|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by JENN WOOD
***
The first time the name Barrett T. Boulware showed up in our files, it seemed like a footnote — just another Lowcountry fisherman tied to the periphery of a saga already drowning in names. But the paper trail surrounding him and his family soon heated up… eventually growing so hot it glowed.
Back in September 2021, when we published our first exclusive on the drug connections of confessed fraudster and convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, the story seemed too far-fetched to believe: a friend, client and business partner of Murdaugh’s whose shadow stretched over the now-infamous hunting property where Murdaugh’s wife and younger son were savagely slain on the evening of June 7, 2021.
Now, we’re returning to 2021 — to those two dead bodies at Moselle, to the Murdaugh empire’s unraveling, and to one of the most enduring mysteries of the saga: where did all the money go?
As I researched this story, signal soon separated from noise. In mortgage after mortgage, deed after deed, one name kept showing up alongside Murdaugh’s: Boulware.
He wasn’t just a client — he was a partner. He was the prior owner of a hunting lodge that became a murder scene.
And shortly before his death in 2018, Boulware gave to Murdaugh something few people would ever consider bestowing upon a non-family member: power of attorney — the right to sign, sell, manage and move money in his name.
Two months later, Boulware was gone.
Most stories would end there – but this one was just getting started.
***
RELATED | ALEX MURDAUGH’S TIES TO ALLEGED DRUG SMUGGLER UNCOVERED
***
THE WATER REMEMBERS
The Lowcountry keeps its own history. And most of its stories start near the water… in murky waterways and hidden marshes, inlets of secrecy that conceal all manner of nefarious ties and shady business dealings.
Now, as Hulu’s Murdaugh: A Death in the Family drama rekindles public fascination with the family’s dark empire, we’re reopening one of the earliest and least-understood chapters in this saga — a story FITSNews first uncovered years before the cameras started rolling.
January 24, 1980 — a Coast Guard cutter noses through St. Helena Sound and finds two shrimp boats and eleven Miami men with a story too neat by half. One of the boats appeared to have been deliberately sunk. No arrests were made; the current carries the truth away.
February 1983—another boat, the Jeannine Ann, and 854 bales of marijuana. This time names are printed in ink: Barrett Boulware and his father among them. All of them charged. All facing trial. But then, the government’s star witness — Franklin Branch — steps into traffic on his way to a bar in Florida and is killed. The cases collapse. The Boulwares walk.
The stories keep coming. A late 1980s traffic stop near the Georgia-South Carolina line. Cocaine and marijuana found. A conviction. An appeal denied (.pdf). And still, over time, the family name drifts back to the docks, to the marshes, to the places where money and favors are traded on the water.
***
RELATED | MORE TIES LINKING ALEX MURDAUGH, ALLEGED SMUGGLER
***
AN UNCHANGING PATTERN
Decades later, those same Lowcountry waters flow past Jenkins Creek — a dock with ties to Boulware that becomes a Jenkins Creek Marine & Charters asset. This was not just a client signing documents — Alex Murdaugh and law partner Ronnie Crosby signed as members of the companies (.pdf). And up the road, a quiet warehouse in Lobeco tied to Williams Farms — a produce house slipping toward bankruptcy.
Then comes the pitch: harvesting cannonball jellyfish by the ton, salting and drying them and shipping them to Asia. A company called Carolina Jelly Balls LLC slides onto the scene, promising jobs and a new Lowcountry hustle. The plan is simple: catch at Jenkins Creek; process inland at John Meeks Way; export. The names behind it aren’t simple at all, though. Steven Giese. Millenarian Trading. A network of seafood companies that will, in time, reappear in Georgia and California under new letterheads.
Neighbors notice the smell first. Inspectors from the Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) notice the rest — open totes, brine finding the quickest path back to the creek, operations running before permits arrive. The “No Exposure” forms go in; the rejection letters come back fast. Jellyfish don’t wait for paperwork, and neither does the enforcement file.
By spring, the pump-and-haul plan hits the inboxes: tens of thousands of gallons of jellyfish wastewater a week, trucked to municipal plants while the company chases permits. Former South Carolina governor and then-U.S. congressman Mark Sanford joins the chorus of objections. Meetings teem with residents who know what their marsh is supposed to smell like.
The names on the filings change again. Nautica & Co. appears. The sites don’t move. Lobeco is still Lobeco. Jenkins Creek is still Jenkins Creek. The paper grows thicker; the operation thins out.
***
RELATED | HOW WAS ALEX MURDAUGH TIED TO DRUG SMUGGLERS?
***
BANKRUPTCIES AND SHELL COMPANIES
There’s a reason the warehouse door at John Meeks Way revolves. The Williams Farms case leaves a trail — assets moving to affiliates, debts left behind, a trustee playing catch-up while new companies inherit old addresses. What used to be pallets of produce becomes pallets of jellyfish. Later, it becomes something else entirely.
The letterhead shifts to Sapelo Shrimp in Georgia. Then to Nautica & Co. in Hacienda Heights, California — a seafood cluster that will land in Los Angeles court filings (.pdf) over diverted funds and investor fraud. The map stretches from Jenkins Creek to Sapelo to Miami to New York City and finally, to a storefront east of Los Angeles. The pattern doesn’t stretch at all. It repeats.
Through it all, the Boulware–Murdaugh thread stays tight. Deeds for Moselle. Mortgages on Boulware properties. A $5 conveyance that reads like a wink. A power of attorney that reads like trust — or leverage.
Murdaugh’s own attorney, Dick Harpootlian, said his client had gotten himself mixed up in some sort of an “Ozark-type situation.”
For those of you unhip to the reference, that’s the Netflix hit in which a financial advisor from Chicago (portrayed by Jason Bateman) drags his family against its will to rural Missouri – where they become key cogs in a massive money laundering operation at the behest of a Mexican drug cartel.
You don’t need every answer to see the outline: strategic waterfront access, recycled companies, rebranded permits, and the same names walking the same channels. The Lowcountry’s old smuggling routes didn’t disappear; they matured.
***
RELATED | SUPREME COURT INVESTIGATING ALEX MURDAUGH’S ‘SMUGGLE BUDDY‘
***
WHY WE’RE REOPENING THIS FILE
The Hulu dramatization of the Murdaugh saga has pulled national attention back to a story South Carolina has lived with for years. But for all the airtime devoted to courtroom spectacle and family tragedy, one question keeps resurfacing: where did all the money go?
And perhaps just as important… where did it all come from?
Long before streaming networks turned the Murdaugh murders into headline fodder, FITSNews reported on a quieter, older thread — a name buried in deeds, mortgages, and shell companies: Barrett T. Boulware.
Our early reporting raised red flags about Murdaugh’s longtime friend and business partner — a man once accused of drug smuggling who was later linked to a tangle of real estate transfers, dissolved corporations, and questionable financial arrangements.
That was my research. And as the bylines attest, it was our founding editor Will Folks‘ reporting. Because let me be blunt – not everyone on our team at the time had the nerve to dig on these connections, let alone put their names on reports detailing them.
With renewed public attention — and new evidence from our ongoing review of property, bankruptcy, and court records — it’s time to reopen this file. Because to understand the missing money and the network it moved through, you have to start long before Moselle … on the dimly lit docks and along the dark, hidden backroads where the Murdaugh empire once grew and thrived.
That empire may be gone… but the story surrounding its downfall hasn’t even begun to be told.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
31 comments
There’ s a whole lot more to this story. Deep into Charleston.
Not to mention the tie ins with local attorneys and the “missing” couple from Harbour Town …
Who is the missing couple from Harbour town?
Great report, Jen!
Superior writing and great investigation. Keep going! It’s all over SC!
Creighton Waters blamed “Murdaugh Fatigue” for the light sentence that Lafitte got. I’ don’t know anyone who isn’t ready for a fresh round of indictments in the “Murdaughsphere” – except possibly for the lawyers and politicians who will go down in flames if they really get serious in following this case to the ends.
A lot of people are waiting . There’s a lot left to be told including some very important names . From years before the murders , during the murders and after the murders .
