Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - JURY SELECTION :Legal Heir Alex Murdaugh, Suspect in Wife and Son's Murders

Episode Date: January 24, 2023

Before the start of jury selection in the murder trial of former Lowcountry attorney Alex Murdaugh, his defense team had already filed a motion seeking to block testimony on potential blood evidence. Jury selection continues in Alex Murdaugh's murder trial. He's accused of shooting his wife, Maggie, and youngest son, Paul. More than 900 potential jurors were called and then divided up into panels. 32 jurors qualified from the first group. After the other groups are polled, the actual jurors and alternates would be selected from the parred-down pool.  Blood spatter evidence is also being discussed by the lawyers and the judge. Defense attorneys have filed a motion to block testimony on potential blood evidence. Murdaugh was wearing a white t-shirt when he arrived at the property.  Murdaugh’s defense team argues that their expert, after reviewing a report and analysis from a prosecution witness, said he could not form an opinion on whether the blood stains on Murdaugh’s shirt were consistent with back spatter from a gunshot. Joining Nancy Grace today:  Mark Tate- Trial Lawyer- The Tate Law Group  Dr. Bethany Marshall - Psychoanalyst (Beverly Hills, CA); Netflix show: 'Bling Empire' (Beverly Hills); @DrBethanyLive   Chris Byers - Former Police Chief Johns Creek Georgia, 25 years as Police Officer, Now a Private Investigator and Polygraph Examiner with Lancaster Information services in Atlanta Lee Reiber- Mobile Device Forensic Expert, COO, Oxygen Forensics, Inc.; Author: "Mobile Forensic Investigations;" Podcast: "Forensic Happy Hour"  Dr. Michelle DuPre - Former Forensic Pathologist; Medical Examiner and Detective: Lexington County Sheriff's Department; Author: "Homicide Investigation Field Guide" & "Investigating Child Abuse Field Guide", Forensic Consultant Anne Emerson - Senior Investigative Reporter, WCIV ABC News 4 (Charleston, SC); Host of Award-Winning Podcast: "Unsolved South Carolina: The Murdaugh Murders, Money and Mystery;" Twitter: @AnneTEmerson  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Finally, will there be justice in the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdoch? Months and months have passed seemingly with no end in sight. But as we go to air, a jury is being impaneled. It's a long and arduous process. 900 jurors have been called to the courthouse. Typically, in a case like this, you can make do with 60, 80, 100 jurors to get a jury of 12, but not so here.

The process happening as we speak. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us here at Fox Nation and Sirius XM 111. Amidst all of the hoopla surrounding the Colleton County Courthouse right now, one headline says the star attraction is the elephant ear or the elephant ears that are being sold outside. You know, those big pieces of dough covered with sugar and cinnamon you get at a fair, the state fair. Food trucks arriving, media there. Some people will call it a circus, but inside that courtroom, it's a whole different thing. Where did the whole thing start? Right here. I think the police just answered immediately. My wife and Tom just got badly.

Okay you said 4147 Moselle Road in Arlington? You said 4147 Moselle Road in Arlington? Yes sir. 4147 Moselle Road in Arlington? Yes, sir. 4147 Moselle Road. Stay on the line with me, okay? Yes, sir. Stay on the line with me, okay? Call an accounting communication.

Collison, I have an Alex Murdoch on the line. Call us from 4147 Moselle Road. He's advising that his wife and child was shot. Okay. And, sir, give me the address again. It's 4147 Moselle Road. I've been up to it now. It's bad.

Okay. Okay, and are they breathing? No, ma'am. Okay, and you said it's your wife and your son? My wife and my son. Are they in a vehicle? No, ma'am. They're on the ground out at my kennel.

If he is lying, and I believe he is, he is making me sick and may he rot in hell. Now, of course, everyone in our country, at least, is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Not a fantastical possibility, but beyond a reasonable doubt.

But I believe he's lying in that 911 call, Meryl Streep, move over. Because Alex Murdoch got it all over you in that 911 call. If what I believe happened really did happen, we've got an all-star lineup to make sense of what we know right now, what is happening in that courtroom, even as we speak. And we are coming to you live from the courthouse. Ann Emerson is with us, Senior Investigative Reporter, WCIV ABC. She is the host of an award-winning podcast, Unsolved South Carolina, The Murdoch Murders, Money and Mystery. Ann Emerson there at the courthouse and warning, you can hear the juror numbers being called out.

