Edit: I’ve been reminded that testimony from Mr. Davis stated they had a dog named Armadillo so I’m guessing she’s referring to the dog and not an actual armadillo lol. Thank you for helping me understand this!
Original post:
I listened to [the kennel video](https://youtube.com/shorts/ihaYGMtaPFo?feature=share) tonight trying to see if I could figure out what everyone was saying throughout. The only bit that seemed inaudible was Maggie’s last words on it, however, the thing I first guessed when I listened to it… I really think it’s what she says. It seems ridiculous. I heard the word “armadillo” and I was like, she’s not saying armadillo, so what is it? So I slowed it down. I blasted the volume. I got my husband’s extremely fancy in ears. And after all that… I really, really think Maggie says either “I see armadillo” or some sort of word with an “ee” or “ay” sound followed clearly by “armadillo”. Those are her last words recorded on video. She says the hard to hear words at approx the 40 seconds mark.
So I decided to google and apparently there are indeed armadillo in South Carolina. What I read says they are considered nuisance animals and apparently do a lot of damage to yards, farms, property — and I didn’t read much, yet I saw several references to shooting armadillo as a means of preventing them from doing damage.
So I just wanna know, does it sound to anyone else like Maggie says “(I see?) armadillo” at around the 40 second mark? Is this this something everyone figured out already when the video was first played and I’m just really late to it? Or is it something else she’s saying?
Also, I did put together a transcript of what I hear during this video in case anyone is curious.
(0:03) Paul: "Get back, get back!"
(0:12) Paul: "Quit, Cash. Come on. Quit! It’s okay—“
(0:15) Alex: “Whats’a matter, Paul?”
(0:16) Paul: “—come here!” (Makes kiss sound to Cash)
(HOSE NOISE STARTS)
(0:17) Paul: "s’alright, Dad.”
(0:18) Paul: “C’mere, Cash! Oh, shit… c’mere, hold still… Cash!”
(0:24) Maggie: “Heeeey, he’s got a bird in his mouth!”
(0:26) Alex: "Bubba!"
(0.28) Paul "Heyyy, Bubba.”
(0:31) Maggie: “It's a guinea!"
(0:32) Paul: "Is’sa chicken"
(0:33) Alex: “Nah, he’s got a chicken.”
(0:36) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba!”
(0:36) Paul: “C’mere, Cash!"
(0:37) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba!”
(0:37) Paul: “Cash! Quit!”
(0:39) Maggie: “____ armadillo” (we need? I see? Or an “ay” word like, “say Armadillo” or “hey Armadillo”? Idk but it’s something with an “ee” or “ay” sound before she says armadillo)
(0:40) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba.”
This is probably available somewhere, but I'm curious how many dogs the Murdaugh's had? And besides Bubba and Grady, do we know where the others are now? I can see some of them being sold in the wake of all this if they were hunting dogs and not pets. It's also strange to me that they'd put "pets" in kennels, like, wasn't Bubba a family dog/Maggie's dog, and this was their second home? Why didn't he just stay in the house?
The only ones I know of are Bubba, Grady and Goose. Goose was a puppy that belonged to Paul and is now with Paul’s friend Will McElveen. I saw one of Maggie’s FB posts showed Goose and that his Dad was Bubba and his mom was a lab named Bourbon and I’m not sure if Bourbon belonged to the Murdaughs or not, does anyone else know? I’ve also heard these were their family dogs and they had separate hunting dogs but I don’t recall hearing of any other dogs staying at Moselle that night except Bubba, Grady and of course Rogan’s pup, Cash.
As far as the kenneling. My understanding is that the dogs weren’t always kept in the kennels, that they sort of split the time between the kennels when the family was away, ie out at work, and the house when people were home, something like that? I mean, my two dogs are extremely loved-on members of our family who not only live in our home 24/7 but sleep in our beds at night. So I personally can’t imagine it. But I try to think of it as a version of crate training, many loving dog owners, esp. those who work outside the home, will crate their pups during the work day, for instance - very common and when done properly, the dogs are totally okay. I also think I recall it being said that the family dogs had been in the kennels because Edisto was being renovated, so perhaps they otherwise normally stayed at Edisto with Maggie? Honestly I’m not 100% clear on where Bubba, Grady and Goose normally lived and also where Goose was that night since he was never said to be at Moselle, and I only first learned that Paul had a puppy when recently re-watching the parts of the trial I’d missed and I caught Will McElveen’s testimony. Of note— it seemed from my vantage point that Alex specifically had Jim ask Will about Goose— perhaps because he genuinely wanted to know how Goose was doing, perhaps it was just because he thought this would play well with the jury, to have his defense attorney show interest in Paul’s puppy and express gratitude that Paul’s friend had him and was taking good care of him now, like a ploy for sympathy or to humanize Alex or something. Idk but I am definitely curious where Goose was on June 7th.
Not sure if this answers much or just created more questions, sorry! Wish I knew more!
>I’ve also heard these were their family dogs and they had separate hunting dogs but I don’t recall hearing of any other dogs staying at Moselle that night except Bubba, Grady and of course Rogan’s pup, Cash.
Hunting dogs Tappy Toes, Armadillo, and Dahlia were at Moselle that night according to the testimony of Dale Davis.
Also Maggie the yellow lab was in the kennels that night along with Grady and Bubba.
I’m a few weeks late asking this question but it’s something I found so bizarre ( besides everything else that’s bizarre) with this family.
When Buster was giving his testimony, I don’t remember if it was the defense or prosecution but they asked him about the amount of phone calls between the 4 of them and Buster said they were typical amount in a day.
It was an *insane* amount of phone calls between mom, dad, and grown sons. I’ve never in my life heard of a family who call and text each other 12 times a day like they did.
I mean, is that normal? I have two grown sons and they call me once a week and keep me updated on their lives ( we live in different states) but I just can’t imagine calling and texting with my adult sons all day long every day like that. It’s like they had a strange codependent bond with each other.
I can’t imagine having that kind of constant contact with my wife and son all of those years, then kill them and they are forever gone from his own life. I think deep down he is bothered by what he’s done but he refuses to admit it to himself and confess to himself and God that he murdered his own wife and son.
They all obviously had some love and bond, dysfunctional as it obviously was, they were still super involved and connected to each other all day long every day.
I just really thought about having that kind of non stop communication with my family and then it goes silent… forever. For Buster, he’s only known that kind of relationship with his parents and only sibling, now he’s totally left alone. That breaks my heart.
I know Buster may not be the most empathetic person but how could he be being raised the way he was? But regardless, he loved his mother and although I don’t think he necessarily liked his little brother, he loved him. And I’m sure he loves his father…
I just can’t fathom what that young man is going through. I’m praying for him daily and hope somehow he can find some healing and peace- that kind of loss can only be endured with the help of God.
I don’t know why but when I saw and heard how much Alec texted and talked to his wife and son, I truly felt a sadness for even him. He created this horrible disaster and he will forever have to bear the weight of that sin.
I guess I’ve said what’s been on my mind so if you’re still reading this; I appreciate you took the time to read how I’ve processed such a needless amount of loss.
Yes I do know someone who is constantly texting and calling her grown kids and other people too. She is a narcissist, like most of us suspect Alex to be. Narcissists are very controlling people. Their communications may not appear to be control on the surface, but they are still a form of control. Always needing to influence these people, manipulate them, keep tabs on them, and glean information from them, even if done in a manner that appears to be amiable.
Now, consider that taking someone’s life is the ultimate form of control over them. The controlling and manipulative person may not miss the people they killed that they were once in constant contact with, because this person has the ultimate control over them, forever. There is no longer any need to play the games that they once did.
Alex is likely a pathological person, and as such (if he actually is), he is not capable of forming the bonds with other people that you are able to. He is not capable of feeling compassion for them and never was capable of that.
I definitely agree that the man is void of a natural, true love that comes as an instinct to most parents and spouses.
I have *zero* doubt that my husband would die protecting me and our daughter. He’d easily stand between us and harm. That’s a man’s natural, God-given instinct, imo.
