Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think he killed the son and wife. I think the deceased girl’s family did that. I think he life unwound after and he took greater liberties with stealing. He may have been stealing for years but stopped covering it up. I think his dog use also spiraled. I think he staged a suicide of himself but bungled it or chickened out. He wanted to make sure the other son got his insurance money. This is all so nutty.

Why would the girl’s family have done this? That doesn’t make sense. People don’t go around revenge murdering, especially the mothers. But husbands kill their wives A LOT.

Well, normally mothers doing go around filing lawsuits a month after their daughter's dead either against the FAMILY of the accused. The grandfather, father, and brother had nothing to do with that boat ride, were not piloting the boat, and not drinking.

She might as well have sued the girl's boyfriend or the friends who were drinking with her. Plus the lawsuits just got thrown out after Covid delays all 2020. So now the grief would be extra fresh.

Though I don't think the mother did it - it was someone else related to the girl in the small community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still doubt he's the perp for the first two murders. Because reports say the son and wife were shot with two different guns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, indicating two shooters at the very least.

Their murders have to deal with that girl. But maybe the relatives wanted the father too -- maybe he said something in their grief or used legal tactics to get his son off that they weren't going to forgive.

I don’t think it’s going to be that interesting and if it has anything to do with the boat accident I think it’s only that the proceedings may have exposed the embezzlement. The dad killed the wife and son and staged the flat tire/shooting to cover up his own theft/affairs/whatever else. As ever, it’s usually the husband. He probably used two guns either to make it look like two shooters (obviously he’s into staging this stuff) or because of his distance to each victim depending on how it went down and if he was planning to kill them both the whole time.

So he was standing outside with a shotgun and a assault rifle at his feet and neither the son/wife tried to run or fight him off?

Maybe a gun expert can come in here but as far as I know you need two hands for both of those weapons. Which means he would have have to stop and adjust the different one.

Unless he shot the son and wife separately, laid in wait, then shot the next one in the same area.

It seems perfectly logical to me that he shot one and then waited for the other and then shot that one.

Okay - so why'd he shoot them and not the other son? Why out of the open rather than inside? Why not a murder-suicide?

Anonymous wrote:I am so fascinated by this story. Is there a podcast yet?? Or even better, an HBO/Netflix miniseries

Podcast called "Murdaugh Murders" by Mandy Matney. I find it really hard to listen to though--she has a bit of a snotty attitude (Everyone else is copying me! I found all this first!" and a really heavy vocal fry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still doubt he's the perp for the first two murders. Because reports say the son and wife were shot with two different guns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, indicating two shooters at the very least.

Their murders have to deal with that girl. But maybe the relatives wanted the father too -- maybe he said something in their grief or used legal tactics to get his son off that they weren't going to forgive.

I don’t think it’s going to be that interesting and if it has anything to do with the boat accident I think it’s only that the proceedings may have exposed the embezzlement. The dad killed the wife and son and staged the flat tire/shooting to cover up his own theft/affairs/whatever else. As ever, it’s usually the husband. He probably used two guns either to make it look like two shooters (obviously he’s into staging this stuff) or because of his distance to each victim depending on how it went down and if he was planning to kill them both the whole time.

So he was standing outside with a shotgun and a assault rifle at his feet and neither the son/wife tried to run or fight him off?

Maybe a gun expert can come in here but as far as I know you need two hands for both of those weapons. Which means he would have have to stop and adjust the different one.

Unless he shot the son and wife separately, laid in wait, then shot the next one in the same area.

It seems perfectly logical to me that he shot one and then waited for the other and then shot that one.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think he killed the son and wife. I think the deceased girl’s family did that. I think he life unwound after and he took greater liberties with stealing. He may have been stealing for years but stopped covering it up. I think his dog use also spiraled. I think he staged a suicide of himself but bungled it or chickened out. He wanted to make sure the other son got his insurance money. This is all so nutty.

Why would the girl’s family have done this? That doesn’t make sense. People don’t go around revenge murdering, especially the mothers. But husbands kill their wives A LOT.

I am so fascinated by this story. Is there a podcast yet?? Or even better, an HBO/Netflix miniseries

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think he killed the son and wife. I think the deceased girl’s family did that. I think he life unwound after and he took greater liberties with stealing. He may have been stealing for years but stopped covering it up. I think his dog use also spiraled. I think he staged a suicide of himself but bungled it or chickened out. He wanted to make sure the other son got his insurance money. This is all so nutty.