The jurors are addressed only by their numbers. Ann Emerson, thank you for being with us. Tell me what's happening right now. We are in day two of jury selection. We are really gaining speed right now. And like you said, you can literally hear behind me. I'm in the media overflow room. They put us at the wildlife center for all the media, just to give you an idea of the spaces that we're in. So it is like a zoo a little bit as we get started with this trial. We're on day two. So we have four panels of jury, possible jurors to go through. Those panels are about, we've estimated about 80 to 90 jurors. We've already flown through three of these panels which means we're going to our last panel as we are talking right now and that's what we're

listening to is the jurors getting called by their numbers and they're starting to whittle it down based on a very important questionnaire uh that they sent out to the jurors before this all started and so they were prepared to answer theseors before this all started and so they were prepared to answer these questions and two of the big questions they're asking besides you know do you know the murdoch um is how have you gotten your your information is it through the podcast that we've been putting out is it through local news national news nancy grace know, we are seriously trying to figure out if they can pull a jury that's going to be fair and unbiased as best as they can based on what they know. Yesterday, there was a very dramatic moment when they only had about 50 jurors left in the first panel. And they said, so anybody stand up if you've heard about this case and the entire jury panel

stood up. Wow well you're exactly right Ann Emerson. Take a listen to our friend Riley Miller WJCL. As jury selection began Judge Clifton Newman asked the first group of potential jurors if they had heard about this case if they had read about this case, if they had read about this case, every single one stood up. Jury selection, of course, is the first order of business. Judge Newman's questions started simple. What do you do for a living? Are you married or single? And what does your spouse do? Then the questions got more complicated. From Facebook groups to local news to national news and documentaries, all potential jurors, not surprisingly, shared how they knew about this double murder case. Well, I mean, it's not just there in South Carolina. People all across the world know

about this case and they should. Here's Blaine Alexander, NBC. The 911 call came late Monday night. Officials say prominent South Carolina attorney Alex Murdoch came home last week and called police after discovering his wife and son murdered. 52-year-old Maggie Murdoch and 22-year-old Paul Murdoch both shot multiple times outside their home, according to investigators. It happened in Island Town, South Carolina, about 90 minutes outside of Charleston. Now, more than a week later, seemingly little progress. No arrests, no named suspect, and from police, no motive.

In addition to Ann Emerson from WCIV joining us right there at the courthouse, and you can hear the jars being called by number, high-profile lawyer joining us, trial lawyer Mark Tate out of the Tate Law Group. He is joining from Savannah, not too, too far away from this courthouse. Mark Tate, this is not California where jury selection can take six weeks. I mean, typically in a murder case, and I don't mean a regular murder case, I mean any murder case in the southeast, a jury can be struck two days max. Oh, absolutely. You know, the prosecutors have in the typical murder case, you know, first of all, it's a guilty plea.

But second of all, if it goes to trial, the prosecutors have their witnesses in their back pocket. And the police officers, investigators, they see every single day. And there's not a whole lot of difficult evidence. And there's certainly not this kind of publicity. And like it or not, that whole family was in the news long before the murders and suicide attempts commenced, and everyone knew them. And everyone has, everybody up there in Hilton Head Island, Colleton County, all those areas up there, they know who the guy is, and they're interested in the story.

There are a lot of people, believe it or not, who are scared still of the Murdoch family. And it's going to be hard, I think, to find someone who honestly can say that they haven't formed opinions about the case. And, you know, that's really the test, Nancy. The test is not whether they've heard something about it. The test is whether they can put aside anything that they've heard and be an impartial jury juror and not have formed any opinions prior to hearing all the evidence. I think it's going to be tough. Well, you're right, Mark Tay. The issue is not have far away from the U.S. not to have at least heard something, whether it's stuck or not, about this case.

So it's not have you heard about it. It's can you put aside anything you've heard and render a true verdict based on the facts and evidence that you hear in the courtroom? And I'm willing to bet practically everybody I know would be able to promise they would base their verdict on what they hear in the courtroom. Because what's been in the news so far is not evidence. It's what journalists think. It's what they've deduced. It's what has been filtered out to them. Guys, I want you to take a listen to our cut one, two, four from WJCL 22, because notoriety or knowing the Murdoch family is a double edged sword right before trial started.

