South Carolina Mother and Son Murdered

[TN-peach]

I think that the State's case for murder is still weak and I don't really know if the door has been completely opened for the financial crimes to be discussed in front of the jury.  I think some of them might be too prejudicial unless they can prove that the Satterfield son called Alec the day of the murder, right when he was also being confronted at work about the missing finds. 

The State needs to connect more dots and they are not doing it.

[ifosterkittens]

I agree @TN-peach. I absolutely believe Alex Murdaugh is the mastermind behind the murders, but I'm not sure he pulled the trigger on both Maggie and Paul, and he's only charged with actually killing them (plus no proof of another gunman). I think there was another person committing the murders, and Alex made sure to stay on the property until he heard the gunshots knowing ok it's done. Maybe Alex participated and shot one of them? So far, I'm not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. 

How the judge rules on how much of the financial stuff comes in will be fascinating. Deeming what is the appropriate amount and is 403 and 404 but not too much that is becomes prejudicial is a fine line. 

The state is doing a terrible job of creating a timeline (defense provided one) and connecting the dots. Alex's team appear to have made a great decision by forcing a speedy trial because the prosecution doesn't seem to have it all together. We are all in agreement Alex is a lying liar who lies and committed all kinds of financial crimes but that alone doesn't make him guilty of murdering Paul and Maggie. 

Emily D Baker said it and I am in complete agreement that ethical women (Alex's paralegal who took her concerns to the CFO Jeanie Seckinger) took down the old boys' club. Jeanie looked like she was read to physically fight Alex's attorney Jim yesterday; she wasn't getting pushed around by them. Jeanie's sister's husband (her BIL) Russell Laffitte was part of the old boys' club too, so while Jeanie did what she the right thing in bringing all this to light I bet it was difficult for family relations. Russell was a top executive at Palmetto State Bank and was found guilty of all six crimes he was charged with and is out on bond awaiting sentencing. https://www.live5news.com/2022/11/23/jury-russell-laffitte-convicted-murdaugh-conspirator-found-guilty-all-six-charges/ 

[hoipolloi]

15 minutes ago, ifosterkittens said:

I think there was another person committing the murders, and Alex made sure to stay on the property until he heard the gunshots knowing ok it's done. Maybe Alex participated and shot one of them? So far, I'm not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. 

This is plausible. I have also thought it possible that only one of the victims was the intended target -- Maybe Maggie because of the rumored divorce? Or Paul because of the boat crash lawsuit? -- but the other one also happened to be at Moselle. In either case, money would be at the root of any motive -- big money that Alex had been illegally diverting into his pockets for many years but that he couldn't have revealed through disclosure for divorce proceedings or the boat crash lawsuit.

15 minutes ago, ifosterkittens said:

We are all in agreement Alex is a lying liar who lies and committed all kinds of financial crimes but that alone doesn't make him guilty of murdering Paul and Maggie. 

This is also true. I fear that he may be (correctly) acquitted of their actual murders in this trial but that will leave no clear avenue for determining who really killed Maggie and Paul and why. 

Edited February 3, 2023 by hoipolloi
Clarity

[TN-peach]

He is clearly a lying scumbag and just a  horrible, horrible person.  I don't know if he murdered his wife and his son but YIKES I wouldn't want to know him or be related to him. 

[ifosterkittens]

Alex's son Buster and brother Randy were not in the court room yesterday or today when the jury was dismissed so they could conduct the in-camera exams (to determine how much if any of the financial crimes will come in) which makes me think their presence is a public show of support only. Maybe they don't believe he committed the murders, but his financial crimes have dramatically changed both their lives. Maggie's family isn't attending the trial.

Yesterday when Chris Wilson said Alex was my one of my best friends, and they haven't spoken since was fraught with emotion. I don't think we can quantify the number of lives Alex Murdaugh has ruined. 

[Howl]

@AveryGWilks (chief investigative reporter in Columbia for @postandcourier) is covering the trial on twitter. 

I've been following a bit on weblseuths.  

.

[TN-peach]

I felt so bad for Chris Wilson.  You could tell he was still trying to figure out how to match the Alec(x) he thought he knew vs. the one that has since been revealed. 

[TN-peach]

So 404 motion was granted. All the stuff is coming in. Maybe not everything everything but a whole lot of extra stuff - the boat case (Mallory Beach case), the financial case, etc.

