Wow

SC Supremes send it back for new trial

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/south-carolina-supreme-court-overturns-143828982.html

It always seemed less than likely that he committed the murders.

ANd maybe his debt, stealing and harming others was the actual motive.

Not entirely true. The court ruled that evidence of financial crimes that was admitted should have been excluded. But there should be enough other evidence that he should be able to get convicted again.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Not entirely true. The court ruled that evidence of financial crimes that was admitted should have been excluded. But there should be enough other evidence that he should be able to get convicted again.

---

Sure, but that doesn't do anything for him in practice. Multiple motives were presented at the trial, and the physical and circumstantial evidence against him is so extensive that a motive isn't even necessary.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Overturned because of the behavior of members of the court, not because of any new evidence or actual concern that he might be innocent.

He'll be easily convicted at his new trial. The evidence against him remains definitive and overwhelming. He obviously murdered them.

---

As I recall, Hawg may have a bit of a different take than yours.

Eagerly looking forward to her weighing in ...

This settles some discrepancy in case law between South Carolina and the federal standard.

The clerk of court, Becky Hill, frequently talked to the jurors about the trial and seemed to be pressuring them to convict.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but the South Carolina standard was that the defense had the burden of proof to show that the clerk actually influenced the jury decision, which is why the visiting judge overseeing the post-trial hearings did not overturn the verdict. The federal standard in that circuit is that the government has to prove the clerk did not influence the jury as the influence is presumptive.

Also happy to see they ruled on the financial evidence. In my opinion it was a week of nothing but inappropriate character testimony. The judge allowed it because the prosecutors made a claim that it went to motive, but there was never a nexus established between his financial crimes and the murders.

Martin Cash said:

---

The judge who presided over this trial should be removed and disbarred. She was writing a BOOK about the trial while it was in progress!

---

It was the clerk of court, not the judge. The clerk was recently convicted and sentenced to probation.

Then there is also that pesky thing about the investigator lying to the grand jury about evidence that didn't exist. Seemed to have gotten away with that one.

Personally, I think he did it but the investigators did a pretty awful job.

Martin Cash said:

---

The judge who presided over this trial should be removed and disbarred. She was writing a BOOK about the trial while it was in progress!

---

I thought it was a Court 'cletk' that wrote a book.
Would THAT still be an issue, though?

I was awaiting your take on this news. I recall you discussing at length the shakiness of the case against him.

I think he did it, but as you pointed out here and previously the flubbed this up to where he should walk or maybe they can get him on some lesser charge.

He was convicted of the financial crimes, no? Meaning he will not be freed pending new murder trial.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

It always seemed less than likely that he committed the murders.

ANd maybe his debt, stealing and harming others was the actual motive.

---

...minutes before they were murdered...

It literally couldn't have been anyone else.

---

How do you know exactly when they were killed?

It could have been dozens or even hundreds of other people.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Overturned because of the behavior of members of the court, not because of any new evidence or actual concern that he might be innocent.

He'll be easily convicted at his new trial. The evidence against him remains definitive and overwhelming. He obviously murdered them.

---

I think he either pulled the triggers or directed them to be pulled by the guy he has shoot him, but I also don't think it was right to introduce all the financial stuff to his trial. I think that was more prejudicial than probative. And because neither his wife nor son had a insurance policy, he didn't get a financial benefit that would take care of his financial problems

This reminds me another attorney family murder allegations case, Michael Howard. Whatever happened with that?
https://www.kbtx.com/2024/12/06/attorney-accused-killing-cremating-his-son-who-was-diagnosed-with-down-syndrome/

pdc093 said:

---

Martin Cash said:

---

The judge who presided over this trial should be removed and disbarred. She was writing a BOOK about the trial while it was in progress!

---

I thought it was a Court 'cletk' that wrote a book.
Would THAT still be an issue, though?

---

My bad, you're right. I'm trying to figure out how a clerk could influence the jury.

Martin Cash said:

---

pdc093 said:

---

Martin Cash said:

---

The judge who presided over this trial should be removed and disbarred. She was writing a BOOK about the trial while it was in progress!

---

I thought it was a Court 'cletk' that wrote a book.
Would THAT still be an issue, though?

---

My bad, you're right. I'm trying to figure out how a clerk could influence the jury.

---

The clerk is the one that worked directly with the jury everyday.