Jenn Wood, this is remarkable research by you; and you were “blunt” that it takes courage which the whole FITSNews still does NOT have to go public with it.
I am NOT apologizing for, or withdrawing, my criticism of your claim on another story that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) paid Barbara Ann Mixson “a staggering amount.” To the contrary, I FULLY STAND BY my advice to you that such “staggering” comments reduce or eliminate serious peoples’ willingness to seriously take serious research of yours such as the above remarkable research.
Having said that, I think that research requires vacation of RAM’s murder convictions, which are wrongful in any event.
In RAM’s murder trial, the Prosecution portrayed its lawyer-witnesses, specially Ronnie Crosby and Christopher Wilson, as paragons of lawyerly ethics. It APPEARS from your above research that both Ronnie and Chris were aware of, if not partners in, RAM’s drug connections and that they testified against RAM to save their own skins.
Chris Wilson and Barrett Boulware were also portrayed by the Prosecution as babes in the woods, devoted friends savagely betrayed by RAM, who would (naturally according to the Prosecution) later betray his own wife and son with the same savagery.
During Creighton Waters’ cross-examination of RAM, specially concerning Wilson and Boulware, RAM was a lamb to the slaughter with Dick and Jim asleep at the wheel and failing to object, or objecting belatedly and drawing Judge Clifton Newman’s disdain of the Defense and its clients.
And contrary to riding RAM revelations to draw attention to my own mistreatment by the system, I objectively and scientifically repeat that my story was one of the proverbial lower rungs of the ladder which rogue prosecutors climbed to finally make the most serious false charges stick (for now) to one of their own and the descendant of three of their own.
As Jesus Christ said in Luke 16-10 New International Version
“Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”
Again, my comment does not appear; so, here it is again:
Jenn Wood, this is remarkable research by you; and you were “blunt” that it takes courage which the whole FITSNews still does NOT have to go public with it.
I am NOT apologizing for, or withdrawing, my criticism of your claim on another story that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) paid Barbara Ann Mixson “a staggering amount.” To the contrary, I FULLY STAND BY my advice to you that such “staggering” comments reduce or eliminate serious peoples’ willingness to seriously take serious research of yours such as the above remarkable research.
Having said that, I think that research requires vacation of RAM’s murder convictions, which are wrongful in any event.
In RAM’s murder trial, the Prosecution portrayed its lawyer-witnesses, specially Ronnie Crosby and Christopher Wilson, as paragons of lawyerly ethics. It APPEARS from your above research that both Ronnie and Chris were aware of, if not partners in, RAM’s drug connections and that they testified against RAM to save their own skins.
Chris Wilson and Barrett Boulware were also portrayed by the Prosecution as babes in the woods, devoted friends savagely betrayed by RAM, who would (naturally according to the Prosecution) later betray his own wife and son with the same savagery.
During Creighton Waters’ cross-examination of RAM, specially concerning Wilson and Boulware, RAM was a lamb to the slaughter with Dick and Jim asleep at the wheel and failing to object, or objecting belatedly and drawing Judge Clifton Newman’s disdain of the Defense and its clients.
And contrary to riding RAM revelations to draw attention to my own mistreatment by the system, I objectively and scientifically repeat that my story was one of the proverbial lower rungs of the ladder which rogue prosecutors climbed to finally make the most serious false charges stick (for now) to one of their own and the descendant of three of their own.
As Jesus Christ said in Luke 16-10 New International Version
“Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”
What is wrong with you to where you are not letting through this comment:?
Jenn Wood, this is remarkable research by you; and you were “blunt” that it takes courage which the whole FITSNews still does NOT have to go public with it.
I am NOT apologizing for, or withdrawing, my criticism of your claim on another story that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) paid Barbara Ann Mixson “a staggering amount.” To the contrary, I FULLY STAND BY my advice to you that such “staggering” comments reduce or eliminate serious peoples’ willingness to seriously take serious research of yours such as the above remarkable research.
Having said that, I think that research requires vacation of RAM’s murder convictions, which are wrongful in any event.
In RAM’s murder trial, the Prosecution portrayed its lawyer-witnesses, specially Ronnie Crosby and Christopher Wilson, as paragons of lawyerly ethics. It APPEARS from your above research that both Ronnie and Chris were aware of, if not partners in, RAM’s drug connections and that they testified against RAM to save their own skins.
Chris Wilson and Barrett Boulware were also portrayed by the Prosecution as babes in the woods, devoted friends savagely betrayed by RAM, who would (naturally according to the Prosecution) later betray his own wife and son with the same savagery.
During Creighton Waters’ cross-examination of RAM, specially concerning Wilson and Boulware, RAM was a lamb to the slaughter with Dick and Jim asleep at the wheel and failing to object, or objecting belatedly and drawing Judge Clifton Newman’s disdain of the Defense and its clients.
And contrary to riding RAM revelations to draw attention to my own mistreatment by the system, I objectively and scientifically repeat that my story was one of the proverbial lower rungs of the ladder which rogue prosecutors climbed to finally make the most serious false charges stick (for now) to one of their own and the descendant of three of their own.
As Jesus Christ said in Luke 16-10 New International Version
“Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”
Very clever FITS! You withhold my comments for days then print them along with my two follow-up attempted posts asking why my first post was not let through. That makes ME seem self-centered and impatient and makes and makes YOU look unfairly attacked.
Be that as it may, better late than never; and I previously quoted Jesus Christ’s parable of the sower. So, if most or even few of the seeds of love and wisdom land in fertile ground and grow and bloom, then I would have done part of my mission.
I still have some useful comments on this story. One of the comments is that the DHEC prompt shut-down of the jelly fish farm operation (without due process?) IS THE OPPOSITE of the phrase you repeat mindlessly, that “the Murdaughs ruled the low country like a fiefdom.” What fiefdom of theirs is that where they can’t even operate a jelly fish farm without being shut down (APPARENTLY without opportunity to respond or appeal) upon neighbors’ unfounded complaints.
Please review my posts within a reasonable time and I will not complain about their not being let through.
There are two others that has STILL not been let through.
Did you take your children to church today? How about making it a democracy and taking them to a different church every other Sunday and letting them vote on which one they like best and explain to themselves and to you and your wife why.
God speed on good research and God bless.
The TIP of the Criminal Iceberg is Barley hit! You need to Investigate the Whore House that was at The Gardens Corner area and Uncovered by Sam Carpenter and his Wife Penny! Look in the Archives of the “Sea Islander” newspaper. You will find them in the Library in Beaufort! Research who owned the home along with who was Arrested! Then go from there and find out Who it Serviced!!
On FITS’ YouTube channel, I was unfairly accused of bragging on myself for having, thank God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, and in the court of none other than Judge Clifton Newman, done for myself what Alex-Murdaugh’s four-lawyer-plus-paralegals defense team COMBINED could not: prevent a jury from returning a wrongful conviction:
But telling the truth is not bragging; it is teaching.
Alex’s defense team, and all South Carolina’s criminal defense lawyers for that matter, could learn from me how to defend an ACTUALLY-innocent, not MERELY constitutionally-PRESUMED-innocent, criminal defendants.
Most, if not all, South Carolina’s criminal defense lawyers know mainly, if not only, how to do one thing well: plea bargain. Even if their client is actually innocent of the charged crime, they force him/her to plead guilty to a lesser crime and get the matter over with while helping the prosecutor save face and be amenable to plea bargain with the next client.
That is THE REALITY of how South Carolina’s criminal “justice” system works. Or worked until the great Dr. Marie Faltas was FALSELY accused and refused to knuckle under.
Don’t take my word for it, take the record.
Dick Harpootlian learned from me and is now saying, “Don’t read the script, read the transcript,” in variation on my long-and-often stated plea: “Don’t take my word, take the record.”
I now modify that to “Take the record, then take my word on my interpretation of that record.”
BTW, note how my writing avoids confusing violations of the grammatical rule of the last antecedent. One more thing y’all can learn from me.
It is difficult but not impossible to “put the toothpaste back in the tube.” But it is impossible to re-blow a soap (or even balloon) bubble once it is burst.
