Latest / Crime Stories with Nancy Grace / STRANGER DNA UNDER MAGGIE'S NAILS?

Transcript

STRANGER DNA UNDER MAGGIE'S NAILS? · Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

0:00
Speaker 1: Bombshell. Tonight, Alexi Murnock inches closer and closer to a
0:04
Speaker 1: double murder retrial, with the death penalty now possibly on
0:09
Speaker 1: the table. Tonight, is there Stranger DNA under Maggie's nails?
0:18
Speaker 1: Good evening. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. I
0:21
Speaker 1: want to thank you for being with us.
0:35
Speaker 2: Moselle, I think my wife and come back.
0:42
Speaker 3: I mean, sir, I can't think of anybody who would.
0:47
Speaker 1: I want to go to that extreme Stranger d n
0:53
Speaker 1: A under Maggie's nails. Remember reality Check, Maggie Murdog was
1:02
Speaker 1: lured to Mozille, Alex Murdog's hunting lodge. She didn't want
1:07
Speaker 1: to go. She stated that she even put it in
1:09
Speaker 1: a text to a friend. She did not want to go.
1:12
Speaker 1: Let's see shots of Mozille, since that's what we're talking about.
1:17
Speaker 1: She goes out there and ends up dead. Tonight, Stranger
1:23
Speaker 1: DNA under her nails. She was found faced down in
1:28
Speaker 1: the dirt, shot point blank range in the back, her
1:33
Speaker 1: blood seeping down into the floor, the dirt of that
1:40
Speaker 1: hunting lodge. Stranger DNA under her nails. Straight out to
1:45
Speaker 1: Dave Matt Crimes Stories Investigative reporter.
1:47
Speaker 4: What this is the claim from the defense Nancy the
1:52
Speaker 4: first salvo being thrown out there, claiming that underneath Maggie
1:58
Speaker 4: Murda's fingernails was DNA male DNA that was not the
2:04
Speaker 4: DNA of Alex or any other family member. According to
2:08
Speaker 4: Jim Griffin, that's Murda's lead attorney, Nancy, and he claims.
2:13
Speaker 4: Griffin claims that they never put that DNA into cotis.
2:19
Speaker 4: There was never a follow up on this DNA. That
2:22
Speaker 4: is a bombshell claim from the defense.
2:25
Speaker 1: Straight out to Gg McKelvey, joining us out of South Carolina,
2:29
Speaker 1: Star of Pretty Lies and Alibis investigative journalist Gigi Stranger.
2:35
Speaker 1: DNA under Maggie Murdock's nails, Now it's just just bs
2:39
Speaker 1: by Hartpootlin Or is this real?
2:42
Speaker 5: I mean, that's a pretty bold claim, and you would
2:44
Speaker 5: think if they were aware of this at the first trial,
2:46
Speaker 5: they would have insisted that be at least that in
2:49
Speaker 5: dakotis are tested. So I guess Tom will tell whether
2:52
Speaker 5: or not that is a true claim, but you can
2:54
Speaker 5: bet if it is, it's going to be a big
2:55
Speaker 5: part of this second trial.
2:57
Speaker 1: Joining us. Mark Pepper, veteran criminal defense attorney out of
3:02
Speaker 1: this jurisdiction in South Carolina found off the Pepper Law
3:05
Speaker 1: firm put him up. Please Pepper whether there is stranger
3:11
Speaker 1: DNA under her nails or not. Let me just jump
3:15
Speaker 1: to the next legal reality which the defense will have
3:18
Speaker 1: to grapple with. Isn't it true? And this is a yes. No,
3:22
Speaker 1: I know you hate that. Isn't it true? The defense
3:27
Speaker 1: has the right to have the state's evidence tested. Isn't
3:32
Speaker 1: that true?
3:34
Speaker 6: Yes?
3:35
Speaker 1: And isn't it true that whatever was under Maggie's nails
3:40
Speaker 1: was there at the time the autopsy was conducted. And
3:43
Speaker 1: I'm going to go to Joe Scotten and Morgan Morgan
3:45
Speaker 1: in just a moment about how those nails were preserved.
3:48
Speaker 1: And they had the right to test the DNA then,
3:52
Speaker 1: And I wonder why they didn't if it even exists.
