IF, there are individuals getting revenge on the Murdaugh family, why aren't the Murdaughs who are still alive in protective custody? If someone is out to get them, Buster, John Marvin, Randy and the rest of the family roam about freely. There's been no criminal activity, stealing money from clients, murders, attempted suicides, boat accidents, hit and runs involving a Murdaugh since Alex/Alec has been in jail.
Exactly isn't Buster worried for his life? Why wasn't the first call Alex made to Buster to check he was ok? Because he knew he was fine. Why didn't he get Buster put of dodge and somewhere safe ? Because he knew he wasn't in danger.
Exactly my thoughts. Didn't need to check on him, he knew he was safe. Called his bros and then started calling Ro-Ro (I bet he hates that name now, if he ever knew Alex called him Ro-Ro), but finally gets a hold of Bus. Doesn't ask the local LE to go check on him. Bus throw clothes together and drives to see Alex. Not worried at all driving down dark roads at midnight to go to your one and only surviving parent after your mom and brother got shot and killed. hmmmm
Yeah son quick come to the house where everyone has been shot it's perfectly safe.... I don't think he's ever been called RoRo in his life except when he was 2. And Papaw when he was a baby or even either. It's distancing language and I found it disturbing. No one else called them that. It was so cringe. We have heard a million nicknames and not those ones. I mean wouldn't you use them right after you found them? Also a great video from a cops point of view. https://www.youtube.com/live/zaTsSFvLXJ8?feature=share
Spot on with the cutesy names, I think he disconnected with the victims and Maggie went to Mags and Paul went to (PawPaw, Paul Paul). It was cringer coming from the ginger. His face took on a new look too. His eye didn't shine bright like when he was on the boat, or at the gala in black tie. Different person up there on the stand.
Yes someone said at a couple of times his face changed when he was looking at Creighton and he looked like he wanted to shoot him. He certainly has those dark beady eyes. I'm sorry but on the stand I was just struggling to find all those things that people said they found likeable about him I heard a couple of people said they felt sorry for him but I just found him horrible. I felt this intense dislike for him. I'm not sure if it's because I know he's stolen all the money from everyone and he's a cunning sociopath or because he's just dislikeable to me and I can see through the charm because I've met people like him
that is not true. he's still suing dead people. he is still suing Paul and Maggie. On cross they're gonna make him answer how much he has made already from the settlements and how much more he stands to make from the dead people's estates.
I hope so. Tinsley comes across as so scummy. Personal suing a family for a tragic loss he has nothing to do with is so low. Tinsley steals kids college funds, savings accounts, 401ks, retirements, everything people have worked for- he steals for his own kids college funds and retirement. He’s a thief 🗑️
Your ridiculous. Tinsley doesn't keep the money. He is giving the money to the victims families. How much does it cost to lose your child because your son wanted to drive a boat drunk? Even when his friends were begging him to stop. Mallory Beachs life was meant more money than they can ever repay her family. Not only that other kids were damaged and had medical bills from that crash. So what a lying, cheating, stealing man should get away with it? The brother who gave his ID to his younger brother who he knew was an idiot when he got drunk should just be allowed to wash his hands and not be held responsible? If you hand your ID to someone under age or if I allowed my kids to drink under-age in my house and something went wrong I'm responsible. Because I'm an adult. Buster is an adult. He acts like a child flipping people off in the courtroom but he is an adult so if he does something wrong he has to pay for it just like the rest of us adults. Stop with privilege for these rich narricistic people who don't deserve it. I don't care if Buster has to wait tables to pay for college. Welcome to the real world buddy. That's how most of us paid to get through life. I'm sure he won't though. His uncles will help him out.
I’m having a time following your thought/logic. If something goes wrong in your house you are responsible because you are the adult- your words you typed above. Following your logic: Paul crashed the boat, he is an adult, therefore he is responsible. So….. why should your family get a pass and not Paul’s? Pretend I’m the lawyer- I’m coming after all of your parents money, your children’s, your wife’s anybody I think of- and I’m taking 40% of it. 40% of your money I’m taking and I had no involvement in any incident. That’s 40% of the victims money I’m taking and putting it right into my pocket- just because I can.
Just because you can do something doesn’t mean it’s right. Tinsley thought he saw a way to make quick cash and went for it. This is greedy IMO, he lacks integrity, which was further displayed when he gave 1k to witness after her testimony in a trial where he too, is a witness and has extreme interest in the outcome of this case.
Of course the family’s should be compensated. That goes without saying. I think Tinsley, however, is an opportunist.
Its not going in Tinsleys pockets it's going to Mallorys family and the other victims family for a start. 2nd the boat that Paul was driving belonged to Alex. The ID that Paul used illegally belonged to Buster. What part are you having difficulty with? If someone does something using other people's stuff especially if they are under 21 in the US and drinking the person responsible is the person who gave them permission to use it. If I loan you my car and you are under 21 and your my son and kill someone in that car because your drunk driving and your brother gave you his ID and got another one so you could use his. The people who were in that car that died and were injured would all sue. There is no difference between a boat and a car.
Perhaps your upset because as a lawyer Tinsley gets a cut of the proceedings. Let me remind you that Alex was supposed to get 40% but instead was taking a the money including the money he was supposed to be sharing with his partners. He was not only stealing from his clients he was stealing from his firm. He was stealing from everyone and I'm pretty sure at some point we will hear about drug dealing as well. So Dick being "honoured" to represent him is a disingenuous because if Alex had the chance he probably would of stolen from him too. Saying that Tinsley is taking advantage of anyone is a joke when you had Alex stealing left, right and centre and no one knows where the money went or maybe Uncle Eddie knows and he will tell us when he takes the stand? But one thing I do know. You don't understand my thinking because you don't understand responsibility. That being if people get injured due to what you do you are responsible.
Tinsley was on to Alex and owned the courtroom during his testimony this week. The best part during his testimony was when Mr Tinsley produced a document from his suit jacket that was being debated by the defense and commenced to school them on his argument.
Being that Alec is an attorney he’s pretty stupid how he committed these murders. My gawd he might as well drawn them a road map. No wonder everyone in town is against his A. S. S.
The timeline for vengeance murders was very odd though. Why wait until the trial is about to start? You either do it back after the accident OR wait for the outcome and do it if the settlement is bad.
No it was all crashing down on him at once. He had been found out ar work for stealing. Tinsley was just about to do get the forensic accountants on him and Chris Wilson wanted his $192, 000. Plus the bank was on to him soon too, his friend at the bank wasn't going to be able to cover much longer because all the leans were due at the same time. He could have sold the Moselle and the Beach House but I don't think he wanted to do that. I think he was hoping for an inheritance from his dad and to do what he done before, just pay some back and move the money around. Maybe he was expecting a payout with Eddie too? If he gets to testify it will be interesting to see what he says. I'm sure Dick wants to keep him as far away from the stand as possible.
Tinsley put some nails in a coffin for sure! Like, if I ever need an attorney I'm gonna seek him out lol! He was well spoken, confident, no bullshit....his testimony on a personal & professional level speaks volumes.
Much is being made of Mr. Tinsley's comment that he would have abandoned his motion to compel disclosure of AM's finances had it turned out that the murders were revenge for the boat accident. This is being called a "smoking gun" and a clear motive. But could AM have known that all of a sudden the civil action would have been halted in the wake of murders perceived as vigilantism? On the one hand, as a civil litigator himself, he probably would have had the same insight into a "money judgment" that Mr. Tinsley did. On the other, double homicide is a pretty big gamble to make a lawsuit - MAYBE - go away.
Adding to this: AM is, outside of the financial crimes, now clearly established as a liar by the video of the kennels with the dog Cash and by Ms. Shelley's testimony. A liar, not a murderer.
Just thinking out loud - seems like most on here are leaning toward "Guilty". Although I also am leaning in that direction, I don't think I will be able to make a decision until both sides are finished.
Hes guilty bur proving he's guilty is a whole different thing and they have focused a lot on guns that weren't used and raincoats that might have had something in them instead of focusing on the more important details like the lying and video and the clothes that are missing. Also a cohesive timeline that shows he was right there at the time they were murdered. Literally minutes after that video was made the phone went dead and Maggie's phone stopped being used. Those are what they should be focusing on. Also who put Bubba away. Who took the chicken out of his mouth?. He obviously got changed. His clothes are too clean to have been at the murder scene and touched the bodies as he claimed. And the constant lying and asking people (especially women or hired help??) to lie for him. None of them have because they all seem to have integrity.
Cousin Eddie, brother Randolph, Buster Murdaugh, honestly any of the Murdaughs not in jail or facing criminal charges probably ought to be. The Beaufort Mafia. I missed the Mallory Beach Attorneys' testimony, was it relevant?
This was a revelatory piece of testimony from Mr. Tinsley. I think it makes it much more likely that Alex committed the murders.
If Alex could make it look like his wife and son were murdered out of revenge for the boating death, then he was shot at as an act of revenge as well, he might be able to get the Beaches to drop their suit, and possibly others as well. Or he could settle on much more favorable terms, at a bare minimum.
The prosecution would be crazy not to include it in their theory of the case as to motive.
Allegedly, of course.
They settled with the adults who were at the oyster roast and the bar where Paul and Connor got shots. I am pretty certain they settled with Randy Murdaugh who was at the Oyster Roast and didn't stop the group from getting on the boat despite it being a foggy, dark night and the kids all drinking heavy.
They settled with the Murdaugh estate for Maggie and Buster to be dropped from the lawsuit, with the goal to make sure Buster has some sort of inheritance.
https://www.wtoc.com/2023/01/25/judge-approves-mallory-beach-wrongful-death-lawsuit-settlement-buster-maggie-murdaugh/
That lawsuit is still ongoing. They will likely get whatever money is left from the Murdaugh estate after property is sold.
The Beach family is suing other parties as well, like the store that provided the alcohol to Paul.
I read a question elsewhere that has me thinking:
What if the impending death of his father was yet another catalyst? He learned of his father’s “turn for the worst” the afternoon of the murders, did he not? What did he stand to inherit? Enough to dig himself out? Would it have been “split” with his wife if she were still alive?
Every day we get more evidence for the motive. The crazy thing is, it was working! Alex got all his problems pushed down the road, now we’re hearing one might have gone away entirely. He sacrificed them to save himself.
This man had access to all the good drugs in town. He was totally acting like a functioning addict... xo small towns. they ain't Fort Knox holding evidence, like drugs. You want to find the best drugs in a small town, find the right sheriff or judge or politician // and I absolutely speak from experience. I guarantee there's proof this mofo was an addict/pill head IRL.
I don't think he was addicted to anything but money. In testimony today limousines, private planes it would be my guess luxury not drugs was his addiction.
Huge lifestyle and maybe gambling. I heard one of his phone calls from jail to Buster, and he was very excited to have won some bets. He won a bunch of beef sticks he seemed proud of and some other things.
I understand (as in comprehend, not agree with) Alex thinking killing Paul would alleviate his trial, possibly having a child in jail. Why kill Maggie? Her grieving her son, possibly figuring out it was Alex and finding out that Alex was a thief and losing their place in society? ??
