Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - Unraveling Alex Murdaugh's Changing Story From Behind Bars

Episode Date: May 20, 2023

Join Nancy Grace and high-profile attorney Dale Carson as they delve into the ongoing legal saga of Alex Murdaugh. Explore Murdaugh's claims of innocence in the double murders of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, and question whether it's a strategic move to strengthen his appeal. Discover the latest developments, including Murdaugh's retraction of his account regarding the tragic death of housekeeper Gloria Satterfield, leading to an insurance company's lawsuit for $4.3 million. Gain insight into Murdaugh's motivations and Dale's expert analysis in this gripping discussion.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Does this man never stop lying? Alex Murdoch, of course, has changed his story again. This time about the death of Gloria Satterfield. As you know, Alex Murdoch, the heir to a legal dynasty in South Carolina, had millions of dollars at his fingertips. A wife, a family, two sons, multiple homes.

But that wasn't enough, was it? He had to steal from all of his clients to the tune of millions of dollars as dead bodies pile up around him. Murdoch convicted in the double murders of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul. But it ain't over yet. There is the housekeeper that helped the family raise the two sons, Paul and Buster, who dies at the foot of his steps. At first, he blamed none other than the dogs that live in the home.

But in a new development from inside a prison cell somewhere in South Carolina, the defendant, Alex Murdoch, has changed his story. His original story that Miss Satterfield died from injury sustained at a fall at his, I guess, hunting lodge, his country estate, as some people call it. For years, he held on to that story that it was the dog's fault that made her fall down the stairs to her death. But now he says he doesn't know how Satterfield fell, that he, quote, invented the story only because it would give him an avenue to file a wrongful death lawsuit for Satterfield's children against him. So he, as their lawyer, could get that money and steal it. So just imagine, even at the beginning, the very beginning when Satterfield falls to her death down the stairs at Moselle, the hunting lodge, he already comes up with a plan to pocket millions of dollars.

He now, behind bars, says the dog's role in the tragedy was an invention. Joining me, high-profile lawyer out of Jacksonville who's seen it all, not only in the courtroom, but as a former special agent with the FBI. Dale Carson is with us. Dale, thank you for being with us. What do you make of this newest invention? You know, what I love about this is the power that exudes out of this man before he falls. And so the standard way of creating a settlement, first you have an autopsy with an unattended death, which did not happen. And then in the standard manner of lawyering, you have depositions, you have requests

for admissions or interrogatories, which are questions put to the potential witnesses. But instead of doing any of that, the insurance company just settled. That's power. But it also allows that the witnesses that were there on the scene, which was not Alex Murdoch's, were never by attorneys for the insurance carrier. So it's rather clever when we think about it. And he's so good at lying. We saw that on the witness stand during the murder trial. He looked so casual and so powerful in his lies that it would be very difficult for someone in a settlement setting to really discern that he's not only not telling the truth, but he's creating a scenario. If he had just fallen down the steps, that's one thing. But the fact that the dogs caused it allowed him to get a $4.3 million settlement in cash that he diverted through

some friends and put in his own pocket. That's pretty clever. Well, I don't know that I would call it clever, maybe nefarious, evil, malevolent. That said, I also find it very probative, or it proves something to me, that Alex Murdoch only made his U-turn, his about-face, his new confession because of a lawsuit against him by, I believe it was Nautilus Insurance Company, that based on their claim that they have been defrauded because they paid out the settlement,

the balance of the settlement funds were paid by a different insurance company. But because Murdoch had no money, his attorneys suggested that Nautilus go after Satterfield's estate attorneys. Now, they claim, Bland Richter claims, there's $7.5 million that they collected from a lawsuit against Murdoch and his firm. So, I find it really interesting, Dale Carson, that it's only when he is threatened with even more money lawsuits that he finally coughs up the truth. But just think about the level of evil

this requires. This is a woman, Gloria Satterfield, Miss Satterfield, a mother, a longtime friend of the family, who has literally changed his son's diapers, taken care of them, cooked for them, taken care of the whole family, cleaned their home, run errands for them for decades. And in the South, this is the way it progresses. Because when parents are working, it's oftentimes the caregiver who raises all the children. Okay, see, I don't know how you were, where did you grow up? In Jacksonville, Florida. Okay, so I don't know what milieu you were in, but my mother and father both worked as a bookkeeper and for the railroad, and we did not have a housekeeper at all.

