PAUL & MAGGIE MURDAUGH: South Carolina vs. Alex Murdaugh for Double Homicide of wife & son *GUILTY*

1623728103817.png
This case is being kept pretty quiet, no major details released to speak of (other than it does say there were two different guns used), but no info regarding who found them, who called 911, very little else.

Of interest, the grandfather died just a few days after these murders and it sounds as if he was ill from various articles so probably not unexpected. I think of the typical motives, did grandpa have a big estate? How big in the overall family of grandpa's on down? They sound like a pretty well known family and a powerful one in their state, more on that in the article.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't believe they knew what went on with the clerk and in the jury room except for the egg juror incident. Then I believe they started to find out, probably by contacting some jurors. Then they heard about the book deal at some point so when did it actually first come out? Officially it was 1st August IIRC but maybe it had launched earlier online. I believe it was self published, but not sure.

The other thing that I find strange is that Maggie's estate was valued at ~ $4m. (Included the Edisto Beach House, which I believe was hers already, and Moselle, which Alex sold to her for $1.) Now I hear that Alex was left ~$4m by his father so that is $8m altogether that he would have from both of their deaths, which happened 3 days apart. $8m is the amount that he swindled and stole from clients so now he has enough money to pay them out right?

Just another weird coincidence in all this tragedy? Or planning?
The house is up for sale again. The person who bought the estate is keeping the kennels and land. I guess nobody is likely to want to buy that.
 
The house is up for sale again. The person who bought the estate is keeping the kennels and land. I guess nobody is likely to want to buy that.
I'd guess just as possible is that the current owner wants the land and kennels and sheds and getting rid of the house and getting some money for it will help pay for the rest. Much smaller but I consider the same, selling the home and keeping the other acres or selling the acres and keeping the home and an acre or few.

Whoever has it clearly doesn't care what happened (to stop him from buying it I mean) and whoever buys whatever part he sells wouldn't either so much as getting a deal or what they want.
 
I'd guess just as possible is that the current owner wants the land and kennels and sheds and getting rid of the house and getting some money for it will help pay for the rest. Much smaller but I consider the same, selling the home and keeping the other acres or selling the acres and keeping the home and an acre or few.

Whoever has it clearly doesn't care what happened (to stop him from buying it I mean) and whoever buys whatever part he sells wouldn't either so much as getting a deal or what they want.
I remember I looked into it at the time and it appeared to be someone interested in the woodland/forestry commercially IIRC so it does make sense they would sell the residence.
 
From the link -

"The defense wants Newman removed from deciding whether there will be a full hearing into Hill’s actions, saying the judge could likely be a witness because of his interactions with Hill.



They also said Newman, in several post-trial interviews, indicated he thought Murdaugh was guilty. The defense argues this could prevent him from fairly deciding if the murder trial was unfair.

While stressing they don’t suggest the judge acted improperly as he presided over the trial, defense attorneys Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin argued in their motion that Newman is a material witness to Hill’s actions in court.

Newman, or a judge who replaces him, will have to decide whether to hold a full hearing on the defense’s allegations. That hearing would enable defense attorneys to force the other jurors, witnesses and potentially even Newman to testify under oath. The defense could also get phone records, emails and texts. Defense attorneys have suggested jurors had group texts going.

Murdaugh is serving life without parole in the shooting deaths of his wife and younger son at their home in 2021. Investigators said 52-year-old Maggie was shot four or five times with a rifle and 22-year-old Paul suffered two shotgun blasts.

Even if his conviction is overturned, Murdaugh likely will remain in prison. He is awaiting sentencing after pleading guilty to federal charges he stole millions of dollars from clients and his family law firm, which will probably mean years or decades behind bars. That trial is set to begin later this month.

In an earlier court filing, his lawyers summarized how they think Hill tampered with the jury in the murder case.

“She asked jurors about their opinions about Mr. Murdaugh’s guilt or innocence. She instructed them not to believe evidence presented in Mr. Murdaugh’s defense, including his own testimony. She lied to the judge to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty. And she pressured jurors to reach a guilty verdict quickly so she could profit from it,” they wrote.

Prosecutors argue that not all jurors agree with the defense’s allegation. Although the prosecution hasn’t responded to the motion to remove the judge, they did write a letter to Newman saying they do not think he should step down. They say bringing another judge up to speed on the trial’s many details would be too costly and expensive.