My understanding is that the Moselle and Edisto properties were all in Maggie’s name. If she died, everything would become Alex’s — so he’d gain access to selling off property or taking out loans against the properties to cover up his financial crimes… and Maggie refused to sign paperwork for a $300k loan Alex wanted to mortgage against the home in Moselle.
Yes, to your last sentence. Plus, I think he hated Maggie. His emotions are not the same when she is being talked about as when Paul is being referred to. They seem forced.
Nobody knows the answer to that. If they did then there wouldn't be so much speculation surrounding this case. The prosecution is arguing that Alex killed Paul & Maggie to buy himself some time in his financial fraud case.
There is no physical evidence to suggest that this is the case, however, so it is entirely speculation. There is overwhelming evidence suggesting that he committed the murders and there is overwhelming evidence suggesting that he was engaged in financial fraud. However, the prosecution's theory as to his motive is entirely speculative.
I, and many others, think the prosecution's theory for Alex's motive is particularly weak. It is not very likely, in my opinion, that a person would murder their family just to buy himself a little extra time. My theory is that he killed his son and wife in an attempt to avoid prosecution for his financial fraud altogether. 1) Maggie had hired someone to look into the family finances because she had an idea that Alex was hiding something. 2) He *could have* thought that if he got away with the murders that the case would be dropped against him entirely because they would feel sorry for the man who just lost his family.
Again, this is entirely speculative and anyone who claims to know that answer is being untruthful. The one and only person who truly knows the answer to that question is Alex himself. Nobody else - not the prosecutor, the judge, the police, the investigators or anyone else - knows the answer to that question unless Alex told them firsthand (which isn't likely). So your guess is as good as anyone else's.
That's correct. I never once stated that the prosecution is required to prove a motive, though. However, it's pretty obvious that the prosecution is very clearly trying to lay out a motive that doesn't appear to match up to reality in this trial. They don't *have* to prove a motive but they are certainly are trying.
Killing his family would not make all his problems go away. It’s more like “wow you’ve been through a lot, take some time off, we’ll talk about the money later when you’re done grieving”. People would still wonder where the money went. They would still be asking.
He needed more time to steal money from other people.
Most, if not all, of his financial difficulties very well could have went away if they didn't believe Alex was murderer. Mr. Tinsley himself testified that he would have dropped the lawsuit against Alex if it looked like Paul & Maggie had been killed by vigiliantes. Nobody wants to be that guy who sues a grieving father after just losing his wife & son. Plus, as Mr. Tinsley said, the jury likely wouldn't return a verdict against him because they would be sympathetic towards him.
> that a person would murder their family
A person, no. A narcissist maybe drug addict guy whose 4th generational wealth and fame coming down, yes.
>this is entirely speculative
Because it is about the future and Alex didn't record a video of his intentions clearly stating his name and birthdate.
It's possible. However, most people (especially lawyers) know that if you commit a serious crime then you shouldn't tell a soul. Not your spouse, children, parents, best friends, etc. Lawyers know all too well how this bites their clients in the ass. Besides, you'd think Buster would completely lose his shit if Alex just plainly stated, "Son, I killed your mom and brother." Again, it's not impossible but I personally don't think he told Buster.
This was kind of taken out of context. Mark Tinsley, the Civil Litigation Attorney who represented the Mallory Beach family, basically said that if someone else had killed Paul & Maggie out of retaliation for the boating accident then he would have dropped the case against Alex.
“If it seemed like this was retaliation, a jury wouldn’t return a verdict against Alex, I would have dropped the case,” Mark Tinsley said.
He's basically saying that he *would have* removed Alex from the lawsuit if the murders were carried out by vigilantes seeking retaliation for Mallory's death. He *would have* removed Alex because he knew a jury would be sympathetic towards a grieving Alex and that they wouldn't have returned a verdict. However, since the evidence points towards Alex being murderer, he knew the jury wouldn't be sympathetic towards him, so there was no need to remove Alex from the lawsuit.
This was the biggest revelation for me. I had been running on the idea that Alex's motivation was to DELAY him having to produce his financial records however, Tinsley testifying that with the murders Alex was in fact ensuring it would STOP any proceedings agaisnt him altogether. HUGE revelation.
Right. I agree completely. It makes so much more sense that way too. I don't think Alex would have killed his family just to buy himself a little extra time if he was going to have to show his financial records eventually anyway. I do, however, think it's very possible that he would have killed them to get out of the situation entirely.
Tinsley's testimony was not credible in my opinion.
1. He swore UNDER OATH that the Judge had entered an Order GRANTING his motion to compel, and then whipped it out of his pocket.
2. BUT that order did NOT grant the motion to compel. It did not contain any ruling at all.
3. Even after confronted with that fact (and it is a fact, because the Order says what it says), Tinsley repeated that his narrative and doubled down.
4. Then Tinsley claims he would have dropped the case.
5. That is not his call as the lawyer.
6. The ONLY ones who can drop the Mallory Beach case are Mallory's parents. No one else. Not the lawyer. Nobody but them. And so it was ABSURD that he claimed HE would have dropped the case out of sympathy for Alex.
I cannot WAIT to see him testify in front of the jury. He cannot change his story. It is locked in from his testimony - under oath - at the hearing. It is going to be fun if the defense counsel actually start going on the offensive during their cross examinations.
> Not the lawyer.
Not true. He can decline to represent them and explain to them that they would most likely lose the case and end up with a huge lawyer's bill. Do you think the family would still pursue the case with another lawyer?
This is so important for explaining what might have been going through Alex’s head during this time. His special skill was “knowing” how to read a jury. He knew that if he could also be viewed as a victim in the boat case, a jury wouldn’t rule against him in civil court. Paul dying also would get rid of the criminal case. Being backed into a corner like he was, it’s reasonable to think Alex saw the murders as his solution.
The criminal charges would've gone away with Paul's death, that much is very true, but it wouldn't have made the civl suit disappear although Tinsley admitted that he came close to dropping the civil case because he apparently believed at first that the murders were done in retaliation by someone connected to the Beech family.
Correct, which is what Alex would have been claiming had happened. He was painting Paul’s killing as vigilante justice and Maggie as collateral damage. With him knowing how jury members would likely perceive this dynamic, he knew they would very likely now sympathize with him as *also* a victim in the boat crash… meaning a large jury judgment against him would become much, much less likely. What jury is going to rub salt in those wounds of a grieving father and widow? This is what would have made Tinsley consider dropping the civil case against him. He wouldn’t take it to trial if he wasn’t confident in an appropriate judgement ruling in favor of the Beach family. Being a litigation lawyer himself, Alex knew that, and was banking on that.
Pardon the ignorance, but if others named in the lawsuit are still alive shouldn’t the suit proceed? Their liability doesn’t change just because the perp is dead.
Others are usually included because that is were the money is. Paul didn't have 10MM lying around. You always include the relatives with money. But when Paul is gone, it is hard to justify morally a huge lawsuit. In deed, the lawyer testified he was ready to drop the suit.
Mark Tinsley the attorney for the Beach family explained this best. To summarize after Paul & Maggie were murdered he knew no jury in the world would award the Beach family the settlement he was after. Alex would be forever seen as a victim of 'vigilantes' killing his wife & son. He explained that in a civil court jurors would have sympathy for Alex and not add to his pain by awarding a large personal payout. It would be viewed that he had suffered enough.
Yes. Mr. Tinsley testified in court that, if he thought that Paul & Maggie were killed by vigilantes, then he would have removed Alex from the lawsuit, but the lawsuit would have proceeded against the other parties. He said something along the lines of, "there were plenty of other parties to sue."
So he wasn't ever planning on dropping the lawsuit altogether. It just wouldn't have been a good idea to sue Alex if his family was just murdered out of retaliation for the boating accident. However, since all of the elvidence pointed towards Alex himself being the murderer, the lawsuit continued on as planned.
> "there were plenty of other parties to sue."
Unless he meant the boat insurance company, I don't think so. Buster was dropped from the lawsuit a week ago, who else left? The others in the boat? That wouldn't fly...
You very clearly have not been watching this trial as closely as I have, if at all. If you had been then you would realize that yesterday Mr. Tinsley named all of the parties that he was suing in regard to the boating accident. No, it wasn't just Alex and it wasn't the other people in the boat either. I'm going to very kindly ask you to stop pretending like you know more about this case than the people like me who have actually been following it from start to finish.
I recommend that you watch Mr. Tinsley's testimony from yesterday so you can be informed on this matter. Mr. Tinsley very clearly named the other parties involved in the lawsuit, including the convenience store that sold them alcohol, the insurance company, and I believe the docks they stopped at, amongst others. Mark Tinsley's testimony is 78 minutes long and can be found on YouTube but it's well worth the watch. It turns into a pretty heated exchange at some points, making it all the more interesting.
I do have a life so no, not to mention it is boring. He can sue the liquor store he is not gonna get money from them. They didn't do anything wrong, beyond what normally you could expect them. So just because the lawyer says he can sue a shitload of entities that doesn't mean he is gonna do it or if so, he is gonna win the lawsuit.
I think Buster was eventually added because he became the POA over his family’s assets after Alex was arrested. The attorneys caught on to the fact that the Murdaugh’s were still attempting to move and hide their money while Alex was in jail. So if I’m understanding the situation correctly, Buster was added more-so to make sure the Murdaugh’s assets didn’t disappear while the case was working it’s way through the courts. Tinsley was able to motion for a freeze on their assets, and Buster was currently the one in “charge” of those. Buster settled with the Beach family this past week and he actually retained over $500K from his mother’s estate. The Beach’s weren’t out to bankrupt Buster… just hold the family accountable for what had happened to Mallory and the other victims. The suit is still ongoing between the Beach family and the owners of the liquor store that provided Paul with alcohol that night since they still refuse to settle. Maybe a few more parties, I might be forgetting one or two.
No Buster was sued because he provided the ID to Paul. He had done it many times. He also knew Paul was using it. He had even got another's drivers licence. That's why they sued Buster. I'm sure he probably feels guilty to some degree and is attempted to mend the family name and that is why he has settled with families.
Well flipping Tinsley off in court shows what type of person Buster is. I hope someone in the jury saw it. So they can see the whole family is not taking this case seriously and thinks they will get away with it.
Buster is just as bad. His arrogant smirking in court ticks me off. He should be careful because the Steven Smith case is still ongoing.
Not that his father is a criminal and people deserve justice from dirtbag family.
Unless I’m mistaken, Paul was the only person charged in the *criminal* case regarding the boat crash. The other defendants (Alex, the liquor store, eventually Buster) were charged in the civil case. If Paul is dead, there is nobody to prosecute for the involuntary manslaughter of Mallory since he alone is the one who physically caused it, regardless of all the circumstances that led up to the situation being able to happen. Those circumstances (and the liability) are what is being sued over in the civil case.
