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

[Jurisprudence]

She told the Daily Beast immediately after she learned of this (on the same day it was filed) not that it was "absurd", but rather “It’s totally not true,” she said. “This is crazy.”

It would be silly for anyone to expect her to admit it. Especially without knowing what evidence they had yet. jmo

Murdaugh Lawyers Claim Fame-Hungry Clerk Tainted Jury

They are appealing his murder conviction and demanding a federal investigation—but the clerk denies wrongdoing.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[Jurisprudence]

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.

It looks like it did in that we'll never know now right? Because if her thumb was on the scale that's a problem. This isn't about the verdict. It's about the Clerk's alleged abuse of power and violation of constitutional rights. And that, if found to be true, cannot be ignored. If AM gets a new trial there is only one person to thank for that: Becky Hill

jmo

 

[Simply Southern]

Not sure what "advanced" would mean and what their internal rules are but it seems quite clear that sequestration is the judge's decision, not the decision of the clerk of the court, and it would be especially improper to use the threat of sequestration as a means for them to conclude their deliberations.

jmo
[BBM]
"Only on rare occasions are members of a jury required to be kept together and away from home during the course of the trial. This is called sequestration. Sequestration occurs in cases involving considerable public interest and is resorted to by the judge when it is deemed necessary to protect the jury from undue exposure to publicity about the trial. While sequestration may be inconvenient, the juror must realize that the judge has determined the measure necessary to assure that justice is done. When the jury must be kept together, the court will see to it that your family is notified, and every possible effort will be taken to ensure your comfort."

Juror Behavior - South Carolina Judicial Branch

www.sccourts.org

The last sentence does seem to indicate that the judge may order it at the end of that day's deliberations, but that would be in the discretion of the judge, not the clerk. But, they never even got that far in this case. We'll never know if he would have done so but the jury had not been sequestered during the course of this trial. I remember remarking at the time that their verdict was so quick that there is no way they reveiwed it all jmo. That trial was 6 weeks long and they deliberated under 3 hours. https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02/1160581579/alex-murdaugh-murder-trial-verdict#:~:text=A South Carolina jury has,commission of a violent crime.

jmo

Thank you.

 

[kittythehare]

It looks like it did in that we'll never know now right? Because if her thumb was on the scale that's a problem. This isn't about the verdict. It's about the Clerk's alleged abuse of power and violation of constitutional rights. And that, if found to be true, cannot be ignored. If AM gets a new trial there is only one person to thank for that: Becky Hill

jmo

Does it really truly look like it did?
why?
I'm not seeing it.
The case was proven.

It was very clear.
Anyone would have had to have found him guilty of the murders.
Spell it out for me if you have time?

I hope I'm not merely wishful thinking here??

 

[Jurisprudence]

Does it really truly look like it did?
why?
I'm not seeing it.
The case was proven.

It was very clear.
Anyone would have had to have found him guilty of the murders.
Spell it out for me if you have time?

I hope I'm not merely wishful thinking here??

All that follows is MOO. This particular issue (as you know) is not about his guilt or innocence but rather about an allegation of jury tampering - and not by a defendant mob boss, but by a person in a position of power and trust employed by the court. This makes it far worse imo. If she is found to have engaged in these activities, no error could be "harmless" imo. In other words, that is to say whether the verdict would have remained unchanged shouldn't play a part in the analysis here. This is conduct that goes beyond the verdict imo.

As for the trial, I didn't see what you saw. Sure I liked Dr. Kinsey. I thought he was a great witness. But, at the end of the day, I didn't think the state proved a murder case. I think they proved a financial crimes case. This is NOT to say that I think he is guilty or innocent. It's only to say what my take was in watching it. I thought they did a terrible job actually. And, they had a lot of rulings in their favor which skewed the real issue here. They did a fantastic job (through those rulings) of showing what a despicable person he is/was and what a crook and con man he is/was (an issue I expected to see on appeal). But I did not see them meet their burden on the issue before the court. But, none of that matters. They got the win.

jmo

 

[MTW2011]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>
Her co-author said, in part, on Court TV yesterday; 15:24 into the video