My grandmother helped raise me. We certainly could not afford a housekeeper to live in the house and clean up. Are you kidding? That's what we did as the children. But that said, this is a woman they knew as a friend, as part of the family. And so she falls to her death on Murdoch's steps. And he immediately comes up with a plan. So he could sue on behalf of Gloria Satterfield's family, basically sue himself and his family,

and then steal the money from the Satterfield children. That's quite a plan, right? Well, it absolutely is. And it requires a lot of forethought. It requires a lot of planning to do something like this. And it speaks to his evil nature. I mean, this man was thinking it through all along.

And you've got to know that this is partly genetic. This is what's been going on in South Carolina in the control of these folks for many generations. And that in itself is frightening. I don't know that it's genetic. I mean, are you trying to say that? What are you trying to say? What I'm saying is... They somehow relieved the responsibility because it's just simply in his genes? Not at all. What I'm saying is this is a tradition with that family. Yeah, that I agree. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. So now we've got him caught in yet another lie.

I don't know how it's going to benefit him at this juncture because he's already got life behind bars for the murders of his wife and son. But that said, we also have him sending out letters proclaiming his innocence. Now, we saw how that worked out on the stand. Nobody believed him because he was caught tripped up in so many lies. So I'm curious about his frame of mind. What is fueling his desire to make people believe he's innocent? What do you think, Dale?

He's a narcissist. He's got an ego that's bigger than all my house. And the result is it's not his fault. The circumstances caused him to act as he did. And that's beyond his control. And if you don't agree with him, well, you're just not very bright. And so that's the method. And, you know, when we talk about him stealing money from clients from settlements, you've also got to wonder how much money he stole from individuals who paid him for legal services

that didn't get properly handled or didn't get handled at all. So this man was rolling in money, and I've always had a question, where did this money go? You can't spend that much money on drugs. So it wouldn't surprise me at all that there's not a buried chest of gold somewhere. Maybe not physically, but certainly electronically, because you can put money in other countries and other places and hide it easily these years, particularly with Bitcoin. All you got to do is have the code. Well, what I'm asking you, aside from your seeming fascination with Bitcoin, despite today and prior to today, why does he feel he needs to prove to other people he did not murder Paul and Maggie? Because, number one, he did. Okay, let's just start with that premise.

He did murder them. So a jury has already found him guilty. What is driving him to try to convince people via letters that he didn't do it? Why is he doing that? If you look at his history, the family history was well thought of by the general public for many years.

And now he's trying to recapture that goodness that he clearly abandoned and lost during that trial. I mean, he's not a good person, but if he looks in the mirror, he wants to see a good person. But of course, in prison, they're not glass mirrors, they're stainless steel mirrors, right? So the reflections kind of warped anyway. Now, according to one friend that he's writing, the friend writes, quote, he's a broken man. Really? He's kicking back, playing checkers, getting love letters. People are dumping money into his commissary account. Strangers are giving him money. Women want to meet him. That does not sound like a, quote, broken man.

But that is the facade which he is portraying to the recipients of these letters. So why? He's not broken. He's not broken. And particularly why his wife, former wife, and his son are rotting in their graves. We're hearing that he writes that he's trying to make amends for the financial crimes, but insists he did not kill Maggie and Paul. So, is that where he draws the line? Yeah, I'll steal millions and millions of dollars from my clients. I'll lie to their face.

I'll steal their money. I'll use it on drugs. But I did not kill my wife and son. So is that where he draws the line? Well, of course, he's just in denial. I mean, it's fairly clear based on the evidence that you and I both watched, you know, with the edification of Magic Cheryl. I mean, we know that he killed his son and his wife. You know, it's really getting...

Go ahead. As tragic as that is, Nancy, as tragic as that is, this is a narcissist. And we know that people who have strong egos will never just roll over and say, okay, well, it's really my fault. They believe, and you know this, they believe that because they were allowed to fool somebody or trick somebody, or in this case, kill somebody, it's that person's fault for being lured into the situation, which he planned and orchestrated where he had all his wife and his son at home. She was on the verge of divorce. She comes from one place to meet with him, knowing and texting a friend that this seems kind of off

a little bit. And that was her failure to abide by her gut, which put her in the position of being manipulated by this guy who feels like, well, I could manipulate her. So what I did was OK. And we know as people who care about other people that that's just wrong. You know, I'm thinking of all the angles regarding these letters. They mean a lot if you examine them for any probative value. Number one, it shows that it's still all about him, just as it was, just as it is, just as it always will be. It's all about how he feels, what he wants to portray. It's not about Paul and Maggie.

