Pressure Mounts to Release Secret Murdaugh Jury Tampering Files

Let’s get serious and SCIENTIFIC.
The economic, fair, realistic, swift, and visionary solution is: bench re-trial with the retrial judge empowered to call the court’s own expert witnesses and lay witnesses if necessary.
Richard Alexander Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) wrongful convictions have been correctly reversed; but he remains a criminal defendant entitled UNDER THAT SAME SIXTH AMENDMENT to a speedy retrial.
Justice for Paul and Maggie means finding the real shooters after RAM is exonerated on a speedy retrial.
There is precedent in South Carolina for that happening.
Justin Mallory was FALSELY accused of stabbing his wife Nakeya to death. His jury deadlocked and he opted for a bench retrial. Judge Thomas W. Cooper, after whom many judicial candidates testify they want to model themselves, bench-tried Justin Mallory and cleared him. Thereafter, Justin Mallory pushed Richland County’s Sheriff’s Department to re-investigate.
An initially-missed fact was noticed: the stabber was left-handed.
And he was found to be Joshua Porch, arrested in California, tried and convicted.
RAM suffered immensely by being wrongly convicted; but he must still suffer from being wrongly accused.
His lawyers seem callous about the time it takes to mount a retrial.
It need not be so if both sides agree to a bench trial. Nothing prevents it from being a three-judge bench trial.
Those who oppose this idea are unwittingly or intentionally protecting the real shooters.

The to everything is: when EXACTLY did the shootings occur?
A penny of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Those who pinch the penny of prevention want to cash in on the pound of cure.
That goes for the penny to properly train law enforcement and crime scene investigators compared to the pound of high-salaried prosecutors and defense attorneys and prosecutors-turned-defense-attorneys all in a case bound to ultimately fail due to investigatory failures from the start.
Ever heard the expression “like a chicken with its head cut off”? It means furiously flapping around.
Ever heard the expression “a stick-to-your-ribs mean”? It means fatty meals are emptied from the stomach much later than light ones.
Now, you might say human observation is that one has a bowel movement almost immediately after a large and fatty meal.
True; but that movement is NOT the meal you just ate. It is the prior meal(s) that got SLOWLY moved down the digestive tact, broken down, and absorbed with ONLY the indigestible residue passing down to the terminal part of the digestive tract and waiting there.
Waiting there for what?
For one of both of two things: enough volume to open the anal sphincter and/or signals from the very upper digestive tract that “more food is coming so you, distal colon and anus, better get empty and ready for it because you do not know how much it will be.”
How do the terminal colon and anus get those signals? The reflexes of the autonomic nervous system.
They start with the dento-colonic reflex. You are more likely to have a bowel movement after brushing your teeth in the morning.
Next is the gastro-colonic reflex. Even babies have bowel movements right after every feed. If that were the milk they just received, they would starve to death. Instead, it is the residue of the milk from the prior feeds.
The reflexes go the other way, too.
Adults and babies feel hungrier after a bowel movement because the terminal colon tells the stomach “I’m good and empty and ready for the residue of the next meal to come down my way.”
That is why babies have more bowel movements a day because they need more feeds a day at the stage of fastest growth. As the growth curve slows, the number of bowel movements decreases until one bowel movement a day becomes the norm for adults.
These are, of course, the physiological, not pathological, sequences.
What does this have to do with Paul and Maggie?
We know FOR SURE that their last meal started after 8:00 pm on 7 June 2021 and ended at 8:30 pm that day.
We also know with relative certainty what they had eaten because Blanca testified what she had cooked and left on the stove for them.
It would have been MANDATORY for properly-trained first investigators on the scene to collect that/those pots left on the stove and precisely measured how much, if any, food was left and precisely subtracted that from the total capacity of the pot(s) left on the stove and the dirty dishes, if any, around.
Of course, with three people sharing the same dinner from the same pot(s), it would have been an educated guess to apportion how much each of the three ate and drank.
But the bottom line is the Prosecution’s FALSE time of death at 8:49 or 8:52 pm, is ONLY 19 to 22 minutes after the last meal. THAT SOON after the last meal, the stomach contents should look almost exactly as they looked on the dinner plates.
THEY DID NOT.
They were too digested into “tan material” for the pathologist to tell exactly what they were and she “did not see any corn or beans or anything like that.” That pretty much rules out death 19 to 22 minutes after the last meal.
And it puts the most likely time of death around 9:30 pm.
Why did Maggie’s phone have some activity around 8:52 pm but not thereafter? EASY! She had laid it on the side-by-side or somewhere to have both hands free to handle the dogs; and one member of the shooting cabal got hold of it to prevent her from using it to record the events or to summon help. Once they realized someone was calling Maggie, they had to discard it far away to prevent her from reaching for it but not too far away for that member to return to the shooting cabal.
And the Defense team fell into the Prosecution’s trap and spent a lot of money proving that Alex would not have heard the shots fired at the kennels when he was at the house for some acoustic reason or another.
The real reason Alex could not hear the shots is that they were fired by the real shooter(s) AFTER Alex had left for Almeda. And, no, he would not have seen, much less suspected a pedestrian disposing of Maggie’s phone on the side of the road.
All that stuff about the phone lighting or not lighting when thrown assumes it was thrown from a moving car.
It need not have been. It could have been placed by a pedestrian.
Tell me, if you can, where I am wrong.

FITS, FITS, FITS, I earned the right to figuratively toot my own horn here, too.
Look at what I wrote two years ago, and of which I was just reminded by another commenter’s question to me yesterday:
“@marieassaad-faltas1299
2 years ago
In reference to pages 59-60 of Becky Hill’s book, am I the ONLY one left in this world with any sense of decency?
FIRST, this means THAT MALE JUROR (not the female egg juror) was discussing the case with at least three friends and talking about how long the case will take.
SECOND, nothing BUT NOTHING compelled that juror to stay on the case and make just $20/day (NOT $10 because I read Becky Hill’s ENTIRE book VERY CAREFULLY). All that juror had to do is tell the judge about the work needs. The judge would have replaced that juror with an alternate (remember? six alternates had been chosen) and no outside money would have changed hands.
THIRD, how do we know there was no explicit or tacit understanding about what that juror was to do in return for those “thousands of dollars” from his three friends? After all, that jury, ACCORDING TO BECKY HILL, communicated with their eyes. Perhaps those friends winked and nodded as the money changed hands.
FOURTH AND FOREMOST, we need to know IMMEDIATELY if that money was the three friends’ own money or whether they were funneling it from someone else.
There may have been money laundering going on if the amount exceeded $10K. Banks are supposed to report those AND it is, according to MY understanding (and I am NOT a lawyer), money laundering to break a $10K transaction into smaller ones to evade the bank’s reporting requirement.
Frankly, I think Dick and Jim are not that brilliant after all. They don’t know where it is REALLY at.
It is no longer “the trial of the century” but “the mistrial of the decade.””
And then tell me why that male, guilty-voting, juror’s receipt of outside money is as ignored as Cousin Eddie Smith’s indicted alleged crimes.