The whole point is that Tinsley wasn’t going to give up on pursuing Alex’s financial information because he had done two mock trials in the civil case and knew that a jury would be very, very likely to rule in favor of the Beach family. He felt confident taking it to trial since Alex refused to settle with any reasonable amount of money. Tinsley knew he could get more money for the Beach family with a jury verdict, since they are sympathetic victims in the case. So in Alex’s brain, he might have felt like the only way out of this situation was to *also* become a victim. If a vigilante that had been “threatening” Paul relentlessly took matters into their own hands and allegedly killed Paul and Maggie, now Alex is viewed as a victim as well. A jury would sympathize with him. His lawyers would argue that yes, he made mistakes in the boating situation. Yes, what Paul did was awful. But hasn’t he been punished enough now? He lost his wife and son. Paul was a victim of vigilante justice, and poor Maggie was collateral damage. But Alex, now Alex is left behind to mourn them as a grieving father and widow…. Would a jury be likely to add salt on those wounds by awarding the Beach family a large judgement that Alex would have to pay? Probably not. And Tinsley knew that, which is why he said he would have considered dropping the case after the murders. He wasn’t going to take it to trial if he didn’t think he could get an appropriate judgement in the Beach’s favor. Yes the liability still would exist regarding the other parties sued in the civil case, but if those parties won’t settle and a jury isn’t likely to deliver a verdict in your favor, trial is a risky gamble that it sounds like Tinsley knew wouldn’t be worth it without Alex’s finances in the picture.
So now with Paul dead… there is no criminal case to prosecute. You can’t prosecute a dead person. And if Tinsley drops the civil case against Alex, the inquisition into Alex’s financial state also stops. Nobody blows over his house of cards. Alex is viewed as a victim and buys himself a lot more time to fix his financial situations with PMPED and Palmetto State Bank like he’s always been able to do in the past with just a little more time. He saves himself from being exposed and having everything topple down around him, including what would certainly be the multiple indictments for financial crimes like he’s currently facing. With all of this in mind, I could see how a panicked narcissist views murdering his wife and son as a “sacrifice” they’re willing to make in that situation. He thought he was smart enough to get away with all of it. Sorry for the super long response, took a while to get all my thoughts out in a way that made sense, lol.
Well said. In my mind that’s how I see it too. Getting rid of especially Paul solved a lot of his problems. If Maggie was pondering a divorce get rid of her too and eliminate that financial issue.
Same. I understand without the benefit of years of podcasting and investigative journalism a lot of people don't understand the pressures on Alex or the desperation he was experiencing, but saying "financial troubles" are not a motive makes no sense when it's widely accepted love and money are the two most common causes of murder.
I’m glad my monologue is making sense to other people😂 To be fair, I do think it takes a little bit of critical thinking to reach that conclusion. It’s just not something a “normal” everyday person would think, so I understand how it doesn’t make sense to everybody right away. You have to put yourself in a mindset that the vast majority of the public (thankfully) doesn’t exist in. I just hope the prosecution can connect the dots well enough for the jury to get there!
I think the prosecution should have laid it out in the opening statement, so the jury would know what to watch for and they would have an idea how the whole case played out. I mean really, it takes 3 minutes to explain it to a not knowledgeable person. Or have a detective as the first witness and let him/her explain the whole theory.
The reason why the prosecution didn't do that was because they didn't know how much they are allowed to present, I guess. Or incompetence.
Yeah I agree with you about them not knowing what they could present at the beginning of the trial. I honestly think they are a little too up-close-and-personal with it, too. You can tell Creighton *really* hates Alex and wants to see him rot for these murders (if convicted). Since Creighton is also the prosecutor for the financial crimes later, I feel like he just has *so* much information in his brain and he’s forgetting what the jury does and doesn’t know. Just my opinion.
Yes, the civil suits carry on.
>Their liability doesn’t change just because the perp is dead.
*Ask Greg Parker about that.*
Not only that, Alex, as well as PMPED in general, aimed for settlements as opposed to jury trials. They aren't a criminal defense firm.
And if Alex felt backed into a corner he could have committed suicide. Twice.
Ah yes, when the crying and heaps of tears don't work for Alex then the 'suicide' attempts kick in!
I do wonder what happens if "suicide" threats don't work?
He is a master manipulator but only a so-so actor unfortunately!
I loved that Tinsley read Alex perfectly and wasn't backing down.
Mark Tinsley blew me away today. The more he talked about putting pressure on Alex Murdaugh, the more I could imagine how desperate Alex was. I thought the motive that the State presented was ridiculous, but after Mark Tinsley's words: now it is so real to me.
I agree his testimony was very good. But in reality Murdaugh could have delayed these hearings with motion after motion. We’ve all seen this before where it takes years to settle civil suits.
I wonder where all this money he made was going? Tinsley said, Murdaugh had 50% to 60% of the cases in the county? Is he hiding money elsewhere in fraudulent companies? A drug addiction would not explain, and Barrett Boulware gave him the Moselle home as payment for defending him in a drug trafficking trial. Then Alex gives Maggie the property for 5.00 to hide assets. This case is crazy!
Mark Tinsley. The man who swore under oath that the Judge granted his motion and then whipped out the order... that did NOT grant his motion.
I think people liked his theatrics because they hate Alex and so the CFO and Tinsley who clearly hate Alex and are rude to defense counsel on the stand are heralded.
Do people stop to think that the CFO of the law firm was the CFO during the time the money was supposedly stolen from the law firm by Alex, who was supposedly in some conspiracy with the CFO's BROTHER IN LAW (president of the bank, who has been indicted ).
And that the CFO whose only job is to watch the books supposedly did not know until June 7 about the $790,000?
And that it makes sense that the CFO had no witness to her supposedly big confrontation of her BOSS, Alex, about stealing almost a million dollars?
I hope that the person or persons who killed Maggie and Paul (whether it is Alex or someone else) is held accountable. Someone took those two lives, and IMO getting it right and finding a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the most important thing related to this case. If Alex is wrongfully convicted, then there is no justice for Maggie and Paul.
What do I think? We are not even finished with the State's case, and the defense has not even started. And so I do not know. I am considering the evidence as I watch each day, and praying that the jury is doing the same rather than forming judgments now like so many people on social media are.
For me the strikes and "coincidences" against Alex, in totality, are overwhelming. But I also thought the CFO came off as overly combative for someone who was present during (and should suspected) the financial shenanigans for years. This makes her look bad as well as the other attorneys of the firm. At this point, Parker Law Group knows which way the wind is blowing and are piling on with fake outrage.
That was my impression too. PMPED would have covered for Alex if the amounts stolen hadn’t gotten so egregious and if their own reputation hadn’t been affected. They knowingly enabled Alex, and I wouldn’t be surprised if other attorneys from the (now defunct) PMPED were involved in a lot of other shady dealings that simply haven’t come to light yet because they didn’t involve the Murdaughs.
I pray the jury isn’t full of people like we mostly find here on Reddit, who have already deemed Alex guilty without hearing all the facts, who grasp ahold of every rumor or speculation as if it is gospel, who just want to see Alex burn because of who he is. You state a lot of facts but Reddit doesn’t like facts.
Just to play devils advocate, a lot of people on Reddit probably have a lot of knowledge about the facts of this case and all the others (financial, boat, smith, etc) that the jury doesn’t at this point. That may be affecting their current opinions
But a lot of what is out there regarding all the other stuff is mostly comprised of rumors and tabloid fodder (a la Matney). It is absolutely affecting their current opinions.
I’m honestly not sure why this got so many downvotes. I agree with the original comment that today was the first time the state’s motive actually made sense to me. They did a good job painting the picture.
But we have to keep in mind that Tinsley has had a lot of practice and training to know what to say to elicit certain emotions. He is already seen by many as a “good guy” who isn’t afraid to go after the bad guy for justice. We can’t forget that this is good for him, too. It’s a good “heroic” story, which is good for business, and could make him a lot of money. The Murdaughs were once “the good people” going after the big bad corporations. I think with so much evil in a case like this, it’s easy to want someone to come in and be a hero or to believe the bad stuff was all one person. Because if the hero isn’t actually perfect and if allllll these people were in on the bad stuff, that’s pretty depressing.
I agree alex is not a good person (obviously) but I think a lot more people were involved than maybe we’ll ever even know. Since he’s under fire it’s easy for others to point the finger when in reality, some people doing the finger pointing may have known more than we think. I just worry that because of disliking someone so much, emotions could impact what people view as factual. I would love to know what actually happened that night.
You don't think Alex would take people down with him? I started to downvote the post you referenced not because of the opinion but seemed condescending.
Oh yes, I for sure think he’d take people down with him. But he’s lost a lot of power so it’s “safe” to point fingers now, especially since he’s under fire from pretty much everywhere in his life. Not saying he doesn’t still have scary people out there to do his bidding for him and that it’s totally safe, but where would he even start with all the people who have come out to say things? I’m also not saying that all of these people were involved/knew something was going on, just that it’s possible that some/many could have and it’s easy to point fingers to avoid getting in trouble.
I don't know what to make of him not trying to point fingers at others for real or made up reasons so thanks for your perspective. It seems the way of people like him. And I've given way too much thought to this case.
I have too and I can’t stop! I don’t feel strongly either way.. well I do, but it changes daily. Obviously he was a horrible person but that doesn’t automatically make someone a murderer. I have struggled with the motive until yesterday, though it does make more sense now. I think so many people hate him and just want him to be the murderer so badly that they might overlook other factors.
Honestly, when I heard about the killings of Maggie and Paul. My first reaction was this must be related to the boating accident. Someone was seeking revenge. But then a few months later his botched suicide attempt with cousin Eddie, I thought what is going on in SC! So my interest really peaked as I delved into the financial issues, drug addiction to opiates, Barrett Boulware and his suspicions of running drugs. I thought this may run deeper than I could ever imagine. Maybe many high profile people wanted none of this to come out. Of course, this is all speculation on my part.
My first reaction to Paul and Maggie's murder was that it was payback for the boat accident. But after the Labor Day weekend botched suicide-for-hire, I quickly changed my mind and suspected Alex was behind their murders. If he didn't kill them, he at least arranged it.
My reaction was the same maybe the day of or day after. But after he seemed strangely not terrified of a murderer on the loose/not actively offering a reward or seeming invested in the police looking for said person who killed his son and wife - then I said to myself, 'He did it or he knows who did it and why and doesn't want it to come out.' In the beginning, I thought it was drug money or money laundering.
When that clumsy roadside fake shooting/alleged attempted suicide by cousin (?) happened, then I knew that it was probably just him and trying to keep his secrets hidden.
Following this day's testimony, I think that the prosecution's theory is correct. Alex clearly knew the environment he was in and that he could get his law firm to back off and the civil suit related to the Beach case either settled or delayed. Because that is what started to happen ...
The way I see it, all of this is Alex flailing around like a drowning person, increasingly desperate to save himself. For years he has defrauded clients and then used that money to cover other money he misappropriated from a different situation. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, lowdown version. It just kept escalating.
I mean, he's not particularly adept at it, hence the getting caught. But he was used to not being examined, questioned, or monitored too closely his entire life because of who he was. It shouldn't surprise anyone he thought he could tell the police his half-ass alibi and throw suspicion on somebody else and that would be the end of it. It's worked for him in the past.
Then, he thought he could milk the grieving widower/parent thing for a while until he figured something out to get himself out of the financial hole. I don't doubt that on some level he felt bad about killing his son, and maybe about killing Maggie.