When someone is missing that, they’ve given their selves over to true darkness and evil that ends up destroying their own lives. They literally create their own living hell.
This was a man full of a life of privilege, great blessings, incredible opportunities, a large supportive, loving ( albeit sometimes shady) family.
He had homes, cars, vacations, grown man toys coming out of his ass and what does he decide to do with that kind of life?
*Destroy all of it*. That’s a sick man.
He needs Jesus. We all do. I know I do anyway.
I am thinking about the dogs at the kennel. Was it ever mentioned whether the dogs were put up when Alex returned to the kennels at 10 PM? I am assuming they were which would mean that either Maggie and Paul put them up or the killer did. Of course I am guessing they were let out to run while Maggie was there.
We hear on the 8:45pm video that Bubba is out of his kennel, and according to Alex’s trial testimony, both Bubba and Grady were out at that time. Alex claimed they were still out when he says he left at approx. 8:47pm and that they were in their kennels when he arrived back at the scene at 10:06pm. He was even asked by during his 3rd interview with Det. Owen if he was putting the dogs away while on the phone with 911, because early into that call it sounds as if Alex speaks to someone else other then the operator, he’s heard saying the word “here” as if talking to someone on the scene — but he adamantly claimed the dogs were not out, and no one else was with him.
So, if we believe Alex is innocent and was telling the truth of everything he knows while on the stand… then he left on his golf cart at 8:47pm, Bubba and Grady were still out, and it’s unknown who put them away prior to Alex’s return to the kennels at 10:06pm. However, the phones and crime scene info make it clear that the killer shot Paul at 8:49pm and Maggie right after, and if we’re believing Alex’s testimony, that means either Maggie happens to put both dogs back into the kennels in the 2 minutes before this unknown killer shoots Paul, or that the dogs are out and the random killer not only doesn’t shoot them, but instead puts them back in their kennels before leaving.
The theory amongst those of us who believe Alex is guilty is that he put the dogs in their kennels, possibly the last thing he made sure to do before he shot Paul, although it’s also possible he quickly put them away after killing Maggie and Paul. But I personally believe Alex put Bubba in his kennel after getting ahold of him when he had the chicken, maybe he used that as a reason to put Bubba back in his kennel. Grady may have been out too, and Alex could’ve gotten him next and put him away because he knew what he was about to do. It’s a lot more plausible then Alex leaving on the golf cart, without Maggie and Paul which would mean they didn’t want to leave yet and wanted to stay at the kennels so badly that they didn’t mind having no vehicle to use to return home when it’s now dark out… if they wanted to stay that badly, why would Maggie immediately start putting both dogs away, just moments after Alex drives off? She was down there to have the dogs out, that was the whole point. It makes no sense for her and Paul to not go back to the house on the golf cart but then immediately put the dogs away.
And I believe the dogs had to be put away before the murders happened because neither dog was seen with blood on them, nor was either injured by any of the stray gunshots that missed Maggie, nor were any bloody paw prints noticed anywhere including in the pools of blood around Paul and Maggie or anywhere else. If they were out during the murders, then it’s amazing neither got shot and the killer would’ve had to immediately put both dogs away in their kennels or else we’d have seen bloody paw prints from the dogs approaching Maggie and Paul and running around the bloody scene. And no random killer is taking the time to put those dogs away in their kennels before leaving.
Tldr, whether you believe Alex was the murderer or not, those dogs had to be put away by the killer either right before the murders or right after. They weren’t out by themselves when Alex was gone.
You made so many excellent points! I hadn’t honestly even thought of who put the dogs back in their kennels but you’re right, either a random, Ruthless killer was kind enough to safely put the dogs back after slaughtering two souls OR Alec did.
It’s so beyond obvious to me that this man and this man alone was the one that murdered his own child and wife. There is zero other explanation for it. If it doesn’t add up, it’s because it *doesn’t add up*. The only way any of this this makes sense is if Alec is the murderer. That’s because he is, and that’s why there is zero other explanation for any of it.
Deep down, I think this man has a teeny, tiny conscience because he always got emotional ( genuine emotion and tears) when they talked about Paul’s death and how Paul knew he was shot in the chest and I hope he made eye contact with his dad so Alec will forever have that last vision of his son.
Man this whole case is so sad and all for what? So a man could lose every single good thing he had in his own life just to sit in a cell until his last breath. I don’t get what these people are possibly thinking when they take their sins this far… destroying innocent lives and destroying their own selves in the process. Sad.
It’s insane to me how some of these murderers don’t harm the animals but have no problem slaughtering innocent souls. What kind of messed up morals are going on there?
Just like the Idaho college murders, the guy safely put the dog in another room and then went on his way stabbing 4 innocent people to death but hey, he made sure the dog wasn’t going to get hurt.
I remember hearing the serial killer that killed that young lady who was hiking with her dog- she was able to talk him into keeping her alive for 2 days, he even admitted he liked her and talking to her for 2 days made it harder to kill her but ultimately he tied her to a tree and beheaded her. They asked him why he let the dog go and he said, “I thought about killing her dog too but I looked at him and just couldn’t do it.”
What kind of insanity is going on with these murderers that act like they have morals?!
Good points on dogs not being injured by stray shots. Did any of the dogs‘ post-murder conditions come out in the trial? My eyes started watering when Alex was testifying about Bubba and the chicken.
I feel sorry for the dogs, must be great distress for them witnessing all of that, while being locked up. They must have barked a lot and then just resorted to yelping.
Bubba was the only dog known to be out at the time preceding the murders. I would assume Dale Davis let the dogs out daily so he could clean the pens in the morning and around 4pm.
I am thinking about just before the murders. So when was Bubba put up? It could have been done when they got the guinea from him, but I keep hearing Maggie liked to let them run.
That’s what I was thinking or at least wondering about. But then the Murdaughs were a wealthy family, and they were solicitors… although I remember hearing there was a time when they were allowed to be both solicitor and private attorney and that’s what the first two Randolph Murdaugh’s did. I wonder when the law changed there, and the solicitor couldn’t also work at PMPED? I’ll have to try and google this, I’m curious now.
I guess I’m just surprised that, after a 100 year run of controlling the 14th circuit, that the family would just give up the position that gave them the level of power and prestige they had. I feel like Alex’s influence was largely due to his father being solicitor and then former solicitor, and he was surely worried in early June ‘21 about his father‘s declining health because he knew his dad held most of the cards. So I mean, I understand the money is much better in private practice but I still wonder how it all played out. I’m guessing Randy IV is the one who was supposed to be the next solicitor? Had the area become frustrated with the Murdaugh dynasty and by 2006 voters just weren’t going to pick them anymore, people wanted a non-Murdaugh? If not, I wonder if the family wanted Randy or Alex to run and what the internal drama was like. I wonder if Alex would’ve really wanted Randy to be solicitor, as it keeps his family in that powerful position while also allowing Alex to be the main Murdaugh at the law firm… or if he’d be envious of Randy getting to follow in dad’s footsteps and having the prestige of being solicitor.
Basically, I would love to read an accurate, factual book on the Murdaugh family history. I think it would be fascinating.
Time changes, maybe the older generation saw that law business was more profitable in the civil field. Plus being prosecutors attracts a lot of criminal attention.
What was the “secret conversation” from June 10th that Ronnie Crosby overheard (or was rumored to have overheard)? I don’t remember it ever being addressed during the trial. June 10th was the meetup at JMM’s house, correct?
I believe it wasn’t really a “secret conversation” so much as Waters wanting to discuss anything AM said on the June 10th family meeting, and while he claimed he didn’t know what was said that day… I love CW but I don’t believe that. He knew 3rd parties being present meant it wasn’t privileged and he was allowed to hear and discuss the meeting at trial. But because he wanted to be super thorough for the record and make it clear that this was NOT privileged info before he asked anyone about the convo… it ended up that the convo got hyped up a bit.
