[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Jury selection and opening statements are set to begin Monday in a trial that mashes up Ed Sheeran’s “Thinking Out Loud” with Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On.”
The heirs of Ed Townsend, Gaye’s co-writer of the 1973 soul classic, sued Sheeran, alleging the English pop star’s hit 2014 tune has “striking similarities” to “Let’s Get It On” and “overt common elements” that violate their copyright.
The lawsuit filed in 2017 has finally made it to a trial that is expected to last a week in the Manhattan federal courtroom of 95-year-old Judge Louis L. Stanton.
Sheeran, 32, is among the witnesses expected to testify.
“Let’s Get It On” is the quintessential, sexy slow jam that’s been heard in countless films and commercials and garnered hundreds of millions of streams, spins and radio plays over the past 50 years. “Thinking Out Loud,” which won a Grammy for song of the year, is a much more marital take on love and sex.
While the jury will hear the recordings of both songs, probably many times, their lyrics — and vibes — are legally insignificant. Jurors are supposed to only consider the raw elements of melody, harmony and rhythm that make up the composition of “Let’s Get It On,” as documented on sheet music filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Sheeran’s attorneys have said the songs’ undeniable structural symmetry points only to the foundations of popular music.
“The two songs share versions of a similar and unprotectable chord progression that was freely available to all songwriters,” they said in a court filing.
Paul Natkin / Getty Images
Townsend family attorneys pointed out in the lawsuit that artists including Boyz II Men have performed seamless mashups of the two songs, and that even Sheeran himself has segued into “Let’s Get It On” during live performances of “Thinking Out Loud.”
They sought to play a potentially damning YouTube video of one such Sheeran performance for the jury at trial. Stanton denied their motion to include it, but said he would reconsider it after he sees other evidence that’s presented.
Gaye’s estate is not involved in the case, though it will inevitably have echoes of their successful lawsuit against Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams and T.I. over the resemblance of their 2013 hit “Blurred Lines” to Gaye’s 1977 “Got to Give it Up.”
A jury awarded Gaye’s heirs $7.4 million at trial — later trimmed by a judge to $5.3 million — making it among the most significant copyright cases in recent decades.
Sheeran’s label Atlantic Records and Sony/ATV Music Publishing are also named as defendants in the “Thinking Out Loud” lawsuit. Generally, plaintiffs in copyright lawsuits cast a wide net in naming defendants, though a judge can eliminate any names deemed inappropriate. In this case, however, Sheeran’s co-writer on the song, Amy Wadge, was never named.
Townsend, who also wrote the 1958 R&B doo-wop hit “For Your Love,” was a singer, songwriter and lawyer. He died in 2003. Kathryn Townsend Griffin, his daughter, is the plaintiff leading the lawsuit.
Already a Motown superstar in the 1960s before his more adult 1970s output made him a generational musical giant, Gaye was killed in 1984 at age 44, shot by his father as he tried to intervene in a fight between his parents.
Major artists are often hit with lawsuits alleging song-stealing, but nearly all settle before trial — as Taylor Swift recently did over “Shake it Off,” ending a lawsuit that lasted years longer and came closer to trial than most other cases.
But Sheeran — whose musical style drawing from classic soul, pop and R&B has made him a target for copyright lawsuits — has shown a willingness to go to trial before. A year ago, he won a U.K. copyright battle over his 2017 hit “Shape of You,” then slammed what he described as a “culture” of baseless lawsuits intended to squeeze money out of artists eager to avoid the expense of a trial.
“I feel like claims like this are way too common now and have become a culture where a claim is made with the idea that a settlement will be cheaper than taking it to court, even if there is no basis for the claim,” Sheeran said in a video posted on Twitter after the verdict. “It’s really damaging to the songwriting industry.”
The “Thinking Out Loud” lawsuit also invokes one of the most common tropes in American and British music since the earliest days of rock ‘n’ roll, R&B and hip-hop: a young white artist seemingly appropriating the work of an older Black artist — accusations that were also levied at Elvis Presley and The Beatles, whose music drew on that of Black forerunners.
“Mr. Sheeran blatantly took a Black artist’s music who he doesn’t view as worthy as compensation,” Ben Crump, a civil rights attorney who represents the Townsend family but is not involved in the trial, said at a March 31 news conference.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Washington — Hip-hop star and Fugees member Pras Michel picked up a different kind of microphone as he took the witness stand in Washington, D.C.’s federal courthouse to defend himself in a multimillion-dollar international fraud trial.
“Mic check 1,2. Mic check 1, 2,” he aptly said at the start of his testimony.
“After consulting with my attorneys and the universe, I have decided to testify,” Michel told the court Tuesday before answering questions from his defense team and prosecutors alike about the approximately $800,000 he said he paid to friends so they could donate to a political campaign.
Prosecutors allege the Grammy-winning artist immersed himself in American politics at the behest of a wealthy Malaysian financier to gain access, peddle influence, and make money. He was indicted in 2019 on federal charges that Low Taek Jho, also known as Jho Low, paid him millions to help launder money Low had allegedly embezzled from a state-owned investment fund in his home country.
Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Michel, who has pleaded not guilty, is accused of using Low’s money to make illegal contributions to former President Barack Obama’s 2012 presidential campaign, and pursuing a back channel with Trump administration officials to persuade them to both abandon a federal fraud investigation into Low’s business dealings, and send a Chinese dissident who is in the U.S. back to China to face criminal charges. Prosecutors do not allege Obama campaign officials were aware of the purported illegal payments.
But taking the stand on Tuesday, Michel said he viewed Low’s payment’s to him as “free money,” and accepted approximately $20 million over the course of nine months to help Low secure a photo-op with Obama, both before and after the 2012 presidential campaign.
Beginning in the spring of 2012, the rapper testified, Low approached him about getting then-President Obama to take a picture with the Malaysian financier – currently a co-defendant in the case, and who remains abroad. He was willing to pay lots of money for it, Michel said.
Low first paid Michel $1 million to consider the proposition and start planning, Michel said Tuesday. But by the end of the campaign season, Michel fell short and consistently required more money to get the job done.
Low ultimately got his photo with Obama — taken after the 2012 presidential election at the White House — but it was what transpired between Low’s initial request and the camera flashes that prosecutors say was the first illegal component of his alleged relationship with Low.
The indictment alleges Michel funneled money from Low to straw donors in order to surreptitiously fund Obama’s re-election campaign, and work around campaign finance laws. The Obama campaign was “duped” and “deceived,” prosecutors said during opening arguments earlier this month, after Michel allegedly helped Low disguise the donations as legitimate contributions that had come from the U.S.
Michel said Tuesday that he unsuccessfully tried to get the Malaysian businessman access to various 2012 campaign fundraisers across the country, including one in Miami in which Michel and Low’s father took pictures with Obama. Low, Michel said, was not allowed at the meetings at the campaign’s request due to his financial dealings.
Months later, according to court records and testimony, wealthy Democratic donor Frank White hosted a fundraiser at his Washington, D.C., home, and pressed Michel to fill a table with friends, each worth about $40,000 in donations.
