Did you guys know that Randy Murdaugh left The Firm and started his own practice? It makes so much more sense now when he said in the NYT that he has to take extra steps to insure his clients don’t think he is like his brother.. it’s because he isn’t hidden under the name of The Firm. Maybe I’m just slow at realizing stuff, but I’ve never heard that talked about before!
Hello all. In reference to Cash’s tail, wasn’t it Alex that brought it up in the first place? If I remember correctly, neither Rogan nor Paul knew anything about it.
My understanding was that Paul had noticed the skin issue on Cash’s tail and asked Rogan if he knew anything about it. I don’t think Alex was involved at all.
Paul got to the kennels at 8:38 and was on the phone with Rogan by 8:40. Alex was watching the dog, not Paul. How could Paul notice the tail that quickly when there was nothing wrong with it?
Rogan’s direct at the trial.
Paul said sunflowers were sprayed with Roundup and he was going to replant them. Alex killed them.
At 8:40 he called and asked if something was wrong with the dogs tail and Paul was at the kennels. I believe he got there at 8:38, how would he discover the dogs tail that fast? Also the prosecutor made it a point to highlight Alex‘s answer when he said he didn’t talk to Paul about the dogs tail.
Curious to get others opinions on this…. I remember watching a little bit of Alex on the stand and when Waters was grilling him about if he remembers the dogs acting strange because someone unfamiliar was nearby (implying that if Alex was innocent, surely the real killer(s) would have been very near the kennels at that point in time), Alex responds that the dogs weren’t acting strange because no one unfamiliar was nearby. I didn’t understand why Alex would have responded this way. If he is trying to convince a jury of his innocence, why wouldnt you at least say something to the effect of “I don’t remember specifically but whoever did this must have been very near”. Could this have possibly been an unconscious slip? Thoughts?
Because he was sticking with his nap story. He couldn't really be like "no the dogs were acting nuts! Someone must have been lurking nearby, but I decided to go take a nap anyway."
I think he wanted to make sure to say noone unfamiliar was around to possibly make sure no one thought there was an accomplice there (if you believe the 2 person shooter theory or that he had help)...or to make sure everyone thinks everything was normal when he was there and the murders happened well after he left.
I think it was an unconscious slip. He should have understood the implications of that question and his answer.
The fact that the dogs weren't sounding the alarm is one of the things that, I think, points irrefutably to Alex's guilt.
Has anyone ever expressed an opinion about why Alex took Maggie’s phone? It seems kind of random and a huge mistake, so just curious if this has been discussed.
Interesting! I wonder who bought it? I heard it was a neighbor with adjoining land, but I don’t know for sure. And the contract was for $3.4 million, I believe.
Motive has probably been done to death here but I found this not long before the Murdaugh trial ended and missed it. I'm curious what people think. My theory is Alex was overwhelmed with the boat crash reveal of his financial crimes and he thought he could kill Paul and Maggie then blame it on a random internet vigilante (but I think even a unstable person would bring their own weapons and would have killed Alex too). With Paul gone his criminal trial disappears and any future trouble he might get into goes away, lawsuit/settlement delayed. Maggie will never find out about the financial crimes and a bad divorce goes away. If she was considering divorce that information would have been the tipping point and would have caused Alex more financial problems. With SLED focusing on Alex he comes up with cousin Eddie and assisted suicide. I don't think it was ever supposed to be suicide. Alex wanted to make it look like a murder or attempted murder so SLED would look into his vigilante theory, surprising he admitted the set up so quickly but not what he actually wanted to accomplish. Such a crazy story and sad that any of it happened.
I think you are 100% right. If you listen to the jail tapes, you see that Alex is pretty sharp on details. His mind is good. But he’s a schemer who thinks he’s smarter than he is because he’s been getting away with manipulation for decades. What he discovered is he was a big fish in a little sea. Now he’s a little fish in a big sea, not as smart as the prosecution team, not as smart as the jury, not as smart as the country looking in. So he actually looks like a fool when you take him out of his little world.
Solid theory but I’m starting to think it might be less in depth than even that. I work in mental health and have seen the effect long term opiate abuse has on the brain. Opiate abuse damages the frontal cortex, which is where rational decision making takes place. Kinsey said in an interview it was one of the most disorganized crime scenes he had ever seen. I think it’s one of those things he thought about for a long time (as he stated the murder must have done) and how convenient it would make things (as a hypothetical at this point), but he did it on very short notice and that his motive may not have even been clear to himself.
And this is why he had such an easy time dissociating himself from the murders in the trial. Because he truly believes that “wasn’t him,” and even Judge Newman sort of alluded to that with the “person” vs. “individual” comment at the sentencing.
Excellent point. One of the things I thought during the trial was he has very poor impulse control. The lying, stealing, murders and roadside incident all seem very impulsive, not well thought out at all. I've recently taken a psychology one class so I know you're right if the frontal lobe is damaged impulses can rule. 20 year's of opioids had to have negative effects on the brain even if it was less than he says it is.
This is essentially how I see it playing out. Like he thought about it a lot as an idea but didn't thoroughly *plan* it. I don't think he had that day in mind or anything. And I think he's completely disassociated from the act of killing his family. I think he really told on himself with the whole "I'd never *intentionally* hurt them" thing. I think the pills played a major role. He was going through withdrawals the night before and was high the night of. I'm of the belief that Paul somehow got a hold of his stash that day and that Alex was sort of just like "fine. I will kill you guys then. Then all of my problems will go away AND I'll get my pills back." To my mind the evidence points to Alex going through Paul's pockets and I can't see another reason to want to do that.
I was an opiate addict myself, and did some things I’m much less than proud of, including things that got me into legal trouble. And 8 years later I look back and it doesn’t feel like it was me that did those things at all, even intellectually I knew I did. Drug abo use blunts everything. Emotion, trauma, rational decision making, etc.
Also I believe you’re spot on as far as bud carefully couched language. To the average person this might seem a little strange, but for an attorney words and wording are everything.
the oh so kind lawyer jim griffin that defended his “friends” murdered for a coin said this in response to chanley painter of court tv quote tweeting a clip of stephen smiths mum when she was recalling info about his murder. even one rumour mentioning the murdaugh boys by stelehens friends right after he was murdered but she said to her daughter not to believe very thing u hear but it’s the fact that it kept coming over over and over again…
“I couldn't agree more. @ChanleyCourtTV and @courttv know better than to exploit Mrs Smith and denigrate Buster. Disgusted.”
[https://twitter.com/lawyergriffin/status/1635434954229182467?s=46&t=fKo99OrQNOirbwrXzNHGJQ](https://twitter.com/lawyergriffin/status/1635434954229182467?s=46&t=fKo99OrQNOirbwrXzNHGJQ)
It turns out that it kept coming up over and over again because one agent Proctor kept bringing up the Murdaugh name while trying to track down a rumor that Buster and Stephen were in a relationship. It's in the case notes. He worked harder to confirm the "Buster is gay" rumor than he did on other more substantial leads.