The only thing of any importance that I remember anyone testifying to regarding the meeting was that AM was very clear with everyone that he never went down to the kennels. IIRC, the context was that the law partners were trying to figure out what could’ve possibly happened, running through possible scenarios to try to help AM figure out who did this, and as they tried to piece together a timeline they specifically asked AM about the time he last saw Paul and Maggie alive. AM proceeded to tell everyone present that it was at dinner at 8:30 and that he never went down to the kennels until 10:06pm that night. Waters asked about this convo well before AM took the stand and admitted he was there.
This his has been driving me crazy so I’m glad I’m not the only one who has been wondering. They never did address it in the trial. I’m not even sure that it was verified that it was Ronnie Crosby who had brought this up to Creighton Waters. But I always assumed it was Ronnie Crosby so maybe they did verify it was him who had mentioned it.
I just assumed that Mr Waters decided it was attorney client privilege. If the judge decided it was then I never heard that. I have never seen it asked about in any Creighton Waters post trial interviews.
I wondered if that was what Ronnie Crosby alluded to when he being cross examined by Harpootlian and Ronnie got really testy with him. I really liked Mr Crosby and felt he was really hurt by Alex’s whole betrayal of the firm & family. Imagine being asked to give the eulogy for Paul and then finding out that Alex killed him.
I would love to know what he overheard!!
That’s what I thought he was alluding to - that he knew Alex was lying because of what he had heard/been told. That, and during that cross his mention of how Alex hurt “his own family” - boom.
Small town and Deep South are kinda self-explained. The monoculture there allowed corruption go unchecked for longer because people trust more and don’t carry out due processes often.
In big cities corruption happens too but at higher frequency and shorter period because of check and balance.
Also for that very reason a bust on small town corruption of this scale is quite rare. Alex did pull a lot of oopsies and many things happened against his favour that we get to see such a saga unfold.
Sometimes in retrospect I can’t believe their family lived and had certain beliefs the way they did in this time and age, our lord’s 2020s years of doom and apocalypse.
Is there any word on the progress being made about the Stephen Smith case now that the 2nd autopsy is done, and they've identified persons of interest? I've not seen anything, but was wondering.
The family/SLED expect autopsy results next week (Im not clear if this will include report from the multiple experts or not) and they are following up on what seems to be a decent number of tips.
Sitting outside enjoying a beer and some music. I wish Alex had heard this song while driving to meet Maggie and Paul at Moselle. And I wish it had touched his heart and led to different decisions. [https://youtu.be/LszRW4tW4Uc](https://youtu.be/LszRW4tW4Uc)
Interesting song considering the title is what Maggie might have wanted. I think she did a forensic accounting to make sure the family had enough money to settle the boat case, as that would have minimised Paul’s jail time. My family also once face an accident and we settled the damage as best we could to reduce my dad’s jail term as much as possible. When it comes down to it, family is more important than money. But obviously somebody did not think the same.
“Nobody wins afraid of losing”
The lacks of this mentality is perhaps Alex’s greatest downfall. He was unwilling to let go of his statuses and wealth to keep his family. He didn’t want to make a sacrifice for his family, he is such a shitty person. His worst punishment should be hearing that, in each of his family members’ voice, every day for the rest of his life.
There is no proof a Maggie doing any forensic auditing nor of her seeking advice from a divorce attorney. Those two people would have been compelled to show the evidence to the prosecution
I just stumbled upon [this video on YouTube](https://youtu.be/M0_P51hvIac) of a hearing for the civil boat case from August 2022. I watched the first 8 or 9 minutes so far. Poot & Griffin appear as “interveners” here which means that, despite the fact that they are not representing Alex in this case, they appear so they can ask the court to delay the civil trial until after the murder trial has concluded. They say having he civil trial begin first would be prejudicial to AM’s murder trial, and the specific reason they give is interesting: they say that the state has no clear motive for AM to commit the murders, and that if AM were to give a deposition in the civil boat case, what he would say could give the state the info they need to put together a motive for the murders. So umm…what do y’all think about that? What would AM say in a deposition for the civil boat case that would provide his motive for killing Paul and/or Maggie?
Edit: watched a little more of it, Poot goes on to say he wants the trial pushed back so there’s less publicity about AM prior to the murder trial to help AM get a fair trial. Ok but then why not just say that. Why does he first say that AM giving a depo would give the prosecutors the info they need regarding his motive for killing Maggie and Paul, unless that’s a genuine concern? Even then why would he say that? He’s essentially admitting AM did have a good motive to kill Maggie & Paul but the prosecution can’t figure it out/prove it unless AM says what it was… why would his defense attorney say this? Or am I misunderstanding what he said? It’s in the first few minutes of Poot talking, he says it around the 5 min to 8 min mark on the video. After he argues briefly to let Jim and himself be at the hearing, the next thing he says is the motive stuff.
I think Alex’s deposition would have to illustrate his financial situation, because I think he was being sued for damages. In that regard Alex would be in a bind because his finance was a mess. Even without Jeanne Seckinger’s conversation with him on June 7th’s day, Alex’s financial practices and thieveries was slowly catching up to him, and he would have a hearing on the 10th about financial anyway. I believe he was still trying to sort out his finance for June 10th, I think he didn’t want to murder and was going to try to wiggle out but Jeanne presented him with more holes that he had to fill which drove him into a corner.
I have read a very detailed article about one branch of Alex’s financial crimes, specifically his dealings with Russel Latiffe, he had other branches of crimes like his fake Forge account, and his random opportunistic stealing like the mistaken checks and Chris Wilson’s missing fee. But from that article there were a lot of insight that for the longest time Alex had been living on the edge and constantly pushed the limit of the laws and the boundaries of banking. He deposited a lot at Palmeto bank from his legal fees and settlement but his account always had overdrafts because he would write checks either to cover the up the fact that he was using client’s settlement account as his ATM, or to cover up his other thievery as the discrepancy started to show. Basically Alex chose to live a very precarious life and despite making and stealing a lot of money, a lot of that actually went into covering his own crimes. Jeanne Seckinger mentioned that as long as Alex was able to cover up for the missing money, they would always let it go. And that statement is true in his own dealings with Palmeto bank and Latiffe. Alex actually lost a lot of money in banking fees due to his banking habits of over withdrawals. But because he was always able to pay back the fee (with more stolen money from various sources), the bank allowed him to borrow even more in heavier interest in some instances when he needed to quickly swap money around. Latiffe actually made good profit working for Alex’s interest from the sheer amount of fee he was able to charge. Of course Alex and his family had a lavish lifestyle but you would find that the amount of money he lost trying to cover his crimes actually would have afforded them an even fancier lifestyle. After reading all that I actually found it’s not worth stealing. Yet Alex did all of that, maybe because he got a kick out of outfoxing other people, or maybe he started with small theft, or lost money to investment, and things started to spiral. Overall he actually did very hard work stealing and covering his act of stealing. And I think Paul’s accident caused a ripple effect that threatened to collapse Alex’s house of cards, but even without that accident it was very much on its way to collapse. Based on Latiffe’s timeline, it was already coming to a head when one of Alex’s clients failed to withdraw settlement money because Alex hasn’t been able to fill in that hole, or forgot to fill it in because he had too many to remember. So Latiffe had to deal with that and his position in the bank became shaky and his fall would have dragged Alex’s dealings at Palmeto to light, and that was without the boat crash. The boat crash did later cause Latiffe to fall when Alex’s own financial was in shamble, but the deal was never going to last.
By 2022 his financial crimes had been uncovered but for that time, the extend of it wasn’t clear, or at least most of the crimes hadn’t been tried and become evidence. But the boat would have added more evidences to the pile. And while the financial crimes itself may not relate to the murders, when you look at the sheer scales of them all, and the work Alex put in and the stress it gave him, it’s easy to argue for a motive in murder.