During his testimony on Tuesday, Michel said he paid his friends money so they could donate to Obama’s campaign and attend the dinner, at one point telling the jury he was paid approximately $20 million to secure the photo for Low, and about 10% of that money went towards paying his friends so they could attend the fundraiser.
Michel testified under oath that no one told him such payments toward political donations could have been unlawful or violations of campaign finance laws.
“I thought I could just give my friends money,” he explained from the witness stand, adding some didn’t spend the funds on political donations as expected.
During cross-examination, prosecutors elicited from Michel that he was aware of other election money laws, like those that prevented Low, a foreign national, from donating to Obama’s campaign, and another that put a limit on how much Michel himself could donate. Still, he contended he was unaware his money moves could have been illegal.
The Fugees star said the funds he gave to his friends to donate were “my money,” not Low’s, adding once Low paid him to secure the photo, he was free to do what was needed to get the job done.
During the at-times contentious cross-examination, Michel and prosecutors argued over whether the funds in question belonged explicitly to Michel, as the defendant argued, or were still connected to Low’s international funds.
Michel testified he was “betrayed” and led astray by his outside advisers, confidants, and employees, who he claims did not advise him correctly on how to handle financial and legal matters in the U.S.
In one such instance, several years after the 2012 election, Michel said he had “heard through friends that they were getting visits from the FBI” about the campaign contributions. After consulting a lawyer, Michel said he was advised to send a letter to the individuals he paid to donate to Obama’s campaign and assert the money in question was not a gift, but a loan that needed to be repaid. Prosecutors say these letters — which also suggested legal action could follow — were threats to witnesses in the investigation. The idea was “stupid,” Michel admitted Tuesday, adding he regretted he followed the advice of his counsel in that matter.
Michel’s testimony on Tuesday also touched on his alleged efforts to push Trump administration officials to drop their investigations into Low and extradite a Chinese national living in the U.S. to China to face criminal charges.
Under cross-examination, Michel said “I took it upon myself” to go to the FBI about the dissident, Miles Guo, to work to connect interested parties with the U.S. government. Guo, a Steve Bannon associate, had since been indicted on fraud charges of his own.
Prosecutors say Michel, Low and their partners, including Republican lobbyist Elliott Broidy, met with leaders in the Chinese government and came up with what would ultimately be an unsuccessful plan to pay Broidy millions of dollars to use his political contacts to push Low’s agenda. Broidy’s plan included sending talking points to officials and pressuring Trump administration officials to put meetings on then-President Trump’s calendar.
Broidy pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to serve as an unregistered foreign agent, and Trump pardoned him shortly before leaving office in 2021.
Michel testified Tuesday that “no one I spoke to ever mentioned” the federal laws that required him to register as a foreign agent if doing work on China’s behalf, and that he would have done so if advised.
Still, government prosecutors elicited that the defendant was present at a gathering between Boidy and the Malaysian prime minister on the night before the prime minister was set to meet with Trump. Michel told the jury he had stopped by to “say hello” and nothing more.
Michel’s defense team — led by celebrity attorney David Kenner — has argued the rapper believed he had acted in the best interest of the U.S. at the time and did not act as a foreign agent of China. They have made numerous attempts to dismiss the charges on various grounds of selective and illicit prosecution and, as Michel’s testimony on Tuesday demonstrated, continue to maintain their client was unaware of the laws he is accused of breaking.
One former Trump official at the center of the alleged pressure campaign was then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who also took the stand as a defense witness on Tuesday.
Sessions, who said Tuesday he did not “recall” ever meeting Michel, told the jury under oath about various high-level meetings about potentially extraditing Guo to China, some involving other federal agencies. Those efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and Sessions said he rebuffed attempts to get him to meet with Chinese security officials about the matter. Sessions said he viewed various meetings as “appropriate.”
Prosecutors from the Justice Department — which Sessions once led as the nation’s top law enforcement officer — declined to question him under cross-examination.
Low, according to the Justice Department, allegedly misappropriated over $500 million from the sovereign wealth fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) with wire transfers to shell companies he and others owned, and some of the proceeds were used for the production of actor Leonardo DiCaprio’s hit film “The Wolf of Wall Street.“
DiCaprio testified in Michel’s trial earlier this month.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., is threatening to report two attorneys for possible disciplinary action for delaying the trial of a man who has been jailed on charges that he assaulted police officers during the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, questioned in court papers filed Thursday whether attorney Joseph McBride was being sincere when he said last summer that he needed to push Christopher Quaglin’s October trial; McBride claimed that he had not yet recovered from a case of COVID-19 that he had contracted in May 2022, and that he had chronic Lyme disease, and treatment and recovery would take two to three months.
McBride said in his filing that his physicians had advised that he “needs to take an aggressive course of action to eradicate and neutralize this condition.”
But the judge noted that at the same time, McBride — who represents several Jan. 6 defendants — continued to do media interviews and spoke in October to a Republican county committee about his fight for the “January 6 political prisoners.” In November, McBride tweeted a picture of himself on the beach at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and another photo inside Trump’s 2024 campaign announcement party, McFadden wrote.
“While lawyers — like all citizens — are entitled to speak freely, these public representations by McBride call into question the genuineness of his need for a medical continuance because of his inability to represent Quaglin last October,” McFadden wrote.
McFadden ordered McBride — who has since withdrawn from Quaglin’s case — and another attorney for Quaglin, Jonathan Gross, to file a response by April 10 as to why the judge should not refer them to the court’s committee on grievances, which investigates complaints against attorneys. The judge set a hearing for April 18.
In response to a journalist’s tweet about the judge’s order, McBride tweeted: “EVERYONE SHOULD SHOW UP FOR THIS TO HEAR THE TRUTH. LET’S GOOOOO!”
McBride withdrew from Quaglin’s case this month — just weeks before the man’s new April trial date — because McBride said he needed to focus on another Jan. 6 case headed to trial at the end of March. McBride told the judge that Gross would take over Quaglin’s case, saying the switch wouldn’t prejudice the defendant and that the other attorney “knows Quaglin’s case well.”
Soon after taking over the case, however, Gross told McFadden he planned to ask for the trial to be pushed again. McFadden wrote that Gross told the judge “that he does not practice criminal law and that he is not competent” to be Quaglin’s lead attorney at trial in just a few weeks.
“Quaglin’s attorneys have now delayed this trial multiple times to the detriment of their client, who remains detained, and to the inconvenience of his co-defendants and the Government who seek a speedy resolution to this matter,” McFadden wrote. “Indeed, the Court has doubts that McBride’s initial continuance request was made in good faith.”
McBride said in a text message Friday that he denies the “insinuations” in McFadden’s order about his representations to the court about his medical condition and continuance requests. McBride said he will respond to the court and looks forward to “displaying the truth and achieving a favorable resolution.”
McBride also said his client believed the judge had so much personal animus toward McBride that Quaglin didn’t think he could get a fair trial.
