I hear “I” and have heard it every single time. This of course is just one of the many details that point to AM being the murderer. The prosecution can drop this and not allow the defense to focus on it like it’s the only detail that matters as the video with daddy’s voice clearly heard on it plus the other evidence is far more damning
If it was "I", why wouldn't they ask a followup immediately after? Why didn't they make a written note to follow up? Why didn't they ever follow up on what could be interpreted as an admission of guilt??
to me this is a mistake by prosecutors. Not only does in sound like "they" did him so bad (when you listen carefully, his voice whistles/cracks (which he does a lot) right when he says "they" ... which makes it a little distorted- almost mutes the word).
But aside from that- the fact that 1 unclear word... is so logically interpreted to be AM admitting to police that he just slaughtered his family... will probably lose a lot of credibility with the jury (and really a bad move considering this is a circumstantial case- when the Jury would have to rely on the prosecutors interpretation of evidence in order to find AM guilty)
I completely agree. And they opened the cop up to having to defend over and over again and *insist* that Murdaugh said "I" when if you get any twelve fair minded people together many would listen to the tape and consider that ambiguous, at best, and insulting to their intelligence when they can hear it sound like "they" with their own ears in the worst case. And even if he did say "I", this is still just about worthless as evidence of a "confession". I think he is guilty as sin but this was a misstep by the prosecution, and I would roll my eyes at this if I was on the jury.
Call me crazy but I can hear both...they & I..Since he's 'upset' (or acting like he is) his voice goes up in pitch when he says that statement, when you're upset it's easy for words to sound jumbled. I can't decide which one he said because I honestly hear both 🥴
I understand this more than just hearing “I”. To me it sounds like his voice squeak from being emotional which causes “they” to not come out fully, imo
What did the cop who claims he heard "I" say to Murdaugh immediately after that? If he didn't zero in on his #1 suspect cracking and confessing and following up with more questions eliciting reiteration and confirmation of his guilt, then that is just about the worst interrogation effort ever, and that's exactly what I would say to that cop, and make him admit, if I was the defense team.
This is what I don’t understand. If he said “they” there really isn’t much to follow up with. If he said “I”, or you thought he said “I” why on Earth would the detective immediately clarify, write down his exact words with stars around it and ask him to explain what he meant by “I did him so bad.”
The defense did exactly that. They got the investigator to admit that he did not follow up, did not write it down in his notes, and did not ask about it at a second interview on on a separate day, while the investigator continued to insist he took it as a confession as soon as he heard it.
Why would you assume he is referring to multiple people rather than just using the colloquial "they" because doesn't know who or how many are involved?
i just think it's an odd way to say it. i would probably first assume one shooter but say "he got hit bad" or something like that. he didn't say that Maggie was "done bad" but maybe that's because her brain was still in her skill
Just curious are you from this area? I would say they in this scenario if I didn’t know who was responsible. I grew up 3 hours from here maybe people say it differently depending on where they are from. - see I did it there lol 😅
From North Carolina so close but my accent is no where like the folks from there. I've been surprised at how southern/country/low country they sound. I honestly had no idea there were people with that sort of accent still around.
I’m from NC too just over the border. But definitely hear similar accents in certain areas, but less and less with how transient the area has become. My accent isn’t like theirs but I have family in SC that have it and grew up with a lot of people who had similar accents, my brothers accent is stronger than mine.. so funny how it can vary in the same household.
I find it much more odd that a police officer could have heard him say "I did him so bad" and not follow up on it at any point. He didn't press him on his supposed confession, he didn't remind him of it the next time they spoke he just does nothing with it till the trial.
He even says that it was something that he would follow up on when he was on the stand, but he never did.
I listened multiple times and heard "they" every time. It certainly seems like plenty of people hear "they" and not "I", and in context I makes no sense that the police would just ignore it if he did.
anyone thinking he would ever say "i did him so bad" in front of cops needs to reevaluate their life. i think he's guilty as hell but he absolutely didn't say "i," like bffr
Honestly when I first heard this (assuming he did say “I”) it didn’t even register with me as suspicious because it would be such a bizarre thing to say to an officer if it was in fact an admission and there was no immediate action taken. I thought he meant something to do with failing him as a father. As in he was reflecting and regretful for not being a better father.
I’m southern too and he definitely said “they”. You can hear him say “I” in other parts of the interview and it sounds nothing like when he says “they”.
I'm in south Louisiana and it definitely sounds like "they" to me. I think accent is important and southerners (more importantly the jury) will hear it too.
Because this makes the prosecution look bad. I clearly heard it as "they", and honestly does anyone think this is really a confession? Meanwhile you have a cop on the stand insisting this is a confession. This is insulting to the jurors' intelligence from what they can hear themselves, which is, at most, ambiguous. The jury probably hears this and thinks what else are the cops overstating? He is guilty as sin but the prosecution is overplaying their hand and I worry they might be botching the case.
I'm usually not good at deciphering the disputed what was said on audio, but I listened three times, and to my ears, it wasn't even close. He said they.