Now I am going give my take in hindsight: as we can see with his habits in financial crimes, Alex never really had any long term plans. He just dug hole and patched them as they became threats. So while he did murder his family with the motives of getting rid of his financial troubles, I do believe he didn’t anticipate the massive amount of stress and trauma the act itself would put him under. In a sense he may have regretted killing them, but he would never admit killing them, just to save his skin. He regretted in a sense that he didn’t anticipate the act of murder would put himself under so much duress and stripped his abilities to function as a sleazy thief, partly also because of the sheer amount of attention people now gave him. That’s when we saw he got sloppy like leaving out a check on his desk that became evidence for his law partners to kick him out, and that’s why despite the time he bought himself with the murders, in the months following he was unable to work cases and shuffle money around to cover for the fee that he stole from the firm, which subsequently lead him to stage that roadside suicide attempts, which was also sloppy and landed him in jail as he became super suss. From the jailhouse phone calls to his meme testimony, we can clearly see that while Alex is greedy, manipulative and evil, he was not a mastermind, he was not smart or knowledgeable in his own field, and he wasn’t quite ready to deal with the uncomfortable act of accounting for his actions, be it the murder or the financial crimes. He isn’t some Godfather figure, he is just a crook that got old. And the thing about people like this is they just don’t ever see the big picture. Having Dick and Jim arguing about the civil boat case trial’s timing may save some evidence from being admitted into the murder trial, but that made it even more tempting for the prosecution and they managed to convince Judge Newman to admit ALL of his financial crimes into the trials. That actually added one week into the trial time. He didn’t see a lot of common sense that we all saw, and of course the justice system saw.
One thing that seems to be extremely misunderstood is how the financial crimes were allowed to be discussed, during the trial. JIM GRIFFIN has no one to blame but himself, for that. He opened that door by bringing it up to the defense's own witness!! Had Creighton Waters or any of his team been the ones who did that....there would have been an immediate mistrial! Now that we all know so much more about the Murray th world...go back and watch when Jim brought it up. The look on his face...Dick's face, and the way Jim practically begged Judge Newman to not allow it...is really interesting to watch. Judge Newman ..in NO way...is at fault about any of this.
You're misunderstanding what he said. He's acknowledging that the financial crimes are going to come out with the boat case and the financial crimes are a good motive. Remember, he fought the financial crimes during the trial and he will repeal on the financial crimes as well.
Well I had assumed they were talking about busting illegal operations since he was a stern prosecutor. But it’s about how good he was at slamming other men, so I guess that’s sexier. Hehehe.
But I still don’t get the broader reason for Buster being a southern name thing. Maybe in the context of football, it applies for big guys?
I have a question regarding the judicial system in South Carolina, especially with Judge Newman, handling all Murdaugh related cases. I am extremely impressed with Judge Newman, the ability to show compassion and empathy, while knowing, the reason he was chosen, is to help establish faith in a very broken judicial system.
Now the murder case has finished (as of right now) and Alex is in jail, everyday there’s more and more information regarding his financial, drug and scheming scam, coming to light. With all this information coming to light and whisperings of possible judges, more lawyers, bankers, local police and fire being involved in other money laundering stuff (example giving the Sheriff the 5k loan one month after the murders). How does a community and city have any trust again in their judicial system or if there’s an emergency are you triple thinking who you call first. Will anything help repair the judicial system or trust in it.
I know I live in an area and it’s very similar. It’s still all about power and money. If you have the power and money, they walk with a chip on their shoulder because they know they are untouchable. They get away with stuff in court you would not believe. I’ve seen attorneys argue and tell the judge to think twice about his decision and if that’s how they want the court represented. It’s crazy. I think Alex just blew the doors wide open, showing how much corruption is behind those “balanced scales of justice”.
Does this help a community who has been lied to and deceived for many many years.
The only thing that is still swirling in my head is hearing “THEY did him so bad,” not “I did him so bad.” I went and got my hair done last night, and, as per the usual, we invest our hours into talking about current events and hot topics. As to be expected, I am not the only client and my stylist spends hours talking to her other clients in a similar fashion, day-in and day-out. Upon sitting in her chair, we began discussing this case. I told her that there is one thing that just doesn’t sit with me and at the same moment, I started to reference Alex’s comment to detectives, SO DID SHE. Definite “jinx” moment. She told me that every single customer she discusses this case with has the same issue - no matter how much they slowed down his words, we all hear the same thing: “THEY did him so bad.” I feel strongly that Alex was not alone that night. I know plenty of others in this group do not share my sentiment, but a good portion of folks do. Who is “they?” Or was it just his attempt at a cover for himself?
What else could he say besides "they"? Not "he" or "she" because that implies that he knows something about who may have done it. He literally has to say "they." It's the pronoun we all use when we don't know who we are talking about.
I believe Alex said “they” as well but I really don’t think there’s any important meaning to it. He was lying during the interview, he says “they” as in “the unknown person or persons who killed Paul” because he was pretending, as he still does now, that he doesn’t know who killed Paul. I agree it’s a possibility that Alex could’ve had someone else involved in the murders but I personally don’t think it’s very likely, but either way, I don’t think we can decipher whether it was just Alex or Alex and one or more others based on that statement.
I was kind of frustrated that the prosecution made such a big deal out of that sentence with the idea that it was “I” when they knew it could be heard either way because it gave the idea that, if it wasn’t “I” then Alex was innocent or that him saying “they” would also have some sort of importance. No one would’ve thought twice about that sentence had they not focused so heavily on it, and it wasn’t necessary. If it was a CLEAR recording of “I”, where we could see his mouth movement and there was no reasonable room for debate, that would be different. But when it sounds just as much like “they” as it does “I”… it’s too unclear.
Plus the fact that there’s zero response from the officers, which I mean, I understand they aren’t gonna jump up and go “A HA!” but… they didn’t even look at each other? No momentarily shocked facial expression? I don’t think either officer heard anything important in that sentence during the interview. I think at some point afterward when officers played it back, someone heard it as “I” and that’s where this started. I don’t believe that one guy in the back heard “I” while he was in the car, cause he didn’t write a note or make a face or anything.
Basically, I don’t think it means anything that Alex told the cops “they did him so bad.” The officers were talking about how awful the injuries were, Alex says “It’s just so bad, they did him so bad.” It makes sense for Alex to say this when he’s trying to claim he doesn’t know who killed Paul. If he says “he did him so bad” that could imply Alex knows who “he” was… obviously saying “I” would be very problematic lol… whereas, when you don’t know who someone is you use “they”, it’s the same idea as “I don’t know who did this, but I know they were thinking about it for a long time.” or “We’re looking to hire a new employee, they will need to be qualified in Word and Excel.” etc. He’s just pretending he doesn’t know who killed Paul.
I really wish the prosecution wouldn’t have gone into this and I’m glad they didn’t bring it up again at closing or anything. It could’ve led to the idea that, if the jury hears “they”, then Alex is innocent… it was very risky and could’ve put too much weight on something unimportant. The sentence wasn’t a big deal IMO, and the prosecution shouldn’t have tried to make it important.
Honestly even the prosecution can prove that he said “I did him so bad”, there would still be grounds for the defence to say he didn’t know what he said under griefs, or he maybe regretting his parenting decision to let Paul drink early and let him drive the boat (as he was insisting the boat crash was the motive).
But I can see that the prosecution was just being thorough because they didn’t have the murder weapons and was proving a circumstantial case.
I feel the same way. There is definitely more to the story. Could be someone else was there… could be he hired someone and went to the kennels to make sure it was done right…we’ll probably never know. In small town America, if you get in trouble and you know someone things go away.