“As such, Mr. Quaglin asked me to step aside and help Mr. Gross take over the case — which is exactly what I did,” McBride wrote.
Gross did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
Quaglin is being held at the D.C. jail, where Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and others on the Committee on Oversight and Accountability visited Friday as some conservatives continue to try to portray Jan. 6 defendants as “political prisoners.”
Of the 20 Jan. 6 defendants held in D.C. as of earlier this month, 17 were accused of assaulting officers at the Capitol, according to Just Security blog, which obtained a recent D.C. Department of Correction list. Six of the defendants have pleaded guilty to assaulting, resisting or impeding officers and two others have been convicted at trial.
A spokesperson for the D.C. jail didn’t immediately respond to a request Friday from The Associated Press for an updated list of Jan. 6 defendants locked up there.
Quaglin, of North Brunswick, New Jersey, is accused of attacking several police officers trying to protect the Capitol from the angry pro-Trump mob that halted Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.
Authorities say Quaglin attacked officers with a stolen riot shield and sprayed them with a chemical irritant. He faces charges including assaulting an officer using a dangerous weapon.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
A neuropsychologist who treated the man suing Gwyneth Paltrow over a 2016 ski collision cast aspersions on the testimony of medical experts hired by the celebrity’s legal team — and argued that, as his personal doctor, she was better suited to speak about 76-year-old Terry Sanderson’s post-concussion symptoms.
“A lot of the experts are opining. I feel like I’m the best judge of what happened to him,” Dr. Alina Fong said.
Fong’s videotaped deposition was the first to be shown on the third day of the trial in Park City, the upscale Utah ski resort town where Sanderson accuses Paltrow of skiing so recklessly that she crashed into him, broke his ribs and left him with lasting brain injuries.
Fong said that when she saw Sanderson less than a year after the accident, he had lost his love for life. He was often dejected and crying. And under her care, Sanderson worked tirelessly to rehabilitate the post-concussion symptoms — including pain, headaches and mood shifts. In cross-examination, she accused Paltrow’s attorneys of planting “red herrings” to mislead jurors. Fong said conclusions from Paltrow’s experts — who have yet to testify — were “easily reputable by just going online and looking at the CDC recommendations.”
Sanderson’s two daughters were also expected to testify on Thursday about the lasting effects of the crash as the trial takes on an increasingly personal note on the third day of proceedings.
Attorneys are expected to call Polly Grasham and Shae Herath to the stand and question them about the broken ribs and lasting brain damage that their father Terry Sanderson claims he sustained after his collision with Paltrow seven years ago.
Rick Bowmer / AP
Neurologist Richard Boehme and Paltrow herself could also be called to testify on either Thursday or Friday.
Sanderson is suing Paltrow for $300,000, claiming she recklessly crashed into him while the two were skiing on a beginner run at Deer Valley Resort in Park City, Utah. In a counterclaim, Paltrow is seeking $1 and attorney fees. The amount of money at stake for both sides pales in comparison to the typical legal costs of a multiyear lawsuit and expert witness-heavy trial.
During the first two days of trial, Sanderson’s attorneys and expert medical witnesses described how his injuries were likely caused by someone crashing into him from behind. They attributed noticeable changes in Sanderson’s mental acuity to injuries from that day.
Paltrow’s attorneys have tried to represent Sanderson as a 76-year-old whose decline has followed a normal course of aging rather than the results of a crash. They have not yet called witnesses of their own to testify, but in opening statements previewed for jurors that they plan to call Paltrow’s husband Brad Falchuk and her two children, Moses and Apple.
Paltrow’s team has previously accused Sanderson of suing to exploit their client’s wealth and celebrity. She is the Oscar-winning star of “Shakespeare in Love” and founder-CEO of the beauty and wellness company Goop.
Her legal team has thus far attempted to poke holes in testimony from Sanderson’s team of experts — and are expected to question his two daughters about their father mentioning Paltrow’s fame, and an email alluding to footage recorded on a GoPro camera that hasn’t been found or included in evidence.
Although ski collisions in general are not uncommon, most accidents occur when a skier collides with a tree or another kind of inanimate object or obstacle. Incidents where a skier collides with another skier happen less often. The National Ski Areas Association recorded 57 fatal incidents stemming from collisions during the 2021-2022 ski season, and most involved skiers hitting trees. Of all skiers who died in those incidents, 95% were men, according to the NSAA, which also reported 54 “catastrophic” incidents over the course of the same season.
This case and its eventual outcome hinge on whether Paltrow or Sanderson acted in an unreasonable manner while skiing that day in Deer Valley, and if someone did, then whom. Roger Cohn, a personal injury attorney at Kohn Roth Law, told CBS MoneyWatch that negligence is a central part of the debate.
“When one skier hits another, the issue is negligence. Did they do something wrong?” Cohn said, adding, “The uphill skier has to watch out for the downhill skier. If you’re overtaking someone and hit them, chances are you are liable and at fault.”
His analysis is consistent with the NSAA’s responsibility code, which applies to ski resorts across North America. According to the code, “people ahead of downhill of you have the right of way. You must avoid them.” The rules also stipulate that skiers must “always stay in control” and be able to stop when necessary to avoid other people.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Gwyneth Paltrow’s lawyer called the story of a retired optometrist who is suing her over a 2016 ski collision “utter B.S.” on Tuesday during the trial’s opening day in Utah.
Terry Sanderson claims that the actor-turned-lifestyle influencer was cruising down the slopes so recklessly that they violently collided, leaving him on the ground as she and her entourage continued their descent down Deer Valley Resort, a skiers-only mountain known for its groomed runs, après-ski champagne yurts and posh clientele.
“Gwyneth Paltrow skied out of control,” Sanderson’s attorneys claim in the lawsuit, “knocking him down hard, knocking him out, and causing a brain injury, four broken ribs and other serious injuries. Paltrow got up, turned and skied away, leaving Sanderson stunned, lying in the snow, seriously injured.”
In a case that has lasted years, Sanderson is suing Paltrow for $300,000 — claiming that the accident in Park City was a result of negligence, and left him with physical injuries and emotional distress.
Sanderson and Paltrow both appeared on Tuesday at the Park City courthouse to begin the trial, which is slated to last longer than a week. A somber-looking Paltrow, wearing a beige knit sweater, tweed harem pants and aviator-style reading glasses, shielded her face from reporters and photographers with a blue “GP”-initialed notebook when she entered and exited the courtroom.
Park City is a resort town in the Rocky Mountains that hosts the Sundance Film Festival, which draws a throng of celebrities each year.
Rick Bowmer / AP
On ski slopes, Utah law gives the skier who is downhill the right of way, so a central question in the case is who was farther down the beginner’s run when the collision transpired. Both Paltrow and Sanderson claim in court filings that they were farther downhill when the other rammed into them, causing their skis to intertwine and the two to tumble.
“All skiers know that when they’re skiing down the mountain, it’s their responsibility to yield the right of way to skiers below them,” Sanderson’s attorney, Lawrence Buhler, told jurors, who — unlike those selected for most trials — walked into the courtroom smiling, likely because of their proximity to a major celebrity.
