All-In [48752]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 38772

Joined: 12/31/97

Murdaugh Trial recap...

Mar 3, 2023, 3:33 PM

So, from a lawyers perspective, it feels a little wrong that you can be convicted of murdering two people primarily based on a lie that you told about your alibi. I mean, there is more, but the idea that you have no murder weapon, no direct evidence of involvement, an extremely suspicious time of death evaluation based on witness testimony of habits of cell phone use and are convicted because you are a liar is a little chilling. Especially since SLED was shown to have fudged evidence at the indictment stage and the only reason they did that was fear that not fudging the evidence would prevent the indictment.

On the other hand, Alex did himself no favors on the stand. I took a class on spotting lies from some FBI profilers and he did a whole bunch of stuff on the stand that was indicative that he was lying. Most obviously his defensive attributions. (did you kill Paul? I loved Paul, I would never hurt Paul vs. NO)

The judge let in a lot of stuff that might be grounds for appeal, but his announcement from the bench this morning that he saw overwhelming evidence of guilt was an indication that the state courts will leave the verdict as is. However, Griffin's point about the Doyle violation might be right. By presenting testimony that Alex stopped answering questions at some point as evidence of his guilt they probably violated his fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination. But that's also probably harmless error which since 1967 has been a factor in constitutional appeals.

Also from a lawyers perspective, watching these guys battle it out in front of a judge that let everyone try their case for 6 full ####### weeks was insane. Like watching Georgia Alabama play when you don't care who wins but just want to watch high level football.

Then watching them shake hands, hug, talk and laugh with one another afterwards made me feel pretty good about my profession, even as badly as Alex maligned it with his actions.

I can't be upset about the result but it did make me want to shift focus to criminal defense.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Nice to have a legal take on it.

I'd probably be in the hung category, primarily because of "...based on a lie that you told about your alibi."

Harpootlian summed my view up when he said "are we going to talk about murder, or about financial crimes?" In his press conference Poot basically said Murdock was convicted for his character, which is worthy of putting Murdaugh's axx under the jail, but it doesn't prove he pulled a trigger, to me at least.

I saw one of the jurors saying he was convinced of guilt when Murdaugh snotted his nose but still had no tears. "I knew he was lying to us" the guy said. Which was undoubtedly true, but that still has nothing to do with triggers. The guy can't breathe without lying.

It was interesting to see both sides fighting as hard as they could to sell a story, but neither to get to the truth necessarily. Both the Prosecution and the Defense wanted the jury to have big old blinders on and only hear their version of events, skillfully ignoring, masking, or blocking anything that didn't fit their narratives. I feel like there's a whole undercurrent related to the drug issue that neither side wanted told.

There's still no motive that I can see. People can crack, or maybe he hired someone, or maybe he just went off the rails in a momentary lapse of reason and mowed them both down, but if killing your family for time or sympathy is the best explanation there is, one can do that by either killing Paul or Maggie - you don't need to kill both. In fact, it's better in that case if you spread them out for more sympathy when you need some later.

Short of video or audio evidence, I could probably be convinced if there were a better motive, and the drug and mystery DNA loose ends were resolved. Or, if the timeline was shown to be impossible for him to wiggle out of, which might be possible if the time of death was narrowed to something less than 2 hours. I still have doubts, but we know how our Low Country friends see these things...

Murdaugh Trial recap...

Honestly, the whole debacle seemed like a huge waste of time

Basically, if I am ever trying a case up in York

Yeah...

Thanks for the professional recap

A group of behavior scientists observed his interviews

I'm sure he is, but Ford's general point still stands.

We'd probably never get murder convictions then.

interestingly the Judge sort of signaled…

That is not the standard!

yes, but…

So if you have 10 peices of circumstantial evidence

technically…

Re: A group of behavior scientists observed his interviews

Re: Murdaugh Trial recap...

I didn't pay that much attention to the trial details,

Re: I didn't pay that much attention to the trial details,

Same.

The hand of one is the hand of all

Crazy psycho killers don't need a motive

Re: Crazy psycho killers don't need a motive

Son's case was getting ready to make him disclose

see though, there is no evidence his wife was leaving him

The man was not thinking logically

so here's my hang up on the motive about the house of cards

I thought he pretty much required his wife to return

Financial ponzi theft was a mountain about to crush him

but does that lead to murdering your wife and kid?

How's he going to disappear? He needs a weekly cash infusion

Murdaugh Trial recap from a layman's perspective.

Re: Murdaugh Trial recap from a layman's perspective.

Re: Murdaugh Trial recap...

Motive -- Family Annihilator

Re: Motive -- Family Annihilator

Eh. Reasonable v shadow

Agree. I don't have any doubt he did it.

Life without parole…

^^^THIS^^^

But for the circumstantial nature of the evidence…

I was on the fence until Meadors rebuttal

Meadors is definitely "The Closer"

Impressive rhetorical and extemporaneous narrative

TigerBoard POTD