And that includes jury selection. A portrait of a Murdoch, a male Murdoch, like a great, great grandpa had to be taken down out of the courtroom. And it brings back memories for me. And I'm sure it does for you too, Mark Tate. In most courtrooms, they're surrounded by a bunch of pictures, typically old white guys, never seen a woman up there, a bunch of old white guys. And they're all judges.

They're all judges that have served way, way, way back. And I've been in the courtroom so much, I would finally, like waiting on a jury to come back, would look at all of these. And they're all former judges. One of those had to be taken down before the jurors came in because it was a Murdoch relative. Hey, guys, take a listen to Riley Miller. The Murdoch name was once associated with power and influence. But attorney Justin Bamberg, who's representing the family of Hakeem Pinkney, one of Alec's alleged financial victims, doesn't think the name will help Alec now. People are kind of over that. And they're like, you know, you had power that you abused at the expense of some people who were in some of the darkest days

of their life so now we don't care that your last name is murdoch some of the potential witnesses who could be called to testify in this case include ellick's brothers randy and john marvin murdoch as well as his only surviving son, Buster. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. You know, back to you, Mark Tate. What did you mean that some people may actually still be afraid of the Murdoch family? Well, you know, I'm here 18, 20 miles from them. I've been practicing in Savannah and trying cases here in Savannah and everywhere else really for 30 plus years. I've had cases in which I represented plaintiffs up in that neck of the woods. And that family had significant power up there. And, you know, at one point, you know,

the first Mr. Murdoch, who was the elected solicitor there in Collin County, you know, wonderful guy, fantastic reputation, sterling character. But as you know, the generations move forward and power seems to be passed down generation to generation as if some sort of royal inheritance uh-uh uh-uh uh-uh mark take don't say royal inheritance to an american oh yes because we don't like that that's why we had that let's see what that little thing was that little skirmish the revolutionary war we don't like that at all i don't think anybody, does anybody here in the studio like it when power or money or fame or whatever is handed down while the rest, everybody else is scrapping to make a living? And yet, yet not unless it's you. Thank you, Jackie, for the insight. But guys, we're in the middle of jury selection and Ann Emerson is with us from WCIV.

Dr. Michelle Dupree, Lee Reber, Chris Byers, Dr. Bethany Marshall, all with us to make sense of what's happening right now. And in the midst of all of this, there's a new reveal. Take a listen to our cut 126 from Will Reeve. Now, new details about what's ahead in the trial. Prosecutors adding Google and Snapchat representatives to their witness lists. Murdoch's son Paul reportedly sent a Snapchat video to his friends just hours before his death. Meanwhile, the defense filing a motion to try to block blood spatter evidence from the trial, claiming authorities damaged Murdoch's t-shirt during the forensic testing process. The debate here is whether or not they can actually rely on the blood spatter that was found on his t-shirt to

indicate anything because there is some question as to whether or not it was on the shirt due to life-saving measures that he took when he encountered the bodies or whether it was in fact from splatter from a gunshot wound. Okay let me me just say, and this is a quickie to you, Dr. Michelle Dupree, I want you to think about this and percolate. No, no, no, and no. Okay? Because anybody that knows about blood spatter, you will know a huge difference between a blood spatter marking

and a blood transfer. For instance, when the sheriff's took the t-shirt, if it touched something else, you can easily tell that's a blood transfer, not a blood spatter. Just think about if you take V8 and you throw it on the wall, that's going to look more like blood spatter not for instance when you take a band-aid off of a cut that looks like a transfer hold that thought i'm coming right back to you but i'm completely captivated intrigued by the whole google and not just google but snapchat development in the trial what What does it mean? Take a look.

Star cut 133 and McGill. The state has filed a new motion and the Murdoch trial of Alec Murdoch to several friends at 7.56 that night, the night of the murders, that is critical to the state's case. Critical to the state's case. And they can time it. 7.56. And I've got to tell you, I know more about Snapchatting than I ever wanted to know because the twins are constantly snapping people. And for those of you here in the studio that don't know, it's not texting a message. It is a picture.

You send them a picture and then they have to send you a picture. It's just there's a Snapchat etiquette. We were talking about it just today on the way to school. But away from that and onto this. Ann Emerson with me, WCIV. Tell me everything. What we're hearing is this Snapchat video, as we were hearing in the report, came very close to when this timeline is occurring. And it's incredibly important to note that this timeline

has shifted to some degree. Previously, we were hearing from sled that the that these double murders occur between 9 and 9 30 p.m we're now getting a broader timeline from prosecutors okay ann amerson and amerson and amerson two out of three people just said what what what did she say slow down you know you're speaking to us mere mortals and amerson and we're trying to keep up with you okay what did you say? And listen, if you hear the judge say anything, I want to know what he's saying. I want to hear everything. So please feel free to change the course of our discussion.