[ifosterkittens]

WTF was today? This is a murder trial and I feel like my foster cat is taking squirrel watch more seriously. Perhaps lead prosecutor Creighton Waters should have just prosecuted the financial crimes and skipped the murder charges. The defense is arguing the state's case was sloppy and a rush to judgment, and the way Creighton was just tossing the tennis shoes around, and throwing the yard debris in the garbage seems to support the defense's argument.

Shelly (Alex's mom's caregiver) could have been a fantastic witness for the state, but in my opinion, Creighton blew it. She loves the Murdaugh family, isn't a hostile witness with an ax to grind who was wronged by Alex. Shelly had important testimony with Alex saying if asked she should say he was there 30-40 minutes. How she was uncomfortable with her conversation with Alex where he mentioned knowing her boss, knowing how expensive a wedding and how he could help her. She was so uncomfortable she called her brother who is in law enforcement and that barely registered with Creighton's approach. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by ifosterkittens
Typos, not a graduate of the dinning table (Alyssa Bates), but surely can't prove that today

[TN-peach]

I felt so bad for Ms. Shelly.  She loved (loves?) that family.  You could tell that it was very difficult for her testify for so many reasons - loyalty to the family that she cared for but also she is a woman of color going up against a "good ol' boy network of generational wealth" that controls the county, her jobs, her livelihood, etc.  There were so many factors into why it was hard for her to testify so why on earth would the State make it harder on her?!!!! Why ask her leading questions?!! Ask her open ending questions?  What happened when Alec came over? and then what happened? what happened next? Did you see anything else? What was he wearing? LET THE WOMAN TALK and tell her story. 

[hoipolloi]

Still trying to catch up on the daily events, but I thought that this reddit comment made a lot of sense.

[ifosterkittens]

@hoipolloia hung jury seems very possible to me. A guilty verdict seems like a stretch at this time. 

I know we likely won't get the answers, but who is paying Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin? I'm nosy AF and would love to know their bill! Any money the government can tie to Alex (including property) is likely frozen. Perhaps he has a secret account he is paying them out of, but to me that seems unlikely. Maybe they discounted their services? They are going to represent him in the financial trials so I'm thinking they have to be getting paid a decent amount to take on that much. This isn't helping a friend beat a trivial traffic ticket.

Would they use money from their parents' estate in hopes of legally clearing Alex of the murders and hoping to mitigate some of the financial crimes? Alex's father is dead, his mother has dementia so someone else probably has control of the money and may be willing to finance these trials to try to preserve as much of the Murdaugh name as possible. 

How has Randy Murdaugh's practice/income been impacted? I know they restructured the law group, and Murdaugh is no longer part of name, but he's still a part of the group. Are people less likely to use him as their lawyer thinking well this family is corrupt? Do people think well only Alex was a bad apple, and Randy is still a reputable Murdaugh? The Murdaugh name no longer carries the weight and power it once did, but maybe still has some influence? 

[hoipolloi]

@ifosterkittens -- all good questions. Harpootlian & Griffin are definitely not doing this pro bono but where the money is coming from is a mystery. My guess would be that it's Murdaugh family money of some kind -- from Alexʻs dadʻs estate or from his siblings. I assume that whatever money Alex still has is frozen solid pending the outcome of the dozens of financial charges against him.

The discussion on that reddit thread is interesting too, with a bunch of (alleged) attorneys weighing in. Besides their general agreement that Alex committed the murders, they all seem to think that the snapchat video from Paul's phone, with at least two people identifying Alex's voice, is the biggest problem for the defense, so far. 

[TN-peach]

From the testimony since Randy is a partner in the law firm he has had to use his own salary to pay the law firm for the money that Alec(x) stole.  As a sibling, I might find way to appear in court during his hearings but if I am paying back millions of $ of my own money because he stole $ then I don't think I will also be willing to give him money for his defense.  But who knows what I would know what I would actually do in that situation but since my family is not millionaires I don't think this will happen nor do I think we will be killing any one. 

The Snapchat video is the biggest piece of evidence against him.  It calls his alibi into questions since he says he was napping and that he didn't go down to the kennels.  The State's case is beyond confusing.  There is no rhyme or reason to the order they are calling witnesses.  The prosecutors are cross examining witnesses and the defense attorneys are asking open ended questions.  There is no narrative, timeline, nothing seems to make connect or make sense. 