In opening arguments, both sides presented their clients as conservative skiers who were stunned when a skier above them crashed into them. Both characterized the other’s version of events as implausible.
Buhler described Paltrow as wealthy, while highlighting Sanderson’s military service and how he sought medical care at the V.A. hospital after the collision.
“She hires multiple ski instructors for her children, which allows them to skip the lines. Private instructors cost thousands of dollars per day,” he said.
Paltrow’s attorneys told jurors Tuesday that Sanderson was the one who crashed into her — a collision in which she sustained what they called a “full body blow.” Attorney Steve Owens noted that members of Paltrow’s group checked on Sanderson, who assured them he was fine — an interaction Sanderson doesn’t deny but said in court filings that he can’t remember.
While showing images on a projector of Paltrow on a chairlift with her son, Paltrow’s attorney cautioned jurors not to let sympathy for Sanderson’s medical ailments skew their judgments. He questioned the 76-year-old’s credibility, noting his age and documented, pre-collision brain injuries. He said that the Utah man had confirmed he was fine after the crash. Owens also said that Sanderson posted a “very happy, smiling picture” of himself online, being tobogganed down post-crash.
“His memories of the case get better over the years. That’s all I’m gonna say. That’s not how memory works,” Owens said.
After his initial lawsuit seeking $3.1 million was dropped, Sanderson amended the complaint and he is now seeking $300,000. Paltrow — the Oscar-winning actor known for her roles in “Shakespeare in Love” and Marvel’s “Iron Man” movies — filed a counterclaim, seeking attorney fees and $1 in damages.
Paltrow has alleged that Sanderson was actually the culprit in the collision, is overstating his injuries, and is trying to exploit her celebrity and wealth. In addition to her acting career, she is also the founder and CEO of high-end wellness company goop.
“He demanded Ms. Paltrow pay him millions. If she did not pay, she would face negative publicity resulting from his allegations,” her attorneys wrote in a 2019 court filing.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
The FBI is searching for a Florida woman who was supposed to stand trial beginning Monday on charges stemming from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, as well as another riot defendant who is now also missing, officials said.
Government exhibit
A federal judge in Washington issued bench warrants for the arrest of Olivia Pollock and Joseph Hutchinson III last week after the court was notified that they had tampered with or removed the ankle monitors that track their location, said Joe Boland, a supervisory special agent with the FBI’s Lakeland, Florida office.
Boland said the FBI has recovered one of the defendants’ ankle monitors after they removed it, but declined to say whether it was Pollock’s or Hutchinson’s. By Monday afternoon, the FBI had not located either of them, he said.
Olivia Pollock, of Lakeland, is the sister of another Jan. 6 defendant, Jonathan Pollock, who has been on the lam for months. The FBI has offered a reward of up $30,000 in exchange for information leading to the arrest and conviction of her brother, who is accused of assaulting multiple police officers during the riot.
Olivia Pollock and Joseph Hutchinson were initially arrested in 2021 and charged in a five-person indictment with assaulting law enforcement and other crimes. Hutchinson is representing himself at trial, and an attorney appointed to assist him as standby counsel declined to comment on Monday.
Olivia Pollock’s lawyer, Elita Amato, said Monday that her client “had been diligently assisting in her defense for her upcoming trial prior to her disappearance.”
Authorities encouraged anyone with information about their whereabouts to contact the FBI.
Olivia Pollock, who was wearing a ballistic plate-carrier vest during the riot, is accused of elbowing an officer in the chest and trying to strip the officer’s baton away during the melee. Jonathan Pollock is accused of thrusting a riot shield into an officer’s face and throat, pulling an officer down steps and punching others.
Authorities say Hutchinson pulled back a fence that allowed other rioters to swarm police trying to defend the Capitol, punched an officer and grabbed the sleeve of another before throwing the officer out of his way.
Hutchinson, who now lives in Georgia, was scheduled to face trial in August. The judge on Monday rescheduled Olivia Pollock’s trial for August as well.
Also on Monday, a Colorado man pleaded guilty on to using a chemical spray to attack police officers who were trying to hold off the mob.
Robert Gieswein, of Woodland Park, Colorado, is scheduled to be sentenced on June 9. Estimated sentencing guidelines for Gieswein recommend a prison sentence ranging from three years and five months to four years and three months, according to his plea agreement.
Gieswein was wearing a helmet, flak jacket and goggles and carrying a baseball bat when he stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. He marched to the building from the Washington Monument with members of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group.
Gieswein repeatedly sprayed an “aerosol irritant” at police officers, pushed against a line of police and was one of the first rioters to enter the Capitol, according to a court filing accompanying his guilty plea to assault charges.
Federal authorities have said Gieswein appeared to be an adherent of the Three Percenters militia movement and ran a private paramilitary training group called the Woodland Wild Dogs.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
It was a field trip to a ghost town. Off a country road, the procession turned slowly up the long driveway of the imposing property. The convoy held the jury in the double murder trial of Alex Murdaugh.
“Moselle” is the hunting lodge of the Murdaugh family — Alex, his wife Maggie, and sons Paul and Buster.
Colleton County Court
The jury was taken to the dog kennels and the small feed room where Paul had been shot at close range with a shotgun. A few yards away, Maggie was shot several times with a 300 rifle. Neither weapon has ever been found.
There was a time when this estate reflected the vast power and prestige of the Murdaugh legal dynasty. Now, the withered grounds seem to echo Alex Murdaugh’s steep fall from grace: from a rich powerful lawyer to an admitted drug addict, thief and convicted murderer.
This is where Alex Murdaugh’s life unraveled on June 7, 2021.
911 OPERATOR: What’s your emergency?
ALEX MURDAUGH: This is Alex Murdaugh. My wife and child have been shot badly.
That night, when Murdaugh was interviewed by investigators, he was quick to offer up an explanation for the murders of his wife and son.
Colleton County Court
ALEX MURDAUGH (to investigators in patrol car): My son Paul was in a boat wreck … There’s been a lot of negative publicity about that and there’s been a lot of people online, just really vile stuff.
The crash that would kill 19-year-old Mallory Beach happened about 2:20 a.m. on February 24, 2019, when a boat carrying six young friends smashed into a bridge. Connor Cook made the frantic call to 911.
911 DISPATCHER: 911, where’s your emergency?
CONNOR COOK: We’re in a boat crash on Archers Creek.
CONNOR COOK: There’s six of us and one is missing.
911 DISPATCHER: Who’s missing?
CONNOR COOK: A female, Mallory Beach is missing. … She’s in the water.
Lynn Reavis: Mallory, she was just this wonderful, fun-loving, happy girl. And everybody loved her.
Lynn Reavis and her niece Mallory were extremely close.
Lynn Reavis: You always got a hug hello and a hug goodbye. And the last thing she told me was she loved me (cries).
In piecing together events, investigators learned earlier that night, 19-year-old Paul Murdaugh used his older brother Buster’s ID to buy beer at a convenience store.