But back to the Snapchat. I know, and I do. I've got one ear on the judge to see if he has to stop for any reason. Because we have certainly seen a lot of stoppages along the way in this already. What we know is that Paul had been snapping with a friend or several friends and sending the Snapchat out. And as you said, kids are all over this. So it was a very important timeline that we need to pay attention to right now. We're being told as of just the last few months, the state has moved the timeline of when these murders occurred between 8.30 and 10 o'clock. So 7.56 is very close to this timeline.

Now, as far as what's on this video, that's what obviously everybody wants to know. We do know about a previous video, and this is where we're trying to make connections and see if there are connections. Is this the same video that they were talking about where Paul was having this quote-unquote just very light conversation with Maggie and Alec, his parents, talking about a dog in the kennels.

Is this the same video? So these are the kind of questions we still want answers to because they didn't outline it in the filing. If Snapchat, you know, I've talked to some tech experts on this. Snapchat and Google, because they're also looking at Google evidence on location devices that were turned off, Google and Snapchat are not witnesses that like to go up on the stand. I'll just say that's what we're told is the reps are not going to be doing this willingly. Oh, blah, blah, blah, blah.

You know what? Who do you know typically that wants to get crowbarred out of their home or office and go sit at the courthouse for three or four days to testify and then get a booty grilling by the other side like you're up there lying. It's a Google or a Snapchat exec that don't have a dog in the fight, that don't have skin in the game, and they're going to get roasted on cross-exam. Of course they don't want to come. That's why we have things

called subpoenas. If you don't come, you're going to land in jail. So I think you're absolutely right, Ann Emerson. Hey, one thing you mentioned, location devices turned off. What do you mean by that? Well, that's what we want to know. You know, we're seeing this filing come across that they want to Google a rep to come and testify about why the location devices at the scene of the crime were turned off. Oh, I'm so happy. I'm so happy. Sounds like somebody's pulling a Koberger. Remember how he cut his phone off, allegedly cut his phone off or put it on airplane mode? We saw that first recently in the Suzanne Morphew case. But, wow, that's telling me a lot right there. Because you have to go deep dive into your device to turn off location or put it on airplane mode.

What, Ann? And I'm coming right to you, Lee Reber. What, Ann Emerson? There was one other thing that we noticed in this filing, and it came right at the end of the filing, and it said that one of the experts was actually coming out of the defense because defense actually shared pretty gruesome crime scene photos of when the actual, you know, what they saw right after and the aftermath of that. So we've actually gotten to see our first photos from the crime scene. Wait a minute.

They showed that during foraudier jury selection? No, no, no. In one of the filings, in the pretrial motion filings, the defense we got. We got those crime scene photos. So we were looking at that. Now, what I read, and I just have to share it because I don't know what this means exactly,

but it looks like Paul's phone was taken out of his pocket. And according to the court filings, when that phone, when his cell phone was taken out of his pocket. And according to the court filings, when that phone, when his cell phone was taken out of his back pocket, it was put on top of his pocket. In the filing, it says that was done by someone other than Paul. And I thought that was interesting.

That is very interesting because he's lying there dead and somebody stages the scene. And that's the whole psychopathy right there as to who staged the scene in other words moved any evidence post-mortem but it also said that there was blood on the inside of his back pocket oh man that means whoever picked the phone up had blood on their hands when they reached into his back pocket to pick up the phone and put it on his pocket. Are you talking about his shirt pocket? Back pocket, his back pants pocket. I thought you said it was taken out of his back pocket.

And just placed on his back pocket. That's what I read. Placed on or in his back pocket? On. Okay, you know, this is reminding me, it reminds me Dr. Michelle Dupree, former forensic pathologist, medical examiner, author of Homicide Investigation Field Guide, joining us from South Carolina. This is her backyard. Dr. Dupree, I'm very curious about the blood on the pocket and possibly blood on Paul's cell phone. And it reminds me of the first time I realized how significant blood spatter and blood evidence is. I had a case where a woman was found naked, that's important, in bed under the covers and she had quote committed suicide. That's what her husband said. And she had shot herself in the head, lying in bed, naked. She committed suicide.