Murdaugh’s lawyers also give the same reasons for wanting Newman removed from a trial on dozens of charges that Murdaugh stole money from clients and his law firm: They say his comments show his mind is already made up.

They cite Newman’s comment to the jury after its guilty verdicts about “all the evidence pointing to only one conclusion and that’s the conclusion that you all have reached.” In a speech at his alma mater, Newman said Murdaugh “committed an unforgivable, unimaginable crime and there is no way he’ll be able to sleep peacefully.”

Newman’s age requires him to retire as a judge at the end of the year, and Murdaugh’s lawyers suggest that’s why he spoke so much afterward, figuring it would be years before the appeals were heard. But the allegation against Hill required an immediate hearing, they said.

And while they think Newman’s comments broke judicial rules, Murdaugh’s attorneys said they don’t want him punished.

The defense is asking the state Supreme Court to suspend any trials or hearings about Murdaugh’s case until they determine whether Newman should be removed."
 

By Melissa Koenig
Published Nov. 8, 2023, 10:41 a.m. ET

The South Carolina court clerk at the center of Alex Murdaugh’s request for a new trial for the murders of his wife and son has denied his allegations that she tampered with the jury, as state prosecutors ask a judge to throw out the disgraced scion’s request.

Rebecca Hill, the Colleton County clerk of court, claims Murdaugh’s allegations that she pushed jurors to convict him in the deaths of his wife, Maggie, and son Paul include “numerous misrepresentations and false statements.”

“I did not tell the jury not to be fooled by evidence presented by Mr. Murdaugh’s attorneys,” Hill insisted in an affidavit filed Tuesday.

“I did not instruct the jury to ‘watch him closely.’ I did not instruct the jury to ‘look at his actions.’ I did not instruct the jury to ‘look at his movements.’ I did not say to the jury, ‘this shouldn’t take long,’” she claimed in the affidavit obtained by The Post.

She continued to deny each of the 26 allegations against her, writing: “During the trial, I did not tell members of the jury that the media would want to interview them at the end of the trial.

“During the trial, I did not hand out business cards to media personnel. I did not tell jurors, ‘Y’all are going to hear things that will throw you all off. Don’t let this distract or mislead you.’”

Murdaugh’s attorneys have argued that Hill “instructed them not to believe evidence presented in Mr. Murdaugh’s defense, including his own testimony,” “lied to the judge to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty,” and “pressured jurors to reach a guilty verdict quickly so she could profit from it.”

But state prosecutors dismissed Murdaugh’s claims in a 48-page response Tuesday, arguing that the one-time legal scion is advancing “a sweeping conspiratorial theory” and that “not every inappropriate comment made by a member of court staff to a juror rises to the level of constitutional error.”

They pointed to a South Carolina Law Enforcement Division investigation in which 10 of the 12 jurors who convicted Murdaugh said they did not feel influenced by court officials.

In fact, the prosecutors argued that Murdaugh’s only evidence of alleged misconduct stems from an affidavit from one juror who said he remembered someone telling him to “watch his body language” — which he said did not affect his verdict — and an alternate juror who was removed prior to deliberations for discussing the case.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

More at link. ~Summer
 

By Melissa Koenig
Published Nov. 8, 2023, 10:41 a.m. ET

The South Carolina court clerk at the center of Alex Murdaugh’s request for a new trial for the murders of his wife and son has denied his allegations that she tampered with the jury, as state prosecutors ask a judge to throw out the disgraced scion’s request.

Rebecca Hill, the Colleton County clerk of court, claims Murdaugh’s allegations that she pushed jurors to convict him in the deaths of his wife, Maggie, and son Paul include “numerous misrepresentations and false statements.”

“I did not tell the jury not to be fooled by evidence presented by Mr. Murdaugh’s attorneys,” Hill insisted in an affidavit filed Tuesday.

“I did not instruct the jury to ‘watch him closely.’ I did not instruct the jury to ‘look at his actions.’ I did not instruct the jury to ‘look at his movements.’ I did not say to the jury, ‘this shouldn’t take long,’” she claimed in the affidavit obtained by The Post.