She made their arrangements. Let them know if court was starting late or if it was being canceled for the day and things like that.

She also went in and told them to watch Alex closely because he lies

aggiehawg said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Not entirely true. The court ruled that evidence of financial crimes that was admitted should have been excluded. But there should be enough other evidence that he should be able to get convicted again.

---

The financial crimes absolutely should have been excluded and that bizarre jury instruction that the jury was only to consider the DAYS of that testimony for purposes of motive

But the SC crime lab messed up the scene and collection of evidence enough that I do not think he will be convicted upon retrial

Watched every day of that trial judge was an idiot

---

I watched every day of the trial, too. There is/was a big thread on here when it was going on. Can't remember all of them now, but there were plenty of holes and room for doubt in the prosecution's narrative.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

It always seemed less than likely that he committed the murders.

ANd maybe his debt, stealing and harming others was the actual motive.

---

...minutes before they were murdered...

It literally couldn't have been anyone else.

---

How do you know exactly when they were killed?

It could have been dozens or even hundreds of other people.

---

Between the time of reporting, his cellphone data and the TOD assessment there's only about a 25 minute window in which they could have been killed. Between that, the other evidence against him and the complete absence of any evidence anyone else was there there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to even suspect it could have been anyone else.

Every single argument against his guilt boils down to "well you can't prove it wasn't someone else". Which isn't how any of this works.

Wabs said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Not entirely true. The court ruled that evidence of financial crimes that was admitted should have been excluded. But there should be enough other evidence that he should be able to get convicted again.

---

The financial crimes absolutely should have been excluded and that bizarre jury instruction that the jury was only to consider the DAYS of that testimony for purposes of motive

But the SC crime lab messed up the scene and collection of evidence enough that I do not think he will be convicted upon retrial

Watched every day of that trial judge was an idiot

---

I watched every day of the trial, too. There is/was a big thread on here when it was going on. Can't remember all of them now, but there were plenty of holes and room for doubt in the prosecution's narrative.

---

There is reasonable doubt only if you believe fictional crime scene shows are how the real world works. In reality many murder convictions come down to a mountain of circumstantial evidence that paints a clear picture.

flown-the-coop said:

---

I was awaiting your take on this news. I recall you discussing at length the shakiness of the case against him.

I think he did it, but as you pointed out here and previously the flubbed this up to where he should walk or maybe they can get him on some lesser charge.

He was convicted of the financial crimes, no? Meaning he will not be freed pending new murder trial.

---

Yes. He's in prison for his financial crimes and won't be out anytime soon, if ever just for those. (Given his age.)

But the forensics, in particular the bullet trajectories were messed up. Maggie's cell phone was tossed while Alex was still up at the house since his Suburban was running and sitting there. Further it was found on the opposite side of the road from the direction Alex was driving.

And while we are at it, the prosecution did not receive the GPS info from the Suburban until mid trial because the prosecution messed up the initial subpoena to GM, misidentifying his truck, as I recall.

Is Murdaugh a POS? Definitely. Did he murder his wife and son? Very doubtful. Did he have them murdered by someone else? Maybe but no evidence to support that theory. Messy crime scene, very messy. If he did hire a hit man he hired a bargain basement one.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Overturned because of the behavior of members of the court, not because of any new evidence or actual concern that he might be innocent.

He'll be easily convicted at his new trial. The evidence against him remains definitive and overwhelming. He obviously murdered them.

---

I think he either pulled the triggers or directed them to be pulled by the guy he has shoot him, but I also don't think it was right to introduce all the financial stuff to his trial. I think that was more prejudicial than probative. And because neither his wife nor son had a insurance policy, he didn't get a financial benefit that would take care of his financial problems

---

I don't think we even need to entertain anything other than he did it himself. To my knowledge there is zero evidence anyone else was there that night before authorities arrived, physical or circumstantial, and there is definitive proof he was there within a VERY narrow event window. And at the end of the day motive really doesn't matter when two people are killed with your weapons and the only person who was there and isn't dead is you. And it's insulting to the intelligence of every thinking person for someone to see his cellphone data and surrounding events and expect them to come to any other conclusion that he was dumping the guns and trying to create a flimsy alibi.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

It always seemed less than likely that he committed the murders.

ANd maybe his debt, stealing and harming others was the actual motive.

---

...minutes before they were murdered...

It literally couldn't have been anyone else.

---

How do you know exactly when they were killed?

