|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Murdaugh Verdict Reversal: ‘Fingers on the Scales of Justice’
Inside the opinion that reversed Alex Murdaugh’s double homicide convictions…
Inside the opinion that reversed Alex Murdaugh’s double homicide convictions…
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
13 comments
Just so there is no chance of Alex Murdaugh missing this, here is my most recent comment on today’s other article of yours:
Dick and Jim have now, thank God, cleaned up part of their expensive mess. They should take a quick victory lap and let Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) represent himself in seeking dismissal of the murder charges outright and withdrawal of his guilty pleas to the financial crimes, which pleas were made under the psychiatric duress of having been falsely accused AND FALSELY CONVICTED of the murders of his wife and younger son.
Neither Judge Clifton Newman, nor Federal Judge Gergel inquired about that psychiatric duress because that is not part of the litany made by non-physician judges.
Again, I volunteer to be RAM’s medical expert witness free of charge in such motions.
And again, I am not a lawyer but was complimented on the transcribed record by at least one federal jurist as better than lawyers.
And again, I do have a personal interest; but one which makes more credible, not less credible, as a medical expert.
They can find no other like me in this vicinity, not only for my excellent intellect and education, but more significantly for my moral authority.
I will NOT testify free of charge for RAM if Dick and Jim do not step aside, for no reason other than their pasts as prosecutors make them lack the moral authority to expose prosecutorial abuses.
It is my time and talents and my choice to whom I give them free of charge.
It is now RAM’s choice whether to expose the system of prosecutorial abuses, and of using criminal charges to gain unfair advantage in civil litigation, which three generations of his ancestors built, which came back to bite him and his sons, or to let others suffer from it.
I can, God willing, take on the abusive prosecutorial system without RAM; but RAM cannot do it without me.
Again, I made my choice. RAM needs to make his quickly.
A very important reply of mine to Alan Wilson’s and Creighton Waters’ press conference few minutes ago deserves to be re-pasted here:
? @reenakemp9132 , if you listened carefully to what Creighton Waters said in the press conference few minutes ago, you will understand that Creighton Waters ABANDONED the sacred prosecutorial duty to explore exculpatory evidence with the same zeal as inculpatory evidence.
He did NOT do that.
Indeed, he BRAGGED about doing THE OPPOSITE.
He said in so many words “aggressive” and “concern for double jeopardy.”
TRANSLATION: if you, as a prosecutor, obey your duty to include exculpatory evidence and the criminal defendant gets acquitted, the State cannot appeal because of double jeopardy. But if you as a prosecutor “aggressively” include irrelevant and prejudicial evidence, and it causes a wrongful conviction, the criminal defendant can appeal and if “the system works” he gets a new trial as just happened.
Right? NO, no, no! WRONG, wrong, wrong!
“The system” trusts the prosecutors to err on the side of caution, not on the side of conviction at any price.
Lives get destroyed because of wrongful convictions, even if later reversed.
The public confidence in the legal system gets rightly shaken.
And most significantly, the REAL perpetrator gets to avoid accountability (for five years now and going) or forever.
If Alan Wilson were truly non-political, he should have announced a reopened neutral investigation and invited all with new information to contribute.
A very important reply of mine to Alan Wilson’s and Creighton Waters’ press conference few minutes ago deserves to be re-pasted here:
? @reenakemp9132 , if you listened carefully to what Creighton Waters said in the press conference few minutes ago, you will understand that Creighton Waters ABANDONED the sacred prosecutorial duty to explore exculpatory evidence with the same zeal as inculpatory evidence.
He did NOT do that.
Indeed, he BRAGGED about doing THE OPPOSITE.
He said in so many words “aggressive” and “concern for double jeopardy.”
TRANSLATION: if you, as a prosecutor, obey your duty to include exculpatory evidence and the criminal defendant gets acquitted, the State cannot appeal because of double jeopardy. But if you as a prosecutor “aggressively” include irrelevant and prejudicial evidence, and it causes a wrongful conviction, the criminal defendant can appeal and if “the system works” he gets a new trial as just happened.