And a skill defense lawyers should learn from me is how to burst bubbles of falsehood.
The COMPLETE transcripts (which I received in “bits and pieces”) of my 22-26 February 2010 Richland County General Sessions jury trial is available for free on Richland County’s Public Index and SC’s Judicial Branch’s website’s C-Track.
The photos of my false accusers harassing ME while I FALSELY got accused of harassing them are available through the federal courts’ PACER at 10 cents/page but possibly free for certain researchers.
The cold-bloodedness of Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (“Weiss”) knowing that I was THE VICTIM of harassment and even rape threats by one Corey/Cory Lamont Curry, whom Hatchet-for-Hire Heather had HERSELF earlier convicted of PWID-crack cocaine but later, in my trial, LIED to Judge Clifton Newman about that Curry’s criminal record, but FALSELY portraying ME as harassing that Curry, is not an exception, it is THE USUAL PRACTICE of prosecutors.
It is not about who is the REAL perpetrator and who is the REAL victim. It is about where the prosecutor’s financial interests are. Which law firm would hire that prosecutor or that judge after (s)he retires from public “service”?
Which criminal defendant would later hire that retired prosecutor or judge if (s)he opens his/her private practice?
THAT is how prosecutorial decisions, clothed with “immunity,” are really made.
Since I owned, and will never own, a law firm, and since I am too God-and-self-reliant to believe in hired lawyers, no one, not one defense lawyer, not one “ethical” prosecutor, not one judge, and not one politician, ever had or has any financial interest in holding Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (“Weiss”) accountable for maliciously and falsely prosecuting me.
That is why I have no problem believing that the gang of prosecutors who procured Alex Murdaugh’s false conviction were knowingly doing it for their own present and/or financial advantage, not for justice.
Once you develop a taste and thrill of lying and seeing your lies believed, you lose all skills and incentives at truth finding.
Take the record of how Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (“Weiss”) continued to maliciously prosecute me; then take my interpretation of why she is the rule, not the exception, although she is an extreme example of the rule.
Then take this interpretation of mine of God’s admonition that the sins of the fathers are called for answers by the offspring to the third generation and the fourth generation: the rotten system you build/tolerate today and let victimize ME today will victimize your third generation and fourth generation tomorrow.
Alex Murdaugh’s forefathers built a system mixing civil litigation with criminal process. It came back to bite Alex.
But two wrongs do not make a right.
Only right makes right.
Nor does anyone else look into these connections out in the open but conveniently ignored:
Paul and Maggie were killed EXACTLY one week after FITSNews tightened its free-articles policy to generate more subscriptions to pay the salaries of Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell, who had just been hired at FITS.
In her book, Mandy (who had conveniently arranged for herself and her then-boyfriend-ordered-to-be-engaged-to-Mandy David Moses to be vacationing offshore) tells of David pulling out the podcasting equipment (which, for some undisclosed reason, Mandy and David had taken with them on their “vacation”) and starting broadcasting THE MINUTE Liz called from the Low Country with news of Paul and Maggie’s deaths.
Coincidences you think?
Then, for clincher, read this comment of mine on Jenn Wood’s most recent Week-in-Review interview:
Jenn Wood, dear, “phenomenal acting” or not, HULU’s purpose is clear: consolidate Alex Murdaugh’s wrongful convictions by falsification or insinuation.
HULU reversed the order of Gloria Satterfield’s and Mallory Beach’s lives ending to INSINUATE that Alex caused Gloria to be pushed off the stairs and die so he could get a settlement out of it and misdirect it to paying for the boat crash case.
No one would ask how Alex could possibly have known that Gloria’ fall from a small height would be fatal. Instead, everyone would be basking in the glory of their non-existent intelligence in making the connection.
Can there be any other explanation for reversing the order of events?
Another connection is that a Conner parent was a court reporter at the same time Becky “Boo” Hill was one; and the two women were, and continued to be close friends.
Whether Ms. Connor bailed out on Ms. Hill after the latter failed from grace, I do not know. But I do know that I can have no sympathy or respect for anyone who frames the innocent for money.
If Alex is not the real killer of Paul or Maggie, and every SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVE analysis says he CANNOT possibly be, then Alex needs to be released IMMEDIATELY. He has already suffered enough.
Continuing to show why accuracy matters and to help separating fact from fiction, I paste here one of my comments on FITS’ last week’s, not yesterday’s, Week-in-Review:
Will Folks, at 5:54, can’t you ever outgrow your tendency to tell untruth even as you claim heroics in pursuing the actual facts and going where they take you?
Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) NEVER claimed “he was 20 miles away” at 8:44 pm on 7 June 2021.
What RAM always TRUTHFULLY said was that SOME TIME after dinner he went to see his mother at Almeida.
Only in the fictional media is RAM ever portrayed as saying, “I never went to the kennels.”
He does NOT say that phrase in ANY of the three video-taped interviews with law enforcement.
Half-truths ARE lies. So, in emphasizing that RAM initially lied by omitting the brief kennels visit, PLEASE don’t commit the lie of FALSELY claiming that RAM ever pretended to have been at Almeida at 8:44 pm.
Again, because I explained n times that the contents of Paul’s and Maggie’s stomachs at autopsy rule out the victims’ lives having ended as early as ONLY 22 minutes after their large, and relatively fatty, last meal, that 8:44 pm video has absolutely NO INCULPATORY value.
Otherwise, please keep pursuing the whole truth and tell it whole and pure.
In simple terms, evolution does not leave unnecessary organs in a living creature.
When we humans acquired opposable thumbs and the erect posture, our tails disappeared.
Prosecutors who win convictions of the innocent by lies, forgeries, and fabrications, lose the ability to win by honest means convictions of the guilty.
Law enforcement officers who learned how to obtain coerced false confession lose the skills of methodical investigative work.
Another “skill” rogue prosecutors develop makes, not only them, and not only the juries from whom they obtain convictions, but the whole society, lose the ability to think sensibly. That prosecutorial “skill” which endangers the whole of society is the ability to sell stupid ideas as if they were brilliant insights.
I keep repeating that, thank God and without a lawyer, I thwarted Hatchet-for-Hire Heather’s (Weiss) scheme to falsely frame me for harassing my then-neighbor, Teresa Felicia Ingram-Jackson, and my then-landlady and contingent real estate owner Dinah Gail Steele, all when Hatchet-for-Hire knew Teresa and Dinah and their drug-dealing “guests” were harassing ME. I keep repeating it, not to brag on myself, but to caution all concerned that what began in my case culminated in the case(s) of Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) and is about to make, not only the legal “profession,” but society as a whole lose any ability or desire to think sensibly.
I am being triggered these days, not only because this time of year revives memories of my 2 December 2009 first brutal false arrest and the several false arrests which followed it to coerce me to plead guilty to that of which I was innocent or to physically kill me in the process. I am also triggered by the release of that CW faux “documentary” about RAM and his family and the comments filled with hate and stupidity.
I am triggered because I cannot answer the fear that if it happened once, it can happen again.
That Teresa Felicia Ingram-Jackson had, before she and I even knew the other existed, been convicted of stealing and using other’s credit card; and, after her perjured testimony failed to cause a jury to convict me, was arrested for shop-lifting and solicitation for prostitution and separately for possessing Oxycontin without prescription. She later pled guilty to marijuana.
On graduating from high school, that Teresa had “worked” as a stripper in a Sumter night club which got closed after a shooting there. She married the owner who was also a chop-shop operator and mid-level drug dealer.
I had suspected illegal activity from the inordinate number of “guests” Teresa received day and night.
But Hatchet-for-Hire Heather put out a rumor that I suspected Teresa solely because she is black.
Here is an excerpt from my brilliant pro se cross-examination of that Teresa in my 22-26 February 2010 general sessions jury trial presided-over by none other than Judge Clifton Newman:
[Page 332, line 16] Dr. Faltas: Thank you, Your Honor.
