The Murdaugh Murders

[GAN]

Did I see what I thought I saw?

When they took the convinced murderer out of the Courtroom the camera showed the Jury!

Isn't that a HUGE no-no?

Not really….they had been officially released, so they were members of the general public at that point

 

[Marrila]

Not really….they had been officially released, so they were members of the general public at that point

Except it should have been their choice whether or not to be shown on camera.
What happened was an example of a very disrespectful way to treat jurors.

 

[dvcgirl67]

Not really….they had been officially released, so they were members of the general public at that point

I don't technically think they were released at that point. The judge spoke to them for quite awhile after Alex was taken away....and then he advised the clerk to release them, and then they did release them.

 

[GAN]

Except it should have been their choice whether or not to be shown on camera.
What happened was an example of a very disrespectful way to treat jurors.

I understand your point, but after the verdict is read they become part of the general public again. It would be no more wrong than showing all the other people in the courtroom. Your identities aren’t private, it‘s all public knowledge at that point.

 

[dvcgirl67]

I understand your point, but after the verdict is read they become part of the general public again. It would be no more wrong than showing all the other people in the courtroom. Your identities aren’t private, it‘s all public knowledge at that point.

True, and at least some of them will likely give interviews to the media.

 

[GAN]

True, and at least some of them will likely give interviews to the media.

The State actually went out of their way to thank the media in the post press conference, for the excellent job they did respecting all involved during the trial. I was surprised that Alex never looked back at his son, just walked away….

Final thought…. The judge did a phenomenal job as well

 

[HopperFan]

Did I see what I thought I saw?

When they took the convinced murderer out of the Courtroom the camera showed the Jury!

Isn't that a HUGE no-no?

Completely inappropriate and unprofessional. It should be up to the jury if they want to be publicly broadcast. If they wish to step out and speak fine, but otherwise no.

And they wonder why people don't want to be jurors? Aside from time, you have opened you and your family to "the public" and possible harm.

Per SC law ~ The members of the jury may not be photographed except when they happen to be in the background of other subjects being photographed.

Honestly I think the only person they should be concerned about is the defendant, maybe his cronies if they feel he might flip for brownie points.

Hopefully at this point it will kick off investigations of all the people who protected & participated in his dirty deeds over the years.

 

[BayouQueen]

Well, what do you know. He didn't get away with it.

 

[dvcgirl67]

The State actually went out of their way to thank the media in the post press conference, for the excellent job they did respecting all involved during the trial. I was surprised that Alex never looked back at his son, just walked away….

Final thought…. The judge did a phenomenal job as well

I didn't see the post presser....but yes on the Judge. He was amazing, truly fair...saw him rule in favor of either sides objections throughout.

 

[a1tinkfans]

Now… let’s see life with no parole .. only cause DP not available. RIP

 

[GAN]

Completely inappropriate and unprofessional. It should be up to the jury if they want to be publicly broadcast. If they wish to step out and speak fine, but otherwise no.

And they wonder why people don't want to be jurors? Aside from time, you have opened you and your family to "the public" and possible harm.

Per SC law ~ The members of the jury may not be photographed except when they happen to be in the background of other subjects being photographed.

Honestly I think the only person they should be concerned about is the defendant, maybe his cronies if they feel he might flip for brownie points.

Hopefully at this point it will kick off investigations of all the people who protected & participated in his dirty deeds over the years.

Again… I get it. But they weren’t photographed as members of the jury. At that point, they were members of the general public. The judge even came out and said such. I was watching it on crime tv and didn’t even notice …it’s unlikely it was done with some evil purpose

 

[HopperFan]

Again… I get it. But they weren’t photographed as members of the jury. At that point, they were members of the general public. The judge even came out and said such. I was watching it on crime tv and didn’t even notice …it’s unlikely it was done with some evil purpose

I disagree with that POV. They are there in the context of a jury. They aren't at the grocery or the park as members of the general public, they are in a courtroom as members of a jury, sitting in a jury box. It doesn't matter that they were technically released, they had not been dismissed or allowed to leave. They had not been released from the building to enter the general public life out of sight.

No one said it was with evil purpose but I do believe it was unprofessional and inconsiderate, and if I were a juror I'd be upset. Me doing my civic duty does not include me being broadcast on national television, forever on the internet, associating me with a horrific crime, in an environment of corruption. Again if a juror comes forward, fine, but it needs to be their choice.

And I don't know how anyone didn't notice as the camera was close up of him walking past the jury.

 

[WEDWDW]

Completely inappropriate and unprofessional. It should be up to the jury if they want to be publicly broadcast. If they wish to step out and speak fine, but otherwise no.

And they wonder why people don't want to be jurors? Aside from time, you have opened you and your family to "the public" and possible harm.

Per SC law ~ The members of the jury may not be photographed except when they happen to be in the background of other subjects being photographed.

Honestly I think the only pgerson they should be concerned about is the defendant, maybe his cronies if they feel he might flip for brownie points.

Hopefully at this point it will kick off investigations of all the people who protected & participated in his dirty deeds over the years.

Yes,I had never seen it done before even after release.

I think it was a mistake -not accepted common practice.

I have seen it replayed many times across several Networks and they have all stopped the replay just before the convicted Murderer reaches the Jury as he is being walked out.

 

[HopperFan]

Yes,I had never seen it done before even after release.

I think it was a mistake -not accepted common practice.

