|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
‘Murdaugh Murders’ Civil Case: Mark Tinsley Is Doing A Lot Of Winning
Will his streak continue once this high-profile wrongful death case goes to trial next month?
16 comments
NO, no, NO, Jen Wood!
Your account is inaccurate and leaves out THE MOST IMPORTANT DETAILS.
Tinsley’s pretense that Gregg Parker conspired to release the photo of Mallory Beach’s dead body to “weaken her family’s resolve” is as stupid as the pretense that Alex Murdaugh (“AM”) killed his wife and younger son to gain sympathy.
But I have since learned, to my amazement and terror, that stupidity becomes gospel if repeated often enough.
And YOU, Jen Wood, are one of leaders of repeating stupidity often enough (including that “family annihilator fits Alex to a T” which term found its way to Creighton Waters’ closing arguments) until it becomes gospel.
And here is the MOST IMPORTANT DETAIL: Sara Capelli was hired by Greg Parker to attack the Murdaughs, not the beaches.
And here are Mark Tinsley’s EXACT WORDS from the transcript of the 16 March 2022 hearing before Judge Price at pp 12, line 21 to 14, line 7:
So we served subpoenas on the PI, Sara Capelli, as well as Wes Donahue. They are broad. Admittedly, they are broad. And specifically what I have asked for, among other things, is all of the video — as I understand Sara Capelli was videoing Paul Murdaugh in excess of a year. She video — she was videoing Paul Murdaugh within three days of his murder, and I’m told that these videos have been turned over to SLED. So we’ve asked for all of the photographs and all of the surveillance.
In addition to her surveillance, they had also caused a camera to be placed at the driveway to Moselle, so there’s video there. So we’ve asked for those.
We’ve asked for the time and the billing records, because those records will indicate when these activities started, parts of what they did, and, significantly, one of the things that Miss Capelli did was, she bought alcohol for some underaged people in Columbia in order to get information about Paul Murdaugh. And we believe that Parker’s reimbursed her for those charges.
There’s a photograph. This happened in November of ’20. This is Miss Capelli at a bar and I’m — I’ve got copies I’m willing to hand up.
THE COURT: Did anyone confirm that there was a camera placed at the entrance of the Moselle?
MR. TINSLEY: The AG’s office has confirmed that SLED has received some video that was taken by Miss Capelli.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. TINSLEY: Whether it was that camera or it was shot by a hand-held camera, I do not know.
THE COURT: All right.
Now, that was NOT in the boat crash case itself but in the so-called-conspiracy/outrage case arising from the boat crash case. AM’s lawyers, Harpootlian and Griffith did NOT attend that hearing because NO MURDAUGH is named in that so-called-conspiracy/outrage case.
The bottom line is that Paul Murdaugh was being followed as late as 3 days before his murder AND a secret camera had been placed at the entrance of Moselle.
Why did that NOT surface in the AM’s double-murder trial? BECAUSE TINSLEY GOT HOLD OF IT FIRST and it was in no one’s interest, including Parker’s, to exonerate AM of the double murders OR to exonerate Buster of Stephen Smith’s death.
What a cruel world this is!
Wow, some off the chain advocacy this morning!
Sub Zero – what is your premise here?
Is “Elick” guilty?
Did Parker’s sell alcohol to minors?
Other than trying to get some money for the Beachs (and of course, himself), is Tinsley somehow complicit in some kind of conspiracy against the “Murdawks” here?
Questions answered in order posed, not order of importance:
1. My premise here is that I just learned that there WAS a secret camera at the driveway to Moselle. After posting, I also came across a FILED email from Tinsley indicating that even Parker’s did not have what Sara Capelli had but that Tinsley wantes, and apparently got, ALL of it.
That camera is the equivalent of DNA. It could ABSOLUTELY exonerate Alex Murdaugh (“AM”) of the murders of Paul and Maggie OR it could increase confidence in this convictions.
In either case, it is ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE for that camera to not have been revealed before and at the trial.
2. AM, by his own admissions in several places, is clearly guilty of insurance fraud and likely tax fraud. AM is NOT guilty of murdering Paul or Maggie as I previously explained in many posts and am tired of repeating.
3. On the day in question, Parker’s did NOT KNOWINGLY sell alcohol to a person under 21. The crime is to KNOWINGLY sell alcohol to a person under 21. By analogy, the U.S. Supreme Court has spent SEVERAL lengthy published opinions explaining that, under the Armed Career Criminals Act’s (“ACCA”) residual clause, the accused has to HAVE KNOWN that (s)he was a person not allowed to possess firearms. I am NOT a lawyer; but it is called a “scienter” or a “mens rea” requirement.
4. Tinsley is not just trying to get “some money,” he was BY HIS OWN ADMISSION trying to get Moselle itself AND $30M. He cares NOTHING about boat or traffic safety, only about money and trophy hunting. Look at his FaceBook page.
Absolutely, Tinsley (and Eric Bland “EB”) were in a conspiracy against the Murdaughs “here” and everywhere.
For one, the Murdaughs and the Goodings are the Hatfields and the McCoys of South Carolina’s low country.
For another, they happily promoted (or did not refute) the filthy lies that Paul and Buster had beaten Stephen Smith to death with a baseball bat.
Now there is evidence that Parker’s paid people to promote those filthy lies. If anyone should be suing Parker’s, it should be the Murdaughs, not the Beaches.
I hope you respect the time I took to answer your questions and respond with the same civility.
You may have just learned about the camera, but I’ve known about it for more than a year. It’s presence was fairly common knowledge. The camera was removed long before Alex Murdaugh murdered his wife and son – it has no bearing on the murder case.
