Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somebody took the forensic data and made an animation of the shootings. It is well done and creepy as hell. It’s the first time I’ve been able to clearly understand what happened. (No gore or anything like that.)

Their theory about the weird angle is that the shooter was leaning down to switch guns when Paul surprised him by stumbling out of the feed room. Other than that, it’s all straight from the forensic evidence.

https://youtu.be/IUY6EWWbjCE

Dang

Was the animator trying to say at the end that the 911 call happened to quickly or too slowly? I didn't understand that part.

Agreed, that part was a little confusing.

I wasn’t really paying attention until someone in this thread recommended the Netflix series, and after watching that I was *hooked.* So, thank you! And they really do all come across as loathsome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somebody took the forensic data and made an animation of the shootings. It is well done and creepy as hell. It’s the first time I’ve been able to clearly understand what happened. (No gore or anything like that.)

Their theory about the weird angle is that the shooter was leaning down to switch guns when Paul surprised him by stumbling out of the feed room. Other than that, it’s all straight from the forensic evidence.

https://youtu.be/IUY6EWWbjCE

Dang

Was the animator trying to say at the end that the 911 call happened to quickly or too slowly? I didn't understand that part.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

I don't see how AM thought murdering his wife and son would be a solution. I know he was desperate for money and that he wanted a loan against the beach house that was in Maggie's name and apparently she was refusing. He now owns that beach house but how could he think he would get away with it? I know he was able to get away with a lot of embezzlement but murder is different. Does everyone assume he was a drug dealer given the amount of pills he had or paid for? It seems like there is more to be uncovered.

She had hired a forensic accountant and was figuring things out. They also weren't living together so were possibly heading toward divorce. He was desperate to prevent himself from being exposed as a liar, crook, etc. I'm guessing that he decided to murder Maggie first then decided to murder Paul as well. By doing so, 1) he would look less suspicious because while husbands are frequently the murderers when wives turn up dead, not many in comparison also murder their adult children and 2) some of the legal troubles brought on by the boating accident might go away. He was also desperate financially -- did he have a life insurance policy on Maggie and/or Paul?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a video where a woman, who was a prostitute, recounted many horrible encounters with Alex in 2015. She claimed that when she first met him, he was polite and nice, but later when they were together, he grew violent and tried to joke her. She said that he completely changed and his pupils dilated so much that his eyes looked black. This is interesting because I noticed saw his eyes changed when he was asked a question by Agent Owens that he didn’t like.

Umm, link? I don't remember hearing about this. Reminiscent of Josh Duggar...

I'm not the PP and hadn't heard of it either but found this on Google.

https://www.fitsnews.com/2022/08/18/lindsey-edwards-sled-interviews-former-sex-worker-in-connection-with-murdaugh-murders-investigation/

Do you honk this is credible? I had read that Maggie was aware of his infidelity then and they worked
on their marriage

I'm the PP who posted the link, and I watched/listened to the whole thing today while I was sorting through toys in my kids' playroom. I think she is a very credible witness. She seemed believable to me.

Anonymous wrote:Yes Maggie had a divorce attorney.

I read the Moselle property was worth $4M but who knows how much if any equity they had in it.

That estimate is a joke. That is bs.

What is the fascination w this case. I have tried to keep up but seems dumb to give it national attention.

^ that should say, "on top of the issues Paul brought"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

I don't see how AM thought murdering his wife and son would be a solution. I know he was desperate for money and that he wanted a loan against the beach house that was in Maggie's name and apparently she was refusing. He now owns that beach house but how could he think he would get away with it? I know he was able to get away with a lot of embezzlement but murder is different. Does everyone assume he was a drug dealer given the amount of pills he had or paid for? It seems like there is more to be uncovered.

There was also an element of shame. Maggie and Paul were realizing the truth about him. They already knew about the drugs and they were figuring out about the money. Deep down Alex is/was extremely ashamed and he can't deal with that shame. On time of the issue's Paul brought to the family and Maggie's possible divorce there you go. He was not rational or clear-headed so don't try to make too much sense of it. He is a sociopath.

Yes Maggie had a divorce attorney.

I read the Moselle property was worth $4M but who knows how much if any equity they had in it.

Things started unraveling quickly with that boat crash. Blanca testified that Maggie confided to her that the lawsuit for that crash was seeking about 30 million, she said that she was frightened and that Alex wasn’t being truthful to her about finances. It is quite suspicious that the first thing Alex told 911 and the first responding officer, was about the wreck and threats to his son, that he should have taken seriously. I think this was his perfect excuse and distraction to throw the scent off of him, point to others and divert the lawsuit; he gave us quite a performance as a grieving parent. He and Maggie were not staying together, so something was amiss in their marriage, rumors that she was seeking a divorce. So yes, it was a combination of motives. There are so many layers of deceit and debauchery, we will never know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

The amount of misinformation on this thread is astounding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

I don't see how AM thought murdering his wife and son would be a solution. I know he was desperate for money and that he wanted a loan against the beach house that was in Maggie's name and apparently she was refusing. He now owns that beach house but how could he think he would get away with it? I know he was able to get away with a lot of embezzlement but murder is different. Does everyone assume he was a drug dealer given the amount of pills he had or paid for? It seems like there is more to be uncovered.

He almost DID get away with it. And yes it was for the money. Drug addicts do stupid and terrible things for money.

Do we know what he was spending his moeny on? Drugs don't cover the millions - was it the lavish lifestyle includign (4) homes? Were the homes all mortgaged or paid for?

This is the remaining mystery. The houses were modest and this is middle of nowhere SC. That land and those houses were not expensive relative to what we are used to in this area. People were quoted as saying how modest their homes were. They had sold one house and from what I know they still had Moselle( the hunting lodge/murder property) and Maggie's beach house. I bet they sold the house they had lived in because Alex needed cash. He was trying to get a loan against Maggie's beach house. Did anyone talk about the air strip on the Moselle property? Did they ever address cousin Eddie and why Alex gave him so much money?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

I don't see how AM thought murdering his wife and son would be a solution. I know he was desperate for money and that he wanted a loan against the beach house that was in Maggie's name and apparently she was refusing. He now owns that beach house but how could he think he would get away with it? I know he was able to get away with a lot of embezzlement but murder is different. Does everyone assume he was a drug dealer given the amount of pills he had or paid for? It seems like there is more to be uncovered.

He almost DID get away with it. And yes it was for the money. Drug addicts do stupid and terrible things for money.

Do we know what he was spending his moeny on? Drugs don't cover the millions - was it the lavish lifestyle includign (4) homes? Were the homes all mortgaged or paid for?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't watch the trial and have avoided a lot of this case. I thought the first theory was that Alex didn't plan on killing Paul and didn't expect him to be there. I read he planned to kill Maggie since she was a danger to him with what she knew.

Did the prosecutor indicate Alex killed his son because of the upcoming trial?

His son's criminal trial? It was offered up as a possible motive / partial motive.

I don't see how AM thought murdering his wife and son would be a solution. I know he was desperate for money and that he wanted a loan against the beach house that was in Maggie's name and apparently she was refusing. He now owns that beach house but how could he think he would get away with it? I know he was able to get away with a lot of embezzlement but murder is different. Does everyone assume he was a drug dealer given the amount of pills he had or paid for? It seems like there is more to be uncovered.

He almost DID get away with it. And yes it was for the money. Drug addicts do stupid and terrible things for money.