Right? NO, no, no! WRONG, wrong, wrong!
“The system” trusts the prosecutors to err on the side of caution, not on the side of conviction at any price.
Lives get destroyed because of wrongful convictions, even if later reversed.
The public confidence in the legal system gets rightly shaken.
And most significantly, the REAL perpetrator gets to avoid accountability (for five years now and going) or forever.
If Alan Wilson were truly non-political, he should have announced a reopened neutral investigation and invited all with new information to contribute.
And here is another reply to another commenter today:?
@Nonna7384 , you’re again assuming that the shootings were at 8:49 – 8:52, which (as I explained many, many times previously) is ABSOLUTELY INCONSISTENT with the victims’ stomachs’ contents at autopsy where the food was too little and too digested for the demise to have occurred only 22 minutes after their large and relatively fatty last meal ended at 8:30 pm. The real shooters were not really mad at the Murdaughs; they only wanted to silence Paul and Maggie from testifying that there were no dogs when Gloria Satterfield fell. Also, shooting Alex would have ended the civil part of the boat crash case because the suit was against Alex and Buster for “bad parenting” and for Paul’s use of Buster’s ID. Please look up my previous comments here and elsewhere. Thanks!
Yet you were the one pontificating about what a great jurist Newman was
Not so! I was only defending now-Retired/Active SC Circuit Judge Clifton Newman against BLATANTLY racist attacks on him.
He presided over my 22-26 February 2010 General Sessions jury trial in Richland County, where and when, thank God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, I did for myself what RAM’s entire defense team could not do for him: prevent a jury from returning a wrongful conviction (although, now thank God, they cleaned up part of their own mess).
My jury hopelessly deadlocked after over five hours of deliberations into the night. And after an Allen charge and sending the jury back to deliberate some more, Judge Clifton Newman declared a mistrial shortly before midnight.
I became a legend of pro se advocacy in the Richland County courthouse. And to dispirit me, false rumors were spread that my jury was split 10-2 of 11-1 for conviction although Judge Clifton Newman never asked for the jury split because that is the correct law and the jury left without talking to anyone.
Perhaps Becky Hill had heard of my feat, which is why she was in such panic to get Myra Catherine Crosby off the jury lest he hangs RAM’s jury as the rumors pretended one juror hung mine,
How would Becky Hill even have known about my case? Easy! David Amadeo Fernandez.
Fernandez was Columbia Assistant City Attorney (“CACA”) in 2008-2014 or so. And he was DIRECTLY seeking to hold me in contempt of court every time I advocated for my constitutional rights to a speedy retrial after the mistrial or dismissal of the false criminal charges against me.
For the 30 months between February 2010 and August 2012, I was arrested three more times on more false charges of which I was later acquitted; and I was again incarcerated by the out-of-control Marion Oneida Hanna (a white literal “bastard” whose father never married her mother), who flew into a rage when she heard that I had OUTSIDE OF COURT called then-CACA Fernandez a bastard for having received a motion of mine by hand-delivery then immediately thrown it on the floor to deny service.
Marion Oneida Hanna was later privately-something by South Carolina’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel for her lack of decorum (putting it charitably) in a 28 March 2011 hearing where I had been diverted to her to thwart my renewed motion for speedy retrial or dismissal of the harassment charges which had then been improperly remanded to Columbia Municipal Court (“CMC”) because Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (Weiss) did not have the integrity of dismissing them but knew she had no TRUE facts to retry them after my post-trial reseach uncovered the subornation, perjury, forgery, and fabrication deployed against me in my trial in Judge Clifton Newman’s court.
In August 2012, always than God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, I got the false harassment charges against me dismissed WITH PREJUDICE with CACA Fernandez staring evilly but helplessly at me.
Back to CACA Fernandez, he followed Hatchet-for-Hire Heather to SC Attorney General’s office (“SCAG”) after having procured from that office a letter saying BASICALLY that said office will prosecute someone who injures a dog but will not prosecute someone who injures Dr. Marie Faltas even if local prosecutors recuse themselves.
Guess where CACA Fernandez pops up on the national stage next!