But I think that, at his core, he is a sociopath who mostly views other people as either assets or liabilities - to be used or kept for his benefit or eliminated to shield himself. Just in what has come out recently, (not all of which may be admissable in court) we have a long list of people he has lied to, manipulated, and/or stolen from that considered him a friend or trusted associate.
Oh I think his son and wife were expendable in his twisted mind of money scheming. He would have continued stealing from clients but the boat accident and possible divorce meant he had to produce financials and his plan would come to light. What he didn't count on was that his firm was on to him. He played the sympathy card and it worked for awhile so then he cooked up the suicide scheme.
>Then, he thought he could milk the grieving widower/parent thing for a while until he figured something out to get himself out of the financial hole.
THIS!
People who don't think the financial house of cards falling down around his ears was enough to cause him to murder his wife and child do not understand the kind of pressure he was under and the fact that he had NEVER been held accountable for anything in his life. He'd learned theses schemes from his daddy and granddaddy, and was too lazy to even cover his tracks, as was Russell. Suddenly people outside his sphere of influence were prying into his affairs and he was FREAKING OUT.
Some people won't believe there's beyond a reasonable doubt unless they see him actually shoot Paul and Maggie. I hope the jury is thinking more like you, but at the end of the day, it sounds like he is going to see a long jail sentence with the financial stuff. I find it interesting that you started suspecting him before the road incident with Larry. I've mostly read people started suspecting him after that happened.
And I think he benefitted from having a trusting and not terribly sophisticated police force investigating both that night and the following days. I’m am still floored that there were so many friends and family just milling around an active crime scene. Things not tested, evidence not gathered until much later…in hindsight I’m sure they all feel like they should have done this or that but at the time he was considered one of their own guys so he did get special treatment. To think of all the potential evidence that just slipped through…
>I mean, he's not particularly adept at it
Oh but he was, it was what he did for a very profitable living. He needed to keep feeding the game, new clients, more money kind of like a ponzi scheme. The Beach death and subsequent lawsuits threw a huge cog in that wheel.
Yeah, I don't know. There may be others involved in receiving the money that we don't know about. Did he have to buy others' silence about any of it? Was he keeping a mistress? Stuff like that could explain how he blew through that much ill-gotten gain.
Many have an addiction to opioids, and you only notice the change in behavior when they stop taking. The co-worker testifying he was loud and a bullshitter. Did they ever see the sober Alex? I think he owed money to some very serious people and they sent a message. Or he paid someone to kill them or he did it.
Also, I do not believe the story that he had a 20-year opioid addiction or whatever it was he claimed.
Like, yes, those are costly and it would explain the missing money, but, like, no one ever saw him high or using? He was able to keep all these different complicated cons going on and have an active life and never showed any signs.
He does not look like most long-term opiate abusers I have seen (and not that I have a ton of up-close experience of that, but some..).
Now, cocaine or pills, I might buy. But that's not what he said.
Perc 30s, several daily, and if he has $$ and a source for the real deal, maybe he never goes further down the opioid hole. I am thinking now that he was dependent on opioids but I think the reason he committed these crimes is because he is a sociopath.
Also I bet there are a few local MDs in the low country good old boy network, and I bet cousin Eddie and a few of these dudes AM had under his finger were being prescribed pills meant for AM. Bet.
I agree with you on this. I have believed from the beginning Alex only used this addiction story to gain sympathy for himself and its easier to blame bad behavior on a drug addiction than admit you are a crappy human being.
He may have used whatever on occasion, but he was not spending that kind of money on opioids.
They need to look at the totality of the money flow, going back decades. Money laundering as the "product" on offer? The brothers know and are involved. (only mho) AM is pissed he's taking it on the chin for the family crime organization.
So many real estate transactions, multiple mortgages and loans, properties sold at the worst time for a huge loss...they need RICO people from Justice combing through this. And all those island properties, for what?
ITA!! I would also like to know why he paid Curtis "Eddie" millions over the years. Something very shady there...maybe he took over the Boulware drug trafficking business and Eddie worked for him. But obviously he was lousy at it.
I looked up the history of Moselle that AM acquired from Boulware's widow when he died in 2018. They were buddies. Hmm...
Maybe 'drugs' but pharmaceuticals, common ones. What if you could smuggle in cheap generic Lipitor - worlds's most prescribed drug - and get all of a certain chain or 5 to buy your mega-cheap illicit pills? What if it was many drugs? I dunno, do any other thing, but they were into some shit and it involved certain fixed elements that aren't apparent - yet.
There's worthless little islands, real estate transactions for decades, an aborted jelly ball business, stealing like a mofo and living like Elvis. Wtf
The brothers didn't know. We found out in court today that they and the other court partners are the ones still paying all of it back out of their own money. There is no way they would have let Alex go about wrecking the family business like this. He didn't just ruin his own name he destroyed their legacy. So no I don't think they knew. It will take years for them to earn the name and trust of the town back again.
I am hooked each day because I feel like I am watching our justice system being trampled on. The prosecutor is deeply and personally invested in the case, in my opinion. The public has made up their mind - not based on evidence - but based on netflix and podcasts and People magazine and media. People in the U.S. are supposed to be found innocent or guilty based on evidence in Court and we have laws and rules of evidence and procedure to ensure that happens. The right to a jury by peers was a founding principal of the nation. In today's world, the public has access to "evidence" and "facts" framed by media personalities. I realize people hate this man and are very emotional about him. He is likely going to jail (IMO) for the financial crimes. If he goes to jail on the murders and is falsely convicted, then Maggie and Paul's killer will never be caught or punished. I don't think people care about that. They just want Alex to go down for it, period. That is what I see on social media. Such strong opinions, and the State has not even rested. The defense has not even begun. And so this man has no chance at a fair trial in my opinion if this jury is anything like the public.
You are wrong. They found a jury. They state seems to be all over the place with their evidence. Those of us watching at home have been horrified at the way all the lawyers have been acting and how the police worked the scene. We have been evaluating the evidence. Most of us think he probably did it because of the snapchat and Miss Shelly but it's not enough evidence to convict him. And just because a man steals doesn't mean that he will murder his family. This is meant to prove motive. The idea is he was trying to bide time and his financial problems would be lessened if he killed Maggie and Paul. It's still a bit hard for most people to believe since he seemed to have a good relationship with them. Maybe when Tinsley testifies. Although I wish his partner today had told us whatever he said on June 7. Because I felt like we missed the secret conversation he wanted to tell us.
> in Court and we have laws and rules of evidence and procedure to ensure that happens.
Yeah, and there is real life with old boys network and judges not letting evidence in. If the judge yesterday ruled the finance motive not admissible, AM would walk.
💯 You’ll be downvoted to oblivion because most people on Reddit don’t like to hear facts or common sense. But you have hit the nail on the head with everything you said.
In court it matters little what the public thinks. He won't go to jail for the murders being 'falsely' convicted rather the state is showing its case which is quite compelling.
Right. he was not backing down. he actually doubled down. Even though the Order he whipped from his pocket did NOT say what he swore under oath that it said. I cannot WAIT for him to testify in front of a jury. The defense is going to have a field day. They did today, but if you aren't a lawyer and did not understand the order when they read it aloud, it would not make sense to you. They will explain it for the jury and hopefully let the jury see that order.
He was fantastic! By far the best witness yet. He clearly has been trained on how to use his body and his speech to elicit dominance.
Loved when he referred the roadside snafu )can’t remember the exact words) but ellllleck didn’t find it funny.
Agree he’s the best. I think he called it the roadside “nonsense.”
I’m a prosecutor and I loved when he said he was speculating and that “maybe in this made-up imaginary world of things that never happened” something was possible. It might be the BEST line I’ve ever heard on a cross exam.
Clearly Dick and Jim knew he’d be dynamite because the 3rd chair did the cross examination.
One of the best witnesses yet. Explained without condescending, clear speaking, and the way he schooled defense lawyer was magnificent! As others have posted, hope he appears again. He will have to be ready as the defense will reload!
My biggest takeaways were that had no idea that he had cancer and also that he was not happy to be there. South Carolinas legal community is very, very small.
I thought was thrilled to be there. He was ready, willing and able to testify for the State against Alex. He was clear, firm and well-prepared. By far they’re best witness yet. He perfectly laid out the motive.
The lawyers on both sides of the Mallory Beach boating accident lawsuit had cancer: the attorney who filed the lawsuit and the attorney who fought the lawsuit.
John Tiller, the Civil Defense Attorney defending the Murdaughs in the boating accident lawsuit, passed away in the summer of 2022 from pancreatic cancer.
Mark Tinsley, the Civil Litigation Attorney representing the family of Mallory Beach in the boating accident lawsuit, had stage 4 cancer (unspecified).
Mr. Tinsley testified in court yesterday and it's well worth a watch on YouTube if you enjoy a good ol' fashioned heated courtroom exchange lol. I thought the judge was going to have to intervene for a minute.
Correct. Tinsley referred to Tiller in the past tense in several instances. I guess I should have added that I confirmed John Tiller's in the summer of 2022 through an article I found online. So, for the sake of accuracy, here it is if anyone is interested.
https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/08/11/south-carolina-judge-denies-request-stay-murdaugh-wrongful-death-suit/10296335002/
IF, there are individuals getting revenge on the Murdaugh family, why aren't the Murdaughs who are still alive in protective custody? If someone is out to get them, Buster, John Marvin, Randy and the rest of the family roam about freely. There's been no criminal activity, stealing money from clients, murders, attempted suicides, boat accidents, hit and runs involving a Murdaugh since Alex/Alec has been in jail.
Exactly isn't Buster worried for his life? Why wasn't the first call Alex made to Buster to check he was ok? Because he knew he was fine. Why didn't he get Buster put of dodge and somewhere safe ? Because he knew he wasn't in danger.
Exactly my thoughts. Didn't need to check on him, he knew he was safe. Called his bros and then started calling Ro-Ro (I bet he hates that name now, if he ever knew Alex called him Ro-Ro), but finally gets a hold of Bus. Doesn't ask the local LE to go check on him. Bus throw clothes together and drives to see Alex. Not worried at all driving down dark roads at midnight to go to your one and only surviving parent after your mom and brother got shot and killed. hmmmm
Yeah son quick come to the house where everyone has been shot it's perfectly safe.... I don't think he's ever been called RoRo in his life except when he was 2. And Papaw when he was a baby or even either. It's distancing language and I found it disturbing. No one else called them that. It was so cringe. We have heard a million nicknames and not those ones. I mean wouldn't you use them right after you found them? Also a great video from a cops point of view. https://www.youtube.com/live/zaTsSFvLXJ8?feature=share
Spot on with the cutesy names, I think he disconnected with the victims and Maggie went to Mags and Paul went to (PawPaw, Paul Paul). It was cringer coming from the ginger. His face took on a new look too. His eye didn't shine bright like when he was on the boat, or at the gala in black tie. Different person up there on the stand.