[TN-peach]

Well today we finally have a murder trial again.  And we are getting more information about the murder.  Is it enough yet? I don't know but Alec sure does seem to like asking the women that work for his family to lie for him without using those exact words. 

[ifosterkittens]

5 hours ago, TN-peach said:

Well today we finally have a murder trial again.  And we are getting more information about the murder.  Is it enough yet?

Finally on day 15 the prosecutor is connecting dots and is focused on the murder! 

I do think based on what we've seen so far it is a strong circumstantial case that could convict Alex Murdaugh because he murdered his wife and son. I no longer think a guilty verdict would just be he's a lying SOB who committed a ton of financial crimes, so it is possible he did the murders. 

Alex told police he never was at the kennels the evening of the June 7th. The video from 8:44pm where Alex's Murdaugh's voice was identified by both Rogan (the owner of dog Cash), and Blanca (housekeeper) prove Alex lied. The shirt and shoes Alex wore in the video from 7:40pm (where the tree was blowing) are missing per Blanca. Blanca likely washed the khaki pants he was wearing in that video the next day. Two guns that are the same type as the two murder weapons are missing. Alex's phone was turned off from 8-9ish (not sure of the exact minutes) which is highly unusual for Alex who always is on his phone and has it with him. Bubba (Maggie's dog with a guinea or chicken in his mouth) must have been outside the kennel on the 8:44 video where Alex's voice was heard, and someone got the bird out of Bubba's mouth and returned Bubba to the kennel. Blanca testified it was tough to get a bird from Bubba's mouth and return him to the kennel- sounds to me like someone who knew and was familiar with the dog would do such a thing. Thankfully Blanca now has Bubba. 

It seems Maggie planned to go back to the beach house in Edisto because she left the front door unlocked when she went to her appointment. Blanca said Maggie seemed annoyed/frustrated when Alex asked her to come out to Moselle that night. Blanca said Maggie had been staying at the beach house because of renovations and she liked to stay there during the summer. Paul was told by Alex he had to come to Moselle that day or night (not sure) to handle the sunflowers. If Alex wanted the whole family to go visit his mom or dad, or just spend time with them, why was Buster not included? 

Alex told Miss Libby (his mom's caretaker) to say he had been there 30-40 minutes- he wanted her to lie. Alex asked Blanca (housekeeper) where his Vineyard Vines shirt he was wearing June 7th was. Blanca testified he wore a polo to work and had a seafoam green Columbia style shirt on in the video from 7:40. She said neither were Vineyard Vines, and he bought the Vineyard Vines polos after the murders when he was storing clothes in the small two-bedroom house, not Moselle. From the attorneys' discussion with the judge (outside the presence of the jury) we learned Alex had the conversation with Blanca about the shirt after he talked to SLED that morning. I believe Blanca and Libby. They both sounded credible to me and had no reason to lie. 

Blanca testified Maggie told her she didn't think Alex was being entirely truthful about the lawsuit (boat case) and the money in the lawsuit. Maggie said they (civil lawsuit from the Beach family) wanted $30 million and they (Alex and Maggie) didn't have it. Dick Harpootlian said in opening the Murdaughs were the perfect family, everything was great. Blanca's testimony showed Maggie at least suspected something was up. Alex's financial crimes show us things weren't perfect, and because of the civil lawsuit it was likely some of his financial crimes may come to light. 

Pure ISB, no evidence at all just my speculation. I think Alex had hired someone to murder Maggie and Paul and was going to have it carried out when he had a solid alibi. I think the murder was planned before the next court date which I think was June 10, the same day Alex's father died (his death is not suspicious). However, when Jeannie the CFO confronted Alex about the missing $792,000 the morning of June 7 I think the timeline for the murder was bumped up to that night, and mistakes were made because the plan changed. I think Alex hired someone to commit the murders. I think there are two murder weapons because something went wrong that evening, and Alex had to physically get involved and pull the trigger on either Maggie or Paul. 