The use of the word “knowingly” doesn’t indemnify Parker’s. In fact, the SC Courts normally interpret the word as “knew or should have known”. Paul was 4 inches shorter, 50 pounds lighter and 4 years younger that Buster – Buster has flaming red hair, Paul’s is a much darker shade – they don’t and didn’t look anything alike. I’ve heard that evidence will be introduced that he was intoxicated when he bought the alcohol further damming Parker’s.
I’m no fan of Tinsley or Bland (far less a fan of Bland) but they’re not the bad guys here. While I think both are far less philanthropical than they’re trying to appear, they’re representing their clients. Gooding and Gooding et al have sat across the court room from PiMPED et al many times, but I seriously doubt a “Hatfield and McCoyesque” feud that would create the conspiracy you seem to believe in.
Not a lawyer, (have way too many for friends), just fascinated by the “slow moving dumpster fire and feces fest” that “Elick” created.
Murdaughs and Goodings, not only competed against each other in elections for solicitor, but brought criminal charges against each other.
The camera was NOT removed a year before someone(s) shot Paul and Maggie meaning to pin it on Alex Murdaugh (“AM”). It was placed there by Sara Capelli who was hired a year before the murders and continued to follow Paul and videotape him as late as 3 days before his death, and probably later.
I do not know how you knew about the camera unless SLED told you in private. If so, please let me know how I can SLED to do the same for me.
I have seen at least FIVE of the team who prosecuted AM falsely and mercilessly trying to frame someone they 100% knew to be innocent ahead of time; then, they continued to punish and torment her for proving her innocence.
I saw their same tactics in AM’s trial: “Oh! The sky is blue and the sun rises from the east. Then the defendant must be guilty. You, the jury, would be stupid and the laughing stock of the town if you do not understand that. And you, the judge, must be corrupt if you do not give the Prosecution free reign.”
By attacking me for my righteous indignation against that, you are attacking innocence and decency themselves.
Capelli was still following Paul and taking still and video images as late as three days before “Elick” murdered him but the “gate cameras” were removed much earlier after the scheming of Parker’s attorneys and private eyes was uncovered.
No! It just got uncovered last month AFTER Parker’s defense team moved to disqualify Tinsley.
Also, in other posts, I explained the NORMAL weight and height changes during the period of validity of a driver’s license.
What about people dying their hair, or losing hair, or the hair graying? Can these people not use their drivers’ licenses for any purpose unless their appearance remains frozen in time, which is biologically impossible?
So you’re saying people (in this case a twenty two year old) shrink? Dude (dudette?) You’re working way to hard to defend the defenseless.
No! The people up to mid-twenties may GROW in height and weight NORMALLY.
Therefore, drivers’ license checkers are not, and should not be, required to check weight and height.
Think of what a nightmare that would be if you add this requirement just to put money in the greedy Mark Tinsley’s bottomless pockets.
You would not be able to cash a check at the drive-thru of a bank, or even inside a bank, unless you step out of your car and out of your shoes to get measured and take off any heavy clothes in winter to get weighed.
And even at that, you are not who you are if your hair has grayed or thinned from the time your driver’s license photo was taken.
All that because Mark Tinsley wants to rule ourt brains!
You’re the one working too hard to make Mark Tinsley seem reasonable and powerful.
Someone should fold Mark Tinsley’s circus of paper tigers.
Miss Capelli broke the law; therefore, any “evidence” from any particular moment of breaking the law is inadmissable. Putting up a camera on a public road is not breaking the law. Providing alcohol to minors is breaking the law, and Parker is liable for those actions while P.I. Capelli was under their employment. And BTW, AleX Murdaugh was a family annihilator.
You are either missing the REAL points or playing dumb like the rest of them.
The first point is that Tinsley wants to collect FROM THE MURDAUGHS because Gegg Parker hired private investigators to FALSELY implicate Buster in Stephen Smith’s death. How unfair is that?
The second point is that, wherever that camera was (and it could have been on private, not public property), it is ABSOLUTELY relevant to Alex Murdaugh’s (“AM”) double murder trial.
Why do we not learn about it till now?
Tinsley says the AG told HIM that it was given to SLED. But we heard NOTHING from the AG about that in AM’s double murder trial.
What we heard, immediately after the trial is, “Buster is next! Your son is next Alex! Justice for Stephen Smith!”
What this means to me is that AM was convicted because the community from which the jury was selected was already poisoned against the Murdaugh.
We, the public, deserve more transparency than that.
If you are happy with pop psychology and pseudo-science, PLEASE do not get in the way of the rest of us who KNOW that time of death is NOT correctly determined by hand in the armpit of the deceased.
Parker sold alcohol to a minor, Paul Murdaugh, which resulted in a death. PARKER is LIABLE, and so is Murdaugh. END. OF. STORY.
No, just the beginning of the story!
Dear SubZero
You lost all credibility when you said:
Also, in other posts, I explained the NORMAL weight and height changes during the period of validity of a driver’s license.
What about people dying their hair, or losing hair, or the hair graying? Can these people not use their drivers’ licenses for any purpose unless their appearance remains frozen in time, which is …..
Just to not leave these hit-and-run attacks on my person unanswered, and assuming you do not understant “NORMAL” weight and height changes:
1. In post-menopausal women, NORMAL bone and muscle loss occurs, and with it height is reduced. With height reduction comes NORMAL weight reductions.
Look at photos of the late Queen Elizabeth II and of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just for two examples.
Some bone and muscle loss occurs in middle-aged men, too, but at a slower rate than in menopausal females.
2. Growth in height and weight continues in late teens with known differences in the age range of the “second growth spurt” between males and females.
What about that do you find not credible? Or are you just attacking me just because you can?
FOLLOW UP if you dare.
FITS, another comment on you WIR today 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.” AND I would appreciate your 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.