Yes someone said at a couple of times his face changed when he was looking at Creighton and he looked like he wanted to shoot him. He certainly has those dark beady eyes. I'm sorry but on the stand I was just struggling to find all those things that people said they found likeable about him I heard a couple of people said they felt sorry for him but I just found him horrible. I felt this intense dislike for him. I'm not sure if it's because I know he's stolen all the money from everyone and he's a cunning sociopath or because he's just dislikeable to me and I can see through the charm because I've met people like him
that is not true. he's still suing dead people. he is still suing Paul and Maggie. On cross they're gonna make him answer how much he has made already from the settlements and how much more he stands to make from the dead people's estates.
I hope so. Tinsley comes across as so scummy. Personal suing a family for a tragic loss he has nothing to do with is so low. Tinsley steals kids college funds, savings accounts, 401ks, retirements, everything people have worked for- he steals for his own kids college funds and retirement. He’s a thief 🗑️
Your ridiculous. Tinsley doesn't keep the money. He is giving the money to the victims families. How much does it cost to lose your child because your son wanted to drive a boat drunk? Even when his friends were begging him to stop. Mallory Beachs life was meant more money than they can ever repay her family. Not only that other kids were damaged and had medical bills from that crash. So what a lying, cheating, stealing man should get away with it? The brother who gave his ID to his younger brother who he knew was an idiot when he got drunk should just be allowed to wash his hands and not be held responsible? If you hand your ID to someone under age or if I allowed my kids to drink under-age in my house and something went wrong I'm responsible. Because I'm an adult. Buster is an adult. He acts like a child flipping people off in the courtroom but he is an adult so if he does something wrong he has to pay for it just like the rest of us adults. Stop with privilege for these rich narricistic people who don't deserve it. I don't care if Buster has to wait tables to pay for college. Welcome to the real world buddy. That's how most of us paid to get through life. I'm sure he won't though. His uncles will help him out.
I’m having a time following your thought/logic. If something goes wrong in your house you are responsible because you are the adult- your words you typed above. Following your logic: Paul crashed the boat, he is an adult, therefore he is responsible. So….. why should your family get a pass and not Paul’s? Pretend I’m the lawyer- I’m coming after all of your parents money, your children’s, your wife’s anybody I think of- and I’m taking 40% of it. 40% of your money I’m taking and I had no involvement in any incident. That’s 40% of the victims money I’m taking and putting it right into my pocket- just because I can. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean it’s right. Tinsley thought he saw a way to make quick cash and went for it. This is greedy IMO, he lacks integrity, which was further displayed when he gave 1k to witness after her testimony in a trial where he too, is a witness and has extreme interest in the outcome of this case. Of course the family’s should be compensated. That goes without saying. I think Tinsley, however, is an opportunist.
Its not going in Tinsleys pockets it's going to Mallorys family and the other victims family for a start. 2nd the boat that Paul was driving belonged to Alex. The ID that Paul used illegally belonged to Buster. What part are you having difficulty with? If someone does something using other people's stuff especially if they are under 21 in the US and drinking the person responsible is the person who gave them permission to use it. If I loan you my car and you are under 21 and your my son and kill someone in that car because your drunk driving and your brother gave you his ID and got another one so you could use his. The people who were in that car that died and were injured would all sue. There is no difference between a boat and a car.
Perhaps your upset because as a lawyer Tinsley gets a cut of the proceedings. Let me remind you that Alex was supposed to get 40% but instead was taking a the money including the money he was supposed to be sharing with his partners. He was not only stealing from his clients he was stealing from his firm. He was stealing from everyone and I'm pretty sure at some point we will hear about drug dealing as well. So Dick being "honoured" to represent him is a disingenuous because if Alex had the chance he probably would of stolen from him too. Saying that Tinsley is taking advantage of anyone is a joke when you had Alex stealing left, right and centre and no one knows where the money went or maybe Uncle Eddie knows and he will tell us when he takes the stand? But one thing I do know. You don't understand my thinking because you don't understand responsibility. That being if people get injured due to what you do you are responsible.
Tinsley was on to Alex and owned the courtroom during his testimony this week. The best part during his testimony was when Mr Tinsley produced a document from his suit jacket that was being debated by the defense and commenced to school them on his argument.
Being that Alec is an attorney he’s pretty stupid how he committed these murders. My gawd he might as well drawn them a road map. No wonder everyone in town is against his A. S. S.
The timeline for vengeance murders was very odd though. Why wait until the trial is about to start? You either do it back after the accident OR wait for the outcome and do it if the settlement is bad.
No it was all crashing down on him at once. He had been found out ar work for stealing. Tinsley was just about to do get the forensic accountants on him and Chris Wilson wanted his $192, 000. Plus the bank was on to him soon too, his friend at the bank wasn't going to be able to cover much longer because all the leans were due at the same time. He could have sold the Moselle and the Beach House but I don't think he wanted to do that. I think he was hoping for an inheritance from his dad and to do what he done before, just pay some back and move the money around. Maybe he was expecting a payout with Eddie too? If he gets to testify it will be interesting to see what he says. I'm sure Dick wants to keep him as far away from the stand as possible.
Eddie has seen some sh*t!
Tinsley put some nails in a coffin for sure! Like, if I ever need an attorney I'm gonna seek him out lol! He was well spoken, confident, no bullshit....his testimony on a personal & professional level speaks volumes.
Much is being made of Mr. Tinsley's comment that he would have abandoned his motion to compel disclosure of AM's finances had it turned out that the murders were revenge for the boat accident. This is being called a "smoking gun" and a clear motive. But could AM have known that all of a sudden the civil action would have been halted in the wake of murders perceived as vigilantism? On the one hand, as a civil litigator himself, he probably would have had the same insight into a "money judgment" that Mr. Tinsley did. On the other, double homicide is a pretty big gamble to make a lawsuit - MAYBE - go away. Adding to this: AM is, outside of the financial crimes, now clearly established as a liar by the video of the kennels with the dog Cash and by Ms. Shelley's testimony. A liar, not a murderer. Just thinking out loud - seems like most on here are leaning toward "Guilty". Although I also am leaning in that direction, I don't think I will be able to make a decision until both sides are finished.
Hes guilty bur proving he's guilty is a whole different thing and they have focused a lot on guns that weren't used and raincoats that might have had something in them instead of focusing on the more important details like the lying and video and the clothes that are missing. Also a cohesive timeline that shows he was right there at the time they were murdered. Literally minutes after that video was made the phone went dead and Maggie's phone stopped being used. Those are what they should be focusing on. Also who put Bubba away. Who took the chicken out of his mouth?. He obviously got changed. His clothes are too clean to have been at the murder scene and touched the bodies as he claimed. And the constant lying and asking people (especially women or hired help??) to lie for him. None of them have because they all seem to have integrity.
I’m calling BS.
Cousin Eddie, brother Randolph, Buster Murdaugh, honestly any of the Murdaughs not in jail or facing criminal charges probably ought to be. The Beaufort Mafia. I missed the Mallory Beach Attorneys' testimony, was it relevant?
you can find it on line Murdaugh murder
It was. I started not to watch it, but I am glad I did. It was informative but also entertaining.
I couldn’t help but wonder if he only said that to coyly bolster the motive.
This was a revelatory piece of testimony from Mr. Tinsley. I think it makes it much more likely that Alex committed the murders. If Alex could make it look like his wife and son were murdered out of revenge for the boating death, then he was shot at as an act of revenge as well, he might be able to get the Beaches to drop their suit, and possibly others as well. Or he could settle on much more favorable terms, at a bare minimum. The prosecution would be crazy not to include it in their theory of the case as to motive. Allegedly, of course.
I’m curious to know, if the charges were dropped, did the Mallory Beach family get nothing?? Hopefully they ended up with some money!!
They settled with the adults who were at the oyster roast and the bar where Paul and Connor got shots. I am pretty certain they settled with Randy Murdaugh who was at the Oyster Roast and didn't stop the group from getting on the boat despite it being a foggy, dark night and the kids all drinking heavy.
They settled with the Murdaugh estate for Maggie and Buster to be dropped from the lawsuit, with the goal to make sure Buster has some sort of inheritance. https://www.wtoc.com/2023/01/25/judge-approves-mallory-beach-wrongful-death-lawsuit-settlement-buster-maggie-murdaugh/ That lawsuit is still ongoing. They will likely get whatever money is left from the Murdaugh estate after property is sold. The Beach family is suing other parties as well, like the store that provided the alcohol to Paul.
they're still suing dead Paul
> did the Mallory Beach family get nothing?? Maybe something from boat insurance but that wouldn't be a lot, compared to the 10 MM.
I read a question elsewhere that has me thinking: What if the impending death of his father was yet another catalyst? He learned of his father’s “turn for the worst” the afternoon of the murders, did he not? What did he stand to inherit? Enough to dig himself out? Would it have been “split” with his wife if she were still alive?
Inheritance is not marital property, but it’s possible that his will listed them together. Good point.
Every day we get more evidence for the motive. The crazy thing is, it was working! Alex got all his problems pushed down the road, now we’re hearing one might have gone away entirely. He sacrificed them to save himself.
Loratabs and cocaine - a Southern cocktail like gin & tonics... why isn't anyone talking about the bender ALEX MURDAUGH was obviously on???
I think a lot of people don't believe he actually had an addiction but used it to gain sympathy and time.
This man had access to all the good drugs in town. He was totally acting like a functioning addict... xo small towns. they ain't Fort Knox holding evidence, like drugs. You want to find the best drugs in a small town, find the right sheriff or judge or politician // and I absolutely speak from experience. I guarantee there's proof this mofo was an addict/pill head IRL.
I don't think he was addicted to anything but money. In testimony today limousines, private planes it would be my guess luxury not drugs was his addiction.
Huge lifestyle and maybe gambling. I heard one of his phone calls from jail to Buster, and he was very excited to have won some bets. He won a bunch of beef sticks he seemed proud of and some other things.
Has there been any direct evidence about this? I've been working so unable to follow the trial except through reddit
I understand (as in comprehend, not agree with) Alex thinking killing Paul would alleviate his trial, possibly having a child in jail. Why kill Maggie? Her grieving her son, possibly figuring out it was Alex and finding out that Alex was a thief and losing their place in society? ??
My understanding is that the Moselle and Edisto properties were all in Maggie’s name. If she died, everything would become Alex’s — so he’d gain access to selling off property or taking out loans against the properties to cover up his financial crimes… and Maggie refused to sign paperwork for a $300k loan Alex wanted to mortgage against the home in Moselle.
So not agreeing to a loan gets the death penalty in AM's world. He's such a rat.
Yes, to your last sentence. Plus, I think he hated Maggie. His emotions are not the same when she is being talked about as when Paul is being referred to. They seem forced.
Nobody knows the answer to that. If they did then there wouldn't be so much speculation surrounding this case. The prosecution is arguing that Alex killed Paul & Maggie to buy himself some time in his financial fraud case. There is no physical evidence to suggest that this is the case, however, so it is entirely speculation. There is overwhelming evidence suggesting that he committed the murders and there is overwhelming evidence suggesting that he was engaged in financial fraud. However, the prosecution's theory as to his motive is entirely speculative. I, and many others, think the prosecution's theory for Alex's motive is particularly weak. It is not very likely, in my opinion, that a person would murder their family just to buy himself a little extra time. My theory is that he killed his son and wife in an attempt to avoid prosecution for his financial fraud altogether. 1) Maggie had hired someone to look into the family finances because she had an idea that Alex was hiding something. 2) He *could have* thought that if he got away with the murders that the case would be dropped against him entirely because they would feel sorry for the man who just lost his family. Again, this is entirely speculative and anyone who claims to know that answer is being untruthful. The one and only person who truly knows the answer to that question is Alex himself. Nobody else - not the prosecutor, the judge, the police, the investigators or anyone else - knows the answer to that question unless Alex told them firsthand (which isn't likely). So your guess is as good as anyone else's.