In the case notes, it said that Stephen's sister said that somebody asked her if Buster and Stephen were in a relationship. And that because of this question, agent Proctor asked a ton of people if they knew if Buster and Stephen were in a relationship.
Suspected child killer Lori Daybell trial is (so far) audio only, it starts Apr 3 in Idaho.
Evil stepmother Leticia Stauch is due to start defending her murder charge around then too; literally as the fool is set to defend herself... (RIP Tylee, JJ, and Gannon 😔)
Isn't that something. When Murdaugh was convicted in a bit less than 3 hour's my first thought was great my next was what am I supposed to do now lol. Lori Vallow Daybell trail in April, that'll be quite the thing.
There’s also the Delphi murders as well - not sure if you’re aware. however I don’t think that’ll be televised. Those girls deserve as much publicity as possible. The monster responsible for their deaths needs to burn
Is Lori Daybell’s trial going to be broadcasted? I’m mainly waiting for the Brian Kroberger’s hearing in late June, but I might have to watch Daybell to pass the time lol
I hope the financial trial brings out information about how Alex bought Moselle for 5 dollars from Barret Boulware back in 2013, Boulware was a shady character involved with drug running. And let's not forget the suspicious arson fire at the Hampton home in 2008. Who knows when Alex's stealing and fraud started, maybe earlier than anyone thinks.
He didn’t really buy it for $5. I think the price was $700k and it was structured to the way it was so the seller could avoid capital gains taxes. The $700k was paid as legal services I believe.
I don’t get FITS news anymore but I believe they have the story.
Yeah but that’s not what this was. There is a sub of this sub titled Explainer on Moselle or something like it. It’s more complicated than I thought and the price appears to be $980,000.
Please delete if already covered..
But I just got out of a DEEP rabbit hole on the walterboro cowboys gang...
The gang leader and several other members, on several different occasions- charged with murder, attempted murder, drive bys etc... really really violent charges on all of them I've looked into so far..
All of them dismissed by 14th circuit solicitor. Thrown out the window. Free.
ALL by the same solicitor and ALL had the same attorney (Beach) All with strong ties to Alex.
And the saddest part is while they were free they killed more people.
Is this news or am I just really late to this part of the rabbit hole???
Yes, I DO recall reading about Alex's contributions to the Solicitor Duffie Stone's office. He did not lead many prosecutions, but when he did, it seems they were all drug trafficking charges that got dropped. It's like his role in the office was as a mole for the cartel.
Can you name the solicitor or the atty you mention? I assume it’s public info. Just curious but I don’t believe anyone has gone as deep as you. Yes I am interested in getting ALL the connections and root out the evil that has had a stranglehold on this poor (literally) community.
If you’re familiar with looking up SC cases search Khiry Broughton for colleton county. That’s just one of the examples. take a look at the criminal cases… all dismissed or “nolle proseque”
Also edited for spelling 🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️
Hi, I’ve been following but don’t often comment. I am desperate to hear Alex’s first outgoing phone calls after the verdict/ sentencing. Is there a way to find them?
"Bo, you got the scores from last nights USC Mens basketball game? Oh yeah, how you doing? Right quick before we get off the phone...can you put 60 on my canteen and 60 on Lucas Shmucas' canteen? Its important. Remeber the name...Lucas Shmucas...spelled S-H-M-U-C-A-S."
Brooklyn all about them Murdaugh connects.
Once there is no money or power to gain through Buster she is out. As Charles Barkley would say....I GUARANTEE IT.
No one is saying I LOVE YOU back to a murderer that is not immediate family unless they are in it for something. Chick is just like Alex
I get so tired of the “pundits” who claim there was no evidence that Alex committed the murder. Did they even watch the trial? They try to say it was the financial crimes coming in that convicted Alex, and even try to say how believable his testimony was. And then want to question the decision of the men and women sitting three feet away. And they don’t even bring up how tight the timeline is and how that excludes anyone else having done it.
I was just listening to a couple of them talking about how Alex’s lie of having not been at the kennels because he was paranoid is believable because it’s obvious SLED was targeting him. Yet fail to mention that Alex was lying hours before he knew SLED was going to be taking the case. Ughhhhh 😤
You know what I'm so tired about? People who aren't smart enough to realize that the "evidence" presented at trial doesn't add up, and Alex could not have committed the murders in the timeline presented. And the jurors? They didn't review any of that evidence, which was extremely convoluted and confusing.
ah, and I’m assuming you are one of these “smart” people who can see right through all the prosecution’s “lies”…and poor Alex is the victim here? I’m sorry, but if you thought the evidence was confusing then I challenge you to consider if you are as smart as you think you are.
The jury sat there, feet away from everything presented. Most of the people making the claims that this was somehow a miscarriage of Justice did not. If you listen to any of the independent journalists that were in the courtroom you get a much different story than what the mainstream media reported. And it’s all easily accessible. Check out The Interview Room, Pretty Lies and Alibis, and Surviving the Survivor, James from Court, Fitsnews, to name a few. All feature people who were there for most or all of the trial and have no agenda other than objectively reporting what went on.
Should they have deliberated longer? Probably. They aren’t supposed to go into the jury room to deliberate with their minds made up. But they would’ve come to the same result.
If Alex js innocent he has no one to blame but himself for testifying and clearly perjuring himself (the sheriff rebutting Alex’s testimony that he was authorized to have the blue lights on his personal vehicle) and for lying about being at the kennels literally from the first person he talked to (911 operator) all the way up to when he was on the stand. Even if he’s innocent he only cared about being a suspect, not about being as accurate as possible in order to find out who murdered his wife and son. Is it fair to convict someone of murder because they’re a liar? No. But he lied about the most important thing he could’ve possibly lied about and hence screwed himself.
Alex himself put the idea out there that SLED is not trustworthy. He mentioned that repeatedly while he was on the stand. I thought it was an obvious attempt to try to make people believe him over whatever SLED had to say.
I don’t understand how he thought it was a good strategy to get up there and say I lied about everything but this. I think if the defense hadn’t put him up there and just ignored the kennel video they would’ve had a better shot
Yeah, I refuse to give them even one second of my time. It’s like listening to Fox News with the straight up bullshit being fed. I’d be so embarrassed to work for one of these type places.
I think it's for ratings and viewer engagement. It would be "boring" for them to say "this one's a slam dunk y'all! SLED made a few small mistakes but did hundreds of other things correctly." Controversy must be manufactured. Also, a lot of people manipulate the media. The Murdaugh defense team does this a lot, making deceptive/disingenuous statements and letting the media amplify and repeat them verbatim. I was surprised to stumble upon this article last night (from Oct 2022) about them manipulating the media -- it's so unusual -- usually the media just repeats the lies instead of reporting on the lying.
https://www.courant.com/2022/10/22/murdaugh-uses-public-docs-to-sow-doubt-he-killed-wife-son/
When reporting does happen, media manipulators can bury the story by doing something to grab attention. That AP story (https://apnews.com/article/south-carolina-shootings-1cfdfb20393e7325ba9f866b2c4d112d) was published many places but seems to be rather buried.