Now, you and I know all of that screams, no, that's not what happened, statistically. But then an old trooper who had been on the Georgia State Patrol, actually, for many, many years. We were looking at the sheets at the crime lab, and we realized that there was blood spatter under her pillow, which means she was shot, and then someone placed her head on the pillow over the blood spatter. And it was like an epiphany for me to realize how significant blood spatter evidence is and what it can prove. Jump in, Dr. Dupree. Exactly. And the blood spatter can actually tell us so many things, as you know, Nancy.

And that's why I think this shirt is very important, because when we look at the shirt, there are two supposed stains on the upper shoulders of both arms. That's up. You won't find that when you're checking somebody's pulse or something like that. And it's spatter. It isn't smear. It isn't something that's going to be transferred.

The other thing that I found really interesting is that the timeline, I want to know how the coroner or sled or whomever determined the time of death. I mean, describe the scene for me. Was there pooling of blood? Was it dried? Was it semi-congel? Was there a film over it? What was the temperature of the body? Were they warm to touch? I mean, tell me these things so that I know how you figured out the time of death. Well, we know that Paul is sending a Snapchat at about 8 o'clock, 7.56, and the bodies were found around 10. So we've got 8 to 10 o'clock. That's two hours.

But you and I have been going round and round and round, Dr. Dupree, about the state of the blood when the bodies were found, congealed, dried, still wet, fresh. Was it getting tacky? All of those things matter as to determining time of death, which is extremely important. Two special guests joining us, Lee Reber, mobile device forensic expert, COO of Oxygen Forensics and author of Mobile Forensic Investigation.

And catch this, star of a podcast called Forensic Happy Hour. Okay, I never thought I'd see those three words put together, but they are. Lee Reber, I know you're holding back. Hit me, hit me hard. With everything you can tell me about Snapchat, turning off location devices, and why Google and Snapchat don't want to show up to court. Do you blame them? Yeah, so many good stuff. First on location, I think the important thing, as you see in so many cases right now, comes down to that mobile device, right?

And location. Communication is obviously everybody, you know, you're talking on your phone, but using those apps, whether it be Snapchat, any type of communication, any type of if you sign in as a Google or with your Google account, the location is there, right? You're transmitting your location and it's clear in all their data policies. However, what's interesting to me is obviously he makes a 911 call, but they had been together allegedly before. So showing all phones together by location is pretty important. Then showing what I understand, the wife's phone was found away from the scene. So if they were together at one time or two of them were together and one, maybe at the time that somebody was murdered, you might have the separation of devices. So actually, it's almost like a video.

If you think of the digital devices, they're together, they're separate. Now this phone is away from that. And you can use all of that by where they even the phone turned on or an app being utilized. I think the location information would be quite critical as long as they obtain this from either their cell phone carriers. With Snapchat, what's interesting about Snapchat is how they're talking. They're really excited about this. What's interesting to me is the retention policy that you have with Snapchat. We all think as soon as you send a Snap, it goes away. Well, it depends because if it's unopened, in quotes, the desired timeline, it keeps it for 31 days

if it has not been opened. So I think that's extremely important to think about on the Snapchat side of it. So did you say it's kept for 31 days if it is not opened? What if it is opened? Yeah, if it is opened, it depends upon the setting, right? If it's opened by the individuals, it goes away. However, if anyone within that group saves that, it gets saved onto the Snapchatchat server so it's available so you're saying and uh regular people talk you are saying that there's a chance that snap was saved yeah for sure yeah it's quite

possible it depends upon when they serve either preservation order on that uh and i don't know that that timeline uh but if it was saved by any of the people within the group, because I understand it was sent to someone, if it was saved, then yes, it would still remain on the server for Snapchat. Well, I can tell you most people,

and I'm speaking generally, don't save snaps unless it's something really commemorative or special to them or has certain meaning to them because, you know, it's kind of a throwaway. I'd be surprised if it was saved unless the subpoena had been delivered within that 31-day period where it's still being housed. To Dr. Bethany Marshall, joining us, psychoanalyst out of Beverly Hills at drbethanymarshall.com, star of Bling Empire on Netflix. Dr. Bethany, let me confirm this with Ann Emerson first.