“Obviously when we sat down we decided that we wanted to share as much as we could, and I should tell you this was run through a media attorney, this was run through the Ethics Commission in the State of South Carolina about even a clerk of court being allowed to write a book, an elected official. And they said, you know, as long as sealed documents aren’t shared, as long as confidential information is not shared it’s OK. And so we went on that premise before we even start”

I’m not sure if he got the letter reply or just what she conveyed to him but he seems genuine IMOO I’m thinking that they were above board and OK to proceed

 

[Simply Southern]

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

Not surprised. He’s just one a many to jump in the fray.
Moo

 

[Simply Southern]

All that follows is MOO. This particular issue (as you know) is not about his guilt or innocence but rather about an allegation of jury tampering - and not by a defendant mob boss, but by a person in a position of power and trust employed by the court. This makes it far worse imo. If she is found to have engaged in these activities, no error could be "harmless" imo. In other words, that is to say whether the verdict would have remained unchanged shouldn't play a part in the analysis here. This is conduct that goes beyond the verdict imo.

As for the trial, I didn't see what you saw. Sure I liked Dr. Kinsey. I thought he was a great witness. But, at the end of the day, I didn't think the state proved a murder case. I think they proved a financial crimes case. This is NOT to say that I think he is guilty or innocent. It's only to say what my take was in watching it. I thought they did a terrible job actually. And, they had a lot of rulings in their favor which skewed the real issue here. They did a fantastic job (through those rulings) of showing what a despicable person he is/was and what a crook and con man he is/was (an issue I expected to see on appeal). But I did not see them meet their burden on the issue before the court. But, none of that matters. They got the win.

jmo

I totally agree!!!

 

[Diddian]

[snipped by me]

I can see them thinking she's in a position of authority, don't question it. (And, that's the whole problem when it comes down to it, isn't it?)

jmo

Well, in this neck of the woods, I would say the greater problem is that there are individuals who wield significant power independent of any office they actually hold or any authority they have actually been granted under the law and who fully expect to get away with it. Some examples just off the top of my head:

• Voluntary (and undocumented, thus unaccountable) service as assistant to the 14th Judicial District Solicitor, while simultaneously serving as a private attorney pursuing product- and injury-related settlements in that same judicial district. There is no such position, Duffy whatever-his-name is couldn't provide any history about what AM did in that position, nor was there reportedly any documentation to assist his memory.
• Flashing an ID associated with that judicial district's solicitor's office when speaking with various parties involved in the boat crash that killed Mallory Beach. Displaying the same as he walked around the hospital that night as authorities arrived to question parties involved.
• Conspiring with others to steal hefty insurance settlements that actually belong to clients (AM basically utilized the misfortune of others as a currency-generator for himself while keeping his clients in the dark about the true status of their claims).
• Structuring disclosures to his partners about the attorney-client arrangements on cases he was working on, to maximize the pool from which he could steal while minimizing the fees he'd need to split with his partners.
• Murdering family members in an attempt to influence litigation that then posed a threat to his finances (and which would likely result in discovery of his criminal acts).
• Faking a shooting of himself (same motive as the previous point).
• Lying in the witness chair while testifying in the associated trial.

I expect that an investigation properly conducted (i.e., DH does not get to make THAT call) will get to the likely truth in relation to these allegations. If these allegations are successful in setting aside the results of the past trial such that a new one is ordered (AND also successful in striking all of AM's testimony given in the past trial), then these allegations will likely result in AM having gotten away with all of the above without consequence. And the next press conference will be about recovery of those fees and expenses AM paid to DH and JG for their services defending him in the last trial (including those spent on the housing of the defense team at that expensive wedding venue in the area).

So AM should not lightly be given a Mulligan on the defense he and his counsel presented in the past trial. They swung and missed. The jury ruled and the public, the prosecution, the defense counsel, and the judge watched as EVERY MEMBER responsible for the jury's verdict was polled to attest to the validity of that verdict.

 

[MTW2011]

I think the closing of the EC letter has an interesting detail - “please be advised that you are prohibited from using any confidential information, as that term is defined in Section 8-13-100(7), in furtherance of your own economic interest.”