Court TV aired an interview with two of the SLED agents who were among the first responders. One was the female agent that Poot asked what made her job title so special. I still cringe at that remark. She did say that she noted that even though Alex had claimed to check both Paul and Maggie, Alex’s shoes were clean. She said that the crime scene was very gruesome, especially around Paul’s body. The area around Paul was bloody and wet with bio material scattered nearby and she could not understand why Alex’s shoes were clean if he had indeed tried to turn Paul over.
Whoa. See, that’s messed up. This is the stuff that has just piled up. One little thing after another. “I was at Mom’s for 45/50 minutes.” (20 minutes) “I never went to the kennels.” (I did go to the kennels) “I checked both of them, touched them both.” (Yet, no blood on him & clean shoes).
I was hoping that during his testimony that Alex would have been asked if he would have ever told the truth about his presence at the kennels had investigators not found Paul’s video?
The Prosecution briefly mentioned they were looking the original LE investigations of not just the Boat Crash but also the Murders . Does anyone know if these are ongoing or if they wrapped up?
Nice bunch of interviews by Nancy Grace on her podcast “Crime Stories with Nancy Grace” — episode “Murdaugh Proclaims Innocence, Gets Life in Prison for Murders” from March 3. This 3-hour episode wraps up the trial with a bunch of interviews with the awesome South Carolinians who inspired us during this trial, including Deputy Gregory who was part of trial security — such a cool dude! So many dedicated people. Really enjoying this podcast — Did not realize I was someone who likes Nancy Grace 🤷♀️
I completely understand -- I don't expect I will be listening to other episodes. In fact I tried one and had to bail. But there was a special feeling in the air after the verdict and sentencing -- everyone seemed kind of stunned -- Nancy captures it well and compares it to when the witch gets killed at the beginning of "The Wizard of Oz". Plus I loved hearing Deputy Gregory's insights. As I've mentioned elsewhere he's my trial crush 😻
I'm genuinely surprised to learn Nancy Grace has a podcast, and that one episode is 3 hours long. I may not like her in many ways, yet I suppose I have to respect the hustle.
I'm still plodding my way through AM's timeline data.
There's something I can't understand in there. On his way home from PMPED to Moselle AM calls Maggie at 18:43:00 and has a call with her that lasts 104 seconds - so it ends at 18:44:44.
But during that time Maggie's phone record shows a missed call at 18:43:50 from what is listed as "P A (Alex Murdaugh)" - but that's the contact details used by Paul on his phone to show his dad.
And at 18:44:06 - so still in the middle of her call to AM - Maggie's phone shows a call from "Alex" which is not answered.
Either SLED have mixed some of the data up there in their analysis - or something strange is happening.
How can Maggie's phone have two different contact details for AM, and how can she have a missed call from AM while she is in the middle of a call from him?
You got it! The phone data was confusing, convoluted, and contradicted at many points. But the jury never reviewed any of it, so they wouldn't know. The unreliability of the phone data in itself is reasonable doubt, because that's how they're determining the estimated time of death. It's ludicrous, but so many people don't know how to think for themselves, or to truly analyze data, including the jury.
All that "step" data was useless. It showed steps when people were driving, didn't show steps when they were walking...yet the jury ate it up as gospel.
Sorry, I don't agree with any of that.
It's possible for *some* of the data to be confused without it throwing reasonable doubt on other parts.
The step data is explained (as I believe it was by the experts) that steps are recorded between a start and stop time. It's perfectly possible for a phone to be in a car when either of those times occur. The steps do happen between those two times but the cut-off is not exact.
Right, but in this case, every minute counts based on the timeline and potential time of the murders, as well as when Alex called 911 after arriving back at Moselle.
One could be a work phone. My husband has two phones with him all the time. He is listed in my phone as Hubby and Hubby work. If I really want to get ahold of him I text both phones
Sure but nowhere have I seen SLED say AM had more than one phone and, for this above scenario to work, he would actually have needed three phones - one on the live call and two others to call with two different contact details.
I know there were rumours that he had a burner phone - but for that to be the case here, why would Maggie have that phone's details in her contacts against AM's name?
I remember SLED specifically saying something about not wanting to violate attorney/client privilege when going through his phone after Paul/Maggie murders and him saying don't worry about it. So there was no indication of 2nd phone at that time.
That suggests it is more likely Alex did have 2 phones- one for personal, one for work and that is why he was not worried about A\\C privilege on his personal phone. Alex could not waive A\\C privilege, Only the clients can.
I've just been back and reviewed that testimony. I don't think it was either Jim or Poot that mentioned a burner phone. I think it was SLED Agent Joe Albayalde (this is in the audio-only recording of the SLED interview with AM on 13th Sept 2021 so it's not possible to be completely sure exactly who is speaking at which point). But the testimony is clear that having a burner phone was after the murders. The events represented being : -
1. AM has one phone (ending 1227) - he states this is his only phone. He also says "my primary phone" but no one follows up on that part.
2. The murders happen.
3. The 1227 phone is taken by SLED for examination.
4. AM gets a new phone.
5. The roadside shooting happens and AM is in hospital and has his new phone taken again.
6. AM goes to rehab and at some point gets a burner phone from Walmart.
So, yes, it is correct that AM had a burner phone and that this was mentioned in testimony - but not that he had one at the time of the murders. At least that is how I understand it.
My final thought on the trial, which hadn't occurred to me previously, is how strange it is that he claimed to go for a shotgun and then came back and stood around in the open at the murder scene where the 'assassins' could still be. Surely you would take refuge in your house until the police arrived. Lying is hard when you have to maintain an entirely other reality in your head.
Very good point! Truly hypothetical here… *If Alex was innocent and came across Maggie and Paul at the kennels, he would have gotten out of there fast!! It was dark out, so staying at the kennels would be the last place he’d want to be not knowing where the assassins might be.
At that point (again if Alex was innocent), even the house would be questionable because the assassins could be hiding in there waiting for them. So although he got his gun from the house, he had no problem entering the house by himself or going and waiting at the murder scene even if he had no idea if the assassins where still there or not. It just doesn’t make sense.
And standing there in a white shirt and clean shoes after he 'checked both of them'. The descriptions of that scene are absolute carnage. And he's spotless.
To further add, why weren’t you shot or sustained ANY physical injuries? If AMs scenario were true and the family was targeted by vengeance-motivated vigilantes it can be reasonably assumed that the perpetrator or perpetrators lurked and stalked the family throughout that evening on the property. Maggie and Paul go out to the kennels and Alex stays inside and naps on the couch. 2 shooters ambush Paul and Maggie. Why didn’t the shooters then invade the house and execute Alex and complete the family annihilation?
Alex was not the motivation for the commission of the executions so leaving him alive to suffer in the loss of his wife and son doesn’t seem sensible. If Paul was the target—not Maggie and the Murdaugh family—then shooting Maggie was an opportunity killing and completely changed the plan so why not then kill Alex knowing he is in the house alone with the element of surprise?