He's not writing, so help me God in heaven, even though I'm in this jail cell, I'm going to find out who murdered them. It's not that. That's exactly right. Exactly right. It's showing who he is yet again. It's not about a never-ending quest to get justice or truth for his wife and his son. It's about clearing his own name, getting sympathizers, and getting support.

Well, apparently it works with all these hangers-on that seem to believe and care about him. I don't understand a culture where we even allow that. It's like edifying and glorifying. Bust back into the middle of the road. Let me just steer us back on to why he's writing the letters, not the nuts that are sending him money and love letters. He is insisting on his innocence regarding the two murders. Why? Because it's who he is.

It's not about Maggie and Paul. It's about him. And point two, it's about his appeal. If he were ever, ever to once admit, okay, I did it. I was high out of my gourd on appeals. I did it. There. If he did that, he would never win on a pill. I don't care how great,

you know, what legal loophole the defense came up with, the appellate court would find out he admitted it, and they would say, yes, there was an error at trial, but it was harmless, and the outcome would have been the same if this error had not occurred. You know that's what the appellate court would do, right? There's no question that that's what they would do. So he's got to play that close to the vest. But I would argue that there's no way in hell he was high on drugs when he did this the ability to kill two people with two separate weapons at a distance belies the fact that he was off on drugs he knew what he was i don't care if he was on drugs or not because voluntary use with drugs or alcohol it's not a defense under agreed

the law in most jurisdictions but particularly in south carolina where the case was tried. My point is, why is he doing this? What is motivating him to write scores of letters declaring his innocence in the murders? Because he wants to win that appeal. If he's crazy, he's crazy like a fox. I don't care if he's on drugs

or not. He did it. They're still dead, whether he's on drugs or not. Dale Carson. Those letters are going to people who owe him favors. And those people are connected to the jailers. I mean, the depth

and penetration of that family's power is uncalculable. He has a reason. You know, another thing, if he cared about Paul and Maggie, you know they still don't have gravestones. His father has a gravestone. They don't.

What about that? They're just going to leave them out there with dirt on top of them? Right. Right. Of course, his economic situation may prohibit that, but then busters out.

Well, if he wants to write letters, he could write letters to people that could help him get the gravestones up. What about that? That's an excellent point. Ding, ding. Yeah, that's an excellent point. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Okay, let's talk about his life behind bars. You do know that he has been moved to protective custody. Right, Dale?

Right, I do, yes. What do you think about that? And it's an 8x10 cell, and it's portrayed as being really horrible conditions, but that's not necessarily the case. They still have access to the outside, and that's in a courtyard that's prevented them from escaping. But the upshot of all of this is he's being protected from who? Now, they say he's being protected from people who would want his death.

And it may be one of the reasons he's lying about the dogs, because the insurance company certainly wants to keep him alive. So you don't know where the octopus's tentacles go and how far they penetrate into that system. We know people who've committed suicide, questionably, while in custody. Any number of things could happen. And so he needs to be kept alive by the insurance company if they ever have a hope of getting $7.5 million back. Do I have to say pedophile father John Gogan, the priest that molested and molested and molested and molested until another inmate killed him? He was in protective custody too.

Well, the prison, Nancy, let me just tell you, the prison has a way of taking care of people i handled a case in atlanta in the 80s where a young lady who was providing food options for the inmates in population now and was getting ready to go home for thanksgiving was assaulted and killed by someone she was giving counseling to. It wasn't six months later that he died from a bail that was in a typewriter, that little wire that used to hold the paper down on the roller for the typewriters. He was stabbed 118 times. So the prisons do have a way of equalizing all of this for us,

even though we don't want to do it. I don't know that I would count on jailhouse justice here because that's few and far between. He never even approached the death penalty. It was not on the table. It was not an option. I don't know that I would count on an inmate to carry out an execution where the court wouldn't do it. I mean, it has happened in the past, but it's few and far between. And speaking of his dire circumstances behind bars, each inmate has their own cell.

They are allowed out basically from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. They play checkers, cars, and watch TV. They have a courtyard to go outside. They each have a private tablet for phone calls, emails, Internet access, FaceTime. He's calling his girlfriends. They're calling him. Yes, he's got admirers that are sending him money. That's what he's doing. That doesn't sound that bad to me.