[17-18] Cross-Examination (resumed) By Dr. Faltas:
[19-22] Q. Good morning. Good morning. Yesterday you claimed that I know who your father is and who your brother is and who – have I ever been introduced to your father or to your brother or to anybody? Did you ever introduce me to your father?
[23 to page 333, line 2] A. I never introduced you to my father. You introduced yourself to my brother, and just common knowledge I would think that you would just assume an elderly man with an elderly woman would automatically be my parents. But, no, you never introduced yourself.
[3] Q. Really?
[4] A. Really, but you know them.
[5-7] Q. No, no. I mean, no, really? Common sense is that any older person is the father of any younger woman in the world? Just—
[8] A. Okay.
[9-10] Q. And that — was I ever introduced to your ex-boyfriend who threatened to kill you?
[11] A. You didn’t have to be.
[12] Q. Ma’am, yes or no?
[13] A. I don’t know.
[14-15] Q. Did you ever introduce me to your ex-boyfriend who threatened to kill you?
[16] A. I don’t know.
[17] Q. Did you ever introduce me —
[18] A. That’s my answer.
[19] Ms. Weiss: Objection.
[20-21] The Court: The objection is sustained. Don’t argue with the witness.
And here are comments and replies from that recently-released CW faux “documentary”:
@marieassaad-faltas1299[,] 1 day ago (edited)
Not a word about Becky Hill’s indictment? Not a word about the second autopsy of Stephen Smith confirming the result of the first autopsy? And not a word about Gloria Satterfield’s death having been IN HOSPITAL due to pre-existing conditions, NOT her fall at Moselle? The Satterfield estate already got $10 MILLION for the demise of their chronic diabetic relative; and Eric Bland STILL wants $4.3 million more?
Who are the greedy ones here? Who are the evil ones here?
At least HULU disclaimed its broadcast as drama. What is YOUR excuse for presenting this garbage as journalism?
And, in case anyone missed my numerous previous posts about this: the Prosecution’s claimed moment of the end of the victims’ lives is WRONG. At autopsy, the food in Maggie’s and Paul’s stomachs was too little and too digested for their lives to have ended only 22 minutes after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal.
Liz Farrell said one, BUT ONLY ONE, truth: Social media defeated the Murdaughs.
But who was behind that social media?
(6 likes)
Highlighted reply @marycahill546 (15 hours ago)
You are misrepresenting the autopsy report. “Maggie Murdaugh’s autopsy report indicated her time of death was estimated to be between 9:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. on June 7, 2021.” The actual time of Maggie’s death was 8:49 pm. That’s when her phone locked and Alex picked it up and moved it 59 steps. He shot them both around 8:50 pm, cleaned up quickly, and took off at high speed for his Mom’s place to establish an alibi.
(1 like)
@marieassaad-faltas1299 (14 hours ago)
?@marycahill546, your obsession with framing Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) is as puzzling (because you sound more educated than the others and I could not detect an OBVIOUS financial interest of yours in the matter) as it is self-betraying and self-defeating.
Let’s be logical here:
Are you saying that cell phones have a MAGICAL mechanism which makes them lock REGARDLESS OF BATTERY POWER as soon as the owner is shot?
And how would the cell phone know that its owner is shot anyway?
Or are you saying that RAM locked Maggie’s phone BEFORE shooting her?
If so, then Maggie could have been shot ANY TIME, even a whole hour, AFTER her cell phone locked.
That would mean that Maggie could have been shot by any one at any time between the time her phone locked and the time RAM discovered Maggie’s body.
Same with Paul with this added question: since RAM was at the kennels while Paul took that TOTALLY irrelevant and useless video of by-then-perfect-looking Cash’s tail, why would RAM not have also taken Paul’s phone and disposed of it along with Maggie’s phone?
And here is a clincher: if RAM went to such great trouble to get rid of Maggie’s cell phone the night of 7 June 2021, why would RAM be in such hurry and panic to help SLED locate it the morning of 8 June 2021?
Just to save you time inventing more untenable explanations, MY explanation is that Maggie had laid her cell phone down on her bike or on the side-by-side or somewhere to have BOTH HANDS free to handle the dogs. The REAL killers (and they were several) found it and had to get rid of it BEFORE the attack lest it record what happened and/or lest Maggie reaches for it to call for help.
Please use your education to think sensibly.
(1 like)
@gabehayes1833 (11 hours ago)
?@marieassaad-faltas1299 why did RaM lie about being at the kennel? Fake his own shooting? Steal millions? Murdaugh is guilty. And his life will play out in prison now. Thankfully.
(1 like)
@marieassaad-faltas1299 (10 hours ago)
?@gabehayes1833 , I do NOT know why Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) omitted reporting his brief visit to the kennels before going to Almeida; and I do not think HE even knows for sure. Habit? Panic? Memory lapse?
What I know for sure is that Paul and Maggie could not have been shot as early as 8:44 pm which is only 22 minutes after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal.
Any timing of shooting CONSISTENT WITH THEIR STOMACHS’ CONTENTS AT AUTPOSY would coincide with RAM’s DIGITALLY-VERIFIED presence in Almeida or travel to and from Almeida.
It is often said that alibi is the Rolls-Royce of defenses.
Scientifically, RAM’s alibi is solid.
(1 like)
It seems every aspiring podcaster thinks dumping on Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) is a sure path to fame and fortune. The latest is one Brian Entin, who started his own channel by interviewing The State newspaper’s Ted Clifford on Stephen Bryant’s execution by firing squad.
Apparently that artless and uninteresting Brian Entin thought dumping on RAM is a righteous price to pay for a ticket to subtly attack the blood and gore of the firing squad.
Ironically, with a rifle being the weapon chosen for THREE shooters, the only difference between the vilified murders of Paul and Maggie Murdaugh and the glorified firing squad is the “professionalism” and efficiency of the latter. While three self-righteous South Carolina employees sanctified by lawyers killed Stephen Bryant is two minutes flat, three self-righteous young women brain-washed by lawyers bungled around before taking the lives of Paul and Maggie Murdaugh.
Brian Entin’s ticket to podcast heaven was his appearance on the recent CW faux “documentary,” which continues to spout half-truths and outright lies apparently to influence South Carolina’s image-sensitive supreme court to deny RAM’s appeal.
The imprecision continues with the comments, which I paste below in my continuing effort to hold back an ocean with my bare hands typing on a keyboard:
@gabehayes1833 (2 days ago)
?@marieassaad-faltas1299 why did RaM lie about being at the kennel? Fake his own shooting? Steal millions? Murdaugh is guilty. And his life will play out in prison now. Thankfully.
(2 likes)
Reply
@marieassaad-faltas1299 (2 days ago)
?@gabehayes1833 , I do NOT know why Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) omitted reporting his brief visit to the kennels before going to Almeida; and I do not think HE even knows for sure. Habit? Panic? Memory lapse?
What I know for sure is that Paul and Maggie could not have been shot as early as 8:44 pm which is only 22 minutes after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal.
Any timing of shooting CONSISTENT WITH THEIR STOMACHS’ CONTENTS AT AUTPOSY would coincide with RAM’s DIGITALLY-VERIFIED presence in Almeida or travel to and from Almeida.
It is often said that alibi is the Rolls-Royce of defenses.
Scientifically, RAM’s alibi is solid.
(1 like)
Reply
Highlighted reply
@sandramartinez3124 (11 hours ago (edited))
Didn’t Dr Riemer say she had almost 2lbs of food in her stomach? That doesn’t seem like “too little”.
Reply
@marieassaad-faltas1299 (6 hours ago)
? @sandramartinez3124 , No, no, NO. Dr. Riemer said “500 ccs of tan material” and “I did not see any corn or beans.”
The measurements in Medicine, specially Forensic Medicine, are in the metric, not the British, system.
“Tan material” means very digested. The “tan” color is likely the coffee.
After 22 minutes in a normal human stomach, the food pretty much is still recognizable in its solid components.
Solid food has to be LITERALLY churned and “melted” by the stomach acid before it can be squeezed through the narrow pyloric sphincter and into the delicate duodenum, then the jejunum and the rest of the small intestines.
That DEFINITELY takes much longer than 22 minutes.