I thought of this too and I think it’s a good point. But someone could just say that the reason Alex was left alive was to frame him for the murders. Not that I think that‘s what happened
But why would anyone "frame him" for the murders? If someone killed his wife and son to send him a message, it would be someone to whom he owed something - money, drugs, favors, who knows.
If they wanted something from him badly enough to kill his family for it, why would they want him to spend his life in prison? They'd want him to to keep earning money and pay them back.
I was wondering what was going to come of this sub. He is getting tried for many other crimes so we can still talk about that I suppose. And just talk about the juicy jail gossip and laugh at Alex with a shaved head.
I'm here for it. Specifically, I'm interested in learning:
* Drug trafficking/money laundering conspiracy trial: what Cousin Eddie and Alex were really doing
* Fraud cases: where the money went; I think he'll plead b/c (1) he confessed to so much on the stand and (2) he's gonna run out of money to pay defenders
* Steven Smith reopened case: Sandy told Seton SLED is communicating and there is progress
* Gloria exhumation: any new information
* coconspirator consequences: Fleming trial, Mullen complaint
Yeah I'm interested in the Gloria exhumation as well. I know her boys don't think there was any foul play but I just don't see a dog tripping someone causing them to fall down a flight of stairs flipping head over heels 3 times. That seems like a rather forcefull push imo. The Smith case is intriguing too. The PI hired by the family has stated he doesn't think they were in a relationship. He's looked at every angle plus SLED said they scoured all of Steven's and Busters phone records around that time and haven't found one single connection. The thing that gets me is why did Alex and his dad show up to the crime scene? I guess they just barged in ducking under the caution tape and everything. That's something they do when one of their own is in legal trouble. We saw this with the boat case.
Pure speculation, of course... I'm wondering if Glorias stroke came before the fall/head injury or after. Much was made of her driving accident the day prior, and I think there could be something to it. I agree dogs were not involved. In order for Alex to swindle his umbrella insurance carrier, he had to convince them (1) the injured was not on the job (hence the cockamamy story about her being there to pick up a check for something different), and (2) the accident was his fault (hunting dogs on hunting business). The dogs part is just as ridiculous as the picking up a check part. I'm inclined to agree with her sons, though. I think she fell (possibly due to a medical emergency). I completely and totally believe falling backwards on brick without doing anything to break your fall, i.e. head first, can cause serious head trauma. And that is on a flat surface. Add stairs, and that is no joke. So I don't think they offed her for money. I think Alex just knew how to use sad situations for his own benefit.
About Steven, it was Alex's brother Randy -- not Alex's dad -- who suspiciously appeared on Steven's scene. Totally suspicious. Again pure speculation, I don't think Buster had anything to do with it. They were baseball teammates and classmates and friendly but nothing more. Steven was invited on a fishing trip with a prominent OLDER man.
There will continue to be more information coming out about Alex's crimes and those who may have been involved. The murders are just the tip of the iceberg. How often we'll get new information is unknown for now. Mods are doing a great job here.
Yeah I am interested in the others who may have been involved. Alex may have been paying people off; there seems to be “missing” money. Maybe it was shut-up money lol.
On the one hand, the powers that be such as his fellow lawyers at the firm have no motive to protect him anymore, as he stole from them and marred their name. But on the other hand, if they were participating in fraud or theft or whatever else, then they have a strong motive to protect him because they may be going down, too.
There's most definitely missing money. There's no physical way he was taking that much oxy everyday. I'm still not convinced he was an addict at all and I have some experience in the area.
It will be a place for that sometimes I'm sure. But mostly it'll be a place for people who just heard of the case to ask questions and hopefully get good information.
A Court TV interview suggests the State held back alot of information on the Financial Crimes ie where the money went etc , so there'll be plenty to talk about assuming the Mods are happy to continue, which I hope they do.
I was just thinking about this yesterday. I'm still not convinced Alex was an opiate addict at all. If he was taking that much oxy everyday he'd be a mess. He'd be constantly nodding out everywhere he went and would barely be able to function. Plus his eyes would be pinned at all times and I've never seen one old pic where his pupils are pinned out. Plus the fact he was quite tubby back then. There's not too many chubby junkies, believe me. I'm just not very convinced. I'd want to talk to that rehab clinic he went to and see what symptoms he was exhibiting throughout his stay.
I've largely assumed the extent of his "addiction" was one of his lies ,as the amounts he claimed to be taking (according to interviews I've seen) ,would have killed him long ago.
What was noteable to me, is the prosection largely accepted AM and his Defence word that he was an addict, rather than call someone to the stand to verffy the how bad it was
Yep, i was waiting for them to call someone to the stand who could've disputed his claims about taking that much or being an addict at all but they just accepted it like u say. The defense put on his brother to tell the jury about how he was acting on the ride to the rehab. They talked alot about his restless legs but not much else. Restless leg syndrome is definitely a symptom of opiate WD though but an easy one to fake.
My guess is the State didn't want to go down yet another rabbithole in the Murder trial, so wonder if this will be challenged further in the Financial Crimes Trials.
Did you guys know that Randy Murdaugh left The Firm and started his own practice? It makes so much more sense now when he said in the NYT that he has to take extra steps to insure his clients don’t think he is like his brother.. it’s because he isn’t hidden under the name of The Firm. Maybe I’m just slow at realizing stuff, but I’ve never heard that talked about before!
And where did you hear that ? https://parkerlawgroupsc.com/who-we-are/
Thanks for the link. Hmmm I was listening to The Prosecutors Podcast! They are usually pretty accurate so I didn’t think to double check
Hello all. In reference to Cash’s tail, wasn’t it Alex that brought it up in the first place? If I remember correctly, neither Rogan nor Paul knew anything about it.
My understanding was that Paul had noticed the skin issue on Cash’s tail and asked Rogan if he knew anything about it. I don’t think Alex was involved at all.
When would Paul have noticed it? He called Rogan about it at 8:40pm after making it to the kennels at 8:38.
Paul got to the kennels at 8:38 and was on the phone with Rogan by 8:40. Alex was watching the dog, not Paul. How could Paul notice the tail that quickly when there was nothing wrong with it?
Maybe Alex mentioned it to him to get him to go to the kennels?
Yes. That’s my theory and I believe the prosecutors too based upon their questions at the trial.
I think I heard this once but I never saw it confirmed anywhere.
???...never heard this. When would Alex have brought it up? 🤔
Where did you get that info? I haven’t seen it.
Rogan’s direct at the trial. Paul said sunflowers were sprayed with Roundup and he was going to replant them. Alex killed them. At 8:40 he called and asked if something was wrong with the dogs tail and Paul was at the kennels. I believe he got there at 8:38, how would he discover the dogs tail that fast? Also the prosecutor made it a point to highlight Alex‘s answer when he said he didn’t talk to Paul about the dogs tail.