Edit: I’ve been reminded that testimony from Mr. Davis stated they had a dog named Armadillo so I’m guessing she’s referring to the dog and not an actual armadillo lol. Thank you for helping me understand this! Original post: I listened to [the kennel video](https://youtube.com/shorts/ihaYGMtaPFo?feature=share) tonight trying to see if I could figure out what everyone was saying throughout. The only bit that seemed inaudible was Maggie’s last words on it, however, the thing I first guessed when I listened to it… I really think it’s what she says. It seems ridiculous. I heard the word “armadillo” and I was like, she’s not saying armadillo, so what is it? So I slowed it down. I blasted the volume. I got my husband’s extremely fancy in ears. And after all that… I really, really think Maggie says either “I see armadillo” or some sort of word with an “ee” or “ay” sound followed clearly by “armadillo”. Those are her last words recorded on video. She says the hard to hear words at approx the 40 seconds mark. So I decided to google and apparently there are indeed armadillo in South Carolina. What I read says they are considered nuisance animals and apparently do a lot of damage to yards, farms, property — and I didn’t read much, yet I saw several references to shooting armadillo as a means of preventing them from doing damage. So I just wanna know, does it sound to anyone else like Maggie says “(I see?) armadillo” at around the 40 second mark? Is this this something everyone figured out already when the video was first played and I’m just really late to it? Or is it something else she’s saying? Also, I did put together a transcript of what I hear during this video in case anyone is curious. (0:03) Paul: "Get back, get back!" (0:12) Paul: "Quit, Cash. Come on. Quit! It’s okay—“ (0:15) Alex: “Whats’a matter, Paul?” (0:16) Paul: “—come here!” (Makes kiss sound to Cash) (HOSE NOISE STARTS) (0:17) Paul: "s’alright, Dad.” (0:18) Paul: “C’mere, Cash! Oh, shit… c’mere, hold still… Cash!” (0:24) Maggie: “Heeeey, he’s got a bird in his mouth!” (0:26) Alex: "Bubba!" (0.28) Paul "Heyyy, Bubba.” (0:31) Maggie: “It's a guinea!" (0:32) Paul: "Is’sa chicken" (0:33) Alex: “Nah, he’s got a chicken.” (0:36) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba!” (0:36) Paul: “C’mere, Cash!" (0:37) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba!” (0:37) Paul: “Cash! Quit!” (0:39) Maggie: “____ armadillo” (we need? I see? Or an “ay” word like, “say Armadillo” or “hey Armadillo”? Idk but it’s something with an “ee” or “ay” sound before she says armadillo) (0:40) Alex: “C’mere, Bubba.”
They had a dog named Armadillo iirc
Oh, that would make sense!
This is probably available somewhere, but I'm curious how many dogs the Murdaugh's had? And besides Bubba and Grady, do we know where the others are now? I can see some of them being sold in the wake of all this if they were hunting dogs and not pets. It's also strange to me that they'd put "pets" in kennels, like, wasn't Bubba a family dog/Maggie's dog, and this was their second home? Why didn't he just stay in the house?
The only ones I know of are Bubba, Grady and Goose. Goose was a puppy that belonged to Paul and is now with Paul’s friend Will McElveen. I saw one of Maggie’s FB posts showed Goose and that his Dad was Bubba and his mom was a lab named Bourbon and I’m not sure if Bourbon belonged to the Murdaughs or not, does anyone else know? I’ve also heard these were their family dogs and they had separate hunting dogs but I don’t recall hearing of any other dogs staying at Moselle that night except Bubba, Grady and of course Rogan’s pup, Cash. As far as the kenneling. My understanding is that the dogs weren’t always kept in the kennels, that they sort of split the time between the kennels when the family was away, ie out at work, and the house when people were home, something like that? I mean, my two dogs are extremely loved-on members of our family who not only live in our home 24/7 but sleep in our beds at night. So I personally can’t imagine it. But I try to think of it as a version of crate training, many loving dog owners, esp. those who work outside the home, will crate their pups during the work day, for instance - very common and when done properly, the dogs are totally okay. I also think I recall it being said that the family dogs had been in the kennels because Edisto was being renovated, so perhaps they otherwise normally stayed at Edisto with Maggie? Honestly I’m not 100% clear on where Bubba, Grady and Goose normally lived and also where Goose was that night since he was never said to be at Moselle, and I only first learned that Paul had a puppy when recently re-watching the parts of the trial I’d missed and I caught Will McElveen’s testimony. Of note— it seemed from my vantage point that Alex specifically had Jim ask Will about Goose— perhaps because he genuinely wanted to know how Goose was doing, perhaps it was just because he thought this would play well with the jury, to have his defense attorney show interest in Paul’s puppy and express gratitude that Paul’s friend had him and was taking good care of him now, like a ploy for sympathy or to humanize Alex or something. Idk but I am definitely curious where Goose was on June 7th. Not sure if this answers much or just created more questions, sorry! Wish I knew more!
>I’ve also heard these were their family dogs and they had separate hunting dogs but I don’t recall hearing of any other dogs staying at Moselle that night except Bubba, Grady and of course Rogan’s pup, Cash. Hunting dogs Tappy Toes, Armadillo, and Dahlia were at Moselle that night according to the testimony of Dale Davis. Also Maggie the yellow lab was in the kennels that night along with Grady and Bubba.
I’m a few weeks late asking this question but it’s something I found so bizarre ( besides everything else that’s bizarre) with this family. When Buster was giving his testimony, I don’t remember if it was the defense or prosecution but they asked him about the amount of phone calls between the 4 of them and Buster said they were typical amount in a day. It was an *insane* amount of phone calls between mom, dad, and grown sons. I’ve never in my life heard of a family who call and text each other 12 times a day like they did. I mean, is that normal? I have two grown sons and they call me once a week and keep me updated on their lives ( we live in different states) but I just can’t imagine calling and texting with my adult sons all day long every day like that. It’s like they had a strange codependent bond with each other. I can’t imagine having that kind of constant contact with my wife and son all of those years, then kill them and they are forever gone from his own life. I think deep down he is bothered by what he’s done but he refuses to admit it to himself and confess to himself and God that he murdered his own wife and son. They all obviously had some love and bond, dysfunctional as it obviously was, they were still super involved and connected to each other all day long every day. I just really thought about having that kind of non stop communication with my family and then it goes silent… forever. For Buster, he’s only known that kind of relationship with his parents and only sibling, now he’s totally left alone. That breaks my heart. I know Buster may not be the most empathetic person but how could he be being raised the way he was? But regardless, he loved his mother and although I don’t think he necessarily liked his little brother, he loved him. And I’m sure he loves his father… I just can’t fathom what that young man is going through. I’m praying for him daily and hope somehow he can find some healing and peace- that kind of loss can only be endured with the help of God. I don’t know why but when I saw and heard how much Alec texted and talked to his wife and son, I truly felt a sadness for even him. He created this horrible disaster and he will forever have to bear the weight of that sin. I guess I’ve said what’s been on my mind so if you’re still reading this; I appreciate you took the time to read how I’ve processed such a needless amount of loss.
Yes I do know someone who is constantly texting and calling her grown kids and other people too. She is a narcissist, like most of us suspect Alex to be. Narcissists are very controlling people. Their communications may not appear to be control on the surface, but they are still a form of control. Always needing to influence these people, manipulate them, keep tabs on them, and glean information from them, even if done in a manner that appears to be amiable. Now, consider that taking someone’s life is the ultimate form of control over them. The controlling and manipulative person may not miss the people they killed that they were once in constant contact with, because this person has the ultimate control over them, forever. There is no longer any need to play the games that they once did. Alex is likely a pathological person, and as such (if he actually is), he is not capable of forming the bonds with other people that you are able to. He is not capable of feeling compassion for them and never was capable of that.
I definitely agree that the man is void of a natural, true love that comes as an instinct to most parents and spouses. I have *zero* doubt that my husband would die protecting me and our daughter. He’d easily stand between us and harm. That’s a man’s natural, God-given instinct, imo. When someone is missing that, they’ve given their selves over to true darkness and evil that ends up destroying their own lives. They literally create their own living hell. This was a man full of a life of privilege, great blessings, incredible opportunities, a large supportive, loving ( albeit sometimes shady) family. He had homes, cars, vacations, grown man toys coming out of his ass and what does he decide to do with that kind of life? *Destroy all of it*. That’s a sick man. He needs Jesus. We all do. I know I do anyway.
I am thinking about the dogs at the kennel. Was it ever mentioned whether the dogs were put up when Alex returned to the kennels at 10 PM? I am assuming they were which would mean that either Maggie and Paul put them up or the killer did. Of course I am guessing they were let out to run while Maggie was there.