3:56
Speaker 1: Maybe because it would reveal Alex and Murnogg's DNA.
4:00
Speaker 7: They had the right to test it. I suspect they did, Nancy,
4:05
Speaker 7: maybe they didn't like the results, or maybe it was
4:08
Speaker 7: simply a trial strategy that they did not want to
4:12
Speaker 7: kind of get off of this path of he just
4:14
Speaker 7: wasn't there, He just didn't do it. I think your
4:18
Speaker 7: next guest will be able to explain a bit better
4:20
Speaker 7: than I will the logistics of the scientific evidence. But
4:24
Speaker 7: as an offense lawyer putting it in period, it's coming
4:27
Speaker 7: into evidence. I'm making sure it comes in because all
4:30
Speaker 7: you're trying to do here is just create doubt.
4:32
Speaker 6: Could someone else have done this?
4:36
Speaker 1: Muddy the water? Right? That's right. The defense's job is correct. Okay,
4:40
Speaker 1: at least you're being honest with me, Mark, and that's
4:43
Speaker 1: why you win so many cases. Mark. Let's review what
4:47
Speaker 1: you just said and break it down tonight. Bombshell, Is
4:50
Speaker 1: there stranger DNA under Maggie Murdock's nails? Mark? Spin that
4:57
Speaker 1: out to its logical conclusion. What if I'm going out
5:01
Speaker 1: on a lamb saying Heartpootley is telling the truth. If
5:04
Speaker 1: it's true, what does that mean for Murdoch's defense? A lot?
5:10
Speaker 7: It changes the entire case. In my opinion, If you
5:12
Speaker 7: put up evidence that proves scientifically that there was another
5:17
Speaker 7: human being there or in close proximity to Maggie at
5:21
Speaker 7: the time of these shootings, that is a bombshell, to
5:24
Speaker 7: use your words, Nancy, that has to get put in
5:27
Speaker 7: front of the jury. It changes the entire landscape. Of
5:30
Speaker 7: the case. In my opinion, in South Carolina, we want
5:33
Speaker 7: to see hard evidence, and when all the signs are
5:36
Speaker 7: pointing to Alec in the very least, you got to
5:39
Speaker 7: give them another option. Is it possible that someone else
5:44
Speaker 7: was at this crime scene. Is it possible that Maggie
5:48
Speaker 7: defended herself, that she scratched someone and that's how somebody's
5:51
Speaker 7: DNA not named Alec Murdoch got under her nails.
5:54
Speaker 6: This is bombshell.
5:56
Speaker 1: Look at your monitor. Look at your monitor. This is
6:01
Speaker 1: where Maggie Murdoch and Paul her Son were gunned down
6:05
Speaker 1: in cold blood execution style. So this is not exactly
6:10
Speaker 1: pristine conditions. She could have gotten anything that could be
6:14
Speaker 1: dog DNA under her nails for all I know, and.
6:20
Speaker 7: It could be anybodies, but it's not Alec Murdoch's, according
6:24
Speaker 7: to Griffin and Harpootlin. And that is the key, Nancy,
6:26
Speaker 7: is that when you're trying to create reasonable doubt, you've
6:29
Speaker 7: got to give the jury some other explanation. And maybe
6:33
Speaker 7: we have it now. Maybe Alex's defense team has what
6:36
Speaker 7: they need. DNA from another human Knotony Mallek, that is
6:40
Speaker 7: fresh would have been collected. You would have chain of custody.
6:44
Speaker 7: This evidence is going to come in. Griffin and Harpootley
6:47
Speaker 7: are dead set on introducing this evidence as they should.
6:50
Speaker 1: Okay, let's just boil it down very quickly, Mark Pepper.
6:54
Speaker 1: This is not an in court argument where if you
6:58
Speaker 1: go on and on and on enough to the judge
7:01
Speaker 1: you think he she may side with you just to
7:03
Speaker 1: make you stop. Here's the deal. If there is stranger
7:08
Speaker 1: DNA under her nail, human DNA under her nails, their
7:11
Speaker 1: claim is going to be sad some other dude did it.
