|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Stephen Smith Investigation: TikTok Video Sparks Speculation
Proximity to ‘persons of interest?’
Proximity to ‘persons of interest?’
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
16 comments
Nice work, Jenn! Lots of loud mouthed speculators out there always claiming to be on top of all things Stephen Smith… meanwhile Jenn is quietly, efficiently, getting it DONE!
Agree! Great job Jen!!
I’m sorry, but I really think it’s time for us all to move on from the Murdaughs in general. Obviously it was a fascinating case, and I followed it just like everyone else, but unless something legitimately big happens, I think it’s pretty much over. Boat case has been settled, murder trial has come and gone. When the financial crimes are over, then a story or two can probably cover that. This story is a perfect example of how the Murdaugh obsession has gone too far. As the author is revealing, it looks like this case, which definitely needs to be resolved, will most likely end up having very little if anything to do with the Murdaughs. I’m honestly surprised some slander (not sure that’s the right legal term) lawsuits haven’t been filed yet. The whole country seems to have an incredibly unhealthy interest in the whole Murdaugh thing. Interesting? Definitely. At some point it’s time to move on and put this in the rear view. I’ve always had an interest in true crime, but I’m actually starting to reevaluate my own thoughts about the genre. I’m honestly starting to feel it might be doing more harm than good. I think it’s starting to pose a threat to our justice system, probably thanks to technology. I don’t know. Just concerned about this whole topic in general.
How and why should we “move on” after an innocent man has been wrongly convicted of the murders of his wife and younger son?
And but for the grace of God, the older son could have been wrongly convicted of Stephen Smith’s death falsely labeled as “murder.”
I think that, yes, there is a relationship between the three death: whoever yelled, “Your son is next, Alex. Buster is next. Justice for Stephen Smith!” as Alex Murdaugh (“AM”) was being led away wrongly-convicted and sentenced, or someone related to that heckler, or someone of like mind, is the real killer of Paul and Maggie Murdaugh.
The murders had to be pinned on AM or else, as Mark Tinsley himself testified, the sympathy for AM would have made the boat crash case unwinnable for Mark Tinsley.
Parker’s agents were likely involved, too. The Paker-hired investigator, Sara Capelli, admitted feeling responsible for those murders in texts to Mark Tinsley.
And apparently, there was a camera at the driveway to Moselle the night of Paul and Maggie’s murders.
That is the real story; but no one else, not even Dick or Jim, has the courage to tell it.
Well, excuse me. I basically meant everyone should leave the Murdaughs alone. I also essentially said I’m surprised there haven’t been slander suits ON BUSTER’s BEHALF against people who have spread rumors about him and smeared his reputation. I think Eric Bland is a complete hypocrite for standing behind Greg Leon and yet continuing to implicate Murdaughs in his pathetic podcast. I think that the whole true crime genre is preventing people, including Alex Murdaugh, from receiving a fair trial. Next time, try NOT snapping off the head of someone who agrees with you. Sheesh.
I did not snap your head off; nor do I even like violent metaphors.
But, in the Catholic theology of my formative years, sins of omission are as culpable as sins of commission. And the Epistle of St. James says, “It is a sin unto him who knows to do good but does not.”
That is after Jesus Christ said, “I was a prisoner and you did not visit me … for what you do unto the least of my brethren you do unto me.”
So, with love and respect, I clarify to you that, FOR ME, moving on FROM Murdaugh is leaving a man I know to be innocent OF MURDERS to almost literally rot in a prison so hot he cannot keep his clothes on.
With my thanks for your attention, I reiterate that my beliefs are mine alone and I am not imposing them on any one, only preaching them.
You go Jenn!!!!
Well, excuse me. I basically meant everyone should leave the Murdaughs alone. I also essentially said I’m surprised there haven’t been slander suits ON BUSTER’s BEHALF against people who have spread rumors about him and smeared his reputation. I think Eric Bland is a complete hypocrite for standing behind Greg Leon and yet continuing to implicate Murdaughs in his pathetic podcast. I think that the whole true crime genre is preventing people, including Alex Murdaugh, from receiving a fair trial. Next time, try NOT snapping off the head of someone who agrees with you. Sheesh.
I did not snap your head off; nor do I even like violent metaphors.
But, in the Catholic theology of my formative years, sins of omission are as culpable as sins of commission. And the Epistle of St. James says, “It is a sin unto him who knows to do good but does not.”
That is after Jesus Christ said, “I was a prisoner and you did not visit me … for what you do unto the least of my brethren you do unto me.”
So, with love and respect, I clarify to you that, FOR ME, moving on FROM Murdaugh is leaving a man I know to be innocent OF MURDERS to almost literally rot in a prison so hot he cannot keep his clothes on.
With my thanks for your attention, I reiterate that my beliefs are mine alone and I am not imposing them on any one, only preaching them.
I also believe he is innocent. I think his trial was a joke. I just don’t understand why you have to be so combative. He needs all the help he can get, so the people who believe in him should stick together. I have a feeling you know him personally (which I do not), so I hope you’re in a position to be able to help him. And now I’m sure I’ll get a bunch of hate comments from other people since I clearly stated my belief in his innocence. But, as you stated above, I’m entitled to my opinion. You wouldn’t know it sometimes, but it’s a free country.
I do NOT know him personally AT ALL.
What I DO know PERSONALLY is what it is like to be falsely accused and maliciously prosecuted. Only in my case, thank God, I defended myself without a lawyer and was ultimately acquitted WITH prejudice, meaning they cannot bring those false charges against me ever again.