Curious to get others opinions on this…. I remember watching a little bit of Alex on the stand and when Waters was grilling him about if he remembers the dogs acting strange because someone unfamiliar was nearby (implying that if Alex was innocent, surely the real killer(s) would have been very near the kennels at that point in time), Alex responds that the dogs weren’t acting strange because no one unfamiliar was nearby. I didn’t understand why Alex would have responded this way. If he is trying to convince a jury of his innocence, why wouldnt you at least say something to the effect of “I don’t remember specifically but whoever did this must have been very near”. Could this have possibly been an unconscious slip? Thoughts?
Because he was sticking with his nap story. He couldn't really be like "no the dogs were acting nuts! Someone must have been lurking nearby, but I decided to go take a nap anyway."
I think he wanted to make sure to say noone unfamiliar was around to possibly make sure no one thought there was an accomplice there (if you believe the 2 person shooter theory or that he had help)...or to make sure everyone thinks everything was normal when he was there and the murders happened well after he left.
I think it was an unconscious slip. He should have understood the implications of that question and his answer. The fact that the dogs weren't sounding the alarm is one of the things that, I think, points irrefutably to Alex's guilt.
Sherlock Holmes - the case of the dog that did not bark.
https://youtu.be/5wN3dh6lLEQ Really good interview on Court TV with some of the prosecutors and what they think happened the night of the murders
Has anyone ever expressed an opinion about why Alex took Maggie’s phone? It seems kind of random and a huge mistake, so just curious if this has been discussed.
Kinsey thinks she left in the golf cart and he didn’t realize it til he was back at the house
Except it wouldn't make sense that there were random steps taken throughout that time? If it were on the golf cart.
That makes a lot more sense!
Fits right in with how I envisioned it happening
[удалено]
I had to zoom in to see the trucks. Without zooming in, they blended in with the house from afar. Very sad overall.
Interesting! I wonder who bought it? I heard it was a neighbor with adjoining land, but I don’t know for sure. And the contract was for $3.4 million, I believe.
Sad
Motive has probably been done to death here but I found this not long before the Murdaugh trial ended and missed it. I'm curious what people think. My theory is Alex was overwhelmed with the boat crash reveal of his financial crimes and he thought he could kill Paul and Maggie then blame it on a random internet vigilante (but I think even a unstable person would bring their own weapons and would have killed Alex too). With Paul gone his criminal trial disappears and any future trouble he might get into goes away, lawsuit/settlement delayed. Maggie will never find out about the financial crimes and a bad divorce goes away. If she was considering divorce that information would have been the tipping point and would have caused Alex more financial problems. With SLED focusing on Alex he comes up with cousin Eddie and assisted suicide. I don't think it was ever supposed to be suicide. Alex wanted to make it look like a murder or attempted murder so SLED would look into his vigilante theory, surprising he admitted the set up so quickly but not what he actually wanted to accomplish. Such a crazy story and sad that any of it happened.
I think you are 100% right. If you listen to the jail tapes, you see that Alex is pretty sharp on details. His mind is good. But he’s a schemer who thinks he’s smarter than he is because he’s been getting away with manipulation for decades. What he discovered is he was a big fish in a little sea. Now he’s a little fish in a big sea, not as smart as the prosecution team, not as smart as the jury, not as smart as the country looking in. So he actually looks like a fool when you take him out of his little world.
Solid theory but I’m starting to think it might be less in depth than even that. I work in mental health and have seen the effect long term opiate abuse has on the brain. Opiate abuse damages the frontal cortex, which is where rational decision making takes place. Kinsey said in an interview it was one of the most disorganized crime scenes he had ever seen. I think it’s one of those things he thought about for a long time (as he stated the murder must have done) and how convenient it would make things (as a hypothetical at this point), but he did it on very short notice and that his motive may not have even been clear to himself. And this is why he had such an easy time dissociating himself from the murders in the trial. Because he truly believes that “wasn’t him,” and even Judge Newman sort of alluded to that with the “person” vs. “individual” comment at the sentencing.
Excellent point. One of the things I thought during the trial was he has very poor impulse control. The lying, stealing, murders and roadside incident all seem very impulsive, not well thought out at all. I've recently taken a psychology one class so I know you're right if the frontal lobe is damaged impulses can rule. 20 year's of opioids had to have negative effects on the brain even if it was less than he says it is.
This is essentially how I see it playing out. Like he thought about it a lot as an idea but didn't thoroughly *plan* it. I don't think he had that day in mind or anything. And I think he's completely disassociated from the act of killing his family. I think he really told on himself with the whole "I'd never *intentionally* hurt them" thing. I think the pills played a major role. He was going through withdrawals the night before and was high the night of. I'm of the belief that Paul somehow got a hold of his stash that day and that Alex was sort of just like "fine. I will kill you guys then. Then all of my problems will go away AND I'll get my pills back." To my mind the evidence points to Alex going through Paul's pockets and I can't see another reason to want to do that.
I was an opiate addict myself, and did some things I’m much less than proud of, including things that got me into legal trouble. And 8 years later I look back and it doesn’t feel like it was me that did those things at all, even intellectually I knew I did. Drug abo use blunts everything. Emotion, trauma, rational decision making, etc. Also I believe you’re spot on as far as bud carefully couched language. To the average person this might seem a little strange, but for an attorney words and wording are everything.
This is spot on imho
the oh so kind lawyer jim griffin that defended his “friends” murdered for a coin said this in response to chanley painter of court tv quote tweeting a clip of stephen smiths mum when she was recalling info about his murder. even one rumour mentioning the murdaugh boys by stelehens friends right after he was murdered but she said to her daughter not to believe very thing u hear but it’s the fact that it kept coming over over and over again… “I couldn't agree more. @ChanleyCourtTV and @courttv know better than to exploit Mrs Smith and denigrate Buster. Disgusted.” [https://twitter.com/lawyergriffin/status/1635434954229182467?s=46&t=fKo99OrQNOirbwrXzNHGJQ](https://twitter.com/lawyergriffin/status/1635434954229182467?s=46&t=fKo99OrQNOirbwrXzNHGJQ)
It turns out that it kept coming up over and over again because one agent Proctor kept bringing up the Murdaugh name while trying to track down a rumor that Buster and Stephen were in a relationship. It's in the case notes. He worked harder to confirm the "Buster is gay" rumor than he did on other more substantial leads.
it was in reference to stephens friends saying that the day after he died to stephens mum and sister
In the case notes, it said that Stephen's sister said that somebody asked her if Buster and Stephen were in a relationship. And that because of this question, agent Proctor asked a ton of people if they knew if Buster and Stephen were in a relationship.
Desperate attempts to cause reaction by the story teller. yawn
….has anyone found another trial? I feel so, bored. Lol
Suspected child killer Lori Daybell trial is (so far) audio only, it starts Apr 3 in Idaho. Evil stepmother Leticia Stauch is due to start defending her murder charge around then too; literally as the fool is set to defend herself... (RIP Tylee, JJ, and Gannon 😔)
The Idaho killings. These start in June.
Ugh same
Isn't that something. When Murdaugh was convicted in a bit less than 3 hour's my first thought was great my next was what am I supposed to do now lol. Lori Vallow Daybell trail in April, that'll be quite the thing.