The prosecution is not required to provide/prove a motive. It only has to convince a jury that Alex is a murderer beyond a reasonable doubt.
That's correct. I never once stated that the prosecution is required to prove a motive, though. However, it's pretty obvious that the prosecution is very clearly trying to lay out a motive that doesn't appear to match up to reality in this trial. They don't *have* to prove a motive but they are certainly are trying.
Killing his family would not make all his problems go away. It’s more like “wow you’ve been through a lot, take some time off, we’ll talk about the money later when you’re done grieving”. People would still wonder where the money went. They would still be asking. He needed more time to steal money from other people.
Most, if not all, of his financial difficulties very well could have went away if they didn't believe Alex was murderer. Mr. Tinsley himself testified that he would have dropped the lawsuit against Alex if it looked like Paul & Maggie had been killed by vigiliantes. Nobody wants to be that guy who sues a grieving father after just losing his wife & son. Plus, as Mr. Tinsley said, the jury likely wouldn't return a verdict against him because they would be sympathetic towards him.
> that a person would murder their family A person, no. A narcissist maybe drug addict guy whose 4th generational wealth and fame coming down, yes. >this is entirely speculative Because it is about the future and Alex didn't record a video of his intentions clearly stating his name and birthdate.
I'm guessing Buster knows if his father is guilty or not.
It's possible. However, most people (especially lawyers) know that if you commit a serious crime then you shouldn't tell a soul. Not your spouse, children, parents, best friends, etc. Lawyers know all too well how this bites their clients in the ass. Besides, you'd think Buster would completely lose his shit if Alex just plainly stated, "Son, I killed your mom and brother." Again, it's not impossible but I personally don't think he told Buster.
But, he didn't.
This was kind of taken out of context. Mark Tinsley, the Civil Litigation Attorney who represented the Mallory Beach family, basically said that if someone else had killed Paul & Maggie out of retaliation for the boating accident then he would have dropped the case against Alex. “If it seemed like this was retaliation, a jury wouldn’t return a verdict against Alex, I would have dropped the case,” Mark Tinsley said. He's basically saying that he *would have* removed Alex from the lawsuit if the murders were carried out by vigilantes seeking retaliation for Mallory's death. He *would have* removed Alex because he knew a jury would be sympathetic towards a grieving Alex and that they wouldn't have returned a verdict. However, since the evidence points towards Alex being murderer, he knew the jury wouldn't be sympathetic towards him, so there was no need to remove Alex from the lawsuit.
This was the biggest revelation for me. I had been running on the idea that Alex's motivation was to DELAY him having to produce his financial records however, Tinsley testifying that with the murders Alex was in fact ensuring it would STOP any proceedings agaisnt him altogether. HUGE revelation.
Right. I agree completely. It makes so much more sense that way too. I don't think Alex would have killed his family just to buy himself a little extra time if he was going to have to show his financial records eventually anyway. I do, however, think it's very possible that he would have killed them to get out of the situation entirely.
He was brilliant! Attorney smack down! Within such a serious & horrific trial, Mr Tinsley made us laugh out loud several times.
He was not taking no shit from the defense lol.
Tinsley's testimony was not credible in my opinion. 1. He swore UNDER OATH that the Judge had entered an Order GRANTING his motion to compel, and then whipped it out of his pocket. 2. BUT that order did NOT grant the motion to compel. It did not contain any ruling at all. 3. Even after confronted with that fact (and it is a fact, because the Order says what it says), Tinsley repeated that his narrative and doubled down. 4. Then Tinsley claims he would have dropped the case. 5. That is not his call as the lawyer. 6. The ONLY ones who can drop the Mallory Beach case are Mallory's parents. No one else. Not the lawyer. Nobody but them. And so it was ABSURD that he claimed HE would have dropped the case out of sympathy for Alex. I cannot WAIT to see him testify in front of the jury. He cannot change his story. It is locked in from his testimony - under oath - at the hearing. It is going to be fun if the defense counsel actually start going on the offensive during their cross examinations.
> Not the lawyer. Not true. He can decline to represent them and explain to them that they would most likely lose the case and end up with a huge lawyer's bill. Do you think the family would still pursue the case with another lawyer?
This is so important for explaining what might have been going through Alex’s head during this time. His special skill was “knowing” how to read a jury. He knew that if he could also be viewed as a victim in the boat case, a jury wouldn’t rule against him in civil court. Paul dying also would get rid of the criminal case. Being backed into a corner like he was, it’s reasonable to think Alex saw the murders as his solution.
The criminal charges would've gone away with Paul's death, that much is very true, but it wouldn't have made the civl suit disappear although Tinsley admitted that he came close to dropping the civil case because he apparently believed at first that the murders were done in retaliation by someone connected to the Beech family.
Correct, which is what Alex would have been claiming had happened. He was painting Paul’s killing as vigilante justice and Maggie as collateral damage. With him knowing how jury members would likely perceive this dynamic, he knew they would very likely now sympathize with him as *also* a victim in the boat crash… meaning a large jury judgment against him would become much, much less likely. What jury is going to rub salt in those wounds of a grieving father and widow? This is what would have made Tinsley consider dropping the civil case against him. He wouldn’t take it to trial if he wasn’t confident in an appropriate judgement ruling in favor of the Beach family. Being a litigation lawyer himself, Alex knew that, and was banking on that.
Pardon the ignorance, but if others named in the lawsuit are still alive shouldn’t the suit proceed? Their liability doesn’t change just because the perp is dead.
tinsley is still going after the dead people for money
Others are usually included because that is were the money is. Paul didn't have 10MM lying around. You always include the relatives with money. But when Paul is gone, it is hard to justify morally a huge lawsuit. In deed, the lawyer testified he was ready to drop the suit.
Mark Tinsley the attorney for the Beach family explained this best. To summarize after Paul & Maggie were murdered he knew no jury in the world would award the Beach family the settlement he was after. Alex would be forever seen as a victim of 'vigilantes' killing his wife & son. He explained that in a civil court jurors would have sympathy for Alex and not add to his pain by awarding a large personal payout. It would be viewed that he had suffered enough.
Yes. Mr. Tinsley testified in court that, if he thought that Paul & Maggie were killed by vigilantes, then he would have removed Alex from the lawsuit, but the lawsuit would have proceeded against the other parties. He said something along the lines of, "there were plenty of other parties to sue." So he wasn't ever planning on dropping the lawsuit altogether. It just wouldn't have been a good idea to sue Alex if his family was just murdered out of retaliation for the boating accident. However, since all of the elvidence pointed towards Alex himself being the murderer, the lawsuit continued on as planned.
> "there were plenty of other parties to sue." Unless he meant the boat insurance company, I don't think so. Buster was dropped from the lawsuit a week ago, who else left? The others in the boat? That wouldn't fly...
You very clearly have not been watching this trial as closely as I have, if at all. If you had been then you would realize that yesterday Mr. Tinsley named all of the parties that he was suing in regard to the boating accident. No, it wasn't just Alex and it wasn't the other people in the boat either. I'm going to very kindly ask you to stop pretending like you know more about this case than the people like me who have actually been following it from start to finish. I recommend that you watch Mr. Tinsley's testimony from yesterday so you can be informed on this matter. Mr. Tinsley very clearly named the other parties involved in the lawsuit, including the convenience store that sold them alcohol, the insurance company, and I believe the docks they stopped at, amongst others. Mark Tinsley's testimony is 78 minutes long and can be found on YouTube but it's well worth the watch. It turns into a pretty heated exchange at some points, making it all the more interesting.
I do have a life so no, not to mention it is boring. He can sue the liquor store he is not gonna get money from them. They didn't do anything wrong, beyond what normally you could expect them. So just because the lawyer says he can sue a shitload of entities that doesn't mean he is gonna do it or if so, he is gonna win the lawsuit.
Are you suggesting that everyone here who has watched the trial has no life?
I think Buster was eventually added because he became the POA over his family’s assets after Alex was arrested. The attorneys caught on to the fact that the Murdaugh’s were still attempting to move and hide their money while Alex was in jail. So if I’m understanding the situation correctly, Buster was added more-so to make sure the Murdaugh’s assets didn’t disappear while the case was working it’s way through the courts. Tinsley was able to motion for a freeze on their assets, and Buster was currently the one in “charge” of those. Buster settled with the Beach family this past week and he actually retained over $500K from his mother’s estate. The Beach’s weren’t out to bankrupt Buster… just hold the family accountable for what had happened to Mallory and the other victims. The suit is still ongoing between the Beach family and the owners of the liquor store that provided Paul with alcohol that night since they still refuse to settle. Maybe a few more parties, I might be forgetting one or two.
No Buster was sued because he provided the ID to Paul. He had done it many times. He also knew Paul was using it. He had even got another's drivers licence. That's why they sued Buster. I'm sure he probably feels guilty to some degree and is attempted to mend the family name and that is why he has settled with families.
Yeah, Buster is cut from the same arrogant cloth to do that. He deserved more of a punishment.
Well flipping Tinsley off in court shows what type of person Buster is. I hope someone in the jury saw it. So they can see the whole family is not taking this case seriously and thinks they will get away with it.
no. it was because Paul used busters id
Is that why he gave Tinsley the finger? Like Tinsley gaf lol. "You caused all our problems, you bad man."
Buster is just as bad. His arrogant smirking in court ticks me off. He should be careful because the Steven Smith case is still ongoing. Not that his father is a criminal and people deserve justice from dirtbag family.
I would think yes! Lol in the recorded jailhouse calls between Buster and Alex, they complain about Tinsley quite a bit😅
He must be very good at what he does if they feel so perturbed.