Mark Tinsley (lawyer for Mallory Beach's family) testified if Alex's wife and son had been murdered by a vigilante Alex would have likely been dropped from the civil suit. Mark said it doesn't matter that Alex was guilty, appearances matter, and getting a settlement would have been difficult if his wife and son were murdered by a vigilante as retaliation. To me this makes the most sense of why Alex would have killed (or hired someone to kill) his wife and son. Maybe Alex thought Buster would have also been dropped from the civil suit (Buster gave Paul his license, and Paul used it that day to buy alcohol). Maybe Alex thought Jeannie would quit looking into his records at the law firm after the murders. By killing Maggie there would be no possibility of divorce, no possibility of her instigating audits, and chances are she knows a few of Alex's secrets he'd prefer to keep quiet. Lots of maybes, but at this time that's my theory. Thoughts? 

[ifosterkittens]

Correction I meant Shelly the caretaker of Alex's mom, not Libby with Alex telling her to say he was at his mom's 30-40 minutes the night of the murders. 

[ifosterkittens]

16 hours ago, ifosterkittens said:

Mark Tinsley (lawyer for Mallory Beach's family) testified if Alex's wife and son had been murdered by a vigilante Alex would have likely been dropped from the civil suit. Mark said it doesn't matter that Alex was guilty, appearances matter, and getting a settlement would have been difficult if his wife and son were murdered by a vigilante as retaliation. To me this makes the most sense of why Alex would have killed (or hired someone to kill) his wife and son. Maybe Alex thought Buster would have also been dropped from the civil suit (Buster gave Paul his license, and Paul used it that day to buy alcohol). Maybe Alex thought Jeannie would quit looking into his records at the law firm after the murders. By killing Maggie there would be no possibility of divorce, no possibility of her instigating audits, and chances are she knows a few of Alex's secrets he'd prefer to keep quiet. Lots of maybes, but at this time that's my theory. Thoughts? 

Clearly, I have too much time on my hands to think about this and should probably get a healthier hobby!

I gave my theory of motive above, but it isn't a strong one. I have a lot of doubts. I don't think we will ever have the thought process behind it, and I wonder if Alex was desperate and acting rashly. If he had a pain pill addiction (we've seen no evidence other than his statements and going to rehab) and was abusing pain pills perhaps his reality was skewed where it made enough sense to him. I also think his crime was pretty well planned and executed so I'm arguing against myself. 

Paul's death resulted in dismissal of the criminal charges- that was a given, but that is the only given. The civil lawsuit was the whole family, Alex, Maggie and Buster, so Paul's death doesn't automatically solve that issue. A criminal conviction of Paul probably would have made the civil case easier but there is no guarantee the civil case dies with Paul, and it is a big gamble to kill Maggie and Paul hoping the civil suit would be dropped. 

Husbands kill their wives all the time, so I don't have trouble believing Alex killed Maggie. According to https://www.respondinc.org/dv-facts-stats/ "Each day in the US, three women are murdered by current or former intimate partner (Bureau of Justice Statistics). 1 in 5 homicide victims are killed by an intimate partner. Over half of female homicide victims in the U.S. are killed by a current or former male intimate partner (CDC)."

A father killing his child is less common than a husband killing his wife, and more difficult to reconcile, but it still happens. I'm having a tough time finding statistics because Paul was an adult when this happened, and most of the statistics are for children under 18. 

Who else would have killed Maggie and Paul? Plenty of people suspected Paul would not be held accountable for the death of Mallory Beach, and it is possible he could have been found not guilty. He had good attorneys, and a trial is always a gamble. If only Paul was killed this would be more plausible to me. If someone was pissed and decided to kill the Murdaughs because they were worried Paul wouldn't be held accountable, wouldn't you kill Alex too? Alex is the one who tried to get the other witnesses to not cooperate with police and place blame on Connor not Paul. I don't see why an outside person would kill Maggie and Paul and not Alex. 

If Alex did kill Maggie and Paul, why did he spare Buster? Buster's involvement in the boat case was him giving Paul his license so he could buy alcohol, so it is relevant but probably not seen as a big deal to Alex. Legally big ramifications, but the act itself may be seen as no big deal by Alex and Maggie. I wish we knew for a fact one way or the other if Alex reached out to Buster to come to Moselle the evening of June 7th. Could Alex justify killing Maggie and Paul but spare Buster so he had someone left, someone who couldn't hurt him as much legally? 

[Antimony]

22 hours ago, ifosterkittens said:

Clearly, I have too much time on my hands to think about this and should probably get a healthier hobby!