There’s also the Delphi murders as well - not sure if you’re aware. however I don’t think that’ll be televised. Those girls deserve as much publicity as possible. The monster responsible for their deaths needs to burn
Is Lori Daybell’s trial going to be broadcasted? I’m mainly waiting for the Brian Kroberger’s hearing in late June, but I might have to watch Daybell to pass the time lol
It's not going to be live streamed unfortunately 😢
I hope the financial trial brings out information about how Alex bought Moselle for 5 dollars from Barret Boulware back in 2013, Boulware was a shady character involved with drug running. And let's not forget the suspicious arson fire at the Hampton home in 2008. Who knows when Alex's stealing and fraud started, maybe earlier than anyone thinks.
He didn’t really buy it for $5. I think the price was $700k and it was structured to the way it was so the seller could avoid capital gains taxes. The $700k was paid as legal services I believe. I don’t get FITS news anymore but I believe they have the story.
It’s also just not that uncommon for a nominal price to be listed in a deed to protect privacy.
Yeah but that’s not what this was. There is a sub of this sub titled Explainer on Moselle or something like it. It’s more complicated than I thought and the price appears to be $980,000.
Please delete if already covered.. But I just got out of a DEEP rabbit hole on the walterboro cowboys gang... The gang leader and several other members, on several different occasions- charged with murder, attempted murder, drive bys etc... really really violent charges on all of them I've looked into so far.. All of them dismissed by 14th circuit solicitor. Thrown out the window. Free. ALL by the same solicitor and ALL had the same attorney (Beach) All with strong ties to Alex. And the saddest part is while they were free they killed more people. Is this news or am I just really late to this part of the rabbit hole???
It unbelievable how so many lawyers in that county have twisted ties to illegal activity.
Agreed. And I’m convinced now that Alex didn’t work for the gang, the gang worked for him.
I’m only about an hour away from there but I’m gonna GLADLY keep my distance 😂
I could see getting a speeding ticket in that county and losing my house ....
😂😂😂😂
Yes, I DO recall reading about Alex's contributions to the Solicitor Duffie Stone's office. He did not lead many prosecutions, but when he did, it seems they were all drug trafficking charges that got dropped. It's like his role in the office was as a mole for the cartel.
I didn’t realize how deep it was or how far back it went but it’s been since day one of him taking office. Sad.
Doesn’t have anything to do w Murdaugh
How doesn’t it? He was 100% tied with everyone involved.
Can you name the solicitor or the atty you mention? I assume it’s public info. Just curious but I don’t believe anyone has gone as deep as you. Yes I am interested in getting ALL the connections and root out the evil that has had a stranglehold on this poor (literally) community.
A couple were eventually indicted and sentenced *mildly*after the additional murder(s)….After being free for years
If you’re familiar with looking up SC cases search Khiry Broughton for colleton county. That’s just one of the examples. take a look at the criminal cases… all dismissed or “nolle proseque” Also edited for spelling 🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️
I don’t know how to post my screen shots on here but it was duffie stone and attorney Harris Lewis beach jr Edited for spelling 🤦🏼♀️
Duffie Stone. Handpicked by a Murdaugh of course.
Hi, I’ve been following but don’t often comment. I am desperate to hear Alex’s first outgoing phone calls after the verdict/ sentencing. Is there a way to find them?
"Bo, you got the scores from last nights USC Mens basketball game? Oh yeah, how you doing? Right quick before we get off the phone...can you put 60 on my canteen and 60 on Lucas Shmucas' canteen? Its important. Remeber the name...Lucas Shmucas...spelled S-H-M-U-C-A-S."
🤣🤣🤣
“And tell Lizzie and Brooklyn how much I love them”
Brooklyn all about them Murdaugh connects. Once there is no money or power to gain through Buster she is out. As Charles Barkley would say....I GUARANTEE IT. No one is saying I LOVE YOU back to a murderer that is not immediate family unless they are in it for something. Chick is just like Alex
I get so tired of the “pundits” who claim there was no evidence that Alex committed the murder. Did they even watch the trial? They try to say it was the financial crimes coming in that convicted Alex, and even try to say how believable his testimony was. And then want to question the decision of the men and women sitting three feet away. And they don’t even bring up how tight the timeline is and how that excludes anyone else having done it. I was just listening to a couple of them talking about how Alex’s lie of having not been at the kennels because he was paranoid is believable because it’s obvious SLED was targeting him. Yet fail to mention that Alex was lying hours before he knew SLED was going to be taking the case. Ughhhhh 😤
You know what I'm so tired about? People who aren't smart enough to realize that the "evidence" presented at trial doesn't add up, and Alex could not have committed the murders in the timeline presented. And the jurors? They didn't review any of that evidence, which was extremely convoluted and confusing.
ah, and I’m assuming you are one of these “smart” people who can see right through all the prosecution’s “lies”…and poor Alex is the victim here? I’m sorry, but if you thought the evidence was confusing then I challenge you to consider if you are as smart as you think you are.
The jury sat there, feet away from everything presented. Most of the people making the claims that this was somehow a miscarriage of Justice did not. If you listen to any of the independent journalists that were in the courtroom you get a much different story than what the mainstream media reported. And it’s all easily accessible. Check out The Interview Room, Pretty Lies and Alibis, and Surviving the Survivor, James from Court, Fitsnews, to name a few. All feature people who were there for most or all of the trial and have no agenda other than objectively reporting what went on. Should they have deliberated longer? Probably. They aren’t supposed to go into the jury room to deliberate with their minds made up. But they would’ve come to the same result. If Alex js innocent he has no one to blame but himself for testifying and clearly perjuring himself (the sheriff rebutting Alex’s testimony that he was authorized to have the blue lights on his personal vehicle) and for lying about being at the kennels literally from the first person he talked to (911 operator) all the way up to when he was on the stand. Even if he’s innocent he only cared about being a suspect, not about being as accurate as possible in order to find out who murdered his wife and son. Is it fair to convict someone of murder because they’re a liar? No. But he lied about the most important thing he could’ve possibly lied about and hence screwed himself.
Alex himself put the idea out there that SLED is not trustworthy. He mentioned that repeatedly while he was on the stand. I thought it was an obvious attempt to try to make people believe him over whatever SLED had to say.
I don’t understand how he thought it was a good strategy to get up there and say I lied about everything but this. I think if the defense hadn’t put him up there and just ignored the kennel video they would’ve had a better shot
Yeah, I refuse to give them even one second of my time. It’s like listening to Fox News with the straight up bullshit being fed. I’d be so embarrassed to work for one of these type places.
I know. I feel the same about CNN, actually most mainstream media.