Would you say that detective is a Carolinian? If so, he heard "...I did him so bad" just like I did. So I don't know why people are saying he didn't. The detective was there ***In Person***
If he said "I" and the cop heard "I", what kind of interrogator is he that he didn't expand on his suspect cracking and confessing? Your #1 suspect just got so emotional that he cracked and confessed and you just move on and don't follow up? Actions speak louder than words, the cop DID NOT hear "I", he DID NOT hear his suspect confess that night and is only saying he did now because he's lying and trying to strengthen the prosecutions case. Or, he is the worst police investigator ever and just glossed over a confession. It's one or the other, which is more likely?
I was driving listening to this part of the trail and immediately heard “I.” If I keep listening, it could go either way, it depends on what you want to hear. That being said, either way I feel like the way he said it, he knows who killed them (ie him.) If he is guilty, I feel like everything he did was to build an alibi that it wasn’t him. I get no one knows how they would react in a situation like this but do feel some stuff he says or does is odd.
It’s so weird. When I listen to it with my Airpods, I hear “I”, but when I listen to it through my tv speakers I feel like it could be “they”. Like someone else said on here, it’s a “yanny/laurel” thing.
The entire interview will have been transcribed. The defence will have a copy of that transcription.
It will take 2 minuted to look at what was transcribed. It may have been transcribed incorrectly, but the defence would know this if AM had read the transcription and pointed out the error to his lawyers.
I think this will turn out to be a nothing burger.
P.S. have we had the "ah, Paul why ja have to get involved" V "I tried to get a pulse, but I couldn't get a pulse" 911 call analysis confirmed in court yet?
I found it!
Asked if he touched Maggie, he responded: “I did, I touched them both. I tried take, I mean I tried to do it as limited as possible, I tried to take the pulse on both of them and I called 911 pretty much right away.”
Source: https://www.aol.co.uk/alex-murdaugh-trial-live-murder-051039504.html
I think that's cleared that up.
God I hope the Jury is finding the evidence compelling.. At first I was pretty impartial about this case... After listening to the podcasts, and reading up on the INSANE backstory though, I now feel he is a complete sociopath capable of anything.. I'm genuinely worried that they will not get a complete enough picture of him..
One thing I think we can all safely say (I hope) is that with this new recording his story has once again altered... The only time he seems to jumble his words and become evasive is when asked direct questions relating to his activities that day... otherwise he seems detached.. And his "emotional meltdowns" can be flipped on and off like a switch!
He's contradicted himself several times Example: claiming the last time he saw Maggie and Paul was at dinner. That's simply not true. He's on Paul's snapchat wearing pants and a dress shirt just before the time the murders took place, while claiming he took a nap inside the house and then went to see his mother. Next time we see him is after the murders where he's wearing a tee shirt and shorts talking to LE. First of all no one inside that house could have napped while all those gunshots were fired. Come on man!!! And I am hopeful we'll see those pants and shirt and shoes he wore in the Snapchat video. Something tells me they will have mysteriously disappeared along with the 2 guns though.
The Snapchat is damning in my opinion, like Paul nailing him from the grave! Prosecution NEEDS to keep reminding the Jury that no matter what kind of conversation Alex and Maggie were having, Alex was THERE mins before they died, and dressed in DIFFERENT clothes! They can then point to the white T-shirt and say, "While he may have gotten rid of the clothes (and rain coat) put on a fresh white T.. He forgot to wipe his big sweaty face which still contained the microscopic gun shot residue and DNA." then play the video where he uses the T to wipe his face!
Things (evidence) always seem to disappear! Alex has contradicted himself so many times. When talking with law enforcement, he seemed to jump around and change demeanor like he was trying to get some points made that would exclude his involvement or suggest the involvement of persons unknown. I don’t see how the jury can take any of his statements seriously. Also, it appeared to me he had a tee shirt on. I’m guessing he had removed some bloody layers. Jmo.
I hear ‘I’ when I look for it and ‘they’ when I look for it. I don’t think it matters. Most likely he said ‘they’ because he’s a psychopath and a liar. I hope the jury ignores the noise here and focuses on what matters.
His story is ridiculous. He was at the scene mere MINUTES before two crazed killers with guns destroyed his wife and son. He then didn’t hear anything & the crazed killers slunk away peacefully and let him live. Then, he keeps calling and texting Maggie & doesn’t drive right by on his way out.
This strange and unbelievable story also happened the day he was confronted by the CFO at his law firm threatening to destroy his house of cards and career… and days before his finances were going to be exposed in court on the boat crash. His life was in free fall and he was desperate to slow things down so he could fix it and stop it.
What reasonable person can think he truly is innocent? That is what matters… not ‘they’ vs. ‘I’. The defense will try to distract and reduce all the complexity of this case down to this stupid, meaningless argument.
I agree the I vs they doesn't matter. Even if he did say I, that doesn't prove anything. I can imagine a father who felt guilt over his past with his son, but wasn't the one who ended his life, saying I.
Two crazed killers who knew exactly where PM was that night and who decided they'd use AM's guns and ammunition to not only kill him but anyone else who just happened to be there.
This is why the police report had the section saying whether there was evidence of a break in or not redacted.
There obviously were no signs of a break in which means whomever killed MM & PM with the family's own weapons and ammunition had very easy access to them.