"Confidential information" means information, whether transmitted orally or in writing, which is obtained by reason of the public position or office held and is of such nature that it is not, at the time of transmission, a matter of public record or public knowledge. Source

in just one of several parts of book she writes about a conversation she heard while being present in Judge’s chambers. I am not sure if that falls within the “confidential information” as the public would not normally know what happened in there, and her position allowed her to be present for that. In my amateur opinion, including details like that in a book being sold (“own economic interest”) sadly seems to go against what the Ethics Commission is mentioning. That information shared, I think, was only possible because of her public position; going by the very definition written in the law but JMOO.

 

[Seattle1]

The latest installment of Murdaugh Murders also features interviews with alleged Murdaugh co-conspirator and accomplice, Curtis Edward Smith (aka Cousin Eddie), and Gwen Generette, one of the trial’s jurors.

^^rsbm

I recognize the name -- she was one of the three Jurors who traveled to NY for the Today Show interview (along with Jurors Ms. Williams and Mr. McDowell), and Court Clerk Ms. Hill.

The following statement was also attributed to Ms. Generette:

"No, I didn't think he was crying. He turned it on and off," juror Gwen Generette said.

Today Show - Jurors

 

[worm]

Well, in this neck of the woods, I would say the greater problem is that there are individuals who wield significant power independent of any office they actually hold or any authority they have actually been granted under the law and who fully expect to get away with it. Some examples just off the top of my head:

• Voluntary (and undocumented, thus unaccountable) service as assistant to the 14th Judicial District Solicitor, while simultaneously serving as a private attorney pursuing product- and injury-related settlements in that same judicial district. There is no such position, Duffy whatever-his-name is couldn't provide any history about what AM did in that position, nor was there reportedly any documentation to assist his memory.
• Flashing an ID associated with that judicial district's solicitor's office when speaking with various parties involved in the boat crash that killed Mallory Beach. Displaying the same as he walked around the hospital that night as authorities arrived to question parties involved.
• Conspiring with others to steal hefty insurance settlements that actually belong to clients (AM basically utilized the misfortune of others as a currency-generator for himself while keeping his clients in the dark about the true status of their claims).
• Structuring disclosures to his partners about the attorney-client arrangements on cases he was working on, to maximize the pool from which he could steal while minimizing the fees he'd need to split with his partners.
• Murdering family members in an attempt to influence litigation that then posed a threat to his finances (and which would likely result in discovery of his criminal acts).
• Faking a shooting of himself (same motive as the previous point).
• Lying in the witness chair while testifying in the associated trial.

I expect that an investigation properly conducted (i.e., DH does not get to make THAT call) will get to the likely truth in relation to these allegations. If these allegations are successful in setting aside the results of the past trial such that a new one is ordered (AND also successful in striking all of AM's testimony given in the past trial), then these allegations will likely result in AM having gotten away with all of the above without consequence. And the next press conference will be about recovery of those fees and expenses AM paid to DH and JG for their services defending him in the last trial (including those spent on the housing of the defense team at that expensive wedding venue in the area).

So AM should not lightly be given a Mulligan on the defense he and his counsel presented in the past trial. They swung and missed. The jury ruled and the public, the prosecution, the defense counsel, and the judge watched as EVERY MEMBER responsible for the jury's verdict was polled to attest to the validity of that verdict.

Back patting, self dealing, sketchy investigations and such in that neck of the woods, and the state for that matter, runs much further than Alex Murdaugh. Yet another reason that this looks so bad on the local justice system.

 

[Seattle1]

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

I can't even imagine hiring an attorney that puts all of his clients on blast.

 

[geevee]

I can't even imagine hiring an attorney that puts all of his clients on blast.

Bland tweeted earlier that his firm would represent any of the jurors for free if they felt they needed help, it seems two (so far) have taken him up on that offer.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Well, in this neck of the woods, I would say the greater problem is that there are individuals who wield significant power independent of any office they actually hold or any authority they have actually been granted under the law and who fully expect to get away with it. Some examples just off the top of my head:

• Voluntary (and undocumented, thus unaccountable) service as assistant to the 14th Judicial District Solicitor, while simultaneously serving as a private attorney pursuing product- and injury-related settlements in that same judicial district. There is no such position, Duffy whatever-his-name is couldn't provide any history about what AM did in that position, nor was there reportedly any documentation to assist his memory.
• Flashing an ID associated with that judicial district's solicitor's office when speaking with various parties involved in the boat crash that killed Mallory Beach. Displaying the same as he walked around the hospital that night as authorities arrived to question parties involved.
• Conspiring with others to steal hefty insurance settlements that actually belong to clients (AM basically utilized the misfortune of others as a currency-generator for himself while keeping his clients in the dark about the true status of their claims).
• Structuring disclosures to his partners about the attorney-client arrangements on cases he was working on, to maximize the pool from which he could steal while minimizing the fees he'd need to split with his partners.
• Murdering family members in an attempt to influence litigation that then posed a threat to his finances (and which would likely result in discovery of his criminal acts).
• Faking a shooting of himself (same motive as the previous point).
• Lying in the witness chair while testifying in the associated trial.

I expect that an investigation properly conducted (i.e., DH does not get to make THAT call) will get to the likely truth in relation to these allegations. If these allegations are successful in setting aside the results of the past trial such that a new one is ordered (AND also successful in striking all of AM's testimony given in the past trial), then these allegations will likely result in AM having gotten away with all of the above without consequence. And the next press conference will be about recovery of those fees and expenses AM paid to DH and JG for their services defending him in the last trial (including those spent on the housing of the defense team at that expensive wedding venue in the area).

So AM should not lightly be given a Mulligan on the defense he and his counsel presented in the past trial. They swung and missed. The jury ruled and the public, the prosecution, the defense counsel, and the judge watched as EVERY MEMBER responsible for the jury's verdict was polled to attest to the validity of that verdict.

See? That post is all about how you think AM is guilty. And, this is precisely the problem. It's not about that. If she did this, she REALLY messed this up. She did. Not him, not Harpootlian, not Griffin, not the Jurors, not other legal professionals who see a huge problem here, and not me. This is what happens when you put your thumb on the scale and try to exact the justice you believe should be exacted. Had she done nothing he may very well have still been found guilty and none of us would be here. Now, she has destroyed that. She's spun the whole process into doubt. That's a problem.

jmo

 

[kittythehare]

Bland tweeted earlier that his firm would represent any of the jurors for free if they felt they needed help, it seems two (so far) have taken him up on that offer.

He'll offer to pay them next..

 

[Diddian]

See? That post is all about how you think AM is guilty. And, this is precisely the problem. It's not about that. If she did this, she REALLY messed this up. She did. Not him, not Harpootlian, not Griffin, not the Jurors, not other legal professionals who see a huge problem here, and not me. This is what happens when you put your thumb on the scale and try to level the justice you believe is the only right way. Had she done nothing he may very well have still been found guilty. Now, she has destroyed that. Sent it spinning into doubt.

jmo

BBM.

At present, AM was found guilty of murdering his wife and son by a jury of his peers. Based upon my own observation of the trial, I agree with the jury's verdict.

As to the Clerk: allegations have been made. The seriousness of the allegation does not equate to the guiltiness of the Clerk. An investigation is due and is already underway by those who are properly authorized to do so. While you say "if she did this...," at the beginning of your post, your final four sentences presume the Clerk's guilt.

 

[Jurisprudence]

BBM.

At present, AM was found guilty of murdering his wife and son by a jury of his peers. Based upon my own observation of the trial, I agree with the jury's verdict.

As to the Clerk: allegations have been made. The seriousness of the allegation does not equate to the guiltiness of the Clerk. An investigation is due and is already underway by those who are properly authorized to do so. While you say "if she did this...," at the beginning of your post, your final four sentences presume the Clerk's guilt.

Okay

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Alex Murdaugh 'extremely angry' about jury tampering allegations

Aired by attorney Jim Griffin Wednesday, the assertion was made just hours after he filed a motion demanding a new trial - based on allegations a clerk tampered with the jury.

www.dailymail.co.uk

'I spoke with Alex today,' the jurist continued. 'He is extremely angry and he's thankful for everything that we continue to do on his behalf.

The idiot double murderer, family annihilator, and witness tamperer needs to stfu.

 

[worm]

With the question of the clerks authority or how she was perceived we have to remember that this is the person enforces family court orders with child support and such and she’s usually seated in front of or near the judge.