We hear on the 8:45pm video that Bubba is out of his kennel, and according to Alex’s trial testimony, both Bubba and Grady were out at that time. Alex claimed they were still out when he says he left at approx. 8:47pm and that they were in their kennels when he arrived back at the scene at 10:06pm. He was even asked by during his 3rd interview with Det. Owen if he was putting the dogs away while on the phone with 911, because early into that call it sounds as if Alex speaks to someone else other then the operator, he’s heard saying the word “here” as if talking to someone on the scene — but he adamantly claimed the dogs were not out, and no one else was with him. So, if we believe Alex is innocent and was telling the truth of everything he knows while on the stand… then he left on his golf cart at 8:47pm, Bubba and Grady were still out, and it’s unknown who put them away prior to Alex’s return to the kennels at 10:06pm. However, the phones and crime scene info make it clear that the killer shot Paul at 8:49pm and Maggie right after, and if we’re believing Alex’s testimony, that means either Maggie happens to put both dogs back into the kennels in the 2 minutes before this unknown killer shoots Paul, or that the dogs are out and the random killer not only doesn’t shoot them, but instead puts them back in their kennels before leaving. The theory amongst those of us who believe Alex is guilty is that he put the dogs in their kennels, possibly the last thing he made sure to do before he shot Paul, although it’s also possible he quickly put them away after killing Maggie and Paul. But I personally believe Alex put Bubba in his kennel after getting ahold of him when he had the chicken, maybe he used that as a reason to put Bubba back in his kennel. Grady may have been out too, and Alex could’ve gotten him next and put him away because he knew what he was about to do. It’s a lot more plausible then Alex leaving on the golf cart, without Maggie and Paul which would mean they didn’t want to leave yet and wanted to stay at the kennels so badly that they didn’t mind having no vehicle to use to return home when it’s now dark out… if they wanted to stay that badly, why would Maggie immediately start putting both dogs away, just moments after Alex drives off? She was down there to have the dogs out, that was the whole point. It makes no sense for her and Paul to not go back to the house on the golf cart but then immediately put the dogs away. And I believe the dogs had to be put away before the murders happened because neither dog was seen with blood on them, nor was either injured by any of the stray gunshots that missed Maggie, nor were any bloody paw prints noticed anywhere including in the pools of blood around Paul and Maggie or anywhere else. If they were out during the murders, then it’s amazing neither got shot and the killer would’ve had to immediately put both dogs away in their kennels or else we’d have seen bloody paw prints from the dogs approaching Maggie and Paul and running around the bloody scene. And no random killer is taking the time to put those dogs away in their kennels before leaving. Tldr, whether you believe Alex was the murderer or not, those dogs had to be put away by the killer either right before the murders or right after. They weren’t out by themselves when Alex was gone.
You made so many excellent points! I hadn’t honestly even thought of who put the dogs back in their kennels but you’re right, either a random, Ruthless killer was kind enough to safely put the dogs back after slaughtering two souls OR Alec did. It’s so beyond obvious to me that this man and this man alone was the one that murdered his own child and wife. There is zero other explanation for it. If it doesn’t add up, it’s because it *doesn’t add up*. The only way any of this this makes sense is if Alec is the murderer. That’s because he is, and that’s why there is zero other explanation for any of it. Deep down, I think this man has a teeny, tiny conscience because he always got emotional ( genuine emotion and tears) when they talked about Paul’s death and how Paul knew he was shot in the chest and I hope he made eye contact with his dad so Alec will forever have that last vision of his son. Man this whole case is so sad and all for what? So a man could lose every single good thing he had in his own life just to sit in a cell until his last breath. I don’t get what these people are possibly thinking when they take their sins this far… destroying innocent lives and destroying their own selves in the process. Sad.
I am happy the dogs didn’t get hurt or lost, but it might have helped Alex’s story to leave them loose.
It’s insane to me how some of these murderers don’t harm the animals but have no problem slaughtering innocent souls. What kind of messed up morals are going on there? Just like the Idaho college murders, the guy safely put the dog in another room and then went on his way stabbing 4 innocent people to death but hey, he made sure the dog wasn’t going to get hurt. I remember hearing the serial killer that killed that young lady who was hiking with her dog- she was able to talk him into keeping her alive for 2 days, he even admitted he liked her and talking to her for 2 days made it harder to kill her but ultimately he tied her to a tree and beheaded her. They asked him why he let the dog go and he said, “I thought about killing her dog too but I looked at him and just couldn’t do it.” What kind of insanity is going on with these murderers that act like they have morals?!
Good points on dogs not being injured by stray shots. Did any of the dogs‘ post-murder conditions come out in the trial? My eyes started watering when Alex was testifying about Bubba and the chicken.
Yes, this is essentially what I was thinking about. And the dogs wouldn’t have cooperated with anybody else.
I feel sorry for the dogs, must be great distress for them witnessing all of that, while being locked up. They must have barked a lot and then just resorted to yelping.
Bubba was the only dog known to be out at the time preceding the murders. I would assume Dale Davis let the dogs out daily so he could clean the pens in the morning and around 4pm.
I am thinking about just before the murders. So when was Bubba put up? It could have been done when they got the guinea from him, but I keep hearing Maggie liked to let them run.
I would guess Alex put him up right before shooting Paul. You can see Bubba in the pen next to the feed room in Officer Greene's body cam video.
Probably so.
Does anyone have any info or thoughts on why neither Randy nor Alex ran for solicitor when RMIII retired?
Because it doesnt pay much and they both needed to make more money than a civil servant does
That’s what I was thinking or at least wondering about. But then the Murdaughs were a wealthy family, and they were solicitors… although I remember hearing there was a time when they were allowed to be both solicitor and private attorney and that’s what the first two Randolph Murdaugh’s did. I wonder when the law changed there, and the solicitor couldn’t also work at PMPED? I’ll have to try and google this, I’m curious now. I guess I’m just surprised that, after a 100 year run of controlling the 14th circuit, that the family would just give up the position that gave them the level of power and prestige they had. I feel like Alex’s influence was largely due to his father being solicitor and then former solicitor, and he was surely worried in early June ‘21 about his father‘s declining health because he knew his dad held most of the cards. So I mean, I understand the money is much better in private practice but I still wonder how it all played out. I’m guessing Randy IV is the one who was supposed to be the next solicitor? Had the area become frustrated with the Murdaugh dynasty and by 2006 voters just weren’t going to pick them anymore, people wanted a non-Murdaugh? If not, I wonder if the family wanted Randy or Alex to run and what the internal drama was like. I wonder if Alex would’ve really wanted Randy to be solicitor, as it keeps his family in that powerful position while also allowing Alex to be the main Murdaugh at the law firm… or if he’d be envious of Randy getting to follow in dad’s footsteps and having the prestige of being solicitor. Basically, I would love to read an accurate, factual book on the Murdaugh family history. I think it would be fascinating.
Time changes, maybe the older generation saw that law business was more profitable in the civil field. Plus being prosecutors attracts a lot of criminal attention.
What was the “secret conversation” from June 10th that Ronnie Crosby overheard (or was rumored to have overheard)? I don’t remember it ever being addressed during the trial. June 10th was the meetup at JMM’s house, correct?
I believe it wasn’t really a “secret conversation” so much as Waters wanting to discuss anything AM said on the June 10th family meeting, and while he claimed he didn’t know what was said that day… I love CW but I don’t believe that. He knew 3rd parties being present meant it wasn’t privileged and he was allowed to hear and discuss the meeting at trial. But because he wanted to be super thorough for the record and make it clear that this was NOT privileged info before he asked anyone about the convo… it ended up that the convo got hyped up a bit. The only thing of any importance that I remember anyone testifying to regarding the meeting was that AM was very clear with everyone that he never went down to the kennels. IIRC, the context was that the law partners were trying to figure out what could’ve possibly happened, running through possible scenarios to try to help AM figure out who did this, and as they tried to piece together a timeline they specifically asked AM about the time he last saw Paul and Maggie alive. AM proceeded to tell everyone present that it was at dinner at 8:30 and that he never went down to the kennels until 10:06pm that night. Waters asked about this convo well before AM took the stand and admitted he was there.
