LIVE! Real Lawyer Reacts: Murdaugh Attorneys' Press Conference - They Have New Evidence 

The never-Ending Story!

It's like murdaugh murder, Season 2! And we're here for it! First season was crazy

Ain’t it so! I really smell a rat! This was a payoff to someone. Isn’t it illegal to smoke on federal ground? AND……smoking is a addiction, so if you have someone, say a crackhead or a meth addict, on your jury, do you have to give them a crack break, or possibly pass around a little meth to make the time go faster? This is a payoff to somebody. Get the FBI in there and look into the finances of everyone involved.

If you call now, you can get a shiny new hearing in trial court at taxpayer expense.

Where are they going to find a jury that don't know about this case ? NC state here ❤

jurors are given a very clear instruction to not discuss the case with ANYONE - even amongst themselves

Agree. Sick of feckless TikTokers spreading misinformation as "cover-up" just because they don't under due process be it LE investigation or court proceedings. They just want to spread next 'news (gossip).'

Lol...

​@@Mataylor17Well there were cameras in the Depp V Heard case and I feel they were relevant. So MANY people were educated on RU-vid through lawyer's channels. They've also been beneficial in the YNW Melly case.

Great point. As popular as they are I don't think the masses are getting educated about law

Why didn't they forward right away, who doesn't know, that if your on a jury, you aren't supposed to discuss the case, or defendant, with anyone! She certainly knew better, IF she really did this, she needs to be held accountable, & for the expenses she is causing. - invading the buried right to privacy - personally I think she wrote the book before the ink was dry on his "guilty verdict".

Yea or at least wait for a length of time. This trial ain’t even cold yet 😂

Jurors can write books I guess but should have a time constraint. If lawyers and docs have to be quiet about their clients and cases everyone else in the tribunal should abide the same protocol

Surely they are ????

@@valansley they should be but I think even judge ito hass a book deal from OJ

I totally agree! That's the problem with most cases and true crime platforms these days. People are always so quick to convict without hearing and weighing all the evidence. That's why i also love LYK because it is based on the laws of justice. I have learned so much too ❤

Right...because the "truth" isn't valued. It's the game of law.

Agreed this is why I always come back to his channel for these case analysis

@@paulab303 100% agree, I watch more cases now myself because even some law “channels” are biased or try to be politically correct. My husband thought Kyle Rittenhouse was guilty as sin, until I made him watch opening statements, then he was hooked. I’m in the UK so our laws are very different, I find it so hard to fathom all the different state laws etc, but I’m getting there! 🤣 I do believe that AM deserves a new trial though.

I would totally understand your point of view. This must be horribly frustrating for everyone.

I saw in a jury pool in a small town and half of the jury pool knew each other and i knew most of them as well. They all chatted up a storm hanging every notorious current case and then when voire dired told the judge they could be totally impartial. If they had some old courthouse crony indicating special knowledge of a defendent, they would not have wanted to be the uncool one who didn't see the evidence as sufficient proof of guilt. If this is true, she's in deep trouble.

Jesus...you have to be kidding.

I bet there’s a pile of 💰 sliding around underneath the table. It stinks.

I'm not sure these exist if they do they're few and far between

The clerk is an official. Maybe they didn't realise this was improper until afterwards

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if the judge was in on it. He was as crooked as the day is long.

There is also a world, where the clerk did this, but the jury also came to the verdict without giving her any mind. It seems they didn't pay it any heed at the time, or I would imagine they would tell the judge. They also said at the time of the verdict it was wholly and individually their own. This smells more like shady lawyers, working for a super shady dude, playing shenanigans.

@@PsykoDestroyer That's not the standard though. The standard is if it happened regardless of whether or not it may have swayed the jury, it's prejudicial. Jury tampering is taken very seriously.

@rmkilc oh 100%, I'm not saying it's OK because there is a potential that harm DIDNT happen. And it It's more to the point that if the jurors felt that she was being inappropriate, there was a time and a place, and none of them took the option up. But given the defendant and his counsel's proclivity not to be honest with the court system, I will scrutinise anything that comes from them pretty harshly

I would have completely Lost My Shit

@@LexiLynn71 IKR!

@@richardw3052 Not all complied. I would be that person!