If you don’t believe me, review the video of Dr. Reimer’s testimony or wait for the official transcript to be filed in RAM’s appeal.
Thanks for reading and God bless.
(1 like)
Et tu Blanca? But I never paraphrase the second half of Shakespeare’s fictional Julius Cesar’s famous last words.
God willing, I do not fall but heed the prayer “where there is darkness let me bring light.”
And in the Coptic Orthodox Holy Liturgy, a prayer says “where sin abounds, may Your grace exceed it.”
BTW, a recent report documents young people’s conversion to Christian Orthodoxy BECAUSE of what they view as its strictness and I view as faith to the true faith.
I will not make a disrespectful prayer for God to make my day 48 hours, which I need to keep single-handedly turning back the ocean of falsehoods trying to drown Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) hopes for exoneration. But I am praying for God to enable me to keep my habit of never doing things by halves. And now to also lift the blurriness of my vision long enough for me to read Blanca Simpson’s just-published book, cover-to-cover as is my habit with every narrative book I touch.
Time-poor as I am, I managed to watch two of Blanca’s book-promoting interviews, the two ten-minute ones YouTube selected for me.
Like others, Blanca and her ghost-writer know that they have to tease a unique nugget of claimed exclusive knowledge for their book to sell, EXACTLY as Becky “Boo” Hill knew, and had told “the Thelma to [Becky’s] Louise,” that a guilty verdict was needed for Becky’s book to sell.
But what I gathered from those two ten-minute interviews is more proof that SLED was NOT interested in pin-pointing the time of death correctly BECAUSE no one interviewed Blanca immediately, and no one even belatedly asked her about the last meal she cooked for the family.
It is bad enough that Colleton County’s coroner lacks a thermometer.
It is worse that SLED knew IMMEDIATELY that Paul and Maggie had some dinner within two hours of the discovery of their bodies but took NO STEPS WHATSOEVER to OBJECTIVELY determine the contents and quantity of that dinner and make that evidence available to the forensic pathologist who autopsied the victims.
That should be the ABCs of EVERY unwitnessed murder investigation: as precise as possible determination of the time of death.
And that should be the basics of EVERY criminal suspect’s due process rights: a SCIENTIFICALLY-sound thorough investigation of the alleged crime.
How many DUI cases are thrown out for failure to pre-calibrate the breath-analyzer or for missing links in the chain of custody of the suspect’s blood?
South Carolina’s Legislature took great pains to legislate requirements for DUI prosecutions supposedly to prevent false DUI convictions even though drunk drivers probably kill more people than victims of firearms.
South Carolina’s Legislature should BY LAW mandate required steps in all homicide investigations OR the solicitor cannot even bring an indictment to a grand jury.
And while it is at it, South Carolina’s Legislature should BY LAW mandate that no indictment or application for probable cause be submitted without the investigator first questioning the suspect about a possible legitimate reason for the alleged act.
Advancements of the law should, God willing, come from my 2 December 2009 false arrest for “harassment in the first degree” and from RAM’s 2 March 2023 false convictions or murders.
Society gains NOTHING from leaving the law as unscientific as it is.
YouTube offered me an (premiere?) episode of Annie Emerson’s Criminally Obsessed podcast, one of the new crops of climbers over Murdaugh to achieve podcast fame and fortune.
I had to stop watching after sampling it and paste this:
Ever Bluffing Eric Bland (“EBEB”) is lying as usual. Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) federal sentence is CONCURRENT, not consecutive, to his state sentence for so-called “financial crimes.”
The Satterfields are NOT “Christian people.” They wanted more than a pound of RAM’s flesh; and they STILL want $4.3 millions MORE than the $10.6 millions they ALREADY got for the death IN HOSPITAL from a heart attack of their poorly-managed chronic diabetic mother Gloria.
And EBEB is NOT “an Old Testament guy.” The Old Testament says “thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” and “thou shalt not covet …”
According to his own book, EBEB started his own family by coveting his “neighbor’s” girl friend and forcing her to convert from Christianity to Judaism only to please EBEB’s mother, even though EBEB himself violates most, if not all, the tenets of justice of Judaism, including requiring the testimony of two men before condemning a third.
I am a devout Coptic Orthodox Christian and a fervent supporter of Egypt’s (albeit so-far “cold”) peace with Israel. So, EBEB cannot play an antisemitism card against me. I probably know more Hebrew than EBEB does and certainly know the Old Testament better than EBEB does.
At my age and health condition, I panic that every time I fall asleep might become my eternal sleep and I will be judged on my omissions.
So, to not have omitted to share what I know or what I concluded as soon as I put it together, here is my most recent comment on Will Folks’ interview of Blanca Simpson:
At minute 34:28 Blanca deserves an Oscar BUT at the same time makes a Freudian slip: “that he left them there. That is the hurtful part to me.”
Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) left Paul and Maggie ALIVE in the kennels. But Blanca’s slip implies that RAM knew who was planning or threatening to shoot them that night. She admits she knows who “helped” in the shootings.
Whoever supposedly “helped” in the shootings could have been THE shooter.
Remember? The hand of one is the hand of all. Or is law applied selectively in this state?
THIS CANNOT BE LEFT AT THAT. Ignoring Blanca’s statement is obstruction of justice.
No matter Will Folks’ friendship with Alan Wilson or Dylan Nolan’s loyalty to his former boss, same Alan Wilson, BOTH Will and Dylan must FORMALLY request Alan Wilson to ask the AG of another state to investigate the knowledge, if any, behind Blanca’s statement that she knows who “helped” AND IMMEDIATELY RELEASE THE RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION to the public.
If it turns out that Blanca was bluffing and simply teasing knowledge she does not have to promote sales of her book, sales must be IMMEDIATELY halted and her book de-published.
Society cannot have obstructors of justice profiting from publications of their obstruction.
Petting a dog does NOT make you a saint and does NOT mitigate obstruction of justice.
URGENT to Jenn and Will: you can’t un-ring the bell of what Blanca said; and you now added to my panic about sinning by omission.
So, please take this pasted-hereunder reply of mine as addressed to the two of you, too:
? @mariac.9727 , that assumes Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) had shot Paul and Maggie AND assumes RAM’s visit to his Alzeihmer’s-inflicted mother, Libby, aggravated by the absence of Libby’s TERMINAL 60-year husband was SOLELY a manufactured alibi.
Think about what Blanca asserted: she KNOWS one or several persons who ACTUALLY helped in the shootings in some way.
In addition to the illogic of RAM having recruited one or several persons to show up at EXACTLY 8:44 pm on 7 June 2021, assist in the shootings and/or clean up thereafter, then disappear without a trace.
Regardless of the timing precision, that person or people would have had interest of their own in having BOTH Paul and Maggie eliminated OR total indifference to the lives of those two people.
ON TOP OF ALL THAT, that helper or helpers must be known to Blanca but to no other person on earth OR be so powerful as to cower all others who know that helper or helpers into silence.
ALL POSSIBLITIES lead to two, but only three possible conclusions: (1) Blanca is B-S-ing to gin up sales for her book, in which case NOT ONE WORD of hers is to be believed; OR (2) Blanca was herself that helper, in which case she must be immediately arrested; OR (3) the Prosecution already knows who those supposed helpers are but had vested interest in offering RAM as the sole shooter.
Again, I reiterate my conviction that the shootings happened around 9:30 pm, NOT 8:44 pm, and I reassert my conclusion that the shootings were actually and completely done by whoever was ready, willing, and able to “help” RAM shoot Paull and Maggie.
I hope someone of conscience takes it from here.
A proverb in Arabic (and I am NOT Arab, I am Coptic but highly-educated in Arabic, French, and English literatures) roughly translates to: “the worst calamity makes you laugh.”