Right: Murdaugh’s trial where Fernandez confabulated a bucket of bloody water at the kennels AND the fake FaceBook post which got Myra Catherine Crosby off the jury.
I do not speak or write without OBJECTIVE support.
In the transcript of the in-chambers proceedings, Fernandez FALSELY tells Judge Clifton Newman “we know [Myra Catherine Crosby’s husband’s] name: Tim Stone.”
I checked few minutes ago; and Fernandez was still listed at SCAG’s office.
But Fernandez did not appear alongside Allan Wilson and Creighton Waters yesterday evening’s press conference.
Coincidence or is SC’s supreme court following up on Fernandez’ role in the machinations against Myra Catherine Crosby?
I do not know. But what I do know is that Allan Wilson can lay no claim to prosecutorial integrity unless and until he SERIOUSLY investigates Heather Weiss’ and Fernandez’ histories of LYING to courts to obtain FALSE convictions.
Not so! I was only defending now-Retired/Active SC Circuit Judge Clifton Newman against BLATANTLY racist attacks on him.
He presided over my 22-26 February 2010 General Sessions jury trial in Richland County, where and when, thank God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, I did for myself what RAM’s entire defense team could not do for him: prevent a jury from returning a wrongful conviction (although, now thank God, they cleaned up part of their own mess).
My jury hopelessly deadlocked after over five hours of deliberations into the night. And after an Allen charge and sending the jury back to deliberate some more, Judge Clifton Newman declared a mistrial shortly before midnight.
I became a legend of pro se advocacy in the Richland County courthouse. And to dispirit me, false rumors were spread that my jury was split 10-2 of 11-1 for conviction although Judge Clifton Newman never asked for the jury split because that is the correct law and the jury left without talking to anyone.
Perhaps Becky Hill had heard of my feat, which is why she was in such panic to get Myra Catherine Crosby off the jury lest he hangs RAM’s jury as the rumors pretended one juror hung mine,
How would Becky Hill even have known about my case? Easy! David Amadeo Fernandez.
Fernandez was Columbia Assistant City Attorney (“CACA”) in 2008-2014 or so. And he was DIRECTLY seeking to hold me in contempt of court every time I advocated for my constitutional rights to a speedy retrial after the mistrial or dismissal of the false criminal charges against me.
For the 30 months between February 2010 and August 2012, I was arrested three more times on more false charges of which I was later acquitted; and I was again incarcerated by the out-of-control Marion Oneida Hanna (a white literal “bastard” whose father never married her mother), who flew into a rage when she heard that I had OUTSIDE OF COURT called then-CACA Fernandez a bastard for having received a motion of mine by hand-delivery then immediately thrown it on the floor to deny service.
Marion Oneida Hanna was later privately-something by South Carolina’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel for her lack of decorum (putting it charitably) in a 28 March 2011 hearing where I had been diverted to her to thwart my renewed motion for speedy retrial or dismissal of the harassment charges which had then been improperly remanded to Columbia Municipal Court (“CMC”) because Hatchet-for-Hire Heather (Weiss) did not have the integrity of dismissing them but knew she had no TRUE facts to retry them after my post-trial reseach uncovered the subornation, perjury, forgery, and fabrication deployed against me in my trial in Judge Clifton Newman’s court.
In August 2012, always than God and WITHOUT A LAWYER, I got the false harassment charges against me dismissed WITH PREJUDICE with CACA Fernandez staring evilly but helplessly at me.
Back to CACA Fernandez, he followed Hatchet-for-Hire Heather to SC Attorney General’s office (“SCAG”) after having procured from that office a letter saying BASICALLY that said office will prosecute someone who injures a dog but will not prosecute someone who injures Dr. Marie Faltas even if local prosecutors recuse themselves.
Guess where CACA Fernandez pops up on the national stage next!
Right: Murdaugh’s trial where Fernandez confabulated a bucket of bloody water at the kennels AND the fake FaceBook post which got Myra Catherine Crosby off the jury.
I do not speak or write without OBJECTIVE support.