7:16
Speaker 1: She fought with him and got his or her his
7:20
Speaker 1: DNA under her nails. That's what they will have, and
7:24
Speaker 1: they will actually have DNA to support it, just like
7:29
Speaker 1: the quadruple sligh in Idaho. Remember the stranger DNA that
7:36
Speaker 1: was on a glove in the parking lot was on
7:38
Speaker 1: a banister in the party house. Coburger was going to
7:42
Speaker 1: use that. Did we have a match to who it was? No?
7:44
Speaker 1: But it's as you said, Mark Pepper, the possibility of
7:48
Speaker 1: another perpetrator based on scientific DNA under her nails. Right,
7:55
Speaker 1: they may have a leg to stand on. Do I
7:57
Speaker 1: believe it? No? But this could be one leg and
8:02
Speaker 1: a stool for reasonable doubt to sit upon.
8:07
Speaker 7: That is exactly right, Nancy, create the reasonable doubt. You
8:10
Speaker 7: don't have to necessarily put up a defense that it
8:12
Speaker 7: wasn't Alec. You at least have to allege that it's
8:15
Speaker 7: possible it could have been someone else. And that's exactly
8:19
Speaker 7: what they'll use this DNA for. You hit the nail
8:21
Speaker 7: on the head, Nancy. It's not only to defend Alec,
8:24
Speaker 7: but is to put in the mind of these reasonable
8:26
Speaker 7: jurors that is it possible. Have you heard anything over
8:29
Speaker 7: this six week trial, eight week trial, ten week trial
8:32
Speaker 7: that gives you hesitation that it was Alec. Well, let's
8:36
Speaker 7: go back and look at what the science shows. We
8:39
Speaker 7: have DNA evidence of someone else's DNA under Maggie's nails.
8:45
Speaker 7: That creates reasonable doubt. That is exactly what Jim and
8:48
Speaker 7: Dick will show this jury.
8:52
Speaker 1: Control room. I'm so glad you played that. See he's
8:55
Speaker 1: crying and snotting and then suddenly, oh, let me check
8:59
Speaker 1: my messages. It's all a big act. Joining us now
9:02
Speaker 1: a very special guest. It is Blanca to a Biatte Simpson,
9:08
Speaker 1: Murdog's housekeeper for many, many years, knows Maggie and all
9:14
Speaker 1: of the children like the back of her hand. And
9:15
Speaker 1: she is the author of a brand new book within
9:18
Speaker 1: the House of Murdog and then a unique friendship Blanca
9:22
Speaker 1: and Maggie. It's an incredible book, by the way. You
9:26
Speaker 1: of all people, Hey, let's see that dog kennel again,
9:31
Speaker 1: can help me out here. Didn't Maggie have her nails
9:35
Speaker 1: done regularly? What could be under her nails? What do
9:38
Speaker 1: you know of her, Blanca?
9:42
Speaker 8: She went to the nail salon to get her nails done.
9:45
Speaker 8: So for many women, if we go to the beauty salon, Now,
9:49
Speaker 8: all the tools that are used are are you know,
9:53
Speaker 8: clean perfect? She could have gotten you know, stranger DNA
9:57
Speaker 8: from the tools that are used in so that doesn't
10:02
Speaker 8: that does that part of it does not bother me
10:04
Speaker 8: for them to try to create, you know, a big
10:07
Speaker 8: scene over the stranger DNA under her nails, you know,
10:11
Speaker 8: because we all get we all get our nails.
10:15
Speaker 6: Down over there and and and you know, we it
10:19
Speaker 6: could have been a dirty.
10:19
Speaker 1: Tool, you know, Blanca. How often would Maggie have her
10:25
Speaker 1: nails done?
10:30
Speaker 8: Usually special occasions or if she wasn't doing any any
10:37
Speaker 8: if she wasn't doing any kind of dirty work like
10:39
Speaker 8: I would say, you know, but she was touching up
10:42
Speaker 8: a lot of areas at Edistow, you know, the painting
10:45
Speaker 8: and all that, and I think she was just looking
10:47
Speaker 8: forward to getting her nails done that day.
10:49
Speaker 6: She usually would go maybe once a month.
10:54
Speaker 1: Do you know that she went that day, Blanca.