South Carolina Division of Natural Resources
Michael DeWitt: And if you look at the video footage when Paul comes out of the store, he’s holding the beer up. … He’s celebrating.
After staying at a party for several hours, the group took the Murdaugh family’s boat to a bar, where Paul and Connor had more to drink around 1 a.m.
Michael DeWitt: They went in, pounded a couple of shots.
Michael DeWitt is an author and editor of the Hampton County Guardian, part of the Gannett | USA Today Network.
Michael DeWitt: Somewhere around 1, 1:30, you see the video footage of them leaving the boat dock.
South Carolina Division of Natural Resources
Michael DeWitt: It was kind of a sad, touching moment when you see Mallory and her boyfriend … I think, is the last moment that anybody … captured an image of her alive.
It was around 1:15 a.m. when they took off again on the boat.
MILEY ALTMAN (police interview): Paul was just driving, doing doughnuts.
Passenger Miley Altman told investigators tempers were running short.
MILEY ALTMAN (police interview): And, so, Connor starts driving for a little bit and then Paul, he like stops Conner and he’s like, “No, this is my boat,” like, “let me drive …”
MILEY ALTMAN (police interview): I saw the bridge coming …
CONNOR COOK to 911: What bridge is this … Paul, what bridge is this?
First responders’ dash cam video captured the mayhem.
OFFICER: Where’s everybody else at?
UNIDENTIFIED: At the bridge, at the bottom of the bridge.
Then-Beaufort County Deputy Sheriff Steven Domino was one of the first on the scene.
Stephen Domino: Everybody was crying, scared, shocked, just worried about their friend.
After Domino got Mallory’s distraught boyfriend Anthony Cook into his patrol car, Paul Murdaugh came into sight.
Stephen Domino: He was walking up from where the boat was.
ANTHONY COOK (to Domino): Get that m———– right there away from me.
Stephen Domino: He actually tried to rush through me to get to Paul because I guess he saw him smiling.
Nikki Battiste | “48 Hours” contributor: Paul was smiling while Anthony’s girlfriend is missing in the water?
Stephen Domino: Correct.
ANTHONY COOK [to Paul Murdaugh]: Why are you f—— smiling like it’s f—— funny? My f—— girlfriend’s gone, bro.
That’s when Anthony Cook definitively identified the person he said was driving the boat.
ANTHONY COOK: Do y’all know Alex Murdaugh?
STEPHEN DOMINO: Yeah, I know that name.
ANTHONY COOK: That’s his son.
STEPHEN DOMINO: That’s the one driving the boat?
ANTHONY COOK: Good luck.
Stephen Domino: That’s when he indicated that he couldn’t be touched.
Mallory’s body was found a week later.
Michael Dewitt: And in the weeks after that … we’re just waiting … Is someone going to make an arrest? Is there going to be an admission of guilt or responsibility?
Michael Dewitt: I think that from day one, ground zero, the effort was … what can we do to get Paul out of this?
Nikki Battiste: Who do you think is responsible for Mallory’s death?
Lynn Reavis: I think Paul Murdaugh was.
A month after the fatal boat crash, frustrated that there was no arrest, Mallory Beach’s family filed a wrongful death suit against members of the Murdaugh family, which allowed them to depose the survivors about what happened that night.
Michael DeWitt: Paul was allegedly acting rash and reckless.
In his deposition, Paul’s friend Connor Cook said that the morning of the crash he didn’t tell investigators that Paul was driving the boat because he was afraid. And, while at the hospital, he says he was told by Alex Murdaugh that he “didn’t need to tell anyone who was driving.”
Michael DeWitt: Alex … reportedly went from room to room to try to communicate with the other boat crash passengers and get them all on the same page.
At the hospital several hours after the crash, Paul’s blood alcohol level was three times over the legal limit.
Michael DeWitt: He was getting belligerent with the nurse’s staff according to court records, just being loud and troublesome.
But that morning, and for weeks to come, many felt that Paul Murdaugh was not treated like a suspect in a crime.
Lynn Reavis: We didn’t think he was gonna be charged.
Nikki Battiste: Why?
Lynn Realis: Because it was takin’ so long. We just didn’t think we’d see that day.
South Carolina Attorney General
Nearly two months after the boat crash, Paul was charged with causing the death of Mallory Beach. He pleaded not guilty and remained free after posting bond — and the Murdaugh name began to tarnish.
Two years passed. And on June 7, 2021, as Paul Murdaugh was awaiting trial in the death of Mallory Beach, gunfire erupted on the Murdaugh family estate.
ALEX MURDAUGH to 911: This is Alex Murdaugh at 4147 Moselle Road.
Maggie Murdaugh/Facebook
At 10:06 p.m., a panicked-sounding Alex Murdaugh called 911 saying he had just arrived home to find his wife of nearly 28 years, Maggie, and their son, Paul, shot.
911 OPERATOR: Is he moving at all? Your son? I know you said that she was shot. But what about your son?
ALEX MURDAUGH (cries): Nobody — they’re not — neither one of them’s moving.
Maggie’s friend Caroline Price called her godson, Buster Murdaugh, when she heard the terrible news.
Caroline Price: I said, “Please tell me this isn’t true.” And he said, “Yes ma’am, Ms. Caroline, it is.” And he immediately without prompt said, “It was premeditated and revenge.” … they were tryin’ to say that … it was associated with the boat crash.
Nikki Battiste: That someone was angry at Paul.
Caroline Price: Right.
Due to the Murdaugh family’s close ties with local law enforcement, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, known as SLED – the state’s top investigative agency – took over the case.
Shellie West: It was amazing to me how quick this rumor mill started.
Maggie’s friend Shellie West heard about the murders from a friend.
Shellie West: And I just said, “Do you think Alex did it?” And he said, “No. There were two guns on the scene.”
Nikki Battiste: But it actually crossed your mind that he might have done it — even early on.
Shellie West: Yeah, I mean, yeah. I mean, that was my first initial reaction … a lot of — lotta times the husband’s the first suspect.
And Price says she had a strange conversation with him after Maggie and Paul’s funeral.
Caroline Price: He talked a lot about Paul. The fact that he wasn’t gonna get his day in court, he wasn’t gonna get to clear his name.
Maggie Murdaugh/Facebook
Murdaugh offered a $100,000 reward as rumors and speculation swirled. Reports at the time raised questions about their marriage and claimed that Maggie was consulting with a divorce attorney.
Caroline Price: Marian, her sister, asked me, “Do – do you know anything about this?” And I said, “No.” And she said, “She never said anything to me, and she tells me everything.”
Nikki Battiste: Maggie never mentioned there was any trouble in the marriage?
Caroline Price: Uh-uh (negative).
At a hearing a few months later, “48 Hours” contributor Nikki Battiste questioned the Murdaugh family attorney Dick Harpootlian about the Murdaughs’ relationship.
Nikki Battiste: Were there any problems in Maggie and Alex’s marriage?