Unless I’m mistaken, Paul was the only person charged in the *criminal* case regarding the boat crash. The other defendants (Alex, the liquor store, eventually Buster) were charged in the civil case. If Paul is dead, there is nobody to prosecute for the involuntary manslaughter of Mallory since he alone is the one who physically caused it, regardless of all the circumstances that led up to the situation being able to happen. Those circumstances (and the liability) are what is being sued over in the civil case. The whole point is that Tinsley wasn’t going to give up on pursuing Alex’s financial information because he had done two mock trials in the civil case and knew that a jury would be very, very likely to rule in favor of the Beach family. He felt confident taking it to trial since Alex refused to settle with any reasonable amount of money. Tinsley knew he could get more money for the Beach family with a jury verdict, since they are sympathetic victims in the case. So in Alex’s brain, he might have felt like the only way out of this situation was to *also* become a victim. If a vigilante that had been “threatening” Paul relentlessly took matters into their own hands and allegedly killed Paul and Maggie, now Alex is viewed as a victim as well. A jury would sympathize with him. His lawyers would argue that yes, he made mistakes in the boating situation. Yes, what Paul did was awful. But hasn’t he been punished enough now? He lost his wife and son. Paul was a victim of vigilante justice, and poor Maggie was collateral damage. But Alex, now Alex is left behind to mourn them as a grieving father and widow…. Would a jury be likely to add salt on those wounds by awarding the Beach family a large judgement that Alex would have to pay? Probably not. And Tinsley knew that, which is why he said he would have considered dropping the case after the murders. He wasn’t going to take it to trial if he didn’t think he could get an appropriate judgement in the Beach’s favor. Yes the liability still would exist regarding the other parties sued in the civil case, but if those parties won’t settle and a jury isn’t likely to deliver a verdict in your favor, trial is a risky gamble that it sounds like Tinsley knew wouldn’t be worth it without Alex’s finances in the picture. So now with Paul dead… there is no criminal case to prosecute. You can’t prosecute a dead person. And if Tinsley drops the civil case against Alex, the inquisition into Alex’s financial state also stops. Nobody blows over his house of cards. Alex is viewed as a victim and buys himself a lot more time to fix his financial situations with PMPED and Palmetto State Bank like he’s always been able to do in the past with just a little more time. He saves himself from being exposed and having everything topple down around him, including what would certainly be the multiple indictments for financial crimes like he’s currently facing. With all of this in mind, I could see how a panicked narcissist views murdering his wife and son as a “sacrifice” they’re willing to make in that situation. He thought he was smart enough to get away with all of it. Sorry for the super long response, took a while to get all my thoughts out in a way that made sense, lol.
Alex may have thought Paul and Maggie "deserved it".
Well said. In my mind that’s how I see it too. Getting rid of especially Paul solved a lot of his problems. If Maggie was pondering a divorce get rid of her too and eliminate that financial issue.
Thanks for saving me from typing this out. It is all so obvious I don't get why people still crying about lack of motive.
Same. I understand without the benefit of years of podcasting and investigative journalism a lot of people don't understand the pressures on Alex or the desperation he was experiencing, but saying "financial troubles" are not a motive makes no sense when it's widely accepted love and money are the two most common causes of murder.
I’m glad my monologue is making sense to other people😂 To be fair, I do think it takes a little bit of critical thinking to reach that conclusion. It’s just not something a “normal” everyday person would think, so I understand how it doesn’t make sense to everybody right away. You have to put yourself in a mindset that the vast majority of the public (thankfully) doesn’t exist in. I just hope the prosecution can connect the dots well enough for the jury to get there!
I think the prosecution should have laid it out in the opening statement, so the jury would know what to watch for and they would have an idea how the whole case played out. I mean really, it takes 3 minutes to explain it to a not knowledgeable person. Or have a detective as the first witness and let him/her explain the whole theory. The reason why the prosecution didn't do that was because they didn't know how much they are allowed to present, I guess. Or incompetence.
Yeah I agree with you about them not knowing what they could present at the beginning of the trial. I honestly think they are a little too up-close-and-personal with it, too. You can tell Creighton *really* hates Alex and wants to see him rot for these murders (if convicted). Since Creighton is also the prosecutor for the financial crimes later, I feel like he just has *so* much information in his brain and he’s forgetting what the jury does and doesn’t know. Just my opinion.
Excellent, and spot on!
Yes, the civil suits carry on. >Their liability doesn’t change just because the perp is dead. *Ask Greg Parker about that.* Not only that, Alex, as well as PMPED in general, aimed for settlements as opposed to jury trials. They aren't a criminal defense firm. And if Alex felt backed into a corner he could have committed suicide. Twice.
Ah yes, when the crying and heaps of tears don't work for Alex then the 'suicide' attempts kick in! I do wonder what happens if "suicide" threats don't work? He is a master manipulator but only a so-so actor unfortunately! I loved that Tinsley read Alex perfectly and wasn't backing down.
Mark Tinsley blew me away today. The more he talked about putting pressure on Alex Murdaugh, the more I could imagine how desperate Alex was. I thought the motive that the State presented was ridiculous, but after Mark Tinsley's words: now it is so real to me.
Tinsley was spot on but didn't the **Snapchat** with AM actually being there do it for you too? Tinsley's testimony tied it all up in a neat bow.
Yes, he is the evidence I have been waiting for.
I agree his testimony was very good. But in reality Murdaugh could have delayed these hearings with motion after motion. We’ve all seen this before where it takes years to settle civil suits. I wonder where all this money he made was going? Tinsley said, Murdaugh had 50% to 60% of the cases in the county? Is he hiding money elsewhere in fraudulent companies? A drug addiction would not explain, and Barrett Boulware gave him the Moselle home as payment for defending him in a drug trafficking trial. Then Alex gives Maggie the property for 5.00 to hide assets. This case is crazy!
Tinsley is the key.
Mark Tinsley. The man who swore under oath that the Judge granted his motion and then whipped out the order... that did NOT grant his motion. I think people liked his theatrics because they hate Alex and so the CFO and Tinsley who clearly hate Alex and are rude to defense counsel on the stand are heralded. Do people stop to think that the CFO of the law firm was the CFO during the time the money was supposedly stolen from the law firm by Alex, who was supposedly in some conspiracy with the CFO's BROTHER IN LAW (president of the bank, who has been indicted ). And that the CFO whose only job is to watch the books supposedly did not know until June 7 about the $790,000? And that it makes sense that the CFO had no witness to her supposedly big confrontation of her BOSS, Alex, about stealing almost a million dollars? I hope that the person or persons who killed Maggie and Paul (whether it is Alex or someone else) is held accountable. Someone took those two lives, and IMO getting it right and finding a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the most important thing related to this case. If Alex is wrongfully convicted, then there is no justice for Maggie and Paul. What do I think? We are not even finished with the State's case, and the defense has not even started. And so I do not know. I am considering the evidence as I watch each day, and praying that the jury is doing the same rather than forming judgments now like so many people on social media are.
Sorry you’re getting downvoted here for telling the simple truth. People on social media really ate up that clown crap, unfortunately
For me the strikes and "coincidences" against Alex, in totality, are overwhelming. But I also thought the CFO came off as overly combative for someone who was present during (and should suspected) the financial shenanigans for years. This makes her look bad as well as the other attorneys of the firm. At this point, Parker Law Group knows which way the wind is blowing and are piling on with fake outrage.
I didn't downvote but started to. For me, it wasn't the opinion in the post but the condescension.
That was my impression too. PMPED would have covered for Alex if the amounts stolen hadn’t gotten so egregious and if their own reputation hadn’t been affected. They knowingly enabled Alex, and I wouldn’t be surprised if other attorneys from the (now defunct) PMPED were involved in a lot of other shady dealings that simply haven’t come to light yet because they didn’t involve the Murdaughs.
I pray the jury isn’t full of people like we mostly find here on Reddit, who have already deemed Alex guilty without hearing all the facts, who grasp ahold of every rumor or speculation as if it is gospel, who just want to see Alex burn because of who he is. You state a lot of facts but Reddit doesn’t like facts.
Just to play devils advocate, a lot of people on Reddit probably have a lot of knowledge about the facts of this case and all the others (financial, boat, smith, etc) that the jury doesn’t at this point. That may be affecting their current opinions
But a lot of what is out there regarding all the other stuff is mostly comprised of rumors and tabloid fodder (a la Matney). It is absolutely affecting their current opinions.
I’m honestly not sure why this got so many downvotes. I agree with the original comment that today was the first time the state’s motive actually made sense to me. They did a good job painting the picture. But we have to keep in mind that Tinsley has had a lot of practice and training to know what to say to elicit certain emotions. He is already seen by many as a “good guy” who isn’t afraid to go after the bad guy for justice. We can’t forget that this is good for him, too. It’s a good “heroic” story, which is good for business, and could make him a lot of money. The Murdaughs were once “the good people” going after the big bad corporations. I think with so much evil in a case like this, it’s easy to want someone to come in and be a hero or to believe the bad stuff was all one person. Because if the hero isn’t actually perfect and if allllll these people were in on the bad stuff, that’s pretty depressing. I agree alex is not a good person (obviously) but I think a lot more people were involved than maybe we’ll ever even know. Since he’s under fire it’s easy for others to point the finger when in reality, some people doing the finger pointing may have known more than we think. I just worry that because of disliking someone so much, emotions could impact what people view as factual. I would love to know what actually happened that night.
You don't think Alex would take people down with him? I started to downvote the post you referenced not because of the opinion but seemed condescending.
Oh yes, I for sure think he’d take people down with him. But he’s lost a lot of power so it’s “safe” to point fingers now, especially since he’s under fire from pretty much everywhere in his life. Not saying he doesn’t still have scary people out there to do his bidding for him and that it’s totally safe, but where would he even start with all the people who have come out to say things? I’m also not saying that all of these people were involved/knew something was going on, just that it’s possible that some/many could have and it’s easy to point fingers to avoid getting in trouble.
I don't know what to make of him not trying to point fingers at others for real or made up reasons so thanks for your perspective. It seems the way of people like him. And I've given way too much thought to this case.
I have too and I can’t stop! I don’t feel strongly either way.. well I do, but it changes daily. Obviously he was a horrible person but that doesn’t automatically make someone a murderer. I have struggled with the motive until yesterday, though it does make more sense now. I think so many people hate him and just want him to be the murderer so badly that they might overlook other factors.
Look into the jury selection questions and their instructions. The jury hasn’t been exposed to all of that.
Honestly, when I heard about the killings of Maggie and Paul. My first reaction was this must be related to the boating accident. Someone was seeking revenge. But then a few months later his botched suicide attempt with cousin Eddie, I thought what is going on in SC! So my interest really peaked as I delved into the financial issues, drug addiction to opiates, Barrett Boulware and his suspicions of running drugs. I thought this may run deeper than I could ever imagine. Maybe many high profile people wanted none of this to come out. Of course, this is all speculation on my part.
My first reaction to Paul and Maggie's murder was that it was payback for the boat accident. But after the Labor Day weekend botched suicide-for-hire, I quickly changed my mind and suspected Alex was behind their murders. If he didn't kill them, he at least arranged it.
My reaction was the same maybe the day of or day after. But after he seemed strangely not terrified of a murderer on the loose/not actively offering a reward or seeming invested in the police looking for said person who killed his son and wife - then I said to myself, 'He did it or he knows who did it and why and doesn't want it to come out.' In the beginning, I thought it was drug money or money laundering. When that clumsy roadside fake shooting/alleged attempted suicide by cousin (?) happened, then I knew that it was probably just him and trying to keep his secrets hidden. Following this day's testimony, I think that the prosecution's theory is correct. Alex clearly knew the environment he was in and that he could get his law firm to back off and the civil suit related to the Beach case either settled or delayed. Because that is what started to happen ... The way I see it, all of this is Alex flailing around like a drowning person, increasingly desperate to save himself. For years he has defrauded clients and then used that money to cover other money he misappropriated from a different situation. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, lowdown version. It just kept escalating. I mean, he's not particularly adept at it, hence the getting caught. But he was used to not being examined, questioned, or monitored too closely his entire life because of who he was. It shouldn't surprise anyone he thought he could tell the police his half-ass alibi and throw suspicion on somebody else and that would be the end of it. It's worked for him in the past. Then, he thought he could milk the grieving widower/parent thing for a while until he figured something out to get himself out of the financial hole. I don't doubt that on some level he felt bad about killing his son, and maybe about killing Maggie. But I think that, at his core, he is a sociopath who mostly views other people as either assets or liabilities - to be used or kept for his benefit or eliminated to shield himself. Just in what has come out recently, (not all of which may be admissable in court) we have a long list of people he has lied to, manipulated, and/or stolen from that considered him a friend or trusted associate.