So, did they leave me alone after that? Noooooooooooo. They never forgave me for being innocent and proving it.
The realty of the system is not “innocent unless and until proven guilty” but “guilty even after being proven innocent.”
None other than Judge Clifton Newman presided over my jury trial in Richland County, SC, on 22-26 February 2010 (yes, 13.5 years ago) and in the middle of it, he complimented me as “most pleasant and gracious” and “not frivolous at all” and “not in any way offensive.” These are all in the transcript of that trial.
But to prevent from defending myself without a lawyer and defeating other false criminal charges against me, they got edicts that I may not represent myself without a lawyer. Ironically, Alex Murdaugh (“AM”) still can do so if he wants to.
Another 3.5 years later, exactly on Solar Eclipse Day, I gently reproached Judge Clifton Newman, “You, out of all judges, should have stood up for me. I was in your court for 5 days.” His answer was, “You were doing a good job standing up for yourself; and the jury agreed with you.” That is in another transcript.
Why am I telling you this?
Because the same people who prosecuted AM were involved in prosecuting ME. And they used on me the same tactics they used on AM.
I call it “Oh! The sky is blue and the sun rises from the east; therefore, the defendant must be guilty.”
In my case, I was falsely accused of harassing my neighbor tenant and my landlady. That could have gotten me 36 years under some warped theories of enhancements. And I have no doubt that, God forbade, Judge Clifton Newman would have given me EVERY DAY of those 36 years along with a stern lecture had my jury gotten it wrong.
AND I KID YOU NOT. The Prosecution ACTUALLY said that part of my supposed “crime” is looking out of my own window when that neighbor was causing a commotion with a third neighbor under my window.
So, AM loves his wife and called her “Mags” as did her close friends and her sister. Therefore, AM must have lured his wife to Moselle to murder her.
I am a medical doctor with additional training in Pathology although I am NOT a board-certified FORENSIC pathologist.
Still, I know for sure from the autopsy reports that Paul and Maggie did NOT die before AM left Moselle for Almeida that night.
It also came out in the boat crash case that Parker’s agents had placed a secret video camera at the Moselle driveway; and SLED knows about it.
All I can do for AM, just as for others I know to be innocent, is shed light upon the exculpatory evidence others do not understand.
If YOU can help clarify my explanations, I would greatly appreciate it.
God bless.
Wow. I am so sorry you went through that. Too bad this is a public forum so we can’t speak openly – so many of the things you said about your own experience sort of explain (not sure that’s the right word) some of the issues that appeared off to me while watching his trial. I’m sorry if I misunderstood some of the things you said. I suppose that’s the trouble with electronic communication. You certainly seem like a strong person, and I wish you the best. God bless you too.
That was my comment above ??. Hit submit before entering information.
Whoops! Replied to the wrong comment. My apologies!
On FITSNews WIR today, another commenter mentioned “the hand of one is the hand of all” in criminal law.” This post is NOT against THAT COMMENTER but against that stupid and unexamined “principle.” I think it is relevant to solving Stephen Smith’s death AND I would appreciate YOUR or Dylan’s reply to it.
“The hand of one is the hand of all” is a VERY BAD idea in criminal law.
That is what happens when ALL they teach them in law school is NOT “how to THINK” but how to repeat by rote what some ancient British judge wrote.
“The hand of one is the hand of all” prevents the solving of crimes and reduces confidence in convictions.
Someone who was just the getaway driver, or who even drove someone to or from the scene of a crime WITHOUT even KNOWING that a crime had been committed there, should NOT be held as culpable as the actual shooter for example.
That “hand of one is the hand of all” is pure INTELLECTUAL LAZINESS by police and prosecutors; they just don’t want to spend the time and effort to apportion responsibility.
It often happens that the getaway driver gets life without parole or even the death penalty, while the actual shooter plea-bargains for the 30-year minimum or even some reduced manslaughter charge.
That happens because the real shooter knows there is so much evidence (gun residue, DNA, fingerprints, etc.) against him/her, while the accessory naively goes to trial thinking society is too decent to paint all with the same brush.
I remind you, if you want to be a uniter, not a factionalist: Democrats should not try to solve every problem by throwing money at it; and Republicans should not try to solve every problem by throwing prisons (or deportations) at it.
FITS, even though some pretend I subscribe to FITSNews, I would not give you a penny because you have no scruples against the framing the innocent, starting with trying to frame Nikki Haley for trying to rape you in the back of her Cadillac, then trying to frame Alex Murdaugh (“AM”) for “choking” a willing prostitute whom you call “sex-trafficked,” to trying to frame Buster for Stephen Smith’s death, to helping frame AM for his wife and younger son’s murder, to now trying to frame the self-made and hard working Judge Manning and defense attorney Todd Rutherford for doing the right thing in promoting prison safety.
Nonetheless, I give you what is more precious than money (examples of my courage and integrity for your children to learn from) and indirectly more money than you can get from one subscription (my brilliant and click-attracting comments).
And here is one more: the proportionality of Russell Laffitte’s sentence, and that of AM for any financial crimes of his has to start with the sentence of RICHARD J, BREIBART, who did much worse to his clients but got to serve under four years in Club Fed.
The main difference I see is that BREIBART used his loot FROM HIS CLIENTS to donate to politicians while AM kept the loot FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES to himself or shared it only with the insurance defense lawyers who rolled over and made the insurance companies pay unjustified millions for dublious claims.
If the Satterfield and Eric Bland are any indication, SOME of AM’s clients have no scruples against defrauding insurance companies so long as they share (or get all) the loot.
Respond to this if you dare.