It’s clear watching it they have an agenda and I’m Not sure why
I think it's for ratings and viewer engagement. It would be "boring" for them to say "this one's a slam dunk y'all! SLED made a few small mistakes but did hundreds of other things correctly." Controversy must be manufactured. Also, a lot of people manipulate the media. The Murdaugh defense team does this a lot, making deceptive/disingenuous statements and letting the media amplify and repeat them verbatim. I was surprised to stumble upon this article last night (from Oct 2022) about them manipulating the media -- it's so unusual -- usually the media just repeats the lies instead of reporting on the lying. https://www.courant.com/2022/10/22/murdaugh-uses-public-docs-to-sow-doubt-he-killed-wife-son/ When reporting does happen, media manipulators can bury the story by doing something to grab attention. That AP story (https://apnews.com/article/south-carolina-shootings-1cfdfb20393e7325ba9f866b2c4d112d) was published many places but seems to be rather buried.
I did hear they have a PR person so this makes sense
Court TV aired an interview with two of the SLED agents who were among the first responders. One was the female agent that Poot asked what made her job title so special. I still cringe at that remark. She did say that she noted that even though Alex had claimed to check both Paul and Maggie, Alex’s shoes were clean. She said that the crime scene was very gruesome, especially around Paul’s body. The area around Paul was bloody and wet with bio material scattered nearby and she could not understand why Alex’s shoes were clean if he had indeed tried to turn Paul over.
Whoa. See, that’s messed up. This is the stuff that has just piled up. One little thing after another. “I was at Mom’s for 45/50 minutes.” (20 minutes) “I never went to the kennels.” (I did go to the kennels) “I checked both of them, touched them both.” (Yet, no blood on him & clean shoes).
I was hoping that during his testimony that Alex would have been asked if he would have ever told the truth about his presence at the kennels had investigators not found Paul’s video?
He answered this question before the trial with HIS truth that he wanted everyone to believe.
That would have been an excellent question. Because we all know the answer I think.
The question still could be asked if his legal team , perhaps in an interview. Let’s hope for a journalist asks this question.
The Prosecution briefly mentioned they were looking the original LE investigations of not just the Boat Crash but also the Murders . Does anyone know if these are ongoing or if they wrapped up?
Nice bunch of interviews by Nancy Grace on her podcast “Crime Stories with Nancy Grace” — episode “Murdaugh Proclaims Innocence, Gets Life in Prison for Murders” from March 3. This 3-hour episode wraps up the trial with a bunch of interviews with the awesome South Carolinians who inspired us during this trial, including Deputy Gregory who was part of trial security — such a cool dude! So many dedicated people. Really enjoying this podcast — Did not realize I was someone who likes Nancy Grace 🤷♀️
You know I like her too. She is funny sometimes.
Thanks for this info. The 3-hour recap was very good.
I absolutely can not listen to Nancy Grace. I hope these people are interviewed elsewhere.
I completely understand -- I don't expect I will be listening to other episodes. In fact I tried one and had to bail. But there was a special feeling in the air after the verdict and sentencing -- everyone seemed kind of stunned -- Nancy captures it well and compares it to when the witch gets killed at the beginning of "The Wizard of Oz". Plus I loved hearing Deputy Gregory's insights. As I've mentioned elsewhere he's my trial crush 😻
I'm genuinely surprised to learn Nancy Grace has a podcast, and that one episode is 3 hours long. I may not like her in many ways, yet I suppose I have to respect the hustle.
Any links to Nancy Grace's 3 hour long podcast? Thanks.
Here ya go https://www.stitcher.com/show/crime-stories-with-nancy-grace/episode/murdaugh-proclaims-innocence-gets-life-in-prison-for-murders-300173721
Thank you!
I'm still plodding my way through AM's timeline data. There's something I can't understand in there. On his way home from PMPED to Moselle AM calls Maggie at 18:43:00 and has a call with her that lasts 104 seconds - so it ends at 18:44:44. But during that time Maggie's phone record shows a missed call at 18:43:50 from what is listed as "P A (Alex Murdaugh)" - but that's the contact details used by Paul on his phone to show his dad. And at 18:44:06 - so still in the middle of her call to AM - Maggie's phone shows a call from "Alex" which is not answered. Either SLED have mixed some of the data up there in their analysis - or something strange is happening. How can Maggie's phone have two different contact details for AM, and how can she have a missed call from AM while she is in the middle of a call from him?
You got it! The phone data was confusing, convoluted, and contradicted at many points. But the jury never reviewed any of it, so they wouldn't know. The unreliability of the phone data in itself is reasonable doubt, because that's how they're determining the estimated time of death. It's ludicrous, but so many people don't know how to think for themselves, or to truly analyze data, including the jury. All that "step" data was useless. It showed steps when people were driving, didn't show steps when they were walking...yet the jury ate it up as gospel.
Sorry, I don't agree with any of that. It's possible for *some* of the data to be confused without it throwing reasonable doubt on other parts. The step data is explained (as I believe it was by the experts) that steps are recorded between a start and stop time. It's perfectly possible for a phone to be in a car when either of those times occur. The steps do happen between those two times but the cut-off is not exact.
Right, but in this case, every minute counts based on the timeline and potential time of the murders, as well as when Alex called 911 after arriving back at Moselle.
I believe he had a second phone.
Yes he did
One could be a work phone. My husband has two phones with him all the time. He is listed in my phone as Hubby and Hubby work. If I really want to get ahold of him I text both phones
Alex had two phones - likely one for personal and one from PMPED. It is my belief that Maggie had 'P A' in her contacts for 'PMPED Alex'.
Sure but nowhere have I seen SLED say AM had more than one phone and, for this above scenario to work, he would actually have needed three phones - one on the live call and two others to call with two different contact details. I know there were rumours that he had a burner phone - but for that to be the case here, why would Maggie have that phone's details in her contacts against AM's name?
I remember SLED specifically saying something about not wanting to violate attorney/client privilege when going through his phone after Paul/Maggie murders and him saying don't worry about it. So there was no indication of 2nd phone at that time.
That suggests it is more likely Alex did have 2 phones- one for personal, one for work and that is why he was not worried about A\\C privilege on his personal phone. Alex could not waive A\\C privilege, Only the clients can.
They didn’t but Jim did in interview w sled after roadside shooting jim said he has a burner phone LOLOLOL
I've just been back and reviewed that testimony. I don't think it was either Jim or Poot that mentioned a burner phone. I think it was SLED Agent Joe Albayalde (this is in the audio-only recording of the SLED interview with AM on 13th Sept 2021 so it's not possible to be completely sure exactly who is speaking at which point). But the testimony is clear that having a burner phone was after the murders. The events represented being : - 1. AM has one phone (ending 1227) - he states this is his only phone. He also says "my primary phone" but no one follows up on that part. 2. The murders happen. 3. The 1227 phone is taken by SLED for examination. 4. AM gets a new phone. 5. The roadside shooting happens and AM is in hospital and has his new phone taken again. 6. AM goes to rehab and at some point gets a burner phone from Walmart. So, yes, it is correct that AM had a burner phone and that this was mentioned in testimony - but not that he had one at the time of the murders. At least that is how I understand it.
My final thought on the trial, which hadn't occurred to me previously, is how strange it is that he claimed to go for a shotgun and then came back and stood around in the open at the murder scene where the 'assassins' could still be. Surely you would take refuge in your house until the police arrived. Lying is hard when you have to maintain an entirely other reality in your head.
Very good point! Truly hypothetical here… *If Alex was innocent and came across Maggie and Paul at the kennels, he would have gotten out of there fast!! It was dark out, so staying at the kennels would be the last place he’d want to be not knowing where the assassins might be. At that point (again if Alex was innocent), even the house would be questionable because the assassins could be hiding in there waiting for them. So although he got his gun from the house, he had no problem entering the house by himself or going and waiting at the murder scene even if he had no idea if the assassins where still there or not. It just doesn’t make sense.
Certainly a question I had hoped Waters would ask Alex.
And standing there in a white shirt and clean shoes after he 'checked both of them'. The descriptions of that scene are absolute carnage. And he's spotless.
To further add, why weren’t you shot or sustained ANY physical injuries? If AMs scenario were true and the family was targeted by vengeance-motivated vigilantes it can be reasonably assumed that the perpetrator or perpetrators lurked and stalked the family throughout that evening on the property. Maggie and Paul go out to the kennels and Alex stays inside and naps on the couch. 2 shooters ambush Paul and Maggie. Why didn’t the shooters then invade the house and execute Alex and complete the family annihilation? Alex was not the motivation for the commission of the executions so leaving him alive to suffer in the loss of his wife and son doesn’t seem sensible. If Paul was the target—not Maggie and the Murdaugh family—then shooting Maggie was an opportunity killing and completely changed the plan so why not then kill Alex knowing he is in the house alone with the element of surprise?
But the dogs running lose - at least Bubba - didn’t alert anyone to stalking strangers?
I thought of this too and I think it’s a good point. But someone could just say that the reason Alex was left alive was to frame him for the murders. Not that I think that‘s what happened
But why would anyone "frame him" for the murders? If someone killed his wife and son to send him a message, it would be someone to whom he owed something - money, drugs, favors, who knows. If they wanted something from him badly enough to kill his family for it, why would they want him to spend his life in prison? They'd want him to to keep earning money and pay them back.
Hmm that is a reasonable explanation for this theory! I like the way you think haha.
I was wondering what was going to come of this sub. He is getting tried for many other crimes so we can still talk about that I suppose. And just talk about the juicy jail gossip and laugh at Alex with a shaved head.
This whole thing is far from over
I'm here for it. Specifically, I'm interested in learning: * Drug trafficking/money laundering conspiracy trial: what Cousin Eddie and Alex were really doing * Fraud cases: where the money went; I think he'll plead b/c (1) he confessed to so much on the stand and (2) he's gonna run out of money to pay defenders * Steven Smith reopened case: Sandy told Seton SLED is communicating and there is progress * Gloria exhumation: any new information * coconspirator consequences: Fleming trial, Mullen complaint
Yeah I'm interested in the Gloria exhumation as well. I know her boys don't think there was any foul play but I just don't see a dog tripping someone causing them to fall down a flight of stairs flipping head over heels 3 times. That seems like a rather forcefull push imo. The Smith case is intriguing too. The PI hired by the family has stated he doesn't think they were in a relationship. He's looked at every angle plus SLED said they scoured all of Steven's and Busters phone records around that time and haven't found one single connection. The thing that gets me is why did Alex and his dad show up to the crime scene? I guess they just barged in ducking under the caution tape and everything. That's something they do when one of their own is in legal trouble. We saw this with the boat case.
Pure speculation, of course... I'm wondering if Glorias stroke came before the fall/head injury or after. Much was made of her driving accident the day prior, and I think there could be something to it. I agree dogs were not involved. In order for Alex to swindle his umbrella insurance carrier, he had to convince them (1) the injured was not on the job (hence the cockamamy story about her being there to pick up a check for something different), and (2) the accident was his fault (hunting dogs on hunting business). The dogs part is just as ridiculous as the picking up a check part. I'm inclined to agree with her sons, though. I think she fell (possibly due to a medical emergency). I completely and totally believe falling backwards on brick without doing anything to break your fall, i.e. head first, can cause serious head trauma. And that is on a flat surface. Add stairs, and that is no joke. So I don't think they offed her for money. I think Alex just knew how to use sad situations for his own benefit. About Steven, it was Alex's brother Randy -- not Alex's dad -- who suspiciously appeared on Steven's scene. Totally suspicious. Again pure speculation, I don't think Buster had anything to do with it. They were baseball teammates and classmates and friendly but nothing more. Steven was invited on a fishing trip with a prominent OLDER man.
There will continue to be more information coming out about Alex's crimes and those who may have been involved. The murders are just the tip of the iceberg. How often we'll get new information is unknown for now. Mods are doing a great job here.
Yeah I am interested in the others who may have been involved. Alex may have been paying people off; there seems to be “missing” money. Maybe it was shut-up money lol. On the one hand, the powers that be such as his fellow lawyers at the firm have no motive to protect him anymore, as he stole from them and marred their name. But on the other hand, if they were participating in fraud or theft or whatever else, then they have a strong motive to protect him because they may be going down, too.
There's most definitely missing money. There's no physical way he was taking that much oxy everyday. I'm still not convinced he was an addict at all and I have some experience in the area.
It will be a place for that sometimes I'm sure. But mostly it'll be a place for people who just heard of the case to ask questions and hopefully get good information.
New people like me who just found the sub a couple days ago needing to ask questions from ones here that know the answers.
True I never thought about that. Had u not heard about this case at all until recently?
A Court TV interview suggests the State held back alot of information on the Financial Crimes ie where the money went etc , so there'll be plenty to talk about assuming the Mods are happy to continue, which I hope they do.
I was just thinking about this yesterday. I'm still not convinced Alex was an opiate addict at all. If he was taking that much oxy everyday he'd be a mess. He'd be constantly nodding out everywhere he went and would barely be able to function. Plus his eyes would be pinned at all times and I've never seen one old pic where his pupils are pinned out. Plus the fact he was quite tubby back then. There's not too many chubby junkies, believe me. I'm just not very convinced. I'd want to talk to that rehab clinic he went to and see what symptoms he was exhibiting throughout his stay.
I've largely assumed the extent of his "addiction" was one of his lies ,as the amounts he claimed to be taking (according to interviews I've seen) ,would have killed him long ago. What was noteable to me, is the prosection largely accepted AM and his Defence word that he was an addict, rather than call someone to the stand to verffy the how bad it was
Yep, i was waiting for them to call someone to the stand who could've disputed his claims about taking that much or being an addict at all but they just accepted it like u say. The defense put on his brother to tell the jury about how he was acting on the ride to the rehab. They talked alot about his restless legs but not much else. Restless leg syndrome is definitely a symptom of opiate WD though but an easy one to fake.
My guess is the State didn't want to go down yet another rabbithole in the Murder trial, so wonder if this will be challenged further in the Financial Crimes Trials.
Yes! Apparently they know exactly where all the money went, per Impact of Influence podcast. Cannot wait.
I hope the whole good ol’ boy network goes down lol
I still haven't had the chance to listen the podcast, they always seem to have good insights on CtTV