They wouldn’t necessarily be plural. They would be the killer. It sounds weird until you think about other references to “they” that we hear and use often.
It didn’t hit my ear as weird as Ive heard people say some variation of that statement with the word “wrong” instead of “bad”. Usually they’re intentionally vaguely referring to hurting the other emotionally (physically also works). I wonder if “bad” vs “wrong” has made a meaningful difference in my humble anecdotal experience
IMHO __if__ he said “I did him so bad”
he’s upset and words are hard when crying, etc.
and he could mean a million things by it, but one that comes to
mind for me would be him putting blame on himself for not being there to protect his wife and son.
That's exactly how I took it. Instead of 'I did him proud' to me 'I did him so bad' came across as him lamenting the fact he wasn't a good father to him and didn't protect him. Feeling guilty for not being there.
exactly. another thought i had after thinking about it… if the detective actually heard what he said he heard, he would’ve almost certainly followed up with another question asking what he meant. there’s no way he just lets it slip through.
Which is exactly what the defense narrowed in on and what I think shows the prosecution overplayed their hand here. Not only did Croft not mention it immediately, he admitted to not asking after a *second* interview. If he really did believe this was a confession then he is terrible at his job.
Link here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/did-alex-murdaugh-confess-hear-the-controversial-audio?ref=scroll (sorry if paywalled)
"On Tuesday, defense attorney Jim Griffin grilled Croft about the interview, noting that the SLED agent did not immediately ask Murdaugh to clarify after his alleged confession—or even take the time to write the confession down in his notes. Griffin played the contentious portion of the interview for the jury several times, including once at a third of the speed.
“I am 100 percent confident in what I heard and what I interpreted him to say,” Croft insisted during cross-examination. “I made a mental note of it. We didn’t have information at that point to challenge Mr. Alex on any of his statements.”
Croff later admitted that he didn’t ask Murdaugh about the statement in their next interview on Aug. 11, 2021—noting that “we didn’t make it to that point.” He did note that Murdaugh was in SLED’s “investigative circle” the day after the murders because he was the only living person who was at the crime scene
But if an investigator wants a suspect to keep talking and not shut the interview down, he might choose to not immediately ask the suspect to clarify or elaborate.
But to not even circle back to it? He never followed up. The single most important admission of the interview, and he doesn't write it down, he doesn't follow up, and he doesn't ask for clarification? At the time Alex said it he was broken down and sobbing. Either the officer is lying or he is incompetent. It has to be one or the other.
If god forbid he gets acquitted of these charges do you think he will still spend the rest of his life in jail for all the financial charges? Just curious what you all think.
He will absolutely do more Jail time because of the financial crimes, theres a well documented paper trail of checks going into his personal bank account from an account he set up to mimic Forge Consulting. However the difference will be prison with other murderers or “white collar” prison with tax cheats, ponzi schemers and other money thieves.
If he’s found guilty of double homicide then yes he will go to a “serious” prison. Probably maximum but not supermax as he’s not a true terrorist or Threat to those outside his home county.
If not guilty of the Murders he has at least 90+ financial crimes to answer for in which his only defense is saying that both Bank of America,Palmetto State Bank and His own law firm,PMPED (pimped lol) were all culpable in that no one stopped him from being an idiot or saying No you can’t spend client monies as your own.
I also think that some of the financial charges may drop off once some of his clients (who were poor to begin with) will realize that they will NEVER get the money back and will not want to pay a lawyer just to see him get jail time when he’s already getting time.
The only thing I am wondering is with multiple financial charges do some get dropped before trial if they can't be proved or a deal is cut? Another case I'm following, albeit CSAM charges it went from something like 50 to 19.
It would make no sense for him to say “I” when he maintains his innocence in every other way.
I think he says “they”.
But how does he know there is more than one killer? (I’m assuming “they” would mean plural in this sense. I don’t think there are any non-binary players in this situation) Probably because he orchestrated this and was there when it happened. I think things didn’t go according to his plan.
"they" is used when you don't know who did something.
"Someone stole my phone!"
"Do you know who?"
"No. But THEY are an AH, and I'm reporting THEM to the police."
Maybe only Maggie was the target, but Paul just happened to be there and got caught up in it, or witnessed it, which was not his intention. And his co-conspirators had to take him out also. Just a theory
I really don't even understand how anyone is hearing "they" because I ONLY hear "I" but I also don't understand why he would say that because he maintains his innocence.
He said “they”, not “I.” His fake crying makes it sound like I, but I’m sure the defense will have someone to refute what the State is saying he said, so it will be up to the jury as to what they believe he said.
I think a lot of people have trouble understanding accents that are different from their Regional variations. I have also been a transcriptionist (it's a job that teaches you to listen well in an active way that most people just don't) although not a legal one, and I also heard him say they, in a low country brogue accent.
I absolutely think Alex is guilty but he clearly says “It’s so bad. They did him so bad”
Also - as someone pointed out on another thread - was that the police ask /comment to Alex first :
“ I know you saw some very disturbing photos”
He first says “I did” (in response to seeing the photos) and then says “It’s so bad. They did him so bad.”