10:58
Speaker 6: She did go that day. She did go that day.
11:02
Speaker 1: That is very significant. And the nail salon where she
11:07
Speaker 1: went that day, where was it.
11:09
Speaker 8: All she told me was she was going to get
11:11
Speaker 8: her nails done when we talked in a pedicure.
11:14
Speaker 6: She used to get her hair done out there in
11:17
Speaker 6: Hilton Head.
11:18
Speaker 8: Mutual friend recommended a young lady out there and that's
11:21
Speaker 8: where she used to go get her haircut.
11:23
Speaker 1: So that will be a matter of getting that video
11:26
Speaker 1: surveillance of the salon that day to see if she
11:29
Speaker 1: was there just before she went to Mozelle.
11:34
Speaker 8: I'm save it's in existence. I mean, it's so many
11:37
Speaker 8: years of past. I don't know they saved it.
11:42
Speaker 1: Or maybe it's send the cloud straight out to Justin
11:44
Speaker 1: Scott Morgan, Professor Forensics, Jacksonville State University. He's the author
11:48
Speaker 1: of Blood Beneath My Feet on Amazon. He is the
11:51
Speaker 1: star of a hit podcast, Body Bags. With Joe Scott Morgan,
11:55
Speaker 1: but for our purposes, he is a death investigator with
11:58
Speaker 1: over ten thousand death scenes under his help. There are
12:01
Speaker 1: many ways by which Maggie Murnach could have gotten DNA
12:06
Speaker 1: under her nails.
12:09
Speaker 9: Yeah, you're absolutely right, and uh, this is what I'm thinking. Okay,
12:14
Speaker 9: So when her when these samples were taken from taken
12:19
Speaker 9: from her remains at autopsy, they would have been very
12:22
Speaker 9: very careful, Nancy. And if you'll just permit me, I'll
12:25
Speaker 9: tell you what the breakdown is and how this is done.
12:28
Speaker 9: There's a sterile kit that we use on the hands
12:31
Speaker 9: at autopsy. Now, her hands hopefully had been bagged at
12:34
Speaker 9: the scene. Okay, when they go into the morgue, they
12:38
Speaker 9: will cut those bags away and anything that's particulated inside
12:43
Speaker 9: of the bags that just falls off or anything, they
12:45
Speaker 9: save those bags. All right, that's that's in general coming
12:48
Speaker 9: off the hands. Now, the next step is that if
12:54
Speaker 9: you think about, you know, the cuticle pushers that that
12:57
Speaker 9: people using their nails, their long wooden st there is
13:01
Speaker 9: a tool that's similar to that where we go beneath
13:04
Speaker 9: the nails. You hear this term nail clippings and nail scrapings.
13:07
Speaker 9: We do scrapings first, So under the nail, you scrape
13:11
Speaker 9: this out with this with this instrument. Okay, it falls
13:15
Speaker 9: into a piece of paper that's separated. That's that's kept separate.
13:20
Speaker 9: Each finger is done individually. Then you go through with
13:25
Speaker 9: sterile nail clippers, all right, that come in this packet
13:29
Speaker 9: and you clip each nail. Those are kept separately. So
13:33
Speaker 9: if everybody that's listening to us right now and just
13:36
Speaker 9: think about it, where do you put your hands throughout
13:39
Speaker 9: the day, Well, you can't keep track of it. You
13:41
Speaker 9: touch various surfaces, you come in contact with it. It goes
13:46
Speaker 9: back to le Carte's principle every contact leaves a trace.
13:49
Speaker 9: And we're not talking about even at a trace evidence level.
13:53
Speaker 9: We're talking about at a molecular level, Nancy, where this
13:58
Speaker 9: bit of transfer can happen with an Now, our guest
14:01
Speaker 9: here is I think this is a brilliant, brilliant examination here.
14:07
Speaker 9: Gold star to her because you're thinking about who's touching
14:10
Speaker 9: her hands at this point in time. Now, I think
14:14
Speaker 9: that if sled has suspected that there was some kind
14:17
Speaker 9: of connectivity here, they would have followed us up because
14:20
Speaker 9: this is bombshell information and at minimum they're saying that
14:24
Speaker 9: this was not entered into codis all right, Well that's
14:28
Speaker 9: kind of a stab in the dark anyway. But I'm
14:31
Speaker 9: wondering if they ever thought about doing phenotyping on any
14:35
Speaker 9: of this DNA sample that was there, and that would
14:37
Speaker 9: put you into categories like racial determination, male versus female.