Ann Emerson joining me at the courthouse. You can hear the jurors being called in the background from WCIV. From what I understand, there is a new, a bright and shiny new Alex Murdoch in front of the jurors because he's there to see every single thing and make eye contact and smile and turn on his apparent charm. I don't think he's charming, but apparently some people do. I understand a very slimmed down Alex Murdoch has actually smirked in court during jury selection and he's turning on a smile I've never seen before. He's dressed up in a suit. He looks like he's going to handle a case, not be a defendant in a case. Is this true with the smiles

and the smirks? Nancy, couldn't be more true. I mean, as far as I'm watching him like a hawk, I've got right now, and just so everybody knows, I'm in a media workflow overflow room. So I'm not in the courtroom. I have the audio coming through the area where I'm working today. But when I'm in the courtroom, which is just across the street. So basically what's going on is he is completely changed from the last few months. He made a transformation and I saw it happening in the last motions hearing in December when they allowed him to have his shackles taken off. He shows up with hair.

We hadn't seen him with a head of hair in a while. Yeah, I thought he shaved his head. He sure did. He sure did. He shows up with a head of hair. Is that real? No, that's got to be real, because I don't think they make a weave that looks like that.

So it has gotten a lot whiter. I have noticed that over the last year or two. Somebody's had a touch-up. I know, exactly. So he is unshackled. He's got on his blazer. He's very relaxed. I saw it in December even when he kind of had his arm over one one of the sort of pews like talking to someone

behind him and had a big smile on his face and he looked like part of the defense team and that is something that I can't even underestimate how important that is to show that level of confidence that he is portraying right now with his defense team. There's no nervousness there. There's a real sense of he's taking notes during the jurors. He's looking at them. Even by the end of the day, he didn't do it at the beginning, but by the end of the day on the third panel, he stands up when they say, can the defendant please stand up? He stands up and says, good afternoon. Okay. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.

Okay, I need a shrink and I need one very quickly. 911, Dr. Bethany, 911, weigh in. Oh, everybody's heard my long, boring explanation so many times. I've never heard you ever. I won't say long, but I've never heard you give a boring explanation. Go ahead. Okay, the brief is that sociopaths have very low levels of anxiety. They never feel they're going to get caught. Because of that, they don't have cause and effect thinking and they are messy. And Nancy, that's what all these crimes are. They are messy.

This guy has so many charges against him, even though we're talking about this first charge right now. The big picture, Nancy, I think about intergenerational wealth and power and how almost every family that has power over the people around them has one crazy, messy, sociopathic family member. I mean, we were talking about the royal family member, Prince Andrew. You know, he like is hanging out with jeffrey with with epstein and then they try to clean him up afterwards make him look good but in that bbc interview he like really reveals his associations with epstein you can't clean up crazy nancy so seeing the senior murdoch in in the courtroom it's like the family's craziest, messiest, sociopathic, drug-addicted, homicidal, larcenous family member on display for the jurors and everyone

to see. And do you think they're going to be caring about Snapchat when they have this cray-cray guy in front of them? I really don't think so. This is going to be a study in sociopathy and everybody's going to learn that these guys are grandiose. They think they're in charge. They think that they control the system. And just a brief comment on all the cell phones and the apps that were open that night. To me, this is like one big family therapy session when I was thinking about this. See where

the family members sit. See where they go. Did the families, did they have dinner together that night? And did he start swirling around in the dog kennel and in the kitchen and wherever he, you know, stored his guns? We're going to know a lot from where he ambled around that house during that night. And I'm sure it was not in intimate settings with his family. Wow that's one of the first times I've ever heard you not work in sadomasochism. I was just waiting for it. It didn't happen. And masturbating. Yeah that too. But I don't think that Alex Murdoch is in any sense crazy in the legal sense. In other words, didn't know right from wrong at the time of the incident because there was too much cover-up.

Chris Byer is joining me. Former Police Chief Johns Creek on the force. 25 years now. Private investigator and polygrapher at Lancaster Information, LancasterServices.com. Chris Byer, I think it's very significant what people do and what they don't do. And I think it's significant if it's true that Alex Murdoch turned off location services on his device. Oh, yeah, that's hugely telling.