Dick Harpootlian: Absolutely none, none. And — trust me, I was with them for almost two years … Always affectionate, always courteous … just a picture of domestic bliss.
And as for the theory that the murders were in retaliation for the boat crash, Maggie’s friends say she never mentioned any threats against their family.
Caroline Price: She talked about how unkind everybody was — and mean.
Shellie West: The looks and the sneers …
Caroline Price: They didn’t seem to feel unsafe. I mean, they were still carryin’ on with their normal routine, day to-day activities and things.
As investigators tried to figure out who would want Paul and Maggie Murdaugh dead, and why, a call came in to 911 that another member of the family was under attack.
Michael DeWitt: It’s almost been a case of episodic television where, “Tune in this week and we’ll see what’s next from Hampton County, home of the Murdaughs.”
Three months after the shooting deaths of Maggie and Paul, Alex Murdaugh again called 911 – this time claiming he’d been shot.
ALEX MURDAUGH to 911: Somebody stopped to help me … and they tried to shoot me.
Murdaugh told investigators he was changing a flat tire on a rural road when a person in a pickup truck passed by, asked Murdaugh if he was having car trouble, and then shot him in the head.
Murdaugh’s conversation on the way to the hospital was captured on police body cam:
OFFICER (body cam video): Do you know what kind of gun it was?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, I don’t know what kind of gun it was. But it sounded – it sounded like a shotgun.
On Sept. 6, 2021, two days after being shot, Alex Murdaugh released this statement: “I have made a lot of decisions that I truly regret” he said, and announced he was leaving the law firm.
LISA WEISMANN | WCSC NEWS: “Alex Murdaugh put out a statement saying… he’s going into rehab.”
Alex Murdaugh said he had been addicted to opioids for two decades. It wasn’t only claims of drug abuse now staining his reputation. He was also accused of stealing millions from his own law firm and was asked to resign the day before he was shot.
Michael DeWitt: Friday, the law firm has a come to Jesus meeting with him … we know you’re allegedly stealing money, you’re out … Saturday, the reported shooting … Monday, Alex releases a statement saying, “I’m going into rehab.’”
Then, came the even more bizarre news that Murdaugh had allegedly hired his distant cousin, Curtis Smith, to shoot him.
Nikki Battiste: He wanted you to kill him.
Curtis Smith: Yeah, he wanted me to kill him.
Authorities say Murdaugh wanted his killing to look like murder so his surviving son Buster could collect a $10 million life insurance payout. Smith says he refused.
Curtis Smith: Yeah. Ain’t happening.
It’s unclear exactly how Murdaugh came to be shot.
Nikki Battiste: Why did you leave the scene?
Curtis Smith: I didn’t know anything else to do.
WTOC
Smith was charged in connection with the shooting but has not entered a plea. On Sept. 16, 2021, facing charges of insurance fraud, conspiracy, and filing a false police report, Alex Murdaugh turned himself in.
Michael DeWitt: The fact that a Murdaugh sat in a chair in a jumpsuit with handcuffs is somethin’ I’ve never seen in my lifetime.
Alex Murdaugh was released on bond and allowed to go back to rehab. While Murdaugh was there, investigators were looking into all of his business dealings and the suspicious death of Gloria Satterfield.
Ronnie Richter: Gloria was the housekeeper for the Murdaugh family for more than 20 years.
Ronnie Richter is an attorney for the Satterfield family.
Ronnie Richter: She literally helped raise Alex Murdaugh’s sons, Paul and Buster.
In 2018, the 57-year-old died after a fall at the Murdaugh estate.
Ronnie Richter: What’s been reported is that she was at the house that day on the front steps. The dogs got a little rambunctious and gave her a push and she fell down the stairs.
Satterfield’s death was ruled “natural,” and no autopsy was ever performed.
Ronnie Richter: There is nothing natural about a 57-year-old woman falling down a flight of steps and dying from head trauma.
At Satterfield’s funeral, Murdaugh did something very odd, says Richter. He recommended Gloria’s sons file a wrongful death lawsuit, against him. Murdaugh even steered them toward an attorney — his friend, Cory Fleming.
Ronnie Richter: A lot of trust was placed in both Alex and in Cory to do the right things, and it really went south from the outset.
Court documents show a $4.3 million payout by Murdaugh’s insurance company, but none of the money ever went to Satterfield’s family.
Nikki Battiste: Where did that money go?
Michael DeWitt: Well, allegedly it went into Alex Murdaugh’s pocket.
Alex Murdaugh was charged with two felonies for his role in the Gloria Satterfield insurance fraud. This time, a judge ordered him to be held without bond.
As Murdaugh sat in jail, he was indicted on dozens more charges for defrauding clients out of millions of dollars. And then in July of 2022, more than a year after the grisly murders —
NORAH O`DONNELL | CBS EVENING NEWS: Disgraced South Carolina attorney Alex Murdaugh was indicted today in the high-profile murders of his wife and son last year.
Alex Murdaugh was charged with killing his wife Maggie and son Paul. Maggie’s friends were relieved that the case was moving forward.
Caroline Price: I was kinda like, “Phew.” You know, “Finally. … maybe we’re gonna get some answers.”
On Jan. 25, 2023, 19 months after Maggie and Paul were gunned down near the dog kennels at their family hunting estate, prosecutor Creighton Waters began laying out the state’s case against Alex Murdaugh.
CREIGHTON WATERS: The defendant Alex Murdaugh, over there, told anyone who would listen that he was never at those kennels.
CREIGHTON WATERS: The evidence is also going to show from these things that every one of us, most of us, carry around in our pockets that he was there. He was at the murder scene with the two victims.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE | Colleton County Sheriff’s Office: I could see Mister Murdaugh down at the end of the driveway.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE (body cam): Central 717… Scene is secure … both gunshot wounds to the head.
First responders described the harrowing scene captured by their body cams.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE: The male victim was close to a small shed and the dog kennel on the left. There was a large deal of blood that had pooled around his body.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE (body cam): Turn around for me.
ALEX MURDAUGH: I don’t have anything.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE: Yes, sir I see that.
SGT. DANIEL GREENE: This is your wife and son?
ALEX MURDAUGH: Is it official they are dead?
SGT. DANIEL GREENE: Yes sir, that’s what it looks like.
Investigators interviewed Murdaugh in a patrol car.
ALEX MURDAUGH: My boy over there, I could see, it was … (cries).
Murdaugh said he spent time with Paul earlier in the evening, riding around the property. After Maggie got home, he dozed off on the couch and when he got up, there was nobody around.
ALEX MURDAUGH (in patrol car): I called Maggie, didn’t get an answer. …Maggie is a dog lover … And I knew she’d gone to the kennel. … And I left to go to my mom’s. …my mom’s late-stage Alzheimer’s patient.
His visit with his ill mother would become his alibi. Murdaugh told investigators when he returned around 10 p.m., there was still no one home, so he drove down to the dog kennels. That’s when he found Maggie and Paul.
ALEX MURDAUGH: I tried to turn Paul over first. … Then I went to my wife, and I mean I could see. … I touched them both. … I tried to take their pulse on both of them.