In the transcript of the in-chambers proceedings, Fernandez FALSELY tells Judge Clifton Newman “we know [Myra Catherine Crosby’s husband’s] name: Tim Stone.”
I checked few minutes ago; and Fernandez was still listed at SCAG’s office.
But Fernandez did not appear alongside Allan Wilson and Creighton Waters yesterday evening’s press conference.
Coincidence or is SC’s supreme court following up on Fernandez’ role in the machinations against Myra Catherine Crosby?
I do not know. But what I do know is that Allan Wilson can lay no claim to prosecutorial integrity unless and until he SERIOUSLY investigates Heather Weiss’ and Fernandez’ histories of LYING to courts to obtain FALSE convictions.
And the rumor mill, prejudicial publicity, and crazy ideas, start again; but should be promptly pruned this time.
Some media outlets had reported, and now without evidence reassert, that Maggie was looking for a divorce lawyer.
Media, mainstream or alternative, has grown careless, inaccurate, and/or downright malicious in false reporting.
But some law suits, difficult as they are, succeed in punishing such conduct or deterring it ab initio.
Case in point: Buster’s law suit against Michael Dewitt, Netflix et. al., is still proceeding against the defendants who did not settle.
And I am still hoping the wonderful Dr. Erin Presnell who did Stephen Smith’s first autopsy (100% confirmed by the second autopsy) sues: (1) that idiot Thomas Moore, who had pompously to gone harass her to change her diagnosis; (2) that unscrupulous paid-propagandist-masquerading-as-journalist Valerie Bauerlein, who wrote in her book that Dr. Presenell was fired after she did Stephen Smith’s autopsy when, in fact, Dr. Presnell had been PROMOTED, not fired; and (3) that washed-up self-important has-been Katie Couric, who said in her interview with Sanctimonious Sandy Smith (“SSS”) that Dr. Presnell should not be still practicing because it sounds as if “she’s not very competent.”
Perhaps Dr. Presnell is too involved in her professional work to waste time on a good law suit; or perhaps SLED’s refusal to release the results of the second autopsy which 100% confirmed Dr. Presnell’s work is one more of Malicious Mandy Matney’s (“MMM”) machinations to run the statute-of-limitations clock on Dr. Presnell’s potential law suit(s) for defamation per se.
I do not know. But I do know (being NOT a lawyer but better than most) that the statute of limitations for defamation runs from the date of the last publication; and these shows keep getting re-run.
Back to the FALSE reports that Maggie “drove to Charleston looking for a divorce attorney,” did Maggie take a metal detector and scan Charleston’s side walks for a lost “divorce attorney”? Or stand in the Four-Corners-of-the-Law holding a sign saying, “Lost and looking for a divorce attorney?” Or what?
In this day and age, one doesn’t drive somewhere looking for an attorney. One finds one on the internet or by word of mouth and phones the attorney’s office to make an appointment.
NOT ONLY IS THERE ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH CONTACT BETWEEN MAGGIE AND A DIVORCE ATTORNEY, Blanca was yesterday on Ann Emmerson’s “Criminally Obsessed” show re-affirming what Maggie’s sister and close friends already said: Alex and Maggie’s marriage was as strong as ever and they cared for each other very much.
As to Mark Tinsley’s law suit, and setting aside the question of who, if anyone, was actually piloting the boat at the moment of the crash, Paul’s drunkenness that night was due to alcohol sold by Parker’s and other stores, NOT supplied by Alex OR Maggie.
True, parents should not give their under-age children alcohol; but Mark Tinsley’s law suit would have failed on the essential question of the lack of foreseeable linkage between Paul having a beer with his parents at a party a year earlier and the boat crash.
It would also have failed on the contributory negligence of the parents of the other five young people on that boat for letting their offspring go on a night boat ride with a known under-age drinker.
Mark Tinsley’s law suit would have failed at many points. It succeeded only in the same way that The Godfather-I movie depicts Khartum-the-horse’s severed head in the bed of the rich and powerful movie director succeeding in giving a singer a coveted come-back role.