He's got a tablet. And the truth of the matter is that existence is not so unlike those of us who work every day. We go one place, we stay there, we come home. But our lives are not filled with a whole bunch of adventure beyond that. And he's being granted that authority, that lifestyle, even though he's guilty of killing probably more than one or two people. I want to talk to you about him being in protective custody. Do you believe that he will ultimately go back to court on the financial crimes? And if so, would he be taken out of protective custody to be transported back and forth to the trial? Well, the way it works now is that individuals who bring litigation both criminal and civil are allowed to bring that person back into the courtroom to face their accusers it's one of the requirements of the law

but i will tell you that today's use of zoom video is rather fascinating we have that in court i could sit right here in my living room and i could, in fact, appear in court in 20 minutes waiting to give testimony or obtain testimony. I mean, that certainly is a possibility. But, of course, if he gets out, he's in general population again. He's exposing he's exposed to whatever risk that they're suggesting he may have. I'm going back to the Gloria Satterfield debacle where he immediately formulates a plan to defraud, steal from Satterfield's family. Explain to those that are not familiar with civil lawsuit doings, how he approached Satterfield's children and said, Hey, I'll represent you while you sue me and my estate for her death,

and I'll get you several hundred thousand dollars. And he gets the money and then pockets it. Explain how that whole thing works about soliciting clients. Sure. Well, so what you do, though, is if you're the responsible party, you're not allowed to have any contact with the victim directly. So you hire another attorney to go represent them and you coordinate with the other attorney how all of this happens. And then you create, as he did, a company that's a sound alike for an existing consulting company. You have the company, the insurance company, send the check to that

LLC, that company that he's created. And then you have a buddy cash the checks for you. But you have to be well connected to do that. And that's one of the concerns of the bar generally is you full well know if you mess around with somebody's trust fund, you mess around with somebody's money, you're going to raise the ire of the bar, which is our controlling agency, immediately. Because you're in such a position to lie to people. People believe you. They want to believe you. And you can drag them on for years, which is exactly what happened here. And because you're trusting your lawyer to save that money for you and he's telling you, I'm taking care of this, buddy. Don't worry about it. I got this. It's just going to be a little bit longer. Who are you going to believe? So he has

that ability, that skill set, and we saw when he was on the stand, his ability to twist things around where they sound reasonable, even though it's a clear lie. What do you anticipate happening in the Mallory Beach boat homicide case? Well, you know, it's what you and I would call stare decisis, right? In the sense that the guy that the courts have already ruled essentially that the case is done. They've ruled that. So if it's done, it's closed. You've got to reopen all of that. And now you've got to find a party that's a guilty party. How do you make this guy in custody for killing his wife and son guilty for the

younger son's behavior? Only by allowing him and I'm talking about Paul Murdoch, only by allowing him, who the parents knew had a drinking problem, to commandeer the boat and now

Mallory Beach is dead. That's the only way. I think that's the only way for any criminal liability, but I don't think there's going to be any criminal liability in the death of Gloria Satterfield as far as the fall itself. Well, I mean, they investigated it, you know? Exactly. You've got mom on the 9-1-1 call you got son in the background chatting things up and telling her to get off the phone yeah you got the husband the the driving to the scene he didn't know what happened

he wasn't there if he knew anything he knew it from the witnesses that were never deposed no information was ever gathered from him And the insurance company simply wanted to settle because of their history of manipulating the system. And it's just easier to settle for $4.3 million than it is to go to trial in South Carolina, where your lawyers alone are going to cost you $2 million. So you just settle to the limits. So you've got Mallory Beach, you have Gloria Satterfield, and you have the Stephen Smith case, which we're still waiting to hear the next step.

It seems to me the next step for Murdoch anyway, and a long line of lawsuits, is going to be about the financial crimes. A lot of people don't care about the prosecution of the financial crimes. I do. And this is why. The victim certainly does. If for any reason his murder convictions are reversed, which I do not anticipate, we will still have the convictions for millions of dollars worth of financial fraud.

So those cases must be prosecuted. And they're going to go straight back to the same judge who's already had a snoot full of Alex Murdoch. You got that right. And, of course, the victims themselves, they want the guy to be convicted if there's any recovery ever made because you and I both know that the bar has funds that it can use to make people whole when they've been cheated by their lawyer. So that's always a possibility. Okay, Dale Carson, we wait. Apparently the Alex Murdoch story isn't over yet. You're listening to an iHeart Podcast.