14:43
Speaker 9: You can actually do height, hair color, eye color, all
14:46
Speaker 9: these sorts of things relative to the subject that this
14:50
Speaker 9: foreign DNA comes from. I just wonder how far they
14:53
Speaker 9: pursued this lead.
14:54
Speaker 1: Nancy Todave Matt Crime Story's investigative reporter, correct me if
14:59
Speaker 1: I'm wrong, But wasn't this brought up in the first trial.
15:06
Speaker 4: It was Nancy, and it was discussed at length during
15:10
Speaker 4: cross examination, the discussion about this specific DNA being found
15:15
Speaker 4: under Maggie Murdaw's fingernails, and it didn't have an impact
15:21
Speaker 4: on the jury. And so it really comes down to
15:24
Speaker 4: the defense is just bringing out something that didn't work
15:27
Speaker 4: last time, and they're going to try to reframe it
15:30
Speaker 4: this time.
15:32
Speaker 1: But since the first trial, Dave mac, the defense may
15:36
Speaker 1: have decided to retest the stranger DNA under her nails.
15:41
Speaker 1: Isn't that true? Absolutely true?
15:43
Speaker 4: They are going to push to you know, as Escott
15:46
Speaker 4: mentioned a minute ago about going into Cotis, that has
15:49
Speaker 4: been a big point of what the what the defense
15:52
Speaker 4: is saying now, they're like, we have to do more.
15:54
Speaker 4: This was used as an example of the lack of
15:57
Speaker 4: investigative work that was done during the first trial, where
16:01
Speaker 4: they were talking about how how law enforcement failed Murda
16:05
Speaker 4: by not investigating some things that could have proven some
16:09
Speaker 4: other guy did it. And they're really having on this
16:12
Speaker 4: Nancy because if there's DNA under her fingernails that does
16:16
Speaker 4: not belong to Alec Murdau or anybody else in the
16:19
Speaker 4: Murdau family. Well, you're left with Okay, she had her
16:22
Speaker 4: nails done earlier in the day.
16:23
Speaker 1: Well, I know a little bit about that. Out to Pepper.
16:28
Speaker 1: It was day sixteen. There were hours of testimony regarding
16:32
Speaker 1: DNA and the scientist was asked about unknown mail. We
16:37
Speaker 1: know it's mail DNA under Maggie's fingernails. Okay. The defense
16:42
Speaker 1: had full cross exam. They asked, were Paul and Alex
16:45
Speaker 1: Murdad excluded as contributors. Expert Zapota said yes, Defense, so
16:52
Speaker 1: mail DNA under her nails were not from Paul and
16:54
Speaker 1: not from Alex murdog response the foreign DNA to her, Yes,
17:00
Speaker 1: they were excluded as contributors. So help me out, Mark, Pepper,
17:07
Speaker 1: How is this different than what was said the first
17:10
Speaker 1: time around?
17:12
Speaker 7: What will be different, Nancy, is that that same cross
17:15
Speaker 7: examination will take place, except it will take place in
17:18
Speaker 7: a much more aggressive way. A and B I suspect
17:23
Speaker 7: will be followed up by a defendants owned expert who
17:26
Speaker 7: has likely now tested this DNA, who has likely now
17:31
Speaker 7: been able to come up with a DNA profile. So
17:34
Speaker 7: maybe we get more than just a unknown male I suspect.
17:38
Speaker 7: Jim and Dick have done their homework on this. This
17:42
Speaker 7: will not just be a simple day sixteen two hour
17:45
Speaker 7: cross examination of what ifs and what forced This will
17:50
Speaker 7: be a.
17:51
Speaker 6: Very pepper targeted attack.
17:52
Speaker 1: Pepper, Pepper, please please. I know they'll put on a
17:56
Speaker 1: big circus, a big dog and pony show, but they
18:00
Speaker 1: had access to this DNA first time around. Yeah, okay,
18:05
Speaker 1: we know that it was tested. So what is different
18:09
Speaker 1: today other than Hart puotely and putting it out in
18:13
Speaker 1: the media just because he says it so doesn't make
18:16
Speaker 1: it so, Pepper.