I gave my theory of motive above, but it isn't a strong one. I have a lot of doubts. I don't think we will ever have the thought process behind it, and I wonder if Alex was desperate and acting rashly. If he had a pain pill addiction (we've seen no evidence other than his statements and going to rehab) and was abusing pain pills perhaps his reality was skewed where it made enough sense to him. I also think his crime was pretty well planned and executed so I'm arguing against myself. 

Paul's death resulted in dismissal of the criminal charges- that was a given, but that is the only given. The civil lawsuit was the whole family, Alex, Maggie and Buster, so Paul's death doesn't automatically solve that issue. A criminal conviction of Paul probably would have made the civil case easier but there is no guarantee the civil case dies with Paul, and it is a big gamble to kill Maggie and Paul hoping the civil suit would be dropped. 

Husbands kill their wives all the time, so I don't have trouble believing Alex killed Maggie. According to https://www.respondinc.org/dv-facts-stats/ "Each day in the US, three women are murdered by current or former intimate partner (Bureau of Justice Statistics). 1 in 5 homicide victims are killed by an intimate partner. Over half of female homicide victims in the U.S. are killed by a current or former male intimate partner (CDC)."

A father killing his child is less common than a husband killing his wife, and more difficult to reconcile, but it still happens. I'm having a tough time finding statistics because Paul was an adult when this happened, and most of the statistics are for children under 18. 

Who else would have killed Maggie and Paul? Plenty of people suspected Paul would not be held accountable for the death of Mallory Beach, and it is possible he could have been found not guilty. He had good attorneys, and a trial is always a gamble. If only Paul was killed this would be more plausible to me. If someone was pissed and decided to kill the Murdaughs because they were worried Paul wouldn't be held accountable, wouldn't you kill Alex too? Alex is the one who tried to get the other witnesses to not cooperate with police and place blame on Connor not Paul. I don't see why an outside person would kill Maggie and Paul and not Alex. 

If Alex did kill Maggie and Paul, why did he spare Buster? Buster's involvement in the boat case was him giving Paul his license so he could buy alcohol, so it is relevant but probably not seen as a big deal to Alex. Legally big ramifications, but the act itself may be seen as no big deal by Alex and Maggie. I wish we knew for a fact one way or the other if Alex reached out to Buster to come to Moselle the evening of June 7th. Could Alex justify killing Maggie and Paul but spare Buster so he had someone left, someone who couldn't hurt him as much legally? 

I'm so glad I searched to see if folks were discussing here. I've been reddit browsing and Emily D Baker watching, but its all such a large crowd that moves too fast.

I have no nailed down theories but my biggest thought is...he did it, and it wasn't planned. I have two thoughts on this, both equally speculative and my husband is tired of hearing of them.

a) They all go down the kennels and Bubba has a chicken in his mouth. Maggie is being teased to some degree for not knowing a chicken versus a guinea hen. Paul is playing with another dog, and Alex realizes that this is a Happy Family Moment and it is also, importantly, if his CFO keeps digging and if the boat case goes on, one of the last happy family moments he will ever have. It doesn't matter that Buster isn't there because it isn't a planned family annihiliation. He wants to preserve his family like this, so he kills them then and there. Now, their last memory is happy, goofy, playing with dogs, and they never find out who he really was. No premeditation.

b) This one is weirder...but it's one I've never seen anybody else consider. They all go down to the kennels. Bubba has a chicken. Eventually, Alex gets the chicken back from him (we hear that he is the one chasing and calling for Bubba while Paul films the other dog) but the chicken is not dead, just wounded and in shock. They decide to put the bird out of its misery. Here, it's important to remember that Paul is shot at a strange angle, almost as if the gunman is kneeling or falling. Let's say kneeling. Alex, deciding to put that bird down, grabs the rifle and kneels down to check if it is loaded/unloaded, or whatever. This family's lack of gun safety is well documented. While he is doing this, Paul stands close to him in the feed room. Maybe looking for a treat for the dogs? It's an accident. Alex pulls the trigger and accidently shoots his son at point blank range in this weird kneeling-down position. Maybe his hands were shaking. Maybe he's not paying attention because of stress or the proclaimed drug addiction. Maybe he does it again because now he has to put his son out of his misery. Maggie can't be allowed to live after seeing this -- it's all coming crashing down, but this is worse. One accident, one murder. This one is weirder but listen...I cannot assume that an unknown person or hired gun was able to shoot Paul at such close range from such a strange angle. You wouldn't let somebody get that close to you if you didn't know them and they had a rifle, and you wouldn't kneel to shoot an target in a murder-for-hire. Also worth noting that birdshot pellets were collected from Paul's body.