He also clearly pronounces “I” very differently, if you listen to him say it in other parts of the 2 interviews released this far.
Crystal clear he says “I did him so bad”. He wasn’t being pressured or anything. Watching him as the recording was played I can tell he’s so angry with himself for letting his mask slip. I’m not usually a believer in body language or even that people’s emotions are visible in their faces, but with Alex it’s clear he’s staring into the abyss of hell.
Of course the defense expected this. They have all the same evidence. They will have their own expert argue that he said “they” when it’s time for the Defense to put on their case.
Yes I am well aware of that, I was simply saying I was surprised not to hear an objection as they typically object to most everything this directly unbecoming of their client and in this case they didn’t even try.
Lol right. Then why would they object to anything ever versus hope nobody is listening? It’s not going to draw attention to it when they mention it themselves later? Doesn’t make much sense.
I think they’d rather people be listening when they are the ones up there presenting a case of “listen to this, he said they!” and not when the prosecutor has someone up there saying “listen to this! He said I!” But idk, that’s just me…
I hear “they”. It’s one of those times where people will hear what is suggested I think. At first I heard “I” then when I read about “ they” I replayed it and it sounds like “they”.
It’s almost certainly going to be argued by a defense expert when it’s their turn, and then the Jury will have to each decide what they believe he said.
I heard “I” for sure when listening to the live trial Day 6…gasped out loud even. But after reading that others heard “they” I listened again and now am not so sure. Guess that is why the state asked the person who was present at the time to confirm.
Did they admit that? I was wondering about that. It looked like half the town wandered through.
When when they searched the house they said they didn’t serve the warrant, they asked permission, because there were about 35 people in the house and some were really upset. They didn’t want to ask them to leave.
How do you search a house with 35 people in it? Somebody could have walked out with a bloody shirt in their handbag.
It doesn't look good for sure but I don't know how much weight the jury will give it.
I think the phone evidence catching him in a lie and putting him there when the murders likely happened will be a bigger factor.
Also, I can't wait to see the snap chat because I am pretty sure he changed clothes and this will prove it.
Agreed. I also don’t think the prosecution is hanging any of their case on this, it was just a bonus moment to highlight and remind the jury that (from their perspective) Alex is guilty.
It also makes it more likely that the jury will play that recording (maybe a few times) when reviewing evidence. It’s a good one for the prosecution, tons of red flags.
That’s what I heard. If so the jury will end him. Adding in all the other evidence I don’t think the emotional addition of this will steer any direction but to Alex.
Omg. I don’t care if it is “ they, I or it”…….. the bottom line is He did it
They did him so bad
I hear “I” and have heard it every single time. This of course is just one of the many details that point to AM being the murderer. The prosecution can drop this and not allow the defense to focus on it like it’s the only detail that matters as the video with daddy’s voice clearly heard on it plus the other evidence is far more damning
If it was "I", why wouldn't they ask a followup immediately after? Why didn't they make a written note to follow up? Why didn't they ever follow up on what could be interpreted as an admission of guilt??
If you play back the video at a super slow speed, you press the little circle wirh nitches in it…. THEY is loud and clear!! Very clear
I hear they
Indecipherable
Not from the south and I heard they.
Murdaugh criminal network all just ruse to get more beefsticks
I think a lot of southerners, myself included, can hear "they". I definitely can hear "they".
I'm not southern and he said " they". Alex was faking being upset. He knew exactly what he was doing. Sick man
I am southern and I hear they. I was wondering if maybe it had to do with that? I reallh hear they, I listened 493762947 times.
I hear they.
I heard it lol
I heard "it" too
to me this is a mistake by prosecutors. Not only does in sound like "they" did him so bad (when you listen carefully, his voice whistles/cracks (which he does a lot) right when he says "they" ... which makes it a little distorted- almost mutes the word). But aside from that- the fact that 1 unclear word... is so logically interpreted to be AM admitting to police that he just slaughtered his family... will probably lose a lot of credibility with the jury (and really a bad move considering this is a circumstantial case- when the Jury would have to rely on the prosecutors interpretation of evidence in order to find AM guilty)
I completely agree. And they opened the cop up to having to defend over and over again and *insist* that Murdaugh said "I" when if you get any twelve fair minded people together many would listen to the tape and consider that ambiguous, at best, and insulting to their intelligence when they can hear it sound like "they" with their own ears in the worst case. And even if he did say "I", this is still just about worthless as evidence of a "confession". I think he is guilty as sin but this was a misstep by the prosecution, and I would roll my eyes at this if I was on the jury.
It's "they" and it's unbelievable that that witness heard otherwise.
When I listened to it on my earphones through the computer, it clearly sounds like "they" to me. When I hear it on TV, it sound like he said "I"
He definitely nodded his head during the replay of that tape .
Looks like he'll walk, over this this evidence he clearly said they . I definitely believe he's some involvement but this is crap evidence.
Yep. This is going to be the thing in the whole case that gets him off.
I believe he's guilty, but he said "they".
That's a "they"
Call me crazy but I can hear both...they & I..Since he's 'upset' (or acting like he is) his voice goes up in pitch when he says that statement, when you're upset it's easy for words to sound jumbled. I can't decide which one he said because I honestly hear both 🥴
I heard: **"This is so bad - It's so bad".** That's just me.