She continued to deny each of the 26 allegations against her, writing: “During the trial, I did not tell members of the jury that the media would want to interview them at the end of the trial.

“During the trial, I did not hand out business cards to media personnel. I did not tell jurors, ‘Y’all are going to hear things that will throw you all off. Don’t let this distract or mislead you.’”

Murdaugh’s attorneys have argued that Hill “instructed them not to believe evidence presented in Mr. Murdaugh’s defense, including his own testimony,” “lied to the judge to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty,” and “pressured jurors to reach a guilty verdict quickly so she could profit from it.”

But state prosecutors dismissed Murdaugh’s claims in a 48-page response Tuesday, arguing that the one-time legal scion is advancing “a sweeping conspiratorial theory” and that “not every inappropriate comment made by a member of court staff to a juror rises to the level of constitutional error.”

They pointed to a South Carolina Law Enforcement Division investigation in which 10 of the 12 jurors who convicted Murdaugh said they did not feel influenced by court officials.

In fact, the prosecutors argued that Murdaugh’s only evidence of alleged misconduct stems from an affidavit from one juror who said he remembered someone telling him to “watch his body language” — which he said did not affect his verdict — and an alternate juror who was removed prior to deliberations for discussing the case.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

More at link. ~Summer

I hope this fails for him.
 
Late last night or early morn, maybe just after midnight, I ran into this and started watching. I knew nothing had been posted here about the response yet and was going to bring it over but got way too tired. I started watching it but in not too long I was falling asleep. I also thought of going to look for an article and not a video but knew I'd not get to that but hoped to bring this link over at least but went down for the count. Now this a.m. I see the new news is here.

It's impossible not to like Gigi if someone wants to watch the docs read. She also always gives a music fact at the start of each video which is kind of fun for music buffs.

I haven't heard it all yet but heard a lot of Becky HIll's response, maybe even all, can't recall. I did not get as far as the State's response before falling asleep. I was full and very tired and today is a day off with 20 phone calls (no lie) to make as to things to take care of and that's without the other things that burn to get done (laundry, cat pan, etc.). I need new shoes and will never get to that I swear. Last night I met up after work (tired as heck) and helped my daughter and SIL pick up and choose paint and supplies and then we went to dinner. My way and tiredness was to bail on that part but i had today off and I NEVER get to see my family which is just so wrong. Miss my mom who is older, etc. Yeah off topic but have to say i had some Asian crispy shrimp thing with like 7 shrimp ringed around the plate and tossed in some type of Asian made sauce that got hotter and hotter with each bite building a higher and higher burn in the throat. In the center was an Asian slaw that was yummy and likely meant to cool the palate in between bites of shrimp. Daughter had a cajun type of pasta with sausage and chicken and more and some type of cream sauce that had its own hint of hot and a slight zing. We shared. Both were awesome and very much something I'd order again. We also shared the salad and unlimited garlic toast that came with hers. I had a very good (one) Southern Comfort Old Fashioned Sweet, we caught up some, not nearly long enough and they drove me home (I'd dropped my car off which I still need to empty out today). I was home by 8 but my day started at 4 a.m. I was FULL but needed to unwind from my week badly and was up until probably 1? but dozing off by midnight. Wanted to sleep in but woke up like always with my tops of no more than six hours of sleep I seem to get and usually less. Anywhoooo I know that's off topic and for the basement but I haven't been even able to "pop and drop" in there lately and am behind on case threads so I am slipping it in here PLUS it relates to my tiredness and why I did not get this case news over here when i first ran into it.

Back to ON TOPIC. What a very strong and confident reply and it just shows how the tables can turn when we first hear in these cases of one side's claims (think Delphi as well) and don't allow for how opinions can change when FINALLY hearing the other side. I don't have any problem with thinking Murdaugh and his gang have created a lot of this but we shall see. If things are FAIR and no M cronies are deciding anyhow or some bigger fix isn't in... I haven't heard the State's yet but I read some here and heard her opening on the news, etc. to know the gist of it.

Very strong responses with the other side of this made up or partially true (remains to be seen) thing by the defense. I doubt it is all true and such things are always very one sided and omit things that don't help them or dispute it.