A prize horse severed head in your bed or your wife and younger son found shot to death in your kennels make you “not refuse” the offer you adamantly refused previously.
That is why I am crusading against civil plaintiffs’ or defendants’ lawyers participating in criminal proceedings, genuine or malicious, to gain unfair advantage in civil litigation, which is unethical and forbidden by the Rules of Professional Conduct, if only anyone would enforce them!
And the rumor mill, prejudicial publicity, and crazy ideas, start again; but should be promptly pruned this time.
Some media outlets had reported, and now without evidence reassert, that Maggie was looking for a divorce lawyer.
Media, mainstream or alternative, has grown careless, inaccurate, and/or downright malicious in false reporting.
But some law suits, difficult as they are, succeed in punishing such conduct or deterring it ab initio.
Case in point: Buster’s law suit against Michael Dewitt, Netflix et. al., is still proceeding against the defendants who did not settle.
And I am still hoping the wonderful Dr. Erin Presnell who did Stephen Smith’s first autopsy (100% confirmed by the second autopsy) sues: (1) that idiot Thomas Moore, who had pompously to gone harass her to change her diagnosis; (2) that unscrupulous paid-propagandist-masquerading-as-journalist Valerie Bauerlein, who wrote in her book that Dr. Presenell was fired after she did Stephen Smith’s autopsy when, in fact, Dr. Presnell had been PROMOTED, not fired; and (3) that washed-up self-important has-been Katie Couric, who said in her interview with Sanctimonious Sandy Smith (“SSS”) that Dr. Presnell should not be still practicing because it sounds as if “she’s not very competent.”
Perhaps Dr. Presnell is too involved in her professional work to waste time on a good law suit; or perhaps SLED’s refusal to release the results of the second autopsy which 100% confirmed Dr. Presnell’s work is one more of Malicious Mandy Matney’s (“MMM”) machinations to run the statute-of-limitations clock on Dr. Presnell’s potential law suit(s) for defamation per se.
I do not know. But I do know (being NOT a lawyer but better than most) that the statute of limitations for defamation runs from the date of the last publication; and these shows keep getting re-run.
Back to the FALSE reports that Maggie “drove to Charleston looking for a divorce attorney,” did Maggie take a metal detector and scan Charleston’s side walks for a lost “divorce attorney”? Or stand in the Four-Corners-of-the-Law holding a sign saying, “Lost and looking for a divorce attorney?” Or what?
In this day and age, one doesn’t drive somewhere looking for an attorney. One finds one on the internet or by word of mouth and phones the attorney’s office to make an appointment.
NOT ONLY IS THERE ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH CONTACT BETWEEN MAGGIE AND A DIVORCE ATTORNEY, Blanca was yesterday on Ann Emmerson’s “Criminally Obsessed” show re-affirming what Maggie’s sister and close friends already said: Alex and Maggie’s marriage was as strong as ever and they cared for each other very much.
As to Mark Tinsley’s law suit, and setting aside the question of who, if anyone, was actually piloting the boat at the moment of the crash, Paul’s drunkenness that night was due to alcohol sold by Parker’s and other stores, NOT supplied by Alex OR Maggie.
True, parents should not give their under-age children alcohol; but Mark Tinsley’s law suit would have failed on the essential question of the lack of foreseeable linkage between Paul having a beer with his parents at a party a year earlier and the boat crash.
It would also have failed on the contributory negligence of the parents of the other five young people on that boat for letting their offspring go on a night boat ride with a known under-age drinker.
Mark Tinsley’s law suit would have failed at many points. It succeeded only in the same way that The Godfather-I movie depicts Khartum-the-horse’s severed head in the bed of the rich and powerful movie director succeeding in giving a singer a coveted come-back role.
A prize horse severed head in your bed or your wife and younger son found shot to death in your kennels make you “not refuse” the offer you adamantly refused previously.
That is why I am crusading against civil plaintiffs’ or defendants’ lawyers participating in criminal proceedings, genuine or malicious, to gain unfair advantage in civil litigation, which is unethical and forbidden by the Rules of Professional Conduct, if only anyone would enforce them!
