wise to not say a word until they issue the statement on her behalf.

jmo

Murdaugh Defense US Attorney Letter in re: Hill

www.documentcloud.org

ETA: It is important imoo to the American system of justice to fully resolve this. I speak to no other country's system of justice, only my own and only imo.

 

[Cindizzi]

Despite impartiality concerns from Alex Murdaugh’s attorneys, the State Law Enforcement Division is now investigating allegations of jury tampering in the double murder case that sent him to prison for life.

[…]

The statement came one day after Murdaugh attorney Dick Harpootlian sent a letter asking that prosecutors not involve SLED or the Colleton County Sheriff’s Office in their conversations with jurors. The defense is concerned that SLED, the lead agency in the murder case, is too invested in Murdaugh’s convictions to objectively investigate allegations that could potentially undermine that outcome. SLED’s handling of the case was repeatedly called into question during the bruising, six-week trial before Murdaugh was ultimately found guilty of killing his wife and youngest son in in June 2021.

The letter to lead prosecutor Creighton Waters also asks that a lawyer sit in on any meetings with jurors, that the interviews be recorded and that they “occur in a building during normal waking hours.”

Harpootlian said the defense team had learned that two SLED agents were in Colleton County Sept. 6 questioning Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill’s staff. Harpootlian said Murdaugh’s team was concerned the agents weren’t “asking the right questions.”
“SLED shouldn’t be involved,” Harpootlian said. “Why is SLED doing this — the people who are so invested in the conviction?”

[…]

SLED investigating alleged jury tampering in Alex Murdaugh murder case

Despite impartiality concerns from Alex Murdaugh's attorneys, the State Law Enforcement Division is now investigating allegations of jury tampering in the double-murder case that sent him to prison for life.

www.postandcourier.com

 

[Vern]

Disagree. She has not issued a statement. She made the one statement immediately after to the Daily Beast as you linked above but we're waiting for that official statement. There is now a request that they open a Federal investigation into her actions. She is represented by counsel and is probably wise to not say a word until they issue the statement on her behalf.

jmo

Murdaugh Defense US Attorney Letter in re: Hill

www.documentcloud.org

She has stated that the accusations are absurd. I presume her innocent until it's proven she's not.

Disagree as you wish, but that's how I stand on this matter given the foolishness exhibted by the defence attorneys thus far with their words and actions. They are not getting an ounce more weight in my considerations than she gets.

SLED is investigating ... oh wait ... DH hates them so that just won't do will it.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Despite impartiality concerns from Alex Murdaugh’s attorneys, the State Law Enforcement Division is now investigating allegations of jury tampering in the double murder case that sent him to prison for life.

[…]

The statement came one day after Murdaugh attorney Dick Harpootlian sent a letter asking that prosecutors not involve SLED or the Colleton County Sheriff’s Office in their conversations with jurors. The defense is concerned that SLED, the lead agency in the murder case, is too invested in Murdaugh’s convictions to objectively investigate allegations that could potentially undermine that outcome. SLED’s handling of the case was repeatedly called into question during the bruising, six-week trial before Murdaugh was ultimately found guilty of killing his wife and youngest son in in June 2021.

The letter to lead prosecutor Creighton Waters also asks that a lawyer sit in on any meetings with jurors, that the interviews be recorded and that they “occur in a building during normal waking hours.”

Harpootlian said the defense team had learned that two SLED agents were in Colleton County Sept. 6 questioning Colleton County Clerk of Court Rebecca Hill’s staff. Harpootlian said Murdaugh’s team was concerned the agents weren’t “asking the right questions.”
“SLED shouldn’t be involved,” Harpootlian said. “Why is SLED doing this — the people who are so invested in the conviction?”

[…]

SLED investigating alleged jury tampering in Alex Murdaugh murder case

Despite impartiality concerns from Alex Murdaugh's attorneys, the State Law Enforcement Division is now investigating allegations of jury tampering in the double-murder case that sent him to prison for life.

www.postandcourier.com

SLED is the poster child for conflict of interest here. They should not be involved in this full stop. And, people wonder why the other jurors want to wait until they have cover of subpoena to testify? ("I had to tell the truth. I was subpoenaed!") This would be one reason why. This fear of intimidation or potential retaliation. Being shunned by the community. This is a disaster.

Maybe we are about to go from jury tampering by Hill to witness tampering by SLED. Time will certainly tell. IMO at this point, the Feds absolutely need to get involved.

jmo

 

[worm]

Given that the AG was deep into this case, I agree that SLED has a vested interest in the outcome and shouldn’t be involved.