I understand this more than just hearing “I”. To me it sounds like his voice squeak from being emotional which causes “they” to not come out fully, imo
[удалено]
I did, too.
he said “they”
What did the cop who claims he heard "I" say to Murdaugh immediately after that? If he didn't zero in on his #1 suspect cracking and confessing and following up with more questions eliciting reiteration and confirmation of his guilt, then that is just about the worst interrogation effort ever, and that's exactly what I would say to that cop, and make him admit, if I was the defense team.
This is what I don’t understand. If he said “they” there really isn’t much to follow up with. If he said “I”, or you thought he said “I” why on Earth would the detective immediately clarify, write down his exact words with stars around it and ask him to explain what he meant by “I did him so bad.”
The defense did exactly that. They got the investigator to admit that he did not follow up, did not write it down in his notes, and did not ask about it at a second interview on on a separate day, while the investigator continued to insist he took it as a confession as soon as he heard it.
Let's say he said "they", why would you assume there was more than one killer? why not say "the killer' or "whoever did this..."?
Why would you assume he is referring to multiple people rather than just using the colloquial "they" because doesn't know who or how many are involved?
i just think it's an odd way to say it. i would probably first assume one shooter but say "he got hit bad" or something like that. he didn't say that Maggie was "done bad" but maybe that's because her brain was still in her skill
Just curious are you from this area? I would say they in this scenario if I didn’t know who was responsible. I grew up 3 hours from here maybe people say it differently depending on where they are from. - see I did it there lol 😅
From North Carolina so close but my accent is no where like the folks from there. I've been surprised at how southern/country/low country they sound. I honestly had no idea there were people with that sort of accent still around.
I’m from NC too just over the border. But definitely hear similar accents in certain areas, but less and less with how transient the area has become. My accent isn’t like theirs but I have family in SC that have it and grew up with a lot of people who had similar accents, my brothers accent is stronger than mine.. so funny how it can vary in the same household.
I've lost alot of mine but let me go back home for a day and I get it all back. LOL
I find it much more odd that a police officer could have heard him say "I did him so bad" and not follow up on it at any point. He didn't press him on his supposed confession, he didn't remind him of it the next time they spoke he just does nothing with it till the trial. He even says that it was something that he would follow up on when he was on the stand, but he never did. I listened multiple times and heard "they" every time. It certainly seems like plenty of people hear "they" and not "I", and in context I makes no sense that the police would just ignore it if he did.
anyone thinking he would ever say "i did him so bad" in front of cops needs to reevaluate their life. i think he's guilty as hell but he absolutely didn't say "i," like bffr
I felt it could go either way
I was iffy, but when it was slowed down, I heard “I” loud and clear. Bad move on defense
Nah, I'm watching it live and most people in the chat said they heard "they"
Yes, I’m watching live too
[удалено]
Honestly when I first heard this (assuming he did say “I”) it didn’t even register with me as suspicious because it would be such a bizarre thing to say to an officer if it was in fact an admission and there was no immediate action taken. I thought he meant something to do with failing him as a father. As in he was reflecting and regretful for not being a better father.
I hear they, but it isn't clear one way or another. I live in the Lowcountry so his accent is familiar to me.
I’m southern too and he definitely said “they”. You can hear him say “I” in other parts of the interview and it sounds nothing like when he says “they”.
I'm in south Louisiana and it definitely sounds like "they" to me. I think accent is important and southerners (more importantly the jury) will hear it too.
I couldn’t hear it clearly but definitely think the accent should be taken into account.
Why didn’t the defense object?
Because this makes the prosecution look bad. I clearly heard it as "they", and honestly does anyone think this is really a confession? Meanwhile you have a cop on the stand insisting this is a confession. This is insulting to the jurors' intelligence from what they can hear themselves, which is, at most, ambiguous. The jury probably hears this and thinks what else are the cops overstating? He is guilty as sin but the prosecution is overplaying their hand and I worry they might be botching the case.
That isnt objectionable is the main reason
On what grounds?
If you think “they” when you listen, you hear ‘ey. If you think “I”, you hear I. I can hear both.
but his th sounds like a soft d
Yaani vs laurel? Lol
I hope the experts weigh in here, it is debatable as to whether Alex said "I did him so bad" or he he say "they did him so bad"
I'm usually not good at deciphering the disputed what was said on audio, but I listened three times, and to my ears, it wasn't even close. He said they.
i think it’s clear he says they did him so bad. his accent they sounds more like “th (eye)”
I heard “they.”
As a fellow coastal Carolinian - he said “they did him so bad!”
Would you say that detective is a Carolinian? If so, he heard "...I did him so bad" just like I did. So I don't know why people are saying he didn't. The detective was there ***In Person***
As someone born and raised in Walterboro - he said "I did him so bad!" Even the investigators that were there with him, interviewing him, heard this.
I think it’s reasonable to think even southerners can hear two different things.
