Murdaugh Attorney Phil Barber Challenges ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Narrative

The excellent Phil Barber still doesn’t get it, not despite of, but because of, being an excellent lawyer.
An excellent lawyer thinks like a lawyer; and a super-excellent lawyer thinks like a judge, a formal government judge that is.
But jurors and the majority of the public are neither lawyers nor government-employed judges.
That “overwhelming evidence” construct is a judge-made one to decide whether the totality of the evidence, when balanced against acknowledged judicial error or defense-counsel error, compels vacation of a guilty verdict.
But jurors do NOT think like that.
Indeed, jurors are instructed to do THE OPPOSITE of that.
Jurors are told in so many words, “you may believe one witness against many, or many witnesses against one. You may credit one piece of evidence against all others, or you may credit many pieces of evidence against one. … Judge the witnesses by their demeanor ….”
In other words, jurors are told “go stare at the witnesses and choose what you fancy.”
All this lawyerly stuff doesn’t matter to jurors.
All this “beyond reasonable doubt” stuff means nothing to jurors if they latch on to one witness and/or one fact and say to themselves, “this is THE ONE the judge told me I may pick out of the whole trial.”
Sadly, the kennel video is that one fact future jurors will latch-on to no matter what else is presented in a new trial.
Heck! Even YOU, Jenn Wood, IN THE SAME NIGHT, aired an interview with James Lasdun hocking a shlock book pretending to be Sigmund Freud analyzing why Alex Murdaugh MUST HAVE killed Paul and Maggie, before airing your interview with Phil Barber’s cool, cerebral and scrupulous analysis of the forensic evidence.
Jurors may, are even likely to, discard ALL forensic evidence of Alex Murdaugh’s innocence BECAUSE the judge will tell them, in long-approved jury charge, “you may believe one fact against many.”
Unless the public understands that the kennel video has no importance because it is too early before the REAL time of the shootings, and that IN FACT Alex Murdaugh never ACTUALLY lied about his brief visit to the kennels (he only omitted that detail after telling the responders that he was with Paul and Maggie for dinner only a quarter mile from the kennels), Alex Murdaugh is doomed again.
Facts need to be out there to show that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Alex to have been the shooter for him to have a chance.
For me, those facts are the victim’s stomachs’ contents at autopsy and non-human (likely avian) spatter on Alex’s white T-shirt.
I do not understand why my repeated explanation for those facts gets ignored other than, perhaps, lawyers’ vanity is, at the end of the day, more important to them than their client’s actual innocence.

A rare polite and open-minded commenter on Jen Wood’s interview with Phil Barber asked five question.
Here is my reply to him/her:
@DayandBayNana08 , I will only answer 3 and 5 for you because there is OBJECTIVE evidence to give you.
Blanca testified that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) wore long kaki pants and a blue shirt under some sport coat when he left for work around noon on 7 June 2021.
We know FOR SURE that each of RAM and Paul returned to Moselle from their different work locations around 7:00 pm and rode together around Moselle for an hour or so.
Paul made a video of himself laughing at his father standing before a sapling he had planted but failed to support; so that sapling was falling. RAM is wearing a blue shirt and long kaki pants in that sapling video.
Also, Blanca testified that she found long kaki pants on the floor of the bathroom the morning of 8 June 2021 and laundered them.
Problem of RAM’s day outfit solved.
The next outfit in which we see RAM on video consists of a white T-shirt and green shorts. He wore them to Almeda, according to RAM’s mother’s night caregiver. We see them on the bodycams of the officers who responded to RAM’s 911 call upon his return from Almeda. RAM gave the T-shirt and shorts to those officers who gave them to SLED who analyzed them and testified about them at trial.
Problem of RAM’s night outfit solved.
I do not know what is missing unless someone has evidence of a missing outfit in between.
As to your question (5), the clothes Maggie wore to the kennels went with her body to the autopsy which, according to the officers searching the Moselle house started THAT NIGHT or early the next morning.
What Blanca SAYS she saw on the floor the next morning are some CLEAN pajamas and underwear of Maggie’s PROBABLY laid there by some of the Murdaugh family members and some of the lawyers’ wives who HURRIEDLY descended on Moselle after they heard the news and thought they might spend the night there to comfort and protect RAM. Except that RAM, Buster, and Brooklyn (Buster’s then girlfriend, now wife and mother of RAM’s first grandchild, also called RAM) could not stand to spend the night at Moselle and went to Almeda.
I cannot help you with the cleaners because I do not believe there were any cleaners other than the REAL shooters who lay in waiting until RAM left for Almeda at 9:07 pm. I believe the real shooters went armed with previously-stolen family guns to scare some confession and/or some settlement out of Paul and Maggie; and when things got out of hand, they shot them very unprofessionally.
You asked politely and this is a civil response SUPPORTED BY THE ACTUAL TESTIMONY AT TRIAL; and I hope you take it in that spirit.