While framing the innocent, and for two murders at that, is never a laughing matter, I had to post this on FaceBook in reply to Ever-Bluffing Eric Bland’s (“EBEB”) pretense that he takes his “integrity seriously”:
“What integrity, Ever-Bluffing Eric Bland (“EBEB”)? Why don’t you start by disclosing, AS YOU HAD PROMISED, where the money from Sanctimonious Sandy Smith’s (“SSS”) Go-Fund-Me page went? And why don’t you acknowledge that you tried to frame Buster Murdaugh for Stephen Smith’s death which is clearly a disguised suicide by walking into oncoming traffic? And why don’t you acknowledge trying to force your own daughter into a sub-specialty she does not love as you had forced her mother to convert to a religion you don’t even practice only to please your own mother? BTW, I am NOT endorsing James Seidel either and had told him his writing style makes his books unreadable. But at least James Seidel has not framed an innocent man then tried to frame his son as you, EBEB, did.”
EBEB and Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (Weiss) are cut from the same cloth and need to be reformed before they destroy their children as April Woodard Sampson had destroyed her daughter, Lela Gabrielle Sampson, who, three years almost to the day, is yet to be tried for any on her ten pending General Sessions charges including attempted murder in Lexington.
I am THE OPPOSITE of gloating when I review an email thread between April and me in 2010, when April was forced on me as my stand-by counsel and acted more as if she had been appointed a stab-in-the-back-counsel.
BTW, April had succeeded now-permanently-disbarred Mark Schnee who had FALSELY pretended he did nothing for me because what I had asked him to do was contrary to his “ethics.” Yeah! Right! It is unethical to ask a lawyer to NOT stab his client in the back!
So, I had emailed April in November 2010 that the number of lies she told in her one month of “service” as my supposed stand-by-counsel is detrimental to the upbringing of her daughters.
Fifteen years later, I am sadly vindicated.
This Thanksgiving, all truth-seekers should be thankful for my existence, my knowledge, and my courage to post to Will Folks’ Blanca interview replies such as this to one who pretended I “clearly do not know the facts of the case”:
?”@mandychadwick8762 , I (1) watched ALL Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) two-murder trial; (2) read ALL documents in the federal case where it was revealed that the whole Gloria case was an insurance fraud fabrication about dogs having tripped her, etc.; (3) PERSONALLY know MOST of the prosecutors in the state criminal trial and many of the insurance defense lawyers in the federal civil case; so, I know what tactics they are capable of cold-bloodedly and unscrupulously deploying; (4) had in 2009-2012 defended myself WITHOUT A LAWYER, mainly in the court of none other than Judge Clifton Newman, and, thank God, first prevented a jury from returning a wrongful conviction of me; and later, always thanks to God and STILL WITHOUT A LAWYER, I got those false criminal charges against myself dismissed WITH PREJUDICE; and (5) am a quadrilingual MD, MPH who, in my much younger years, performed 48 autopsies which required meticulous medical records review to correctly diagnose the main cause and contributory causes of death.
So, what is it that you think you know about this case more than I do?”
This invitation to supply any more real facts is extended to all readers of this outlet.
This remarkable research which implies that unpaid drug dealers COULD BE the TRUE shooters needs to be supplemental with the TRUE time of the shootings.
The answer is at the end of this pasted reply to a commenter on FITSTube:
? @RJ1234-d1s , repeating a falsehood ever more frequently and ever louder never makes it true in the end.
Has anyone EVER answered with OBJECTIVE science my assertion that the shootings COULD NOT HAVE happened as early as only 22 minutes after the victims’ KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal?
This time I call on pathologists of conscience, I even call on FITSTube or Jenn Wood to interview Dr. Michelle Duprey (Eric Bland’s hand-picked pathologist for Stephen Smith’s “second autopsy”) about BOTH (1) the timing of demise by stomach contents as related to contents and quantity of last meal; AND (2) Stephen Smith’s “second autopsy” having confirmed that he died where his body was found as a result of vehicle versus pedestrian collision.
America cannot be great without BOTH the Constitution and true science.
Do NOT destroy both in the service of vendetta and greed of a chosen few against marked fewer.
Hot off the press:
Thank God, (1) I survived the most recent episode (few minutes ago) of my numerous-false-arrests-caused angina, which episode caused me to wake up with chest pain a couple of hours ago; (2) my vision is not too blurry to post this or to review selected parts of the official transcript; and (3) THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) two-murder trial is now available in digital (meaning word searchable format) on C-Track on South Carolina’s Judicial Branch’s website.
My preliminary review of excerpts CONFIRMS my assertion that Paul and Maggie COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SHOT as early as only 22 minutes after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal.
It also CONFIRMS that the Prosecution KNEW IT and did everything possible to distract from that exonerating fact:
FIRST, Creighton Waters peremptorily struck an otherwise-qualified juror SOLELY BECAUSE he is a pathologist.
OFFICIAL TANSCRIPT pp 403-404:
[19-20] THE COURT: Thank you, sir. Just wanted to confirm since I saw you hesitated to get up.
[21] THE JUROR: Oh, I’m fine.
[22] THE COURT: But you sound good to me.
[23-24] THE JUROR: I work full-time at the hospital as a pathologist, so I’m fine.
[25 to page 404, line 2] THE COURT: Oh, okay, good. Thank you, sir. You can go back and stand right where you — in front of the bench and we’ll see —
[3] THE JUROR: Back there with those people?
[4-5] THE COURT: No. Right in front there by the clerk. He’ll show you.
[6] THE JUROR: Oh, okay. Thank you. Okay.
[7] THE COURT: He’s good to go.
[8-9] (All parties returned to the courtroom. Jury selection continued.)
[10] THE CLERK: What say you for the State?
[11] MR. WATERS: Please excuse the juror from this case.
[12-13] THE CLERK: Juror 22, you can have a seat back with the panel.
[14] Juror 729. What say you for the State?
[15] MR. WATERS: Please present this juror.
[16] THE CLERK: What say you for the defendant?
[17] MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Swear this juror.
[18] THE CLERK: Have a seat to your right.
[19] Juror 864. What say you for the State?
[20] MR. WATERS: Please present this juror.
[21] THE CLERK: What say you for the defendant?
[22] MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Please swear the juror.
[23-25] THE CLERK: If you will have a seat to your right, please. Your Honor, that’s your twelve.
NEXT and ETCETERA, please stay tuned to, God willing and FITS permitting, my future posts.
Thank God I stayed alive and y’all stayed tuned for the second proof that the Prosecution KNEW that Paul and Maggie had together a dinner of the same contents, which dinner ended at 8:30 pm on 7 June 2021.
That proof is again from THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of RAM’s two-murder trial, which transcript is available on C-Track and shows, at page 432, lines 9-22, Creighton Waters telling the jury:
I told you that you’re going to hear evidence that Maggie did not like being in Moselle as much as she liked Edisto, the beach house, but that on June 7, 2021, she came back to Moselle. And the evidence is going to show that she arrived about 8:15, and the evidence is going to show that — from the cell phones that Paul was there at the house, at the main house, and Alex Murdaugh himself says that they ate dinner. And the autopsy is going to reflect both Paul and Maggie having similar stomach contents, indicating that they recently shared a meal together.
About 8:30, like 15 minutes after they arrived, Paul’s phone starts moving towards the kennels.
Please pray for my continued survival from this angina and stay tuned for more exculpatory excerpts, God so willing and FITS permitting.
And before, God so willing, I proceed to the clincher of the Prosecution KNOWING the relationship between the last meal and the more precise timing of death, I destroy the Prosecution’s unfairly in the media (before, during, AND after trial) ridiculing the Defense’s two-shooter theory as some midget vigilantes who rode by Moselle hoping to find guns lying around.
I often wrote my REASONABLE conclusion that Maggie was shot with Paul’s PREVIOUSLY-STOLEN $8K gun.
Think of it: what would someone do with such an expensive gun? Resell or re-paint it and use it. So, the REAL SHOOTER could be the thief of Paul’s stolen gun OR have could have bought it from the real thief.
NOTHING impossible, implausible, or irrational about either possibility.
Now notice what the Prosecution’s own expert admitted at page 353, lines 12-17, OF THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT under oath but after considerable obfuscation:
A Based on my examination, those are the marks that I was able to conclude that matched. When I looked at the totality of that cartridge, that fired cartridge case, excuse me, to look at the firing pin or breach face marks, I was unable to determine that — if it was fired by the Item 33 rifle, or by another rifle that was similar.
