WATCH LIVE: Murdaugh Family Murders — SC v. Alex Murdaugh — Day 20

WATCH LIVE: Murdaugh Family Murders — SC v. Alex Murdaugh —  Day 20

A small town in South Carolina prepares for the highest-profile murder trial seen in decades. Once-renowned in the area, disgraced attorney Alex Murdaugh faces trial for allegedly murdering his wife Maggie and youngest son Paul in 2021.

Read About The Case: https://lawandcrime.com/tag/alex-murdaugh/

#alexmurdaugh
#MurdaughFamilyMurders
#lawandcrime

STAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:
Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3y
Where To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5
Sign Up For Law&Crime’s Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletter
Read Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2Iqo

LAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetwork
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrime
Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetwork
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrime

LAW&CRIME NETWORK PODCASTS: https://lawandcrime.com/podcasts/

SUBSCRIBE TO ALL OF LAW&CRIME NETWORK YOUTUBE CHANNELS:
Main Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz8K1occVvDTYDfFo7N5EZw
Law&Crime Shorts: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVXOqoOCYbi-iXChKAl6DTQ
Channel B: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXCLaaClAWQiTkl3pw9ZdLw
Channel C: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMV3pzWIhJGLYzoHyxBjjNw

source

Share this post

20 thoughts on “WATCH LIVE: Murdaugh Family Murders — SC v. Alex Murdaugh — Day 20

  1. Mark Ball, what did you think that the main house should have done to show whether it had already been searched and cleared, MAYBE jump up and down yelling “Already cleared by the p.o.’s?? IF you, Mark Ball, weren’t sure IF the main house MIGHT be POSSIBLY unsafe, you did NOT have to go inside, you DID have A CHOICE for you AND your wife to leave the whole property AND GO BACK TO YOUR OWN HOME.

  2. Mark Ball was great. I loved that even tho he was technically a witness for the defense, he made sure the truth was known, and in my opinion he ended up being a better witness for the state.

  3. Red flag #1 of crime scene, closest family (alex) calls in a whole f@cking parties worth of fam and friends like hey yall im coving up some murders yall wanna have a party bo?

  4. I think it should b allowed after the defense and state cross examines the witnesses then the jurors should b allowed to ask questions of the witnesses..

  5. His defense is really just his lawyers trying to say Alex is a good guy and then just trying to claim the cops didn't do their job right….these lawyers are the worst. And don't they know of the cops had been more thorough it would have been worse for Alex. He was the one calling everyone and their moms to come to the house on that night!

  6. So the defense thinks they can have Alex testify bur only to what they want and that they can stop the state from asking questions they don't like…really I can't even believe they asked that. He can either choose not to testify or he can answer questions

  7. NOTE: The Defense's experts don't have reports because, if they had report, they would have to provide those to the Prosecutor ahead of the Trial. No reports means the Prosecution cannot prepare ahead of time for cross examination. So, for example, we now know from an interview with law enforcement after the Trial ended, foot coverings are not usually used for outdoor crime scenes because they actually pick up and then shed debris AND the coverings are made of paper – what happens when they get wet? Without a report the Prosecutor couldn't consult law enforcement about this and confront the expert.

  8. So the defense wanted to be able to put the accused up there to paint a rosy picture of who he is but NOT give the state a right to say uhhh no…this dude is a scumbag.

  9. 1:20:00
    Well kiddies, Défense is begging to limit the Prosecution on cross examination of Alex, should he testify. Defense wants no financial crimes listed. Prosecution jumps up and doesn't lolly gag. He gets straight to the point and says that if Alex testifies he makes himself wide open to questioning, they refuse to be limited. (cites lots of good stuff here 611B, a case `Gilbert v Gleaton` where the a voluntary defendant testifies looses his right to not answer questions, the judge already let the financial in but then the financial detects a credibility problem which they are allowed to attack, Taylor v State again waived his rights to not answer, Brown v US Defendant can be impeached and isn't protected in crafting a protected narrative.)

    Defense tries to weakly argue that the only criminal activity that can be used to impeach have to have convictions (pffft, and he cites no cases of course, just Rule 609)… they keep leaning on 403 and have literally NO other argument. Which is other non related crimes cannot be used to prove the one being tried. Pros. cites 608c and motive (the reason the financials was let in, in the first place.) Judge cites 607 and 608, also 611 and 609….. he isn't convinced by Defense and denies their motion. If they don't like cross they will have to bring it up during that specific question.

  10. It's my guess right now that there were so many 'high-up's' and 'authoritative' people involved in all of this mess, i.e. the boat incident, the drugs, the money, etc., that there is much more to this than meets the eye. I don't think he did the shooting himself and I wouldn't be surprised if he's covering and/or protecting someone. I also wouldn't be surprised if there's police and other notable lawyers involved in it all.

Comments are closed.