The dualling post-opinion interviews constrain me to reiterate my call for the defense team to bow out and let Alex represent himself.
Sadly, as committed to his client as Mr. Harpootlian is, he seems to have learned NOTHING from the now-reversed conviction where he and Jim Griffin ASSUMED the jury will discount Creighton Waters’ crazy theories on the time of death and on motive.
Even more sadly, cases are now won or lost, not in courtrooms but in public opinion; and seeing the majority of comments on the post-reversal stories, Creighton Waters is already winning the retrial.
For those deluded by, and extolling, Creighton Waters, listen carefully to what he he said in his presser after the opinion reversing the conviction but sparing HIM overt criticism.
You will understand that Creighton Waters ABANDONED the sacred prosecutorial duty to explore exculpatory evidence with the same zeal as inculpatory evidence.
He did NOT do that.
Indeed, he BRAGGED about doing THE OPPOSITE.
He said in so many words “aggressive” and “concern for double jeopardy.”
TRANSLATION: if you, as a prosecutor, obey your duty to include exculpatory evidence and the criminal defendant gets acquitted, the State cannot appeal because of double jeopardy. But if you as a prosecutor “aggressively” include irrelevant and prejudicial evidence, and it causes a wrongful conviction, the criminal defendant can appeal and if “the system works” he gets a new trial as just happened.
Right? NO, no, no! WRONG, wrong, wrong!
“The system” trusts the prosecutors to err on the side of caution, not on the side of conviction at any price.
Lives get destroyed because of wrongful convictions, even if later reversed.
The public confidence in the legal system gets rightly shaken. And most significantly, the REAL perpetrator gets to avoid accountability (for five years now and going) or forever.
If Alan Wilson were truly non-political about this, he should have announced a reopened neutral investigation and invited all with new information to contribute.?
Murdaugh derangement syndrome is spreading.
Trying again:
So, Creighton Waters now vindictively brandishes the death penalty?
He’s in over his head.
Now that the Catholic Church has declared its opposition to the death penalty to be a core belief, Prancing Creighton Waters (“PCW”) cannot exclude jurors opposed to the death penalty if they are Catholic.
Instead of itching to execute the innocent, Alan Wilson should show some zeal in improving murder investigations.
To expiate for his Frankenstein creation, FITS should do a whole show or a whole story on the scientific failures of the investigation into Paul and Maggie’s shootings.
Here is more about ballistics which is augmented by this (link to video deleted for publishability).
It shows SLED, presumably in the early morning of 8 June 2021, supposedly collecting evidence from around and inside the house at Moselle.
Many mistakes appear in that short clip:
1. The spent bullets collected from around the exterior seven-step stoop are BASICALLY rubbed together by the evidence gatherer thus HOPELESSLY contaminating the subsequent tool-mark microscopic examination and analysis if such analysis were a science to begin with.
2. The evidence gatherers arrived without simple plastic or paper bags in which to put each bullet separately with an identification of the precise location it was found.
3. They then resort to a quick and dirty non-solution of putting a bullet in each finger of a “new glove” again without precise location identification and after the bullets had scarred each other from being basically rubbed together.
4. The exterior door handle is not dusted for fingerprints nor swabbed for DNA.
5. Once inside the house, no effort or attention is paid to any food or drink containers with residue or unconsumed content. That should be basic in any murder investigation even where the victims had been visibly shot: had they been poisoned or attempted to be poisoned before the shootings? Were they under the influence of anything they had consumed before being confronted by their shooter(s)? That may not necessarily have been the case here; but these are basics of any investigation started on a blank slate.
6. They are heard commenting to each other that the autopsies already started. They should have carefully looked for evidence of unconsummated or recently-consummated food and drink to supply to the autopsy performer.
Or course, many more mistakes appear even in that short clip.
Now that the Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury has been vindicated, it is essential to vindicate the DUE PROCESS right to a scientifically-sound investigation before charges are even brought against anyone.
Of course, many more mistakes appear even in that short clip.
Now that the Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury has been vindicated, it is essential to vindicate the DUE PROCESS right to a scientifically-sound investigation before charges are even brought against anyone.
Trying again:
So, Creighton Waters now vindictively brandishes the death penalty?
He’s in over his head.
Now that the Catholic Church has declared its opposition to the death penalty to be a core belief, Prancing Creighton Waters (“PCW”) cannot exclude jurors opposed to the death penalty if they are Catholic.
Instead of itching to execute the innocent, Alan Wilson should show some zeal in improving murder investigations.
To expiate for his Frankenstein creation, FITS should do a whole show or a whole story on the scientific failures of the investigation into Paul and Maggie’s shootings.
Here is more about ballistics which is augmented by this (link to video deleted for publishability).
It shows SLED, presumably in the early morning of 8 June 2021, supposedly collecting evidence from around and inside the house at Moselle.
Many mistakes appear in that short clip:
1. The spent bullets collected from around the exterior seven-step stoop are BASICALLY rubbed together by the evidence gatherer thus HOPELESSLY contaminating the subsequent tool-mark microscopic examination and analysis if such analysis were a science to begin with.
2. The evidence gatherers arrived without simple plastic or paper bags in which to put each bullet separately with an identification of the precise location it was found.
3. They then resort to a quick and dirty non-solution of putting a bullet in each finger of a “new glove” again without precise location identification and after the bullets had scarred each other from being basically rubbed together.
4. The exterior door handle is not dusted for fingerprints nor swabbed for DNA.
5. Once inside the house, no effort or attention is paid to any food or drink containers with residue or unconsumed content. That should be basic in any murder investigation even where the victims had been visibly shot: had they been poisoned or attempted to be poisoned before the shootings? Were they under the influence of anything they had consumed before being confronted by their shooter(s)? That may not necessarily have been the case here; but these are basics of any investigation started on a blank slate.
6. They are heard commenting to each other that the autopsies already started. They should have carefully looked for evidence of unconsummated or recently-consummated food and drink to supply to the autopsy performer.
Or course, many more mistakes appear even in that short clip.
Now that the Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury has been vindicated, it is essential to vindicate the DUE PROCESS right to a scientifically-sound investigation before charges are even brought against anyone.
Of course, many more mistakes appear even in that short clip.
Now that the Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury has been vindicated, it is essential to vindicate the DUE PROCESS right to a scientifically-sound investigation before charges are even brought against anyone.
Recently incited into making a linguistic correction, I post here, too, because the error recurs:
In Latin America, they do NOT speak Latin.
They speak Spanish, Portuguese, and the native pre-European expeditions languages of the various tribes in those countries.
Where Latin is spoken TODAY is in the Vatican’s highest inner circles among the Catholic Pope and the Catholic Cardinals and Bishops, if that.
Since Vatican-II, even Catholic masses are no longer required to be conducted ENTIRELY in Latin but may be conducted in local languages, though parts of the Catholic liturgy remain in Latin.
And just an anecdote which people of a certain age and political persuasion might remember: Former Vice-President Dan Quayle was pilloried for having said, or not said, when visiting Latin America that he was sorry he did not speak Latin.
Physicians, too, know a lot of Latin words and phrases because the names of most body parts and conditions come from Latin and from Greek.
Also, lawyers use some Latin words and phrases, relics of Roman Law and of Code Napoleon, though MOST South Carolina lawyers pronounce them atrociously.
For example, a typical South Carolina lawyer would pronounce the phrase for a document commanding you to bring something with you as if “sahpeeena dufus take home.” The correct spelling is “subpoena duces tecum” pronounced SUB-PE-NA DOO-CHESS TAY-COOM.
And while I am at it, pre-trial examination of jurors should not be pronounced “dyare” as if dire consequences follow; it should be pronounced “deer” because that is the French infinitive verb for “say.”
So, the French phrase for “seeing [them] say” should NEVER be pronounced VOYR DAYRE but VO-WAR DEER.
Just saying because, with pre-trial matters related to the Murdaugh retrial looming, I hope not to get jarred by atrocious pronunciations of Latin and French phrases.