This makes sense in a way. Maybe the law firm didn't even know about the millions he took until the son got charged with manslaughter and they started looking into finances.

As for the suicide for insurance payout - would also explain why he was sent or went to 'rehab' within 24 hours of being found on the rob with the superficial gunshot wound.

Though it amazes me how he 'ruined' his life considering he had everything handed to his. Every patriarch in his family has been county prosecutor. They own their own law firm. He most likely inherited the land and hundreds of acres title-clear.

I don’t think he killed the son and wife. I think the deceased girl’s family did that. I think he life unwound after and he took greater liberties with stealing. He may have been stealing for years but stopped covering it up. I think his dog use also spiraled. I think he staged a suicide of himself but bungled it or chickened out. He wanted to make sure the other son got his insurance money. This is all so nutty.

Assault rifles are not small and usually not the weapon of choice of FAs. Handguns are easier and get off enough rounds to kill 1-2 people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still doubt he's the perp for the first two murders. Because reports say the son and wife were shot with two different guns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, indicating two shooters at the very least.

Their murders have to deal with that girl. But maybe the relatives wanted the father too -- maybe he said something in their grief or used legal tactics to get his son off that they weren't going to forgive.

I don’t think it’s going to be that interesting and if it has anything to do with the boat accident I think it’s only that the proceedings may have exposed the embezzlement. The dad killed the wife and son and staged the flat tire/shooting to cover up his own theft/affairs/whatever else. As ever, it’s usually the husband. He probably used two guns either to make it look like two shooters (obviously he’s into staging this stuff) or because of his distance to each victim depending on how it went down and if he was planning to kill them both the whole time.

So he was standing outside with a shotgun and a assault rifle at his feet and neither the son/wife tried to run or fight him off?

Maybe a gun expert can come in here but as far as I know you need two hands for both of those weapons. Which means he would have have to stop and adjust the different one.

Unless he shot the son and wife separately, laid in wait, then shot the next one in the same area.

Anonymous wrote:I still doubt he's the perp for the first two murders. Because reports say the son and wife were shot with two different guns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, indicating two shooters at the very least.

Their murders have to deal with that girl. But maybe the relatives wanted the father too -- maybe he said something in their grief or used legal tactics to get his son off that they weren't going to forgive.

I don’t think it’s going to be that interesting and if it has anything to do with the boat accident I think it’s only that the proceedings may have exposed the embezzlement. The dad killed the wife and son and staged the flat tire/shooting to cover up his own theft/affairs/whatever else. As ever, it’s usually the husband. He probably used two guns either to make it look like two shooters (obviously he’s into staging this stuff) or because of his distance to each victim depending on how it went down and if he was planning to kill them both the whole time.

A related lawsuit was filed in March 2019 going after the whole family - the deceased grandfather, the father, and the brother. I'm guessing the boat victim's family/mother saw them all as culpable. And they'd be especially angry in 2021 as likely this was thrown out in court after an expensive set of hearings.

According to The Island Packet, Renee Beach, Mallory’s mom, filed a lawsuit against former solicitor Randolph Murdaugh III, his son Richard Alexander Murdaugh, and his grandson Richard Alexander Murdaugh Jr. — Paul’s older brother Buster. The suit alleged that Buster Murdaugh allowed Paul Murdaugh, who the outlet said was not named in the suit, to use his ID to buy alcohol.

I still doubt he's the perp for the first two murders. Because reports say the son and wife were shot with two different guns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, indicating two shooters at the very least.

Their murders have to deal with that girl. But maybe the relatives wanted the father too -- maybe he said something in their grief or used legal tactics to get his son off that they weren't going to forgive.

Anonymous wrote:He is from a long line of attorneys, how dumb can he be? But then again, he is corned and desperate

I wonder what his reasoning was for shooting the wife and second son who was on trial for accidental murder.

Obviously the son's trial was going to be expensive.

We also heard he was having an affair.

But he could have just self-represented the son and divorced. Though being a Southern community I doubt the husband/wife were even contemplating divorce. He was just allowed to continue on with his affair.

He is from a long line of attorneys, how dumb can he be? But then again, he is corned and desperate