It also bears realizing while most are falling for and jumping on the one side out on the Delphi saga, there will also likely be a very strong response with very different alleged facts but we haven't seen that yet. They differ a lot in that this one has had its trial and a conviction already and in this one it is about the jury and a clerk. In that one no trial yet and it is about a defense team who now made it also about a judge.

Both cases though are about getting their client off as the end goal of course and by the defense and both interestingly involve a court official of such was brought in after the first issue occurred.

News also seems to have become very weighted and defense driven lately. Places like Court TV should well know there is a another side and it is coming and it is never immediate and in the meantime they have the defense with a total (not even partial) win. The prosecution side in Delphi has a case and evidence, etc. to protect as does the judge which add another layer. Here, the case is over and the facts tried so it is a bit different.

Here TOO they involve the judge and add him in. It is OBVIOUS they want Newman off the case and any decisions although they aren't so stupid as to run him into the ground or diss a probably well respected judge to the higher court, they simply hint at not perfect things he did in not too strong of a manner and give reasons he should be off in hopes the higher court agrees rather than remanding anything back to Newman. No expert but that's my uneducated take on it.
 
A DEFENSE attorney who doesn't just jump on defense side like some talking heads but gives it from both sides or gives an honest opinion regardless.

 
This Fox news link appears to have all the updates. So the court agreed to give Alex a new trial and stay his appeal while that happens.

Is that right?


My interpretation is that they've stayed things while he is waiting on the decision as to whether or not he'll get a new trial. I don't think anything has been decided as to a new trial.
 
Late last night or early morn, maybe just after midnight, I ran into this and started watching. I knew nothing had been posted here about the response yet and was going to bring it over but got way too tired. I started watching it but in not too long I was falling asleep. I also thought of going to look for an article and not a video but knew I'd not get to that but hoped to bring this link over at least but went down for the count. Now this a.m. I see the new news is here.

It's impossible not to like Gigi if someone wants to watch the docs read. She also always gives a music fact at the start of each video which is kind of fun for music buffs.

I haven't heard it all yet but heard a lot of Becky HIll's response, maybe even all, can't recall. I did not get as far as the State's response before falling asleep. I was full and very tired and today is a day off with 20 phone calls (no lie) to make as to things to take care of and that's without the other things that burn to get done (laundry, cat pan, etc.). I need new shoes and will never get to that I swear. Last night I met up after work (tired as heck) and helped my daughter and SIL pick up and choose paint and supplies and then we went to dinner. My way and tiredness was to bail on that part but i had today off and I NEVER get to see my family which is just so wrong. Miss my mom who is older, etc. Yeah off topic but have to say i had some Asian crispy shrimp thing with like 7 shrimp ringed around the plate and tossed in some type of Asian made sauce that got hotter and hotter with each bite building a higher and higher burn in the throat. In the center was an Asian slaw that was yummy and likely meant to cool the palate in between bites of shrimp. Daughter had a cajun type of pasta with sausage and chicken and more and some type of cream sauce that had its own hint of hot and a slight zing. We shared. Both were awesome and very much something I'd order again. We also shared the salad and unlimited garlic toast that came with hers. I had a very good (one) Southern Comfort Old Fashioned Sweet, we caught up some, not nearly long enough and they drove me home (I'd dropped my car off which I still need to empty out today). I was home by 8 but my day started at 4 a.m. I was FULL but needed to unwind from my week badly and was up until probably 1? but dozing off by midnight. Wanted to sleep in but woke up like always with my tops of no more than six hours of sleep I seem to get and usually less. Anywhoooo I know that's off topic and for the basement but I haven't been even able to "pop and drop" in there lately and am behind on case threads so I am slipping it in here PLUS it relates to my tiredness and why I did not get this case news over here when i first ran into it.

Back to ON TOPIC. What a very strong and confident reply and it just shows how the tables can turn when we first hear in these cases of one side's claims (think Delphi as well) and don't allow for how opinions can change when FINALLY hearing the other side. I don't have any problem with thinking Murdaugh and his gang have created a lot of this but we shall see. If things are FAIR and no M cronies are deciding anyhow or some bigger fix isn't in... I haven't heard the State's yet but I read some here and heard her opening on the news, etc. to know the gist of it.

Very strong responses with the other side of this made up or partially true (remains to be seen) thing by the defense. I doubt it is all true and such things are always very one sided and omit things that don't help them or dispute it.