It could have been dozens or even hundreds of other people.

---

Between the time of reporting, his cellphone data and the TOD assessment there's only about a 25 minute window in which they could have been killed. Between that, the other evidence against him and the complete absence of any evidence anyone else was there there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to even suspect it could have been anyone else.

Every single argument against his guilt boils down to "well you can't prove it wasn't someone else". Which isn't how any of this works.

---

The only known time of the murders is between 8:48 and 10:06, roughly 80 minutes.

My argument is that you can/t prove it was him and that's the only argument that "innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond a reasonable doubt" need. Bringing up other possibilities helps add doubt but it's cetainly not the only argument.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Overturned because of the behavior of members of the court, not because of any new evidence or actual concern that he might be innocent.

He'll be easily convicted at his new trial. The evidence against him remains definitive and overwhelming. He obviously murdered them.

---

I think he either pulled the triggers or directed them to be pulled by the guy he has shoot him, but I also don't think it was right to introduce all the financial stuff to his trial. I think that was more prejudicial than probative. And because neither his wife nor son had a insurance policy, he didn't get a financial benefit that would take care of his financial problems

---

And it's insulting to the intelligence of every thinking person for someone to see his cellphone data and surrounding events and expect them to come to any other conclusion that he was dumping the guns and trying to create a flimsy alibi.

---

One of my biggest issues with the whole theory that Alex did it and then hid evidence is that the timline to do all of it is extremely tight. Possible but difficult even with having pre-planned. And almost none of it was done well except for getting rid of the murder weapons. So he planned it so well that he made the weapons dissappear but then screwed everything else up?

Are there really people that are less than 100% convinced this dude did the crime?

The Snapchat video with his voice on it was enough to make me believe he absolutely did it.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

It always seemed less than likely that he committed the murders.

ANd maybe his debt, stealing and harming others was the actual motive.

---

...minutes before they were murdered...

It literally couldn't have been anyone else.

---

How do you know exactly when they were killed?

It could have been dozens or even hundreds of other people.

---

Between the time of reporting, his cellphone data and the TOD assessment there's only about a 25 minute window in which they could have been killed. Between that, the other evidence against him and the complete absence of any evidence anyone else was there there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to even suspect it could have been anyone else.

Every single argument against his guilt boils down to "well you can't prove it wasn't someone else". Which isn't how any of this works.

---

The only known time of the murders is between 8:48 and 10:06, roughly 80 minutes.

My argument is that you can/t prove it was him and that's the only argument that "innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond a reasonable doubt" need. Bringing up other possibilities helps add doubt but it's cetainly not the only argument.

---

TOD estimates are extremely accurate when bodies are found so soon after death. It's completely disingenuous and obviously absurd to argue that they could have been killed right up the exact moment Alex called the authorities.

Modern crime TV has completely destroyed the average Americans idea of "reasonable doubt" and it's one of the reason I think there's a strong argued for getting rid the jury system entirely. It's just fundamentally broken (for other reasons as well).

bonfarr said:

---

Are there really people that are less than 100% convinced this dude did the crime?

The Snapchat video with his voice on it was enough to make me believe he absolutely did it.

---

I would question a lot about someone who believes with 100% certainty that Murdaugh is guilty, the first thing being where did they get their info about the case?

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Overturned because of the behavior of members of the court, not because of any new evidence or actual concern that he might be innocent.

He'll be easily convicted at his new trial. The evidence against him remains definitive and overwhelming. He obviously murdered them.

---

I think he either pulled the triggers or directed them to be pulled by the guy he has shoot him, but I also don't think it was right to introduce all the financial stuff to his trial. I think that was more prejudicial than probative. And because neither his wife nor son had a insurance policy, he didn't get a financial benefit that would take care of his financial problems

---

And it's insulting to the intelligence of every thinking person for someone to see his cellphone data and surrounding events and expect them to come to any other conclusion that he was dumping the guns and trying to create a flimsy alibi.

---

One of my biggest issues with the whole theory that Alex did it and then hid evidence is that the timline to do all of it is extremely tight. Possible but difficult even with having pre-planned. And almost none of it was done well except for getting rid of the murder weapons. So he planned it so well that he made the weapons dissappear but then screwed everything else up?

---

That's typically how most plans like that go. And again, you have to want to have doubt to look at the totality of events and believe it's reasonable to think he didn't do it.