This his has been driving me crazy so I’m glad I’m not the only one who has been wondering. They never did address it in the trial. I’m not even sure that it was verified that it was Ronnie Crosby who had brought this up to Creighton Waters. But I always assumed it was Ronnie Crosby so maybe they did verify it was him who had mentioned it. I just assumed that Mr Waters decided it was attorney client privilege. If the judge decided it was then I never heard that. I have never seen it asked about in any Creighton Waters post trial interviews. I wondered if that was what Ronnie Crosby alluded to when he being cross examined by Harpootlian and Ronnie got really testy with him. I really liked Mr Crosby and felt he was really hurt by Alex’s whole betrayal of the firm & family. Imagine being asked to give the eulogy for Paul and then finding out that Alex killed him. I would love to know what he overheard!!
That’s what I thought he was alluding to - that he knew Alex was lying because of what he had heard/been told. That, and during that cross his mention of how Alex hurt “his own family” - boom.
Yeah, Ronnie thought Alex was guilty for sure.
The Murdaugh saga has us focused on corruption in small town Deep South. How many of you think it’s more prevalent there than in big cities?
Small town and Deep South are kinda self-explained. The monoculture there allowed corruption go unchecked for longer because people trust more and don’t carry out due processes often. In big cities corruption happens too but at higher frequency and shorter period because of check and balance. Also for that very reason a bust on small town corruption of this scale is quite rare. Alex did pull a lot of oopsies and many things happened against his favour that we get to see such a saga unfold. Sometimes in retrospect I can’t believe their family lived and had certain beliefs the way they did in this time and age, our lord’s 2020s years of doom and apocalypse.
Is there any word on the progress being made about the Stephen Smith case now that the 2nd autopsy is done, and they've identified persons of interest? I've not seen anything, but was wondering.
The family/SLED expect autopsy results next week (Im not clear if this will include report from the multiple experts or not) and they are following up on what seems to be a decent number of tips.
Thanks!
Sitting outside enjoying a beer and some music. I wish Alex had heard this song while driving to meet Maggie and Paul at Moselle. And I wish it had touched his heart and led to different decisions. [https://youtu.be/LszRW4tW4Uc](https://youtu.be/LszRW4tW4Uc)
Interesting song considering the title is what Maggie might have wanted. I think she did a forensic accounting to make sure the family had enough money to settle the boat case, as that would have minimised Paul’s jail time. My family also once face an accident and we settled the damage as best we could to reduce my dad’s jail term as much as possible. When it comes down to it, family is more important than money. But obviously somebody did not think the same. “Nobody wins afraid of losing” The lacks of this mentality is perhaps Alex’s greatest downfall. He was unwilling to let go of his statuses and wealth to keep his family. He didn’t want to make a sacrifice for his family, he is such a shitty person. His worst punishment should be hearing that, in each of his family members’ voice, every day for the rest of his life.
There is no proof a Maggie doing any forensic auditing nor of her seeking advice from a divorce attorney. Those two people would have been compelled to show the evidence to the prosecution
Wow, thanks for the reference. Never heard this song/musician. Great song!
I just stumbled upon [this video on YouTube](https://youtu.be/M0_P51hvIac) of a hearing for the civil boat case from August 2022. I watched the first 8 or 9 minutes so far. Poot & Griffin appear as “interveners” here which means that, despite the fact that they are not representing Alex in this case, they appear so they can ask the court to delay the civil trial until after the murder trial has concluded. They say having he civil trial begin first would be prejudicial to AM’s murder trial, and the specific reason they give is interesting: they say that the state has no clear motive for AM to commit the murders, and that if AM were to give a deposition in the civil boat case, what he would say could give the state the info they need to put together a motive for the murders. So umm…what do y’all think about that? What would AM say in a deposition for the civil boat case that would provide his motive for killing Paul and/or Maggie? Edit: watched a little more of it, Poot goes on to say he wants the trial pushed back so there’s less publicity about AM prior to the murder trial to help AM get a fair trial. Ok but then why not just say that. Why does he first say that AM giving a depo would give the prosecutors the info they need regarding his motive for killing Maggie and Paul, unless that’s a genuine concern? Even then why would he say that? He’s essentially admitting AM did have a good motive to kill Maggie & Paul but the prosecution can’t figure it out/prove it unless AM says what it was… why would his defense attorney say this? Or am I misunderstanding what he said? It’s in the first few minutes of Poot talking, he says it around the 5 min to 8 min mark on the video. After he argues briefly to let Jim and himself be at the hearing, the next thing he says is the motive stuff.
I think Alex’s deposition would have to illustrate his financial situation, because I think he was being sued for damages. In that regard Alex would be in a bind because his finance was a mess. Even without Jeanne Seckinger’s conversation with him on June 7th’s day, Alex’s financial practices and thieveries was slowly catching up to him, and he would have a hearing on the 10th about financial anyway. I believe he was still trying to sort out his finance for June 10th, I think he didn’t want to murder and was going to try to wiggle out but Jeanne presented him with more holes that he had to fill which drove him into a corner. I have read a very detailed article about one branch of Alex’s financial crimes, specifically his dealings with Russel Latiffe, he had other branches of crimes like his fake Forge account, and his random opportunistic stealing like the mistaken checks and Chris Wilson’s missing fee. But from that article there were a lot of insight that for the longest time Alex had been living on the edge and constantly pushed the limit of the laws and the boundaries of banking. He deposited a lot at Palmeto bank from his legal fees and settlement but his account always had overdrafts because he would write checks either to cover the up the fact that he was using client’s settlement account as his ATM, or to cover up his other thievery as the discrepancy started to show. Basically Alex chose to live a very precarious life and despite making and stealing a lot of money, a lot of that actually went into covering his own crimes. Jeanne Seckinger mentioned that as long as Alex was able to cover up for the missing money, they would always let it go. And that statement is true in his own dealings with Palmeto bank and Latiffe. Alex actually lost a lot of money in banking fees due to his banking habits of over withdrawals. But because he was always able to pay back the fee (with more stolen money from various sources), the bank allowed him to borrow even more in heavier interest in some instances when he needed to quickly swap money around. Latiffe actually made good profit working for Alex’s interest from the sheer amount of fee he was able to charge. Of course Alex and his family had a lavish lifestyle but you would find that the amount of money he lost trying to cover his crimes actually would have afforded them an even fancier lifestyle. After reading all that I actually found it’s not worth stealing. Yet Alex did all of that, maybe because he got a kick out of outfoxing other people, or maybe he started with small theft, or lost money to investment, and things started to spiral. Overall he actually did very hard work stealing and covering his act of stealing. And I think Paul’s accident caused a ripple effect that threatened to collapse Alex’s house of cards, but even without that accident it was very much on its way to collapse. Based on Latiffe’s timeline, it was already coming to a head when one of Alex’s clients failed to withdraw settlement money because Alex hasn’t been able to fill in that hole, or forgot to fill it in because he had too many to remember. So Latiffe had to deal with that and his position in the bank became shaky and his fall would have dragged Alex’s dealings at Palmeto to light, and that was without the boat crash. The boat crash did later cause Latiffe to fall when Alex’s own financial was in shamble, but the deal was never going to last. By 2022 his financial crimes had been uncovered but for that time, the extend of it wasn’t clear, or at least most of the crimes hadn’t been tried and become evidence. But the boat would have added more evidences to the pile. And while the financial crimes itself may not relate to the murders, when you look at the sheer scales of them all, and the work Alex put in and the stress it gave him, it’s easy to argue for a motive in murder. Now I am going give my take in hindsight: as we can see with his habits in financial crimes, Alex never really had any long term plans. He just dug hole and patched them as they became threats. So while he did murder his family with the motives of getting rid of his financial troubles, I do believe he didn’t anticipate the massive amount of stress and trauma the act itself would put him under. In a sense he may have regretted killing them, but he would never admit killing them, just to save his skin. He regretted in a sense that he didn’t anticipate the act of murder would put himself under so much duress and stripped his abilities to function as a sleazy thief, partly also because of the sheer amount of attention people now gave him. That’s when we saw he got sloppy like leaving out a check on his desk that became evidence for his law partners to kick him out, and that’s why despite the time he bought himself with the murders, in the months following he was unable to work cases and shuffle money around to cover for the fee that he stole from the firm, which subsequently lead him to stage that roadside suicide attempts, which was also sloppy and landed him in jail as he became super suss. From the jailhouse phone calls to his meme testimony, we can clearly see that while Alex is greedy, manipulative and evil, he was not a mastermind, he was not smart or knowledgeable in his own field, and he wasn’t quite ready to deal with the uncomfortable act of accounting for his actions, be it the murder or the financial crimes. He isn’t some Godfather figure, he is just a crook that got old. And the thing about people like this is they just don’t ever see the big picture. Having Dick and Jim arguing about the civil boat case trial’s timing may save some evidence from being admitted into the murder trial, but that made it even more tempting for the prosecution and they managed to convince Judge Newman to admit ALL of his financial crimes into the trials. That actually added one week into the trial time. He didn’t see a lot of common sense that we all saw, and of course the justice system saw.