It also bears realizing while most are falling for and jumping on the one side out on the Delphi saga, there will also likely be a very strong response with very different alleged facts but we haven't seen that yet. They differ a lot in that this one has had its trial and a conviction already and in this one it is about the jury and a clerk. In that one no trial yet and it is about a defense team who now made it also about a judge.

Both cases though are about getting their client off as the end goal of course and by the defense and both interestingly involve a court official of such was brought in after the first issue occurred.

News also seems to have become very weighted and defense driven lately. Places like Court TV should well know there is a another side and it is coming and it is never immediate and in the meantime they have the defense with a total (not even partial) win. The prosecution side in Delphi has a case and evidence, etc. to protect as does the judge which add another layer. Here, the case is over and the facts tried so it is a bit different.

Here TOO they involve the judge and add him in. It is OBVIOUS they want Newman off the case and any decisions although they aren't so stupid as to run him into the ground or diss a probably well respected judge to the higher court, they simply hint at not perfect things he did in not too strong of a manner and give reasons he should be off in hopes the higher court agrees rather than remanding anything back to Newman. No expert but that's my uneducated take on it.
Judge Newman is retiring at the end of the year anyway isn't he?
 
My interpretation is that they've stayed things while he is waiting on the decision as to whether or not he'll get a new trial. I don't think anything has been decided as to a new trial.
Oh ok. He's filed the motion for the new trial though, on 28th Oct I see. I am a bit behind on this.

 
This Fox news link appears to have all the updates. So the court agreed to give Alex a new trial and stay his appeal while that happens?

Is that right? Apparently not.

The court has allowed him to apply for a new trial.

No new trial has been granted. I think they got the appeal to the higher court stayed at their own request while this other stuff is addressed and decided.
 
My interpretation is that they've stayed things while he is waiting on the decision as to whether or not he'll get a new trial. I don't think anything has been decided as to a new trial.
I guess I should have read one post further. Yeah, it is stayed to my knowledge. Not dropped, just filed but now waiting and put on hold or something like that.
 
Judge Newman is retiring at the end of the year anyway isn't he?
they have to at a certain age from what I understand. although I remember something about they can still serve as a reserve judge or be like in a rotation to do such.

i think a big motive here by the murdaugh defense (one of fhem) is getting Newman off the case. you see it in all their stuff. they don't dare come strongly AT him. he isn't one of their cronies, he is not one of their corrupt imo but they also do not dare go at him and malign him too hard, etc.
 

BY JOHN MONK
UPDATED NOVEMBER 13, 2023 11:58 AM

Lawyers for convicted killer Alex Murdaugh are asking that the location of his trial later this month on state financial crimes charges be moved to a county where a “fair and impartial” jury can better be found. If the trial cannot be moved from Beaufort County, or a jury cannot be brought in from another part of South Carolina, Murdaugh’s attorneys ask for a one-year delay.

Currently, Murdaugh’s trial on various state financial crimes is scheduled to state Monday, Nov. 27, in Beaufort. Prosecutors from state Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office had no immediate response. A spokesman said the response will come in court or in filings.

<snip>

A hearing on the motion is expected to be held Friday morning at the Beaufort County courthouse. The motion also says that of 167 questionnaires returned by prospective jurors in the upcoming financial crimes trial, “at least 147 panel members admitted having prior knowledge about the Defendant and his criminal charges.”

The motion adds that “exhaustive media coverage about the Defendant has permeated Beaufort County, as reflected by the jurors’ responses received thus far.” Although state law allows trials to be transferred to other counties in the 14th Judicial Circuit, prospective jurors in the circuit’s other four counties — Colleton, Hampton, Jasper and Allendale — have likely been exposed to the same amount of media coverage, the motion says.

“Transferring venue to another county in the circuit would not be an option,” the motion says. “There are perhaps counties located in the Upstate whose citizens have not followed the coverage of the Defendant as closely as the citizens in the Low Country; however, this is very doubtful in the present media climate.” The motion closes by saying “the better course of action is to simply continue this case, and the other financial fraud cases, until at least one year after the conclusion of the murder trial.”
 