Noticed “or by another rifle that was similar”?
The expensive guns Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) bought for Paul and Buster were IDENTICAL but for the color. Paul’s was stolen, replaced, and the replacement, too, stolen. But Buster’s gun, which was often “borrowed” by Paul (after losing TWO SIMILAR guns) and friends, was staying put and minding its own business in the Moselle gun room on 7 June 2021.
That Buster’s rifle is the rifle taken from the Moselle gun room by the investigators and labeled State Exhibit 33.
Prove me wrong if you can.
To this day, and due to my indelible early education by French Catholic nuns, I think of temperatures in centigrade and volumes in cubic centimeters.
Dr. Ellen Riemer spoke of Paul and Maggie’s stomach contents in milliliters, which due to the specific gravity OF WATER being 1, converts to grams OF THE SAME NUMBER. One cc of water is one milliliter of water and weighs one gram.
Now that the OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) two-murder trial is out, I comfortably confirm what I have been asserting for almost three years now: the food in Paul and Maggie’s stomachs at autopsy was too little and too digested for them to have died ONLY 22 MINUTES after their KNOWN large, and relatively fatty, last meal.
Although no stomach contents photos were apparently entered at trial, Dr. Riemer’s testimony leads to ONLY ONE SCIENTIFICALLY-BASED conclusion: Paul and Maggie died around 9:30 pm, NOT as early as 8:44 pm, on 7 June 2021.
And here is Dr. Riemer’s testimony on direct examination by Creighton Waters in the State’s case-in-chief:
[Page 3381, lines 10-11] Q Did both Maggie and Paul, did you make any observations about their stomach contents?
[12-21] A Yes. So part of the autopsy, I’m not just looking at the wounds. I’m examining all of the internal organs, and when I — this is how I knew it went through the pancreas and the kidney. Because, remember, I’m not just looking outside of the body. I have to — I do everything, look at all of the internal organs and dissect each one. And it — when examining the stomach it’s — I will document the contents of the stomach, and they each had a lot of recently digested food fragments. So, you know, there was a — they had a full stomach of food.
[22 Q And were those stomach contents consistent with one another?
[24 to page 3382, line ] A Yeah, they looked identical to each other. They were kind of gray/tan, you know. I couldn’t tell exactly what it was, but it may have included meat. I didn’t see any corn or, you know, green beans or anything like that. But whatever it was, they were identical to each other. And I believe she had 600 MLs, which is, like, it’s — 450 MLs is a pound, so it’s like almost one and a half pounds of food. And he had 500 MLs, which is a little bit more than a pound. But they looked similar like they may have shared a meal together.
Those 500 or 600 ccs of “tan/gray” “couldn’t tell exactly what it was” is LIKELY half coffee because they had high caffeine in their toxicology report but is definitely TOO DIGESTED for the first 22 minutes after the last meal.
The Prosecution knew it but counted on the Defense to miss it. The Defense continues to ignore that part, either out of embarrassment for having missed it ab initio OR out the local legal “profession’s” obsession with discrediting me even if it means leaving their client rotting in a wrongful incarceration.
Next, God so willing and FITS permitting, I shall quote a part from Blanca Simpson’s testimony which proves the Prosecution was keen on blind-siding the Defense about the REAL time of death.
This excerpt of John Meadors’ examination of Blanca Simpson shows: (1) Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) long kaki pants, which he wore to work on 7 June 2021 and had them on while riding around Moselle for a couple of hours after returning from work (see the snapchat video of the shrub that kept cantilevering) were left in the laundry room when RAM took them off before or after dinner and changed into the white T and green shorts; and (2) Blanca had made meat and corn and rice for Paul but the pathologist could not see any, meaning Paul lived long enough (at least an hour) after dinner for the corn to clear his stomach.
After this, nobody buy Blanca’s book soaked with the blood of the innocent, and no one tell me RAM is guilty.
[Page 2978, lines 15-16] Q Now, Ms. Maggie had asked you to fix dinner for the family. Did you do that?
[17] A I did.
[18] Q Can you tell them what you made?
[19] A She called it steak burger, but’s cubed steak and gravy, some white rise, and some green beans.
[21] Q You’re a good cook, aren’t you?
[22] A Yes, sir.
[23-24] Q Did you see or talk to Maggie ever again after those texts or those phone calls?
[25 to page 2978, line 4] A Before I left Moselle, I texted her and I said the dinner was on — I believe I texted to the effect that I left dinner on the stove for them. And — I can’t really remember the text, but I did text her and let her know that dinner was ready and that I was leaving.
[5-6] Q And you said one of her phrases she used is no worries. Had she said that to you that day?
[7] A Yes.
[8] Q When was that? It doesn’t matter.
[9] A I can’t remember.
[10] Q You’ve got a family of your own, right?
[11] A Yes, sir.
[12] Q Did you — when you left Moselle, what did you do?
[13] A Picked up my son at school.
[14] Q All right, and your husband is working?
[15] A Yes, sir.
[16] Q Law enforcement?
[17] A Yes, sir.
[18-19] Q Okay, and when you got home that night, did anybody call you that night?
[20] A No.
[21-22] Q Okay. When did you hear about the murder at Moselle of Paul and Maggie Murdaugh?
[23-24] A The next morning when I was getting ready to go out there.
[25] Q The next morning?
[Page 2979, line 1] A Yes, sir.
[2] Q Okay. How did you hear?
[3] A Alex called me.
[4-5] Q And what did he tell you? He called you the next morning?
[6] A He called me early the next morning.
[7] Q And what did he say to you?
[8-12] A He — he sounded shaky on the phone. You could tell he was — his voice sounded really shaky, and he said B, they’re gone, they’re gone. And my initial thought was did she go back to Edisto? I — that thought didn’t cross my mind that he meant that they were dead at that time.
[13] Q You just didn’t comprehend what was going on.
[14-17] A No, sir, I did not. So, he told me again. He said, he said no, B. They’re dead. And at that point I don’t remember because I believe I dropped the phone. My husband grabbed the phone and I don’t remember after that.
[18] Q You literally dropped the phone.
[19] A Yes.
[20] Q And did your husband get on the phone?
[21] A I don’t remember.
[22] Q Okay.
[23 to page 2980, line 1] A I don’t remember. I don’t remember. I — all I remember is when he said that they were dead. I dropped the phone. And I believe I said “I’ll be right over, I’ll be right over, but —
[2-3] Q Did he, the defendant, Alex Murdaugh, tell you which way to go when you got to the house?
[4-13] A He said him and Buster were at Almeda, so I told him he was going to Almeda. You know, I wanted to make sure they were okay, so I went from my house to Almeda. And then when I got ready to leave Almeda, he said, well, when you go to the house, go in the front because there’s a lot of SLED agents by the kennels. You can’t go in that way. And he said just try to straighten up the way Maggie liked everything, you know, in the house. He said you knew her the best, so you know how she liked stuff. So, I did. I went to the house.
[14] Q So, you went to —
[15] A I went to Moselle.
[16] Q You went to Almeda to start with?
[17] A Yes, I did, to check on Buster and Alex.
[18] Q Okay. To comfort them.
[19] A Yes, sir.
[20-21] Q Okay, and at his request, you went to Moselle to start cleaning up and getting the house in order?
[22 to page 2981, line 1] A Yes, sir. He said there was going to be people probably stopping by and bringing food and stuff. He said I just want the house to look the way Maggie would like for it to look. So I said okay, and I went to the house and then —
[2-3] Q Did you have a usual way that you went into Moselle entrance wise?
[4-10] A From the house I would — if I was coming from my house, I would come in on the — I called it the Mylie’s side. So, I would actually enter the property through the kennels, and if I was coming from Hampton or if I — you know, the other direction, then I would use the front entrance. But normally I used the kennel entrance coming from my house.
[11-12] Q When you got to Moselle — we’re now in the morning of June 8th, right, of 2021?
[13] A Yes, sir.