She assumed she'has impunity like the lawyers and judges. Somehow Jim got wind of it and burned her house down knowing she had none of the perks the her superiors enjoy

He’s guilty regardless nobody else was there

What I don't like most of all is she is a public official, an elected state official. Hiding behind lawyers and refusing to make a statement to the public who elected her is unacceptable and reeks of probable guilt. This is different than you and me and runs of the mill SOBs. She works for the public and owes the public a statement and cowers behind lawyers. Yes. Federal charges. Bring them! At the very least this cost SC citizens millions! (assuming it plays out the way most of us, even those who think AM is guilty, suspect, which is: new trial).

@@arielbonzai462 According to the lawyers, they saw her talking to jurors and to the judge. They just could not stop the whole trial and raise the concerns right then.

@@frankz6969 That very well may be. But you don't believe that it means citizens should be imprisoned without the right to a fair trial in front of an impartial jury. Do you?

Judge Newman is no hero either. I hate to break it to you.

I felt he may be guilty but I also had "reasonable doubt". What don't we know? That's how I felt watching the trial. Add in potential clerk corruption, this is gross.

Does it actually matter? Does it change what he did? Wake up.

​@@angelald8172idiot

​@@lizgander9172Explain what you mean by that? (I'm not being rude, I just want to know 🤔.)

Exactly what I was thinking. Wondering if this may come into play in other cases she was on? This is not good, not good at all!

She’s going to have a lot of skeletons come out.

Oh wow. Hadn’t thought of that!

Yes.

Maybe not since there has never been a case this big before that she could use for money and fame. However if I was a lawyer for anyone found guilty in this courthouse I would definitely want to talk to the Jury

I don't believe that Alex will get a 'fair' trial anywhere in South Carolina. He's hurt and stolen from too many people. You know that word has spread like wildfire. That's how it goes in the south. AND he is flat out GUILTY. Regardless of a retrial on this case, he will spend the rest of his life in federal prison. (And PS. I do believe that Ms. Hill is absolutely guilty and should be punished accordingly!)

Very good observation.

I personally believe there's a lot about Murdaugh that just didn't get made public some how. That there's people still in power connected to him and his crimes. Both his beach front property and the main property was owned previously by a known drug trafficker. That's why the main property had a hanger and a former airstrip. Both properties were transferred to him for incredibly, unbelievably,😂 crazy cheap. He was supposedly blowing millions on a pill habit. Would be a great cover story for him being blackmailed by someone he just couldn't mention without losing Buster too. His beach house had someone break in, dump diesel all over and tried to burn it. His lawyers weren't even allowed to mention it during trial. Only the "repairs". The judge claimed the defense couldn't prove it was attempted arson so they couldn't bring it up. Like the defense has the same powers of law enforcement and could have found who exactly did it. This case and trial was a good old fashioned railroading. Whether he did it or not they made sure he got the least fair trial possible.

I agree to all those reasons jealous being the number 1. They seen she was swaying for her financial gain. After her book came out and everything came to light..

If this narcissist clerk is guilty of the accusations I sure hope she gets her just deserves, as in prison time.

It is a very serious offense - again, IF it is true.

⁠@@tiffanybob922these trials cost MILLIONS of dollars. If she tried to influence this jury, then Merdough is entitled to a new trial! So you don’t think she should be held responsible for her actions??

Lol. You clearly dont get how powerful they are

​​@@mattk8810I feel that she was paid by Alex's brothers to cast massive doubt in the case. Why she wrote the book though, I don't get that....🤔 (And regardless of the book, her behavior is dispicable!)

Thing is, if I hadn't found LawTube, I might *not* have realized she couldn't talk to jurors like that. Now, I probably would have taken a remark like "don't be fooled by what the defense is about to say" as a personal opinion and inappropriately offered, but the rest of the allegations... She allegedly specifically told the jury to pay attention to Murdaugh's body language on the stand. She would have known that body language is inadmissible and why, but most jurors probably don't. I didn't before LawTube.

I would have gotten up out of my seat and reported her. I have a big mouth and will not keep it shut when someone tries to do things unfair. I got in trouble a lot when I was a kid. LOL But my mom always told me if somebody is not doing the right thing don't wait on somebody else to bring it up. It is a shame that it took how long after the trial for this to happen.