BY JOHN MONK
UPDATED NOVEMBER 13, 2023 11:58 AM

Lawyers for convicted killer Alex Murdaugh are asking that the location of his trial later this month on state financial crimes charges be moved to a county where a “fair and impartial” jury can better be found. If the trial cannot be moved from Beaufort County, or a jury cannot be brought in from another part of South Carolina, Murdaugh’s attorneys ask for a one-year delay.

Currently, Murdaugh’s trial on various state financial crimes is scheduled to state Monday, Nov. 27, in Beaufort. Prosecutors from state Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office had no immediate response. A spokesman said the response will come in court or in filings.

<snip>

A hearing on the motion is expected to be held Friday morning at the Beaufort County courthouse. The motion also says that of 167 questionnaires returned by prospective jurors in the upcoming financial crimes trial, “at least 147 panel members admitted having prior knowledge about the Defendant and his criminal charges.”

The motion adds that “exhaustive media coverage about the Defendant has permeated Beaufort County, as reflected by the jurors’ responses received thus far.” Although state law allows trials to be transferred to other counties in the 14th Judicial Circuit, prospective jurors in the circuit’s other four counties — Colleton, Hampton, Jasper and Allendale — have likely been exposed to the same amount of media coverage, the motion says.

“Transferring venue to another county in the circuit would not be an option,” the motion says. “There are perhaps counties located in the Upstate whose citizens have not followed the coverage of the Defendant as closely as the citizens in the Low Country; however, this is very doubtful in the present media climate.” The motion closes by saying “the better course of action is to simply continue this case, and the other financial fraud cases, until at least one year after the conclusion of the murder trial.”
I didn't know what reaction emoji to use. I went with laughter at the one year request although I find it outrageous and not that funny. Outrage or anger was another option.

A year is not going to make a single person who already has read about or knows about any of this or of Alex M forget their opinion, that is why it is ridiculous.

I would say though more know less about the financial crimes or "understand' them than do about the murders.

And of course the defense wants a YEAR and isn't this very last minute? Scheduled to start in just days?

Why doesn't he just plead guilty as he did to the fed financial ones? Hmmm?

What a cluster ____.
 

BY JOHN MONK
UPDATED NOVEMBER 13, 2023 11:58 AM

Lawyers for convicted killer Alex Murdaugh are asking that the location of his trial later this month on state financial crimes charges be moved to a county where a “fair and impartial” jury can better be found. If the trial cannot be moved from Beaufort County, or a jury cannot be brought in from another part of South Carolina, Murdaugh’s attorneys ask for a one-year delay.

Currently, Murdaugh’s trial on various state financial crimes is scheduled to state Monday, Nov. 27, in Beaufort. Prosecutors from state Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office had no immediate response. A spokesman said the response will come in court or in filings.

<snip>

A hearing on the motion is expected to be held Friday morning at the Beaufort County courthouse. The motion also says that of 167 questionnaires returned by prospective jurors in the upcoming financial crimes trial, “at least 147 panel members admitted having prior knowledge about the Defendant and his criminal charges.”

The motion adds that “exhaustive media coverage about the Defendant has permeated Beaufort County, as reflected by the jurors’ responses received thus far.” Although state law allows trials to be transferred to other counties in the 14th Judicial Circuit, prospective jurors in the circuit’s other four counties — Colleton, Hampton, Jasper and Allendale — have likely been exposed to the same amount of media coverage, the motion says.

“Transferring venue to another county in the circuit would not be an option,” the motion says. “There are perhaps counties located in the Upstate whose citizens have not followed the coverage of the Defendant as closely as the citizens in the Low Country; however, this is very doubtful in the present media climate.” The motion closes by saying “the better course of action is to simply continue this case, and the other financial fraud cases, until at least one year after the conclusion of the murder trial.”

He already testified, under oath, that he did them. So what the Hades is do they think it's going to change?
 
Newman even though court higher could have decided for him to handle, recused from post trial motions but not from all. I am sharing this as I see there is no print news media on it and I don't do news and this is the reason, they don't report sh*t and I don't see the news here. I had a moment and so sharrng it. Others interested can probably find more. This vid is interesting though and shares and discusses more than any article will.

This is an example of a defense attorney who doesn't play all defense views if he sees otherwise. I don't watch him often but on occasion. More do to trying to catch up with others, other cases, and no time.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,872
Messages
214,786
Members
869
Latest member
Jericho
Back
Top