We know our devices. We have them all the time. We're connected to them. And as an investigator, it's been one of the greatest tools in solving cases the last several years up to a decade. And yeah, very curious that he found a reason to turn that off, especially when he was at his house. So yeah, that's very telling to me as an investigator, for sure. Chris Byers, what do you make of his smiling and alternately smirking demeanor in the courtroom? I think the one that spoke before nailed it. I think he's

just got an aura of always getting away with things from a family of privilege. And I think he's just not feeling the pressure of it, knowing that, you know, history has always been on his side as far as his family and getting all some different things that they were accused of. And I think he's just got that air of arrogance. Well, he's definitely had a makeover. And I'll tell you a classic makeover are the Menendez brothers. They look like two college freshmen when they went in on trial for the murders of their mother and father. You know, I'm thinking about what's happening in the courtroom right now. I want you to take a

listen to our cut 128, our friends at GMA. Murdoch is facing more than 100 finance-related charges, accused of stealing more than eight and a half million dollars from more than a dozen victims, friends, family, and clients of his family's law firm. This was a longstanding prominent family in the area, and that's going to have a lot of impact on our jurors. This is going to be a very long process to get to jurors that are not biased by this family's longstanding presence in this community. The presiding judge in this case issued an order last month saying any identifying information about the jurors who serve in this trial cannot be disclosed. The trial is expected to last about three weeks. Prosecutors are seeking life in prison. To Mark Tate, high profile lawyer joining us from the Tate Law Group in Savannah, just in

the shadow of this courthouse. Mark Tate, do you believe these jurors will be or should be sequestered, put in a hotel? Well, I mean, you know, Nancy, you've tried tons of criminal cases. You know how much jurors hate to be sequestered. Do you blame them? I hate to even travel away from my twins. I do it. But yeah, I mean, who wants an angry juror in the box? Yeah. So and the defense feels the same way. They're going to punish somebody, and you want to make things as easy as possible. And in all honesty, I have found when I've tried high-profile civil cases, jurors listen to judges, and the judges admonish them every single day and inquire every single morning. Don't pay attention to the press.

Don't talk about it. And I tend to think they take that seriously. If they're not going to take it seriously, they're going to sneak information when they're sequestered. If they're going to take it seriously, they're going to take it seriously at home. You know, I've never been on a jury. I've always been stricken, believe it or not. But I do know that people, I've seen near domestic violence situations of husbands and wives trying to get them to each other to talk about what happened in a jury or what's going on in a trial.

And so I tend to think that they're, I tend to think that they believe and trust and then try to adhere to what the judge tells them. I think it's a tough call for either side to insist on sequestration and if i were the one sitting there defending uh murdoch first of all i would have emptied out every single bank account he has for a paid in advance fee before I set foot to defend him. Man, you're not kidding. Rule number one in criminal defense, cash up front. That's right, because you know if you walk him, and he might, you're not getting paid a dime by that redhead fool. No, not a penny. Go ahead, Ann Emerson.

Oh, I just wanted to let you know, right now they're going through finding out exactly how all the jurors know about what's going on in the Alec Murdoch case. They're finding out what? They're finding out. They're asking each juror, how do you know about this case? What are you listening to? And we're hearing over and over again, it's a lot of word of mouth in this little community. You can't underestimate a little community with a good grapevine.

And Colleton County is all about it. Well, I mean, the thing is, in any high-profile cases, people have heard about it, heard about it ahead of time, whether it's on TV, in the newspaper, online. So the issue is, can they be honest jurors and decide, come up with a decision based on what they hear in court? Ann Emerson got a question for you. He's facing over 100 other finance-related charges. But what charges will this jury hear about?

Oh, boy, that is right now what they've got to decide. Now, from what I've been told, what they want to know is whether or not these financial crimes, all 99 of them, are going to show up as the motive for why this double murder happened. But is he being tried for those in front of the jury? Absolutely not, Nancy. You know that. Right. They were severed. They were severed. Correct, Ann Emerson? They are absolutely severed. They are severed from that. But this is the question can they be brought in because he hasn't been convicted of these crimes yet so because they

haven't been convicted the judge has to rule on allowing these crimes to be brought in as the motive and the motive is very clearly from the state to do they that he had a confrontation right before these double murders occurred. The state is saying that he used these double murders as a distraction and a way to gain sympathy from the public, from his family, from all of these people to get the heat off. That is what the motive is that the state is saying. That's a tough, tough call, a very tough call for this judge whether to allow in prior acts, financial fraud to the tune of millions to show motive. The jury is being selected right now.

We are live at the courthouse nancy grace signing off goodbye friend you're listening to an iheart podcast