18:18
Speaker 7: Well, what makes it different is that this is a
18:22
Speaker 7: different case. This is a different trial. They're going to
18:26
Speaker 7: lead with their best items that they now understand what
18:29
Speaker 7: maybe worked the first time and what didn't work. If
18:32
Speaker 7: they get any impression as some of your other guests
18:35
Speaker 7: stated that this DNA fingerprint issue kind of went over
18:39
Speaker 7: the jury's heads, well, they're not going to let that
18:41
Speaker 7: happen again this time. They're going to spend money on
18:43
Speaker 7: experts to make sure that this becomes a central theme
18:46
Speaker 7: of this trial. I would also say this, Nancy, in
18:49
Speaker 7: response to some of your guests. They didn't put it
18:51
Speaker 7: in codis correct, they didn't call their own expert, they
18:54
Speaker 7: didn't put up.
18:55
Speaker 6: A big dog and pony show.
18:57
Speaker 7: Isn't it possible that none of these things were done
19:01
Speaker 7: by SLED because SLED didn't want to know whose DNA
19:06
Speaker 7: was under her fingernails. Isn't it possible that they had
19:10
Speaker 7: their guy and they solely focused on him, and they thought, well,
19:13
Speaker 7: if we put any additional good gravy.
19:16
Speaker 1: Second verse, same as the first, he places himself at
19:21
Speaker 1: the scene on the dog video, if I could get
19:23
Speaker 1: the control room to pull that up a plate in
19:25
Speaker 1: a moment, but first, another way they can attack based
19:30
Speaker 1: on DNA under Maggie's nails.
19:32
Speaker 10: And in this case, as you saw in the first
19:35
Speaker 10: off swed bungle the crime scene processing, they didn't take
19:40
Speaker 10: DNA or attempt to take DNA or fingerprints from the
19:43
Speaker 10: feed room where Paul was shot. They what they did
19:47
Speaker 10: not preserve things like Maggie's phone in a Faraday bag.
19:51
Speaker 10: I mean, it's bunder after bunder after bunder after blunder.
19:55
Speaker 10: So they have no forensic evidence. They didn't take fingerprints,
19:59
Speaker 10: they didn't gather DNA, they have no video, they have
20:02
Speaker 10: no confession all. They have nothing that connects him to
20:06
Speaker 10: the murder in terms of physical evidence, witnesses or statements.
20:11
Speaker 1: That from our friend Dona Ratuneau at Fox News and
20:15
Speaker 1: from Inside Edition. Okay, everything that he just said is
20:20
Speaker 1: a lie. To doctor Bethany Marshall joining us renow it
20:23
Speaker 1: psychoaalyst out of the LA jurisdiction. She's the author of
20:26
Speaker 1: deal Breakers. You can see her now on Peacock and
20:31
Speaker 1: on Bravo and find her at doctor Bethany Marshall dot com.
20:34
Speaker 1: Doctor Bethany I saw hert pooling in. His lips were moving,
20:41
Speaker 1: So I guess that means he's lying, because analy is
20:44
Speaker 1: what he said. They didn't take DNA. Well, yes they did,
20:49
Speaker 1: because that's his new claim that the DNA that they
20:51
Speaker 1: did take doesn't match a Murdoch. Okay, they didn't preserve
20:55
Speaker 1: things like Maggie's phone in a Faraday bag, Yes they did.
20:59
Speaker 1: They almost didn't, because his client threw it out the window.
21:02
Speaker 1: And we see where Murdog's car based on the black
21:06
Speaker 1: box the nav system slow down, you can tell he
21:09
Speaker 1: lowers the passenger side the window at that's exactly where
21:14
Speaker 1: her phone was found. And they did preserve it. They
21:17
Speaker 1: didn't need to put it in a Faraday bag. A
21:19
Speaker 1: Faraday bag, I'll go if it's givings on this is
21:23
Speaker 1: something to protect the phone from emitting signals or getting signals.