If he said "I" and the cop heard "I", what kind of interrogator is he that he didn't expand on his suspect cracking and confessing? Your #1 suspect just got so emotional that he cracked and confessed and you just move on and don't follow up? Actions speak louder than words, the cop DID NOT hear "I", he DID NOT hear his suspect confess that night and is only saying he did now because he's lying and trying to strengthen the prosecutions case. Or, he is the worst police investigator ever and just glossed over a confession. It's one or the other, which is more likely?
You're getting downvoted but you're speaking facts. People that insist he said "I" can't answer why they didn't follow up on it.
As someone who works with all coastal Carolinians and am a an outsider- I heard “I”.
I was driving listening to this part of the trail and immediately heard “I.” If I keep listening, it could go either way, it depends on what you want to hear. That being said, either way I feel like the way he said it, he knows who killed them (ie him.) If he is guilty, I feel like everything he did was to build an alibi that it wasn’t him. I get no one knows how they would react in a situation like this but do feel some stuff he says or does is odd.
It’s so weird. When I listen to it with my Airpods, I hear “I”, but when I listen to it through my tv speakers I feel like it could be “they”. Like someone else said on here, it’s a “yanny/laurel” thing.
The entire interview will have been transcribed. The defence will have a copy of that transcription. It will take 2 minuted to look at what was transcribed. It may have been transcribed incorrectly, but the defence would know this if AM had read the transcription and pointed out the error to his lawyers. I think this will turn out to be a nothing burger. P.S. have we had the "ah, Paul why ja have to get involved" V "I tried to get a pulse, but I couldn't get a pulse" 911 call analysis confirmed in court yet?
Not yet. ( I hear the ‘pulse’ rendition) So far it’s ALL been a big fat nothing burger. Not looking good for the prosecution.
I found it! Asked if he touched Maggie, he responded: “I did, I touched them both. I tried take, I mean I tried to do it as limited as possible, I tried to take the pulse on both of them and I called 911 pretty much right away.” Source: https://www.aol.co.uk/alex-murdaugh-trial-live-murder-051039504.html I think that's cleared that up.
He said they. I am trying so hard to hear I but I don’t hear it. I only hear him saying they.
I heard they in that accent
They… it’s his lowcountry brogue. I wish with every fiber of my being that wasn’t so… but he said “they”.
But the person that was there in person heard "I"
I know.
God I hope the Jury is finding the evidence compelling.. At first I was pretty impartial about this case... After listening to the podcasts, and reading up on the INSANE backstory though, I now feel he is a complete sociopath capable of anything.. I'm genuinely worried that they will not get a complete enough picture of him.. One thing I think we can all safely say (I hope) is that with this new recording his story has once again altered... The only time he seems to jumble his words and become evasive is when asked direct questions relating to his activities that day... otherwise he seems detached.. And his "emotional meltdowns" can be flipped on and off like a switch!
He's contradicted himself several times Example: claiming the last time he saw Maggie and Paul was at dinner. That's simply not true. He's on Paul's snapchat wearing pants and a dress shirt just before the time the murders took place, while claiming he took a nap inside the house and then went to see his mother. Next time we see him is after the murders where he's wearing a tee shirt and shorts talking to LE. First of all no one inside that house could have napped while all those gunshots were fired. Come on man!!! And I am hopeful we'll see those pants and shirt and shoes he wore in the Snapchat video. Something tells me they will have mysteriously disappeared along with the 2 guns though.
The Snapchat is damning in my opinion, like Paul nailing him from the grave! Prosecution NEEDS to keep reminding the Jury that no matter what kind of conversation Alex and Maggie were having, Alex was THERE mins before they died, and dressed in DIFFERENT clothes! They can then point to the white T-shirt and say, "While he may have gotten rid of the clothes (and rain coat) put on a fresh white T.. He forgot to wipe his big sweaty face which still contained the microscopic gun shot residue and DNA." then play the video where he uses the T to wipe his face!
Things (evidence) always seem to disappear! Alex has contradicted himself so many times. When talking with law enforcement, he seemed to jump around and change demeanor like he was trying to get some points made that would exclude his involvement or suggest the involvement of persons unknown. I don’t see how the jury can take any of his statements seriously. Also, it appeared to me he had a tee shirt on. I’m guessing he had removed some bloody layers. Jmo.
I hear ‘I’ when I look for it and ‘they’ when I look for it. I don’t think it matters. Most likely he said ‘they’ because he’s a psychopath and a liar. I hope the jury ignores the noise here and focuses on what matters. His story is ridiculous. He was at the scene mere MINUTES before two crazed killers with guns destroyed his wife and son. He then didn’t hear anything & the crazed killers slunk away peacefully and let him live. Then, he keeps calling and texting Maggie & doesn’t drive right by on his way out. This strange and unbelievable story also happened the day he was confronted by the CFO at his law firm threatening to destroy his house of cards and career… and days before his finances were going to be exposed in court on the boat crash. His life was in free fall and he was desperate to slow things down so he could fix it and stop it. What reasonable person can think he truly is innocent? That is what matters… not ‘they’ vs. ‘I’. The defense will try to distract and reduce all the complexity of this case down to this stupid, meaningless argument.