I have seen it replayed many times across several Networks and they have all stopped the replay just before the convicted Murderer reaches the Jury as he is being walked out.

I saw that most major have cut it but it's still on internet sites, YouTube ... so it's not going anywhere.

The fact that most have cut it tells me they know it's not cool they were taped.

 

[JPPT1974]

This case really has been riveting. And that you have to feel for his younger son Buster. His life is ruined as well. Losing his mother and older brother. Now his father to be in prison for life.

 

[WEDWDW]

When Googling "Sociopath", his picture should come up.

 

[GAN]

I disagree with that POV. They are there in the context of a jury. They aren't at the grocery or the park as members of the general public, they are in a courtroom as members of a jury, sitting in a jury box. It doesn't matter that they were technically released, they had not been dismissed or allowed to leave. They had not been released from the building to enter the general public life out of sight.

No one said it was with evil purpose but I do believe it was unprofessional and inconsiderate, and if I were a juror I'd be upset. Me doing my civic duty does not include me being broadcast on national television, forever on the internet, associating me with a horrific crime, in an environment of corruption. Again if a juror comes forward, fine, but it needs to be their choice.

And I don't know how anyone didn't notice as the camera was close up of him walking past the jury.

Trying not to beat a dead horse because I do see what you’re saying and don’t disagree. But the judge literally said they were free do to as they please, as they are no longer jurors …so it’s not a pov it’s actual fact. The only reason laws restrict jurors from being photographed is to secure the fairness of a trial from outside influence, not to protect the privacy of those serving(names and addresses are released). The job of a juror is a public service -your identity WILL be disclosed. It’s a fundamental principle of the American Justice system and always has been. If it’s a case that’s deemed sensitive, a judge can rule for an anonymous jury but that would occur prior to jury selection ..that wasn’t the case here.

 

[HopperFan]

Trying not to beat a dead horse because I do see what you’re saying and don’t disagree. But the judge literally said they were free do to as they please, as they are no longer jurors …so it’s not a pov it’s actual fact. The only reason laws restrict jurors from being photographed is to secure the fairness of a trial from outside influence, not to protect the privacy of those serving(names and addresses are released). The job of a juror is a public service -your identity WILL be disclosed. It’s a fundamental principle of the American Justice system and always has been. If it’s a case that’s deemed sensitive, a judge can rule for an anonymous jury but that would occur prior to jury selection ..that wasn’t the case here.

Completely disagree with their “freedom” at that moment.

What we have learned here is the system disrespects and puts jurors in jeopardy. One should factor in their comfort with this if called.

 

[GAN]

Completely disagree with their “freedom” at that moment.

What we have learned here is the system disrespects and puts jurors in jeopardy. One should factor in their comfort with this if called.

That’s definitely been debated …whether you keep all juries anonymous. But at this point it’s by a case by case basis and totally determined by State prosecutors or the judge.

Just for thought, there were probably 200 people in that courtroom. Do you think the jurors were disrespected by those people that could look at them all day long for 6-weeks …and there were probably at least a 1000 different people in there at one time or another during the course of the trial. What if the courtroom held 500 or 1000 people? So my point is, what’s the difference if people see you in person or on camera ? Unless you’re suggesting we put paper bags over jurors heads or have them watch from a tv screen in a back room of the court.

If a potential juror had an issue with the chance they might be on tv, they could have said that during selection and they would have been released. They all understood it was a televised courtroom and could have gotten out of it if they felt strongly enough. I don’t feel bad at all….

 

[Sanchez]

It is difficult to explain the influence of the Murdaugh family and the law firm in this part of the State. Hampton, Jasper, Bamberg, Barnwell and Colleton (location of the trial) Counties are isolated, rural and among the poorest counties in South Carolina. Therefore, they are among the poorest counties in the U.S.

I’m no conspiracy theorist but there is a reason why cases are valued at 10 or 20 times the normal amount in these places. Juries are heavily influenced (that is a kind way to put it) and this law firm made tens of millions by capitalizing on liberal venue rules. No much happens in these counties but if you have the opportunity to sue General Motors, for example, the go to move is to associate this firm and multiply the value of your case by having it heard in Hampton County.

Fairness is removed from the equation which includes many of the judges stationed in that area. These counties did not benefit from economic development because business would not locate in this area for fear of being an ATM. For example, WalMart would face so many overinflated slip and fall cases it wouldn’t be financially feasible.

Alex Murdaugh took advantage of his family name. I didn’t know him very well in law school but was aware that his family had great influence and that he was not shy about using that. I am not in the personal injury world but do have occasion to handle matters in these counties. Fortunately, I haven’t had to work with him over the years. He is known as an average to below average lawyer who used threats and intimidation. The depth of his thievery is astounding but when you consider the arrogance and family history it is easy to see that the rules didn’t apply to him. He lived a life where he always got what he wanted and used intimidation and fear when necessary.

In this context it was hard for me to believe that a jury would agree to convict. The evidence was overwhelming and I am relieved and pleased that Murdaugh is done.

However, I wonder whether the jury was influenced by the PMPED law firm(or whatever they are calling it now) who due to the circumstances might have an interest in his conviction. I hope not, but things have been so bad for so long in Hampton and surrounding areas that I’ve come to expect more of the same.

There are many more cases to come. I am most interested in what is going to happen, if anything, to his former law partners. They knew or should have known of his theft. They have paid more than $10 million to the victims and who knows what else will surface. It will be interesting to see whether any of them face criminal or ethical charges.