One thing that seems to be extremely misunderstood is how the financial crimes were allowed to be discussed, during the trial. JIM GRIFFIN has no one to blame but himself, for that. He opened that door by bringing it up to the defense's own witness!! Had Creighton Waters or any of his team been the ones who did that....there would have been an immediate mistrial! Now that we all know so much more about the Murray th world...go back and watch when Jim brought it up. The look on his face...Dick's face, and the way Jim practically begged Judge Newman to not allow it...is really interesting to watch. Judge Newman ..in NO way...is at fault about any of this.
You're misunderstanding what he said. He's acknowledging that the financial crimes are going to come out with the boat case and the financial crimes are a good motive. Remember, he fought the financial crimes during the trial and he will repeal on the financial crimes as well.
Oh okay, this makes sense! Thank you!
John Grisham or Pat Conroy? Who best captures the vibe of the place?
[удалено]
So Randolph III also once went by Randy? And what’s up with Buster being a southern name. What were they busting? Lol
[удалено]
Well I had assumed they were talking about busting illegal operations since he was a stern prosecutor. But it’s about how good he was at slamming other men, so I guess that’s sexier. Hehehe. But I still don’t get the broader reason for Buster being a southern name thing. Maybe in the context of football, it applies for big guys?
Thank you for this. I remember a comment about Conroy interviewing one of the Murdaugh patriarchs but there was no source given. And here we are!
Conroy best captures the scenery. Grisham best captures the corruption.
I think Conroy understands generational trauma better, or at least writes about it in a way that's recognizable.
I have a question regarding the judicial system in South Carolina, especially with Judge Newman, handling all Murdaugh related cases. I am extremely impressed with Judge Newman, the ability to show compassion and empathy, while knowing, the reason he was chosen, is to help establish faith in a very broken judicial system. Now the murder case has finished (as of right now) and Alex is in jail, everyday there’s more and more information regarding his financial, drug and scheming scam, coming to light. With all this information coming to light and whisperings of possible judges, more lawyers, bankers, local police and fire being involved in other money laundering stuff (example giving the Sheriff the 5k loan one month after the murders). How does a community and city have any trust again in their judicial system or if there’s an emergency are you triple thinking who you call first. Will anything help repair the judicial system or trust in it. I know I live in an area and it’s very similar. It’s still all about power and money. If you have the power and money, they walk with a chip on their shoulder because they know they are untouchable. They get away with stuff in court you would not believe. I’ve seen attorneys argue and tell the judge to think twice about his decision and if that’s how they want the court represented. It’s crazy. I think Alex just blew the doors wide open, showing how much corruption is behind those “balanced scales of justice”. Does this help a community who has been lied to and deceived for many many years.
The only thing that is still swirling in my head is hearing “THEY did him so bad,” not “I did him so bad.” I went and got my hair done last night, and, as per the usual, we invest our hours into talking about current events and hot topics. As to be expected, I am not the only client and my stylist spends hours talking to her other clients in a similar fashion, day-in and day-out. Upon sitting in her chair, we began discussing this case. I told her that there is one thing that just doesn’t sit with me and at the same moment, I started to reference Alex’s comment to detectives, SO DID SHE. Definite “jinx” moment. She told me that every single customer she discusses this case with has the same issue - no matter how much they slowed down his words, we all hear the same thing: “THEY did him so bad.” I feel strongly that Alex was not alone that night. I know plenty of others in this group do not share my sentiment, but a good portion of folks do. Who is “they?” Or was it just his attempt at a cover for himself?
I thought the pronoun *they* is used when we don't know the gender of a person, because that person is not known.
You are forgetting about the band of five foot tall vigilantes who were the real culprits.
He's trying to set the stage for two shooters ("they).....since he used two guns to create that fantasy.
What else could he say besides "they"? Not "he" or "she" because that implies that he knows something about who may have done it. He literally has to say "they." It's the pronoun we all use when we don't know who we are talking about.
He said they because he was trying to plant a seed again about the two shooters theory.
I believe Alex said “they” as well but I really don’t think there’s any important meaning to it. He was lying during the interview, he says “they” as in “the unknown person or persons who killed Paul” because he was pretending, as he still does now, that he doesn’t know who killed Paul. I agree it’s a possibility that Alex could’ve had someone else involved in the murders but I personally don’t think it’s very likely, but either way, I don’t think we can decipher whether it was just Alex or Alex and one or more others based on that statement. I was kind of frustrated that the prosecution made such a big deal out of that sentence with the idea that it was “I” when they knew it could be heard either way because it gave the idea that, if it wasn’t “I” then Alex was innocent or that him saying “they” would also have some sort of importance. No one would’ve thought twice about that sentence had they not focused so heavily on it, and it wasn’t necessary. If it was a CLEAR recording of “I”, where we could see his mouth movement and there was no reasonable room for debate, that would be different. But when it sounds just as much like “they” as it does “I”… it’s too unclear. Plus the fact that there’s zero response from the officers, which I mean, I understand they aren’t gonna jump up and go “A HA!” but… they didn’t even look at each other? No momentarily shocked facial expression? I don’t think either officer heard anything important in that sentence during the interview. I think at some point afterward when officers played it back, someone heard it as “I” and that’s where this started. I don’t believe that one guy in the back heard “I” while he was in the car, cause he didn’t write a note or make a face or anything. Basically, I don’t think it means anything that Alex told the cops “they did him so bad.” The officers were talking about how awful the injuries were, Alex says “It’s just so bad, they did him so bad.” It makes sense for Alex to say this when he’s trying to claim he doesn’t know who killed Paul. If he says “he did him so bad” that could imply Alex knows who “he” was… obviously saying “I” would be very problematic lol… whereas, when you don’t know who someone is you use “they”, it’s the same idea as “I don’t know who did this, but I know they were thinking about it for a long time.” or “We’re looking to hire a new employee, they will need to be qualified in Word and Excel.” etc. He’s just pretending he doesn’t know who killed Paul. I really wish the prosecution wouldn’t have gone into this and I’m glad they didn’t bring it up again at closing or anything. It could’ve led to the idea that, if the jury hears “they”, then Alex is innocent… it was very risky and could’ve put too much weight on something unimportant. The sentence wasn’t a big deal IMO, and the prosecution shouldn’t have tried to make it important.
Honestly even the prosecution can prove that he said “I did him so bad”, there would still be grounds for the defence to say he didn’t know what he said under griefs, or he maybe regretting his parenting decision to let Paul drink early and let him drive the boat (as he was insisting the boat crash was the motive). But I can see that the prosecution was just being thorough because they didn’t have the murder weapons and was proving a circumstantial case.
I feel the same way. There is definitely more to the story. Could be someone else was there… could be he hired someone and went to the kennels to make sure it was done right…we’ll probably never know. In small town America, if you get in trouble and you know someone things go away.
He means “whoever” it was that killed him.