Detective Laura Rutland interviewed Alex Murdaugh that night and told the jurors she noted despite his claim of touching the blood-soaked bodies of his wife and son, he appeared clean.
PROSECUTOR JOHN MEADORS: How would you describe the defendant’s hands when you saw him?
DET. LAURA RUTLAND: They were clean.
JOHN MEADORS: How would you describe his T-shirt?
DET. LAURA RUTLAND: Clean.
JOHN MEADORS: Did those clothes appear to be fresh?
DET. LAURA RUTLAND: They did.
JOHN MEADORS: Like they just came out of laundry?
DET. LAURA RUTLAND: It could be.
Maggie and Paul died from multiple gunshot wounds. Daily Beast senior national reporter Pilar Melendez shared the investigators’ findings.
CBS News
Pilar Melendez: So, Paul was shot first … he was shot twice with a shotgun.
Pilar Melendez: Paul was found here next to the feeding room. … Very close by … right here is where Maggie was found.
Maggie was killed with a 300 Blackout rifle and suffered five gunshot wounds. A crime scene specialist described her final moments.
KENNETH KINSEY: The shooter was right here (demonstrating with a pointer) … The second shot was not as close, but it still wasn’t at long distance. It was approximately here into the crown of the head.
Three days after the murders, building their timeline, investigators talked to Alex Murdaugh again.
ALEX MURDAUGH (in patrol car): We sat around and ate supper … we hung around the house for a little while. I know that Maggie went to the kennels. Um, I don’t know exactly where Paul went, but he left the house, too. … I stayed in the house. … and I actually fell asleep on the couch.
AGENT DAVID OWEN |SLED: The last time … you saw Paul and Maggie is when you all were eating supper?
ALEX MURDAUGH: Yes, sir. (cries)
The Murdaughs were avid hunters and had more than 25 weapons on the property.
During a search, SLED agents found spent shell casings and ammunition that matched the bullets that killed Maggie and Paul. But the murder weapons were never found.
Colleton County Court
Maggie’s cell phone was also missing. The day after the murders, investigators found it on the side of the road, half a mile from the property. SLED analyzed the data from Alex, Maggie and Paul’s cell phones.
At 7:56 p.m., Paul sent a Snapchat video of his dad to a friend. Paul is heard laughing in the background.
Pilar Melendez: Around 8:30, Paul’s phone starts moving towards the dog kennels. He’s also calling and texting two friends then … responding to Snapchats – until about 8:40, when he gets on a four-minute phone call with his friend Rogan Gibson.
Rogan Gibson told investigators their phone call was about his dog who was staying at the kennels. Rogan thought he heard Alex in the background.
Pilar Melendez: That immediately sets a red flag for law enforcement, because that totally messes up Alex’s timeline. And how could he be at the dog kennels at 8:40 when he claims he was … sleeping?
Two months after the murders, agents interviewed Alex Murdaugh again, this time at a SLED office. They asked him if he went down to the kennels that night.
SLED AGENT: I’ve got information that … you were heard in the background. … Was it you?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, sir, not if my times are right.
SLED AGENT: Who do you think it could have been?
ALEX MURDAUGH: I have no idea.
Colleton County Court
In November 2022, there was a breakthrough in the investigation. Agents showed Gibson a video of his dog Cash that they had found on Paul’s phone. Paul had shot it at 8:44 p.m., minutes before he was killed.
CELL PHONE VIDEO: Voice 1: It’s guinea. Voice 2: It’s a chicken. Voice 3: Come here, Bubba …
PROSECUTOR JIM GRIFFIN: What voices did you hear?
ROGAN GIBSON: Paul’s, Ms. Maggie, and Mr. Alex.
JIM GRIFFIN: How sure are you now?
ROGAN GIBSON: Positive.
JIM GRIFFIN: 100%?
ROGAN GIBSON: That’s correct.
The prosecutor says Murdaugh is heard saying “Come here Bubba” — calling the family dog.
Pilar Melendez: This is a huge piece of testimony because it places Alex in the kennels roughly five minutes before prosecutors say Maggie and Paul were murdered.
Authorities believed Maggie and Paul were shot around 8:49 p.m. when their phone screens were locked and never opened again. The prosecutor asked several other witnesses if they recognized Murdaugh’s voice on that video.
Pilar Melendez: Every single witness has said with a 100% certainty that that’s Alex in the background of that video … it completely shatters his alibi.
Alex Murdaugh’s car and cell phone data showed he drove to his mom’s house shortly after 9 p.m. Between then and until he returned and dialed 911 at 10:06 p.m., he made 10 calls to family and friends, including five to Maggie.
Pilar Melendez: Prosecutors basically allege that … after killing Paul and Maggie, Alex took steps to cover up … and show that he is … talking to all these people, so how could he murder his wife and son?
As to the motive, the state had a theory that a perfect storm was gathering for Alex Murdaugh.
Pilar Melendez: Alex was scared about information coming out that he had been stealing money from his clients and his law firm for years.
On the day of the murders, Murdaugh was confronted by his firm about missing legal fees of almost $800,000. Also, that week, he was due in court for a hearing on the boat crash civil case. Murdaugh was being sued for $10 million by Mallory Beach’s family.
Pilar Melendez: The prosecution is alleging that, in order to dissuade further questions about his financial crimes and garner sympathy from the community and his law firm, he killed his wife and son.
Pilar Melendez: It’s the actions of a desperate man.
After the judge ruled Murdaugh’s alleged financial schemes could be brought in, the state called the firm’s CFO Jeannie Seckinger.
PROSECUTOR CREIGHTON WATERS: Was anyone concerned about … those missing fees after the murders happened?
JEANNIE SECKINGER: We weren’t because we were concerned about Alex … we weren’t going to go in there and harass him about money when … his family had been killed.
The Beach family’s attorney Mark Tinsley also testified and told the jurors, in the wake of the murders, the civil case against Alex Murdaugh would have gone away.
MARK TINSLEY: If Alex is the victim of a vigilante, no one is going to hold him accountable. … The case would be over.
As the state rested its case, Alex Murdaugh made the risky decision to take the stand.
JUDGE CLIFTON NEWMAN: Have you made a decision as to whether you’re gonna testify?
ALEX MURDAUGH: I am going to testify. I want to testify
Against his attorney’s advice, Alex Murdaugh decided to take the stand in his own defense. Under questioning by attorney Jim Griffin, Murdaugh is hoping the jury will look past his lies and believe that now he’s telling them the truth.
DEFENSE ATTORNEY JIM GRIFFIN: Did you kill Maggie?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, I did not kill Maggie. I did not kill Paul. I would never hurt Maggie and I would never hurt Paul. Ever. Under any circumstances.
Pool
After all the testimony identifying him on that kennel video, Murdaugh is forced to admit he was with his wife and son minutes before prosecutors say they were gunned down.
JIM GRIFFIN: Were you, in fact, at the kennels at 8:44 p.m. on the night Maggie and Paul were murdered?