21:30
Speaker 1: They found it and they preserved it right where Murdog
21:33
Speaker 1: threw it out, So all that is a lie. Okay,
21:37
Speaker 1: then what else does he say? They have no forensic evidence? Well,
21:41
Speaker 1: I don't know what they think the dog video is.
21:44
Speaker 1: They didn't take fingerprints, yes they did. They didn't gather DNA,
21:49
Speaker 1: yes they did. They have no video. I'm about to
21:51
Speaker 1: play it. They don't have a confession. That's true because
21:54
Speaker 1: Murdog is a very wily lawyer. They have nothing Okay,
21:59
Speaker 1: all of that's a lie. That is all a lie.
22:02
Speaker 1: So again his lips are moving, Doctor Bethany Marshall.
22:05
Speaker 11: You know, Nancy, all this line is not going to
22:07
Speaker 11: play well with the jury. And I'll tell you what
22:10
Speaker 11: else is not going to play well with the jury.
22:12
Speaker 11: This whole thing about another man's DNA being under her fingernails.
22:17
Speaker 11: You know that would be more consistent with triangulation or
22:20
Speaker 11: with a knife attack something like that, right, because then
22:23
Speaker 11: the perpetrator is close enough to Maggie and Paul that
22:27
Speaker 11: they would have to fight the perpetrator off. Now, somebody
22:30
Speaker 11: who's going to use a gun, a shotgun is going
22:33
Speaker 11: to be far away from the victims, not close enough
22:38
Speaker 11: for the victim to have to fight the perpetrator off.
22:41
Speaker 11: So I'm sort of thinking, do they not know that
22:44
Speaker 11: the jury is capable of critical thinking? Do they not
22:48
Speaker 11: think that the jury's going to be offended by all
22:51
Speaker 11: these lives? Jurors are people, too, Nancy. They have thoughts,
22:55
Speaker 11: they have feelings, and they do respond to how the
22:59
Speaker 11: attorneys talked them and speak to them. And if they're
23:02
Speaker 11: the attorneys are acting like they're third graders, they're not
23:04
Speaker 11: gonna like that.
23:08
Speaker 1: He states Hart. Pootlan again states they don't have video. Well,
23:13
Speaker 1: I'm about to play it.
23:14
Speaker 3: Watch give it, get me quick, gush qui post gay,
23:37
Speaker 3: Hey you got burdens. Now, hey, buba, it's a guinea.
23:46
Speaker 3: There's a chickens. Come a cash quick to you.
23:54
Speaker 1: G g McKelvey, what is the significance of that video?
24:00
Speaker 5: I mean the timing of it, because it puts him
24:03
Speaker 5: right there in the kennels when their phones essentially go
24:06
Speaker 5: silent minutes later, So you have kind of a rough
24:10
Speaker 5: estimate of when these murders took place. I think it's
24:13
Speaker 5: a big video. I was there when that was played
24:15
Speaker 5: in court, and everybody was glued to that video.
24:18
Speaker 1: And after that day, you know, during a break.
24:21
Speaker 5: We all talked about how normal it sounded, which some
24:24
Speaker 5: people thought, maybe that's not going to hit well with
24:26
Speaker 5: the jury because Paul seems very relaxed. Maggie seems relaxed.
24:30
Speaker 5: You hear Elk in the background saying bubba. I mean,
24:34
Speaker 5: so we'll see what happens. But I think one thing
24:36
Speaker 5: to note, Nancy is we're going to have an entirely
24:39
Speaker 5: new jury. And the other thing too, we don't know
24:41
Speaker 5: where this trial is going to be held yet. There
24:43
Speaker 5: hasn't been a change of VENU request. But the original
24:46
Speaker 5: vote was nine guilty. Two jurors voted not guilty in
24:50
Speaker 5: that first vote, and then you have one undecided. So
24:53
Speaker 5: I think the defense is going to take the totality
24:55
Speaker 5: of this DNA evidence. The kennel video, I would focus
24:58
Speaker 5: on everybody's that was normal, sounds playful. You know, we
25:02
Speaker 5: don't know where this trial is going to be held,
25:04
Speaker 5: but I'll tell you this. Nancy lived in South Carolina.