[14-15] Q Okay. Did you see anybody in the property before you got to the main house?
[16] A No, sir.
[17-19] Q And when you got to the main house, take us right there, Blanca. Right now as you’re walking right in the house, what were your observations?
[20-23] A It was hard because I know she wasn’t going to be coming back. And I didn’t want to move — I didn’t want to move her stuff. It was just a weird feeling going through when I unlocked the front door to get in. It felt cold.
[24] Q You really cared for her, didn’t you?
[25] A I did.
[Page 2982, line 1] Q What did you do when you got inside?
[2 to page 2983, line 2] A When I got inside, I didn’t turn on any lights; I didn’t do anything. I walked — I walked through the front door and I went in the kitchen, and I was kind of — I was kind of — when I looked in the kitchen, I kind of just stopped in my tracks and I looked at the stove, and then I was kind of — I don’t know what the word is. When I looked and I noticed the stove, that there was no pots on the stove, it was kind of unusual because usually when they ate dinner — when they ate dinner the night before, the pots usually stayed on the stove. Very, very seldom would she put, you know, certain meals in the refrigerator. A lot times it was just left on the stove until the next day. And the pots were not — they were not in the sink and they were not on the stove. And then as I walked through, I walked — if you walked through the kitchen like you’re going to — from the kitchen — if you walked through the kitchen, if you go to the left there’s two — a freezer and a refrigerator, and the laundry room sat right there to the — there’s a backdoor to the back porch, and then there’s a — the laundry room door. They’re both right there. And as I turned to go to the laundry room, I noticed that there was — her pajamas were in the middle of the doorway right in the middle, laid neatly in the middle of doorway going into the laundry room. It was her pajama pants, a pair of underwear, and her pajama top.
[3] Q Was that unusual?
[4] A That was very unusual.
[5] Q Why?
[6-8] A Because she would — she wouldn’t lay her clothes out like that, not in the middle of the door like that. It just didn’t look right to me.
[9] Q And you took care of the house?
[10] A Yes.
[11] Q And you took care of the clothes?
[12] A Yes.
[13-15] Q And not to get too personal but sometime you can’t help it. Were the underwear there with the pajamas unusual?
[16] A Yes.
[17] Q Why?
[18] A She didn’t wear underwear with her pajamas.
[19] Q No underwear with the pajamas, but that struck —
[20] A No underclothes with the pajamas.
[21-22] Q But that struck you as unusual they were there with the pajamas?
[23-24] A Yes, sir, because the underwear appeared to be clean, not dirty. They still had, like, fold marks.
[25 to page 2984, line 1] Q And the pots, and I may have just missed it. You said — where would the pots end up when you found them?
[2-9] A After I looked at the pajamas on the floor the way that they were set, I turned around and I said, well, I wonder where the pots are. So, I happened to — I opened the refrigerator door, and the pots were sitting inside the refrigerator with lids on them, and I was, like, you know, who did this? I don’t know at that point, but that was not normal for the pots — the whole pot to be sitting in the fridge.
[10-11] Q Did you make any other observations in the house, the bathroom, or anywhere else?
[12 to page 2985, line 1] A In the master bathroom was — her clothes were sitting next to the tub. It was a small pile of clothes right there next to the tub. And by the shower — if you walk in the master bedroom, there is a big garden tub, spa type tub, and then right here is the shower, and there’s a window. On the floor next to the shower was a slight puddle of water, a towel, and a pair of khaki pants. And then as I went to the left to see if there was anything else that was out, I looked in the closet, and in the closet was a white, damp towel on the floor, and there was a — I’m pretty sure the t-shirt was white at one time, but, you know, they get kind of dingy after a few years. But it appeared that a t-shirt had fallen off a stack of t-shirts that were on top of the shelf right there in the closet. It was laying on the floor next to the tub.
[2-5] Q When you took care of the home, was that — tell us how the clothes were laid out, the shirts, the shorts. Were you saying up on a shelf, were the shirts — how were they?
[6-13] A In the closet there was a shelf, there was some shelves, smaller shelves right here. Then there was some long ones. Maggie used to keep her clothes on these. And then there was a shorter one kind of like a little box looking thing. Alex used to keep his clothes, his belts and stuff in that. And then on top there was also an area where he kept t-shirts. They were folded and they were kept on the shelf.
[14-16] Q And when you say t-shirts, I know what a t-shirt is, but, I mean, were they t-shirts like I’m wearing right now or were they t-shirts with pockets? What was it?
[17-20] A Usually there would be t-shirts like when if they would go — like when you go to a restaurant and they have the logo, those type of t-shirts. He had a big collection of those.
[21] Q And would you put them on the shelf?
[22] A Yes, sir, I did.
[23] Q Did you iron t-shirts?
[24] A Yes, sir, I did.
[25] Q And you washed all the clothes?
[Page 2986, line 1] A Yes, I did.
[2-3] Q Did he have a certain place that he kept shorts versus long pants?
[4-17] A Yes, sir. When you walked in the master bedroom — when you enter the master bedroom, the bed was right here at the foot of the bed. You had a dresser here and a dresser here. The right dresser, in the top drawers were usually his underwear, his socks. The next drawer was his t-shirts. On the bottom drawer were the pajama pants that he would wear or his shorts that he would wear to sleep in. In the left drawer — and one sits on this side of the door going into the bathroom, and the other one is right here. On the left dresser he kept his white t-shirts that he would wear under — when he wore a suit he would wear, the t-shirts were in one of those drawers, and then the other two drawers were shorts, the dressier shorts, and then the not-so-dressier shorts.
[18-19] Q So, you testified a shirt looked like it had fallen when you saw it this morning?
[20] A Yes, sir.
[21] Q June 8th of 2021. Okay. Was it still clean?
[22] A Yes, sir.
[23] Q Did you put it back?
[24] A Yes, sir.
[25 to page 2987, line 2] Q Okay. My boss, Don Zelenka, just reminded me that the food that you cooked, did you look and see how much was eaten in the pots?
[3] A No, sir, I did not.
[4-5] Q Okay. Now, you said there was a damp towel. Where was that?
[6] A In the closet on the floor.
[7-8] Q And I know what damp means, but when you touched it, did it feel —
[9] A It was damp.
[10] Q What did you do with it?
[11] A Took it to the laundry room.
[12] Q And you said there was some pants there.
[13] A Yes, sir. There was a pair of khakis by the shower.
[14] Q And what did you do with those?
[15] A Took them to the laundry room.
[16] Q Did you wash them?
[17] A Yes, sir.
[18-19] THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, let’s stand for a moment.
[20] (Break in proceedings.)
[21-22] THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, you may go to your jury room.
[23] (The jury left the courtroom.)
[24] THE COURT: We’ll take about 10 minutes.
[25] (A break was taken.)
On a closer look, what is “Mylie’s side” in this part of Blanca’s trial testimony FROM THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT?
[22 to page 2981, line 1] A[.] Yes, sir. He said there was going to be people probably stopping by and bringing food and stuff. He said I just want the house to look the way Maggie would like for it to look. So I said okay, and I went to the house and then —
[2-3] Q[.] Did you have a usual way that you went into Moselle entrance wise?
[4-10] A[.] From the house I would — if I was coming from my house, I would come in on the — I called it the Mylie’s side. So, I would actually enter the property through the kennels, and if I was coming from Hampton or if I — you know, the other direction, then I would use the front entrance. But normally I used the kennel entrance coming from my house.
[11-12] Q[.] When you got to Moselle — we’re now in the morning of June 8th, right, of 2021?
[13] A[.] Yes, sir.
I mean is that Mylie Aultman, a plaintiff in the boat crash case?
I wish you would get Blanca AND her ghost-writer for another interview.
One more question supported by juxtaposing the official transcript with this interview:
If Blanca was so surprised by the end of Paul and Maggie’s lives that Blanca dropped the phone upon hearing the news from Alex, how come she knew who helped?
Or put in the reverse: if Blanca knew who the helper(s) was/is, why was she surprised by their “success”?
The whole thing makes absolutely no sense.