ALEX MURDAUGH: I was.
KENNEL CELL PHONE VIDEO: “Come here Bubba.”
JIM GRIFFIN: Did you continue lying after that night, did you not?
ALEX MURDAUGH: Once I lied, I continued to lie. Yes, sir.
JIM GRIFFIN: Why?
ALEX MURDAUGH: Oh, what a tangled web we weave. But once I told a lie, I mean, I told my family, I had to keep lying.
Murdaugh claims he’d been compelled to lie because of an opioid addiction he battled for 20 years, spending tens of thousands of dollars a week and taking up to 60 or more pills per day.
ALEX MURDAUGH: As my addiction evolved over time, I would get into situations or circumstances where I would get paranoid thinking.
But he dismisses the prosecution’s theory of mounting pressure from his addiction and alleged financial crimes leading up to the murders.
JIM GRIFFIN: Mr. Murdoch, on June the 7th, did you believe that your financial house of cards was about to crumble?
ALEX MURDAUGH: Absolutely not.
During a six-hour cross-examination over two days, Prosecutor Creighton Waters grills Murdaugh about his long history of lying to his financial victims.
ALEX MURDAUGH: And Mr. Waters, just to try to get through this quicker, I admit —
CREIGHTON WATERS: I know you want to get through it quicker, but we’re not. So, answer the question please.
ALEX MURDAUGH: What I – what I admit is that I misled them. I did wrong. And that I stole their money.
Waters contends it was only because he’d been caught in his lie about being at the kennels that Murdaugh finally came clean.
CREIGHTON WATERS: The reality is … you, like you’ve done so many times over the course of your life, had to back up and make a new story that kind of fit with the facts that can’t be denied. Isn’t that true, sir?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No sir, that’s not true.
Waters then tries to box him in to his new timeline on the night of the murders, zeroing in on four minutes — between 9:02 and 9:06 p.m. — when his phone logged 283 steps, right before he left to visit his mom.
CREIGHTON WATERS: That’s far more steps in a shorter time period than — than any time prior that you’ve seen from the testimony in this case. So, what – what were you so busy doing? … Going to the bathroom?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, I don’t think that I went to the bathroom.
CREIGHTON WATERS: Getting on a treadmill?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, I didn’t get on the treadmill.
CREIGHTON WATERS: Jog in place?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, I didn’t jog in place.
CREIGHTON WATERS: Doing jumping jacks?
ALEX MURDAUGH: No, sir. I did not do jumping jacks.
Murdaugh reasserts his theory of the murders.
ALEX MURDAUGH: I believe that boat wreck is the reason why Paul Paul and Maggie were killed … Because I can tell you for a fact … that the person or people who did what I saw on June the 7th, they hated Paul Murdaugh, and they had anger in their heart.
Maggie Murdaugh/Facebook
Throughout the trial, the defense makes the case that Alex Murdaugh was a devoted family man. His son Buster describes a dad who’d coached his Little League teams and was now stricken with grief.
BUSTER MURDAUGH: He was destroyed. He was heartbroken. I walked in the door and saw him and gave him a hug and just — just broken down.
The defense calls a crime scene analyst who, based on blood spatter, position of shots fired, and the fact that two different guns were used, says there was more than one shooter.
TIM PALMBACH: My opinion is the totality of the evidence is more suggestive of a two-shooter scenario.
The prosecution disagrees.
CREIGHTON WATERS: This is Alex the prosecutor, the lawyer. He’s thinking through this. He’s thought through this. He’s going to use two guns because it is going to confuse people that perhaps there were two shooters.
In his closing to the jury, Waters argues that all the evidence points to Alex Murdaugh.
CREIGHTON WATERS: Paul, who had stippling from that first shot at close range, shot with no indication that he detected a threat from the person who fired that weapon. And why? Cause it was him (points at Alex Murdaugh)! Maggie sees what happens and she comes running over there. … She was running to her baby … she got mowed down by the only person we have conclusive proof was at that scene just minutes before. And who lied about that very fact.
And he describes how Murdaugh could have cleaned up at the kennels afterwards.
CREIGHTON WATERS: Wouldn’t take long to strip down and wash yourself off. … Get in that cart and get back to the house.
JIM GRIFFIN: Here we are with a Mr. Clean theory … He takes a hose and washes himself off? He gets in a golf cart — butt naked I guess — and drives to the house?
Defense attorney Jim Griffin pushes back on the prosecution’s theory.
JIM GRIFFIN: He would have to be a magician to make all that evidence disappear. … The shooter’s covered in blood. The shooter’s gun is covered in blood. … Common sense thing here is there were two shooters.
Instead, said Griffin, investigators zeroed in on Murdaugh to the exclusion of other suspects because he was an easy target.
JIM GRIFFIN: Longtime drug problem, his financial issues, misconduct were exposed … easy, easy, easy, easy target for SLED … the evidence is crystal clear … they started fabricating evidence against Alex.
Griffin tells the jury SLED also presented false evidence to the grand jury when seeking an indictment against Murdaugh.
JIM GRIFFIN: They came up with a report that says Alex’s T-shirt had high velocity blood spatter on it.
The lead SLED agent testified he had not received an email update that further testing had shown there was no blood.
DAVID OWEN | SLED Agent: I did not see that report. I was not made aware of its existence.
JIM GRIFFIN: SLED failed miserably in investigating this case. And had they done a competent job that Alex would have been excluded … a year ago.
Then he addresses the single most problematic piece of evidence for the defense.
JIM GRIFFIN: Really, we’re back to the lie. … ‘Cause that’s all they have in this case … He lied because he had a closet full of skeletons. …. But what he didn’t lie, what he didn’t lie for is because he was covering up for the fact that he killed Maggie and Paul. … Alex would not have killed the people he loved most in the world.
CREIGHTON WATERS: This defendant … has fooled everyone, everyone. … And he fooled Maggie and Paul too, and they paid for it with their lives. Don’t let him fool you, too.
After hearing from 75 witnesses in more than five weeks, the jury deliberates for just under three hours before returning with a verdict. Murdaugh is found guilty of murdering his wife and son.
At sentencing the next day, Judge Clifton Newman gives Murdaugh one last chance to appeal to the court.
ALEX MURDAUGH: I respect this court, but I’m innocent.
Unmoved, Judge Newman sentences him to two consecutive life terms in prison.
JUDGE CLIFTON NEWMAN: I know you have to see Paul and Maggie during the nighttime when you attempt to go to sleep. I’m sure they come and visit you.
Nikki Battiste: I can’t stop thinking about the fact that it is a video on Paul’s own phone that really was critical in this case.
Creighton Waters: Well, I think it is ironic … in a murder case the victims can’t testify, but in many ways, they do … they leave something behind that lets you know what happened to ’em. And in this case, it was Paul’s video. … It’s Paul testifying from the grave.
Alex Murdaugh has been transported to Kirkland Reception and Evaluation Center in Columbia, South Carolina.
He’ll be assessed there before being assigned permanently to a maximum-security prison.
[ad_2]