25:07
Speaker 5: A lot of people think he's guilty, but there are
25:09
Speaker 5: plenty who think he didn't do it. And then there
25:11
Speaker 5: are a lot of people who really have no clue
25:13
Speaker 5: about this case. So this is going to be a
25:15
Speaker 5: very different trial in a million ways. And I'll be
25:19
Speaker 5: there for the other six weeks or however long this
25:21
Speaker 5: takes to see it through.
25:24
Speaker 1: I mean, the reality is to Brian f is Gibbons
25:26
Speaker 1: joining us Director Operations USPA Nationwide Security. He is a
25:32
Speaker 1: former Marine and a rocky warrant VET. Brian, the reality
25:37
Speaker 1: is that, and jump in Dave and Gigi, anybody on
25:41
Speaker 1: the panel if you've got a better timeline than I do.
25:44
Speaker 1: But it was within minutes, minutes after that video occurred,
25:52
Speaker 1: and we know when the video occurred because it was
25:55
Speaker 1: sent that The story behind the video is that the
25:59
Speaker 1: dog seeing let's see the dog is named Cash. Cash
26:03
Speaker 1: had to go to the vet. Cash did not belong
26:06
Speaker 1: to the murdogs, but the murdogs had him in the kennel,
26:10
Speaker 1: so they were taking a video of him, specifically his tail,
26:15
Speaker 1: to show to send the video to a lady vet
26:19
Speaker 1: that night, and they did send the video to the
26:24
Speaker 1: dog's owner, so we know when the video was taken.
26:27
Speaker 1: We know based on the NAV system what time murdogs
26:31
Speaker 1: scratched off and went and hit out at his mother's.
26:34
Speaker 1: Then he was back what one hour later and poof
26:37
Speaker 1: they were dead. Do I have that timeline correct? GG McKelvey, Yeah,
26:43
Speaker 1: that's pretty much. You know.
26:44
Speaker 5: What's interesting is from the time elapsed of when Paul
26:47
Speaker 5: took the video to when his phone went silent was
26:49
Speaker 5: four minutes, So it was four minutes after that recording
26:52
Speaker 5: that both his and Maggie's phones never sent texts again.
26:56
Speaker 5: Because remember Paul was actively texting the owner of the dog.
27:00
Speaker 5: He was trying to figure out something that was going
27:02
Speaker 5: on physically with the dog. So yeah, we do have
27:04
Speaker 5: that timeline there and then at ten thirty four PM.
27:07
Speaker 1: Wait a minute, it's even if season more more precise
27:11
Speaker 1: gg at eight forty four is the video It started
27:18
Speaker 1: at eight forty four. At eight forty nine, all the
27:22
Speaker 1: phones go silent, so in that five minute space, so
27:28
Speaker 1: he must have been standing there with the gun behind
27:30
Speaker 1: his back at the time of the video. And then
27:34
Speaker 1: we've got the suv screeching off. Okay, not only that,
27:41
Speaker 1: to Dave mac murdog's team is contesting the timeline, stating
27:46
Speaker 1: that we don't really know when Maggie and Paul were
27:49
Speaker 1: shot dead.
27:52
Speaker 3: That's exactly what they're doing.
27:53
Speaker 12: Nancy.
27:53
Speaker 4: Now you just pointed out about the video about Paul's
27:56
Speaker 4: kennel video being taken at eight forty four and being
27:59
Speaker 4: sent forty eight. But look that argument from the defense
28:04
Speaker 4: the time of death is only an estimate and not
28:07
Speaker 4: an exact scientific determination. They're also contesting cell phone activity
28:12
Speaker 4: and vehicle telemetry, claiming it can be misinterpreted, creating uncertainty
28:18
Speaker 4: about precisely when Maggie and Paul were killed. The defense
28:23
Speaker 4: also attacking the state's theory, saying it leaves too little
28:26
Speaker 4: time for Murda to commit the murders, clean up, dispose
28:30
Speaker 4: of weapons, and leave for his mother's house at nine
28:33
Speaker 4: oh six pm. And the defense is also arguing that
28:37
Speaker 4: investigators constructed the timeline to fit their theory rather than
28:41
Speaker 4: allowing the evidence to dictate the sequence of events.
28:45
Speaker 1