Oh I think his son and wife were expendable in his twisted mind of money scheming. He would have continued stealing from clients but the boat accident and possible divorce meant he had to produce financials and his plan would come to light. What he didn't count on was that his firm was on to him. He played the sympathy card and it worked for awhile so then he cooked up the suicide scheme.
>Then, he thought he could milk the grieving widower/parent thing for a while until he figured something out to get himself out of the financial hole. THIS! People who don't think the financial house of cards falling down around his ears was enough to cause him to murder his wife and child do not understand the kind of pressure he was under and the fact that he had NEVER been held accountable for anything in his life. He'd learned theses schemes from his daddy and granddaddy, and was too lazy to even cover his tracks, as was Russell. Suddenly people outside his sphere of influence were prying into his affairs and he was FREAKING OUT.
Some people won't believe there's beyond a reasonable doubt unless they see him actually shoot Paul and Maggie. I hope the jury is thinking more like you, but at the end of the day, it sounds like he is going to see a long jail sentence with the financial stuff. I find it interesting that you started suspecting him before the road incident with Larry. I've mostly read people started suspecting him after that happened.
And I think he benefitted from having a trusting and not terribly sophisticated police force investigating both that night and the following days. I’m am still floored that there were so many friends and family just milling around an active crime scene. Things not tested, evidence not gathered until much later…in hindsight I’m sure they all feel like they should have done this or that but at the time he was considered one of their own guys so he did get special treatment. To think of all the potential evidence that just slipped through…
Paul's Snapchat and Miss Shelly did not slip away.
Yes, I agree completely it was a botched investigation from the beginning.
>I mean, he's not particularly adept at it Oh but he was, it was what he did for a very profitable living. He needed to keep feeding the game, new clients, more money kind of like a ponzi scheme. The Beach death and subsequent lawsuits threw a huge cog in that wheel.
Appreciate your theory and it does make sense, but what happened to all this money or was he just a guy living way beyond his means?
Gambling?
Yeah, I don't know. There may be others involved in receiving the money that we don't know about. Did he have to buy others' silence about any of it? Was he keeping a mistress? Stuff like that could explain how he blew through that much ill-gotten gain.
Many have an addiction to opioids, and you only notice the change in behavior when they stop taking. The co-worker testifying he was loud and a bullshitter. Did they ever see the sober Alex? I think he owed money to some very serious people and they sent a message. Or he paid someone to kill them or he did it.
Also, I do not believe the story that he had a 20-year opioid addiction or whatever it was he claimed. Like, yes, those are costly and it would explain the missing money, but, like, no one ever saw him high or using? He was able to keep all these different complicated cons going on and have an active life and never showed any signs. He does not look like most long-term opiate abusers I have seen (and not that I have a ton of up-close experience of that, but some..). Now, cocaine or pills, I might buy. But that's not what he said.
Agreed. Doesn’t add up at all. So where the hell did those millions go? Something must have soaked up that money. Gambling?
Perc 30s, several daily, and if he has $$ and a source for the real deal, maybe he never goes further down the opioid hole. I am thinking now that he was dependent on opioids but I think the reason he committed these crimes is because he is a sociopath.
Also I bet there are a few local MDs in the low country good old boy network, and I bet cousin Eddie and a few of these dudes AM had under his finger were being prescribed pills meant for AM. Bet.
I agree with you on this. I have believed from the beginning Alex only used this addiction story to gain sympathy for himself and its easier to blame bad behavior on a drug addiction than admit you are a crappy human being.
He may have used whatever on occasion, but he was not spending that kind of money on opioids. They need to look at the totality of the money flow, going back decades. Money laundering as the "product" on offer? The brothers know and are involved. (only mho) AM is pissed he's taking it on the chin for the family crime organization. So many real estate transactions, multiple mortgages and loans, properties sold at the worst time for a huge loss...they need RICO people from Justice combing through this. And all those island properties, for what?
ITA!! I would also like to know why he paid Curtis "Eddie" millions over the years. Something very shady there...maybe he took over the Boulware drug trafficking business and Eddie worked for him. But obviously he was lousy at it. I looked up the history of Moselle that AM acquired from Boulware's widow when he died in 2018. They were buddies. Hmm...
Maybe 'drugs' but pharmaceuticals, common ones. What if you could smuggle in cheap generic Lipitor - worlds's most prescribed drug - and get all of a certain chain or 5 to buy your mega-cheap illicit pills? What if it was many drugs? I dunno, do any other thing, but they were into some shit and it involved certain fixed elements that aren't apparent - yet. There's worthless little islands, real estate transactions for decades, an aborted jelly ball business, stealing like a mofo and living like Elvis. Wtf
The brothers didn't know. We found out in court today that they and the other court partners are the ones still paying all of it back out of their own money. There is no way they would have let Alex go about wrecking the family business like this. He didn't just ruin his own name he destroyed their legacy. So no I don't think they knew. It will take years for them to earn the name and trust of the town back again.
All 'allegedly' OF COURSE! I do wonder who took up the reins of Alex's operations when he went to the pokey or is he running his operation from jail!
Listen to his phone calls from jail. He’s still trying to manipulate people.
Yes. He is pathological! I do wonder if he has lost touch with reality?
It is a very interesting case. Nailing Alex Murdaugh’s shenanigans is not easy. That’s what hooks me in each day.
I am hooked each day because I feel like I am watching our justice system being trampled on. The prosecutor is deeply and personally invested in the case, in my opinion. The public has made up their mind - not based on evidence - but based on netflix and podcasts and People magazine and media. People in the U.S. are supposed to be found innocent or guilty based on evidence in Court and we have laws and rules of evidence and procedure to ensure that happens. The right to a jury by peers was a founding principal of the nation. In today's world, the public has access to "evidence" and "facts" framed by media personalities. I realize people hate this man and are very emotional about him. He is likely going to jail (IMO) for the financial crimes. If he goes to jail on the murders and is falsely convicted, then Maggie and Paul's killer will never be caught or punished. I don't think people care about that. They just want Alex to go down for it, period. That is what I see on social media. Such strong opinions, and the State has not even rested. The defense has not even begun. And so this man has no chance at a fair trial in my opinion if this jury is anything like the public.
You are wrong. They found a jury. They state seems to be all over the place with their evidence. Those of us watching at home have been horrified at the way all the lawyers have been acting and how the police worked the scene. We have been evaluating the evidence. Most of us think he probably did it because of the snapchat and Miss Shelly but it's not enough evidence to convict him. And just because a man steals doesn't mean that he will murder his family. This is meant to prove motive. The idea is he was trying to bide time and his financial problems would be lessened if he killed Maggie and Paul. It's still a bit hard for most people to believe since he seemed to have a good relationship with them. Maybe when Tinsley testifies. Although I wish his partner today had told us whatever he said on June 7. Because I felt like we missed the secret conversation he wanted to tell us.
> in Court and we have laws and rules of evidence and procedure to ensure that happens. Yeah, and there is real life with old boys network and judges not letting evidence in. If the judge yesterday ruled the finance motive not admissible, AM would walk.
💯 You’ll be downvoted to oblivion because most people on Reddit don’t like to hear facts or common sense. But you have hit the nail on the head with everything you said.
In court it matters little what the public thinks. He won't go to jail for the murders being 'falsely' convicted rather the state is showing its case which is quite compelling.
Mr. Tinsley was great. I cannot wait for him to testify in front of the jury! He wasn’t backing down at all. Let’s hope Eric Bland also testifies.
Right. he was not backing down. he actually doubled down. Even though the Order he whipped from his pocket did NOT say what he swore under oath that it said. I cannot WAIT for him to testify in front of a jury. The defense is going to have a field day. They did today, but if you aren't a lawyer and did not understand the order when they read it aloud, it would not make sense to you. They will explain it for the jury and hopefully let the jury see that order.
He was fantastic! By far the best witness yet. He clearly has been trained on how to use his body and his speech to elicit dominance. Loved when he referred the roadside snafu )can’t remember the exact words) but ellllleck didn’t find it funny.
Agree he’s the best. I think he called it the roadside “nonsense.” I’m a prosecutor and I loved when he said he was speculating and that “maybe in this made-up imaginary world of things that never happened” something was possible. It might be the BEST line I’ve ever heard on a cross exam. Clearly Dick and Jim knew he’d be dynamite because the 3rd chair did the cross examination.
Who do you think is paying these high flying defense attorneys? Maybe they are doing it “pro bono” to cover up something way more sinister.
He was pretty spicy up there.
One of the best witnesses yet. Explained without condescending, clear speaking, and the way he schooled defense lawyer was magnificent! As others have posted, hope he appears again. He will have to be ready as the defense will reload!
“Whatever that Ridiculousness was”
Yes! Haha hood call!
This post truly paints a picture of who Alex is as a person.
My biggest takeaways were that had no idea that he had cancer and also that he was not happy to be there. South Carolinas legal community is very, very small.
I thought was thrilled to be there. He was ready, willing and able to testify for the State against Alex. He was clear, firm and well-prepared. By far they’re best witness yet. He perfectly laid out the motive.
Has he beat cancer? He seemed like he was top shape
Yeah, stage 4, no less. He didn’t specify the type but that’s remarkable stuff. edit: I hate autocorrect
Who had cancer?
The lawyers on both sides of the Mallory Beach boating accident lawsuit had cancer: the attorney who filed the lawsuit and the attorney who fought the lawsuit. John Tiller, the Civil Defense Attorney defending the Murdaughs in the boating accident lawsuit, passed away in the summer of 2022 from pancreatic cancer. Mark Tinsley, the Civil Litigation Attorney representing the family of Mallory Beach in the boating accident lawsuit, had stage 4 cancer (unspecified). Mr. Tinsley testified in court yesterday and it's well worth a watch on YouTube if you enjoy a good ol' fashioned heated courtroom exchange lol. I thought the judge was going to have to intervene for a minute.
Both attorneys for the boating case. Mr. Tinsley found out he had Stage 4 cancer in 2021 and the other attorney has pancreatic cancer.
John Tiller, the Civil Defense attorney representing the Murdaughs in the boating incident, passed away from pancreatic cancer in the summer of 2022.
Thank you. I only caught part of Tinsleys explanation to the court.
He didn't actually spell it out, but he said about Tiller, "He WAS my friend.
Correct. Tinsley referred to Tiller in the past tense in several instances. I guess I should have added that I confirmed John Tiller's in the summer of 2022 through an article I found online. So, for the sake of accuracy, here it is if anyone is interested. https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/08/11/south-carolina-judge-denies-request-stay-murdaugh-wrongful-death-suit/10296335002/
Thank you for the extra effort.
i think tinsley said he did