These murders don't make sense in a normal context, for sure. The prosecution has regularly shit the bed here as well, but the Defense also has a hard case to make too. An unknown assailant came to Moselle, where Paul and Maggie weren't even supposed to be, and shot both of them just minutes after Alex left, using guns consistent with ones used on the property, and Alex's clothes from that night are never recovered and he tries to get two working women to lie for him, and this all happened when the only person who knew it was about to come crumbling down was Alex? It's a hard sell. 

Edited February 12, 2023 by Antimony

[ifosterkittens]

8 minutes ago, Antimony said:

I have two thoughts on this, both equally speculative and my husband is tired of hearing of them.

Very relatable! My family is like we get it you're invested, but they aren't. 

9 minutes ago, Antimony said:

These murders don't make sense in a normal context, for sure. The prosecution has regularly shit the bed here as well, but the Defense also has a hard case to make too. An unknown assailant came to Moselle, where Paul and Maggie weren't even supposed to be, and shot both of them just minutes after Alex left, using guns consistent with ones used on the property, and Alex's clothes from that night are never recovered and he tries to get two working women to lie for him, and this all happened when the only person who knew it was about to come crumbling down was Alex? It's a hard sell. 

The lack of "normal" context is the reason we are coming up with all of these theories. I agree with your assessment of why it isn't an unknown assailant. Your second theory is very interesting. I can follow that logic a fatal accident and subsequent murder to cover up the accident. I like your second theory! 

Part of me wonders if Jeannie confronting Alex that morning about the missing $792,000 made Alex called Maggie and Paul to Moselle to discuss something about finances or the lawsuits. I doubt he would have been totally honest with them, but maybe disclosed something that lead to a big argument that ended with two dead. It sounds like too extreme a reaction to me, but we never know what anyone is truly capable of. 

I don't understand why the defense decided to present the Murdaughs as the perfect family. No family is perfect, lots of great families out there, but all made up of flawed human beings. Defense had hoped none of the financial stuff would come in but had to expect at least some of it would- they had to be prepared for that possibility. This is a family under a lot of stress (financial, mental, emotional) and let's not understate the financial expense of a criminal trial for Paul and the civil trial against the family. Son Paul has criminal charges for boating under the influence that caused the death of Mallory Beach- that's a lot for any family. There is a civil lawsuit naming both parents and the Buster- very stressful, probably tough on a marriage and the family unit. Alex's mother had dementia and his father's health is very poor which is also stressful. Oh, plus Alex embezzled millions from his firm and clients and is now facing a hundred charges on his financial crimes. I know Alex's financial crimes came to light after Maggie and Paul were murdered, but it was already starting to unravel on June 7th when Jeannie confronted him about the missing $792K. Then Alex who is a civil attorney couldn't understand his own life insurance policy and hired his cousin to kill him instead of dying by suicide at his own hand to commit insurance fraud to benefit his only surviving family member. Ummm hello that perfect family you were arguing is wondering who you were talking about! 

[Antimony]

21 hours ago, ifosterkittens said:

Very relatable! My family is like we get it you're invested, but they aren't. 

The lack of "normal" context is the reason we are coming up with all of these theories. I agree with your assessment of why it isn't an unknown assailant. Your second theory is very interesting. I can follow that logic a fatal accident and subsequent murder to cover up the accident. I like your second theory! 

[snip just for space]

Thanks! I have a hard time justifying birdshot rifle as a purposeful murder weapon. Partially for this reason, I think it's almost immaterial that Buster wasn't there. I also have a list of reasons why it makes sense and fits the narrative that Buster wasn't there.

a) It wasn't premediated in anyway, it's immaterial.
b) Buster is by all accounts a favorite child. Unfortunately, by the time of the muders, Buster had already been kicked out of Law School for plagarism. However, it seems that Alex didn't think this was a problem (jail phone calls trying to get him reinstated). So, perhaps Buster is spared to carry the family legacy or whatever. Paul was clearly never going to do that. 
c) If the tip off of the issues re: the missing $792,000 was part of the issue, it's worth noting that both Paul and Maggie were present at the death of Gloria Satterfield and could have, if everything else got discovered, blow that whole fraud wide open as well. Maybe Alex calls them both to Moselle to talk about this particular issue re: Satterfield. Unfortunately, I don't know when the Satterfield Sons sue Alex a second time, so I'm shakier on this timeline. 