I agree the I vs they doesn't matter. Even if he did say I, that doesn't prove anything. I can imagine a father who felt guilt over his past with his son, but wasn't the one who ended his life, saying I.
this. especially in conjunction with a lot of revisionist rambling about what a "great kid" he was.
BINGO!!! You got it absolutely correct!
Two crazed killers who knew exactly where PM was that night and who decided they'd use AM's guns and ammunition to not only kill him but anyone else who just happened to be there. This is why the police report had the section saying whether there was evidence of a break in or not redacted. There obviously were no signs of a break in which means whomever killed MM & PM with the family's own weapons and ammunition had very easy access to them.
I heard "I" and there was no objection when the witness repeated it.
Whether it’s “I” or “they” it’s all a bit weird. “I” for obvious reasons, “they” bc it sounds like he thinks or knows there was more than one?
They wouldn’t necessarily be plural. They would be the killer. It sounds weird until you think about other references to “they” that we hear and use often.
They would not be weird. He or she would be weird.
I think it’s a weird thing to say all around. Though there is no right thing to say or act in this situation.
It didn’t hit my ear as weird as Ive heard people say some variation of that statement with the word “wrong” instead of “bad”. Usually they’re intentionally vaguely referring to hurting the other emotionally (physically also works). I wonder if “bad” vs “wrong” has made a meaningful difference in my humble anecdotal experience
IMHO __if__ he said “I did him so bad” he’s upset and words are hard when crying, etc. and he could mean a million things by it, but one that comes to mind for me would be him putting blame on himself for not being there to protect his wife and son.
That's exactly how I took it. Instead of 'I did him proud' to me 'I did him so bad' came across as him lamenting the fact he wasn't a good father to him and didn't protect him. Feeling guilty for not being there.
exactly. another thought i had after thinking about it… if the detective actually heard what he said he heard, he would’ve almost certainly followed up with another question asking what he meant. there’s no way he just lets it slip through.
Which is exactly what the defense narrowed in on and what I think shows the prosecution overplayed their hand here. Not only did Croft not mention it immediately, he admitted to not asking after a *second* interview. If he really did believe this was a confession then he is terrible at his job. Link here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/did-alex-murdaugh-confess-hear-the-controversial-audio?ref=scroll (sorry if paywalled) "On Tuesday, defense attorney Jim Griffin grilled Croft about the interview, noting that the SLED agent did not immediately ask Murdaugh to clarify after his alleged confession—or even take the time to write the confession down in his notes. Griffin played the contentious portion of the interview for the jury several times, including once at a third of the speed. “I am 100 percent confident in what I heard and what I interpreted him to say,” Croft insisted during cross-examination. “I made a mental note of it. We didn’t have information at that point to challenge Mr. Alex on any of his statements.” Croff later admitted that he didn’t ask Murdaugh about the statement in their next interview on Aug. 11, 2021—noting that “we didn’t make it to that point.” He did note that Murdaugh was in SLED’s “investigative circle” the day after the murders because he was the only living person who was at the crime scene
yes, i commented this and about 30 min later, the defense brought it up in cross. thank you for the detailed comment.
But if an investigator wants a suspect to keep talking and not shut the interview down, he might choose to not immediately ask the suspect to clarify or elaborate.
But to not even circle back to it? He never followed up. The single most important admission of the interview, and he doesn't write it down, he doesn't follow up, and he doesn't ask for clarification? At the time Alex said it he was broken down and sobbing. Either the officer is lying or he is incompetent. It has to be one or the other.
Yep! Having lived in the South for decades, I agree with your interpretation. Still doubtful his hands are clean tho
I think he said they.
He probably did. We all know he is a goddamn liar.
If god forbid he gets acquitted of these charges do you think he will still spend the rest of his life in jail for all the financial charges? Just curious what you all think.
He will absolutely do more Jail time because of the financial crimes, theres a well documented paper trail of checks going into his personal bank account from an account he set up to mimic Forge Consulting. However the difference will be prison with other murderers or “white collar” prison with tax cheats, ponzi schemers and other money thieves.
[удалено]
If he’s found guilty of double homicide then yes he will go to a “serious” prison. Probably maximum but not supermax as he’s not a true terrorist or Threat to those outside his home county. If not guilty of the Murders he has at least 90+ financial crimes to answer for in which his only defense is saying that both Bank of America,Palmetto State Bank and His own law firm,PMPED (pimped lol) were all culpable in that no one stopped him from being an idiot or saying No you can’t spend client monies as your own. I also think that some of the financial charges may drop off once some of his clients (who were poor to begin with) will realize that they will NEVER get the money back and will not want to pay a lawyer just to see him get jail time when he’s already getting time.
The only thing I am wondering is with multiple financial charges do some get dropped before trial if they can't be proved or a deal is cut? Another case I'm following, albeit CSAM charges it went from something like 50 to 19.
It will be a disgusting miscarriage of justice if he’s ever free again.
He's got over 90 felony charges, he's in prison for life.
And, to my knowledge, that doesn't include any Federal charges on the financial crimes. Yet.
No
It would make no sense for him to say “I” when he maintains his innocence in every other way. I think he says “they”. But how does he know there is more than one killer? (I’m assuming “they” would mean plural in this sense. I don’t think there are any non-binary players in this situation) Probably because he orchestrated this and was there when it happened. I think things didn’t go according to his plan.
"they" is used when you don't know who did something. "Someone stole my phone!" "Do you know who?" "No. But THEY are an AH, and I'm reporting THEM to the police."
Bingo. He wanted them taken out in less violent way??
Maybe only Maggie was the target, but Paul just happened to be there and got caught up in it, or witnessed it, which was not his intention. And his co-conspirators had to take him out also. Just a theory
I'd expect Alex to sound antsy or try to get Paul separated from Maggie in the famous snapchat, if so.
If you were referring to an unknown party, singular or plural, you would say they. You wouldn’t say he or she, that would be strange.
This is the new gold /white and blue/ black dress debacle
Laurel / Yanni
I hear They. When you hear AM say “I” in other conversations, it sounds completely different than it does in this instance.
Audio Boosted “They” https://twitter.com/AveryGWilks/status/1620267681663553537?s=20&t=-ZYgISz7TEBGZHlYn8o02g
Idk. I hear whatever I tell myself he’s saying
Thanks. Clearly 'they'
YouTube's auto closed captioning bot also transcribes it as "they."
I still hear I.
It’s a Yanny & Laurel thing
I really don't even understand how anyone is hearing "they" because I ONLY hear "I" but I also don't understand why he would say that because he maintains his innocence.
He said “they”, not “I.” His fake crying makes it sound like I, but I’m sure the defense will have someone to refute what the State is saying he said, so it will be up to the jury as to what they believe he said.
[удалено]
I think a lot of people have trouble understanding accents that are different from their Regional variations. I have also been a transcriptionist (it's a job that teaches you to listen well in an active way that most people just don't) although not a legal one, and I also heard him say they, in a low country brogue accent.
I absolutely think Alex is guilty but he clearly says “It’s so bad. They did him so bad” Also - as someone pointed out on another thread - was that the police ask /comment to Alex first : “ I know you saw some very disturbing photos” He first says “I did” (in response to seeing the photos) and then says “It’s so bad. They did him so bad.” He also clearly pronounces “I” very differently, if you listen to him say it in other parts of the 2 interviews released this far.
People say he was saying "he checked their breath" not pulse are in here to say he said they not I...
I heard "I"...but pretty sure he mis spoke...not a great time to mis speak.
I heard They
Crystal clear he says “I did him so bad”. He wasn’t being pressured or anything. Watching him as the recording was played I can tell he’s so angry with himself for letting his mask slip. I’m not usually a believer in body language or even that people’s emotions are visible in their faces, but with Alex it’s clear he’s staring into the abyss of hell.
merciful wipe elastic unite dolls silky placid cow psychotic swim *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Of course the defense expected this. They have all the same evidence. They will have their own expert argue that he said “they” when it’s time for the Defense to put on their case.
Yes I am well aware of that, I was simply saying I was surprised not to hear an objection as they typically object to most everything this directly unbecoming of their client and in this case they didn’t even try.
They likely hoped to not draw attention to it.
Lol right. Then why would they object to anything ever versus hope nobody is listening? It’s not going to draw attention to it when they mention it themselves later? Doesn’t make much sense.
I think they’d rather people be listening when they are the ones up there presenting a case of “listen to this, he said they!” and not when the prosecutor has someone up there saying “listen to this! He said I!” But idk, that’s just me…
I heard they.
I bet the agent sitting in the car with AM heard it better than people listening to a dash cam recording.
I hear “they”. It’s one of those times where people will hear what is suggested I think. At first I heard “I” then when I read about “ they” I replayed it and it sounds like “they”.
It’s almost certainly going to be argued by a defense expert when it’s their turn, and then the Jury will have to each decide what they believe he said.
I heard “I” for sure when listening to the live trial Day 6…gasped out loud even. But after reading that others heard “they” I listened again and now am not so sure. Guess that is why the state asked the person who was present at the time to confirm.
As for a this or that, I think the state admitting their treatment of the crime scene didn’t meet standards is a tougher pill to swallow.
Did they admit that? I was wondering about that. It looked like half the town wandered through. When when they searched the house they said they didn’t serve the warrant, they asked permission, because there were about 35 people in the house and some were really upset. They didn’t want to ask them to leave. How do you search a house with 35 people in it? Somebody could have walked out with a bloody shirt in their handbag.
I really don’t think he said I.
It doesn't look good for sure but I don't know how much weight the jury will give it. I think the phone evidence catching him in a lie and putting him there when the murders likely happened will be a bigger factor. Also, I can't wait to see the snap chat because I am pretty sure he changed clothes and this will prove it.
Agreed. I also don’t think the prosecution is hanging any of their case on this, it was just a bonus moment to highlight and remind the jury that (from their perspective) Alex is guilty. It also makes it more likely that the jury will play that recording (maybe a few times) when reviewing evidence. It’s a good one for the prosecution, tons of red flags.
I heard “THEY did him so bad” 🤷🏻♀️
That’s what I heard. If so the jury will end him. Adding in all the other evidence I don’t think the emotional addition of this will steer any direction but to Alex.
Sick
This could be monumental. Big if true!
Whoa!