​@@donnalynn2but how would you know she's not allowed to speak privately to the jurors when she's in charge of taking care of things they need? How would you know she's not allowed to say things like "watch his body language" or don't be fooled? She can talk to them just not about the case. Most would not know this to even report it.

The way many people act these days, I'm not really surprised. She wanted to write a book and get paid. Unfortunately, some people are just really selfish.

I like this guy. He is unbiased in his opinions and tells it as it is.

@@kdogg82Same. He gives facts for us to form our own opinions unlike other yt’ers.

@@kdogg82 That was my first comment from about a year ago almost. I used to occasionally watch some other lawtubers as well, but Peter stood the test of time. Not interested in any drama, no unnecessary click baits, straightforward legal analysis. He's natural educator also, which I'm sure if you stay long enough, can see it for your self. Now I sometimes will just watch trial streams and news, but for legal discussion and fun time when appropriate, I just come here. This is the best chat group as well so...hope you like it here and stay with us. :)

100% believe the jurors. that trial was biased and crooked.

I agree with this. THIS was a murder trial, PERIOD!

A new trial will hopefully expose more of what was truly going on. There's something much more evil than that red devil Murdaugh a

I agree They probably would not have but the defense lawyers are clearly more powerful and they got win of it Also she was just too obvious and made a lot of stupid moves like bathroom chats I think the smoking ban was her downfall. Addiction is powerful.

@arielbonzai462 Even the jurors who weren't smokers felt pressured by this! They felt like they were keeping the smoker's from just 1 cigarette! I'm a smoker's! When in a stressful situation, I smoke more!

I don’t think it’s at all “unusual that something like this happens”, I think that it’s unusual that we find out that something like this happens.

@@Lorac1234 Times are changing for sure with so many now following True Crime Cases and lawyers educating the public on RU-vid following these cases with us. I don’t doubt we’ll find out about a lot of other cases where the defendant’s Constitutional Rights were violated.

😮😮😮😮

😂

They are

Yes I think there is a good chance they are too.

I agree! What reason would they have to lie?

Same

Agree

We don't know that any corruption occurred. This could be an underhanded attempt by the defense to get a new trial.

Yes I agree. I can see them assuming she is the authority figure and no one else is saying anything so must not be a big deal or just wanting to get the case over with. It is wild!

You would think that, but Evil wears MANY FACES!!

Clerk of the court is usually a lawyer who knows the code of conduct better than most lawyers. Would be outrageous if true

I am so concerned about another trial All the time. Money. Omgosh. And his power comes back into play. Oh dear

@@kenanexpress2760I didn’t know clerk of court could be an elected position.

I feel the exact same. What a shame it would be, if he was set free at some point, because of that woman’s actions. If this turns out to be true, I hope she gets prosecuted to the fullest.

I'm still very interested in what his statement meant when he said that he didn't want to go with Maggie to the kennels because exactly what he didn't want to happen it did happen! It just seems so puzzling since both of them were brutally murdered 😢

Alex also said he didn’t want to go to the kennels bc when you go to the kennel’s you always get shot listen closely I think he meant to say when you go to the kennels you always sweat bc he was talking about that but I think he slipped up I can’t believe creighton did not hear or catch it I certainly heard him clearly go back and watch the trial prosecutor cross examining Alex

They will have to, plus so many that didn't get a verdict they wanted, will be able to use the clerk..this is not good for the court.

Good question!

He said no in a previous video. That it wouldnt. But im with the other commenters, i also think, "How could it not?"

Maybe they did and it was ignored....

The jury in this case was told the same thing. Doesn't mean they actually do it. Many people let emotion and/or mob rule decide for them.

If you have never served on a jury before, you may think this was part of the clerks of court's job.

He won't be able to stay at the mansion. He will be at a local dive😅

Yes, it will be harder, but the average person doesn’t know much if anything about this case. We lose sight because of our investment in the subject.

Yes it is & will ! Define fair. " Trial By our peers.. " he had that. Here.. 😮hold my camel's 🐫 back !

I know so many ppl that have never heard of Alex Murdaugh

Who cares. He is guilty. The end.

If you can't get a fair trial, the charges should be dismissed.

@@richardw3052 Not point genius. The jurors didn't break any laws.

Or the jurors could have been paid to sign those affidavits. Remember who were talking about people. Anyone involved in the trial is entitled to a book deal.