I do think the defense fumbled by trying to do this "big happy family" thing becuase it brought too much it. It brought in the video of Alex's birthday, showing one of his co-conspirators (Cory? Cody? There's too many lawyers!) and it brought in the idea of character evidence. With the client they have, they should be doging character evidence. 

[hoipolloi]

@Antimony & @ifosterkittens -- appreciate the ISB posts! I am not sure what to think at this point except that Alex is behind the murders of his wife & son, either directly (with the Moselle videos he has now been shown to have the opportunity as well as means & motive) or indirectly (not discounting the possibility of a hired killer). The jailhouse phone calls clearly show Alex as an endlessly manipulative narcissist so I could see him orchestrating their murders even if he didn't pull the trigger(s).

Re: Buster & Paul. From the first, it seemed obvious that Buster was the golden boy of the two kids while Paul was the chronic fuck up. In fact, it was hard not to see Paul as a monster-in-the-making after reading the accounts of his behavior on the night of the boat crash. Now, like Mandy Matney, the longtime reporter on these cases, I wonder what he could have been if his parents had given a damn and gotten him the help he needed. How any parent could witness his endless drinking & out of control behavior without doing something is beyond me.

Finally, here is a great timeline + theories of the case. She updates it regularly.

[Antimony]

22 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

@Antimony & @ifosterkittens -- appreciate the ISB posts! I am not sure what to think at this point except that Alex is behind the murders of his wife & son, either directly (with the Moselle videos he has now been shown to have the opportunity as well as means & motive) or indirectly (not discounting the possibility of a hired killer). The jailhouse phone calls clearly show Alex as an endlessly manipulative narcissist so I could see him orchestrating their murders even if he didn't pull the trigger(s).

Re: Buster & Paul. From the first, it seemed obvious that Buster was the golden boy of the two kids while Paul was the chronic fuck up. In fact, it was hard not to see Paul as a monster-in-the-making after reading the accounts of his behavior on the night of the boat crash. Now, like Mandy Matney, the longtime reporter on these cases, I wonder what he could have been if his parents had given a damn and gotten him the help he needed. How any parent could witness his endless drinking & out of control behavior without doing something is beyond me.

Finally, here is a great timeline + theories of the case. She updates it regularly.

I think I would have hated Paul as he was described early on, but the more I hear about him...I feel like I know him. Not him, exactly, but that guy. I know versions of grown Paul. Buck fuck wild people who grew up into rough but gentle men who want nothing more than be in the woods. I believe Matney (I think...) mentioned that Paul once wanted to maybe go into Forestry/Natural Warden type of work. A lot of the testimony has just made it all...sadder...even in the context of Mallory's death. The whole thing is just a terrible mess, and maybe the odds were slim for Paul to become decent but...I've definately met versions of Paul. I think Matney points out that the whole family encouraged, allowed, and aided and abetted the drinking to the point that Alex was buying Paul drinks, underage, in public at restaurants. Baffling. 

The Big Evidence from this morning is that based on DNA evidence, Paul loaded the guns that killed Maggie. Touch DNA tracing. More evidence towards family guns. 

Edit: It seems to be that Maggie's DNA (blood) was found in the gun that Alex picked up when he told law enforcement he was going to get a gun. The Benilli (sp?)

I teach Forensics in the Media on Thursday so I'm like....tuned in constantly. I think we're going to make this a Case Study. 

Edited February 13, 2023 by Antimony

[hoipolloi]

34 minutes ago, Antimony said:

I think Matney points out that the whole family encouraged, allowed, and aided and abetted the drinking to the point that Alex was buying Paul drinks, underage, in public at restaurants. Baffling. 

It's baffling and criminal -- plus everyone around them had to have known about the excessive & underage drinking. Then again, when you read the accounts of the boat crash & its prequel, NONE of the adults in that circle of kids seemed to bat an eye about all the drinking the kids did that night. 

[TN-peach]

Quick note - I don't know if my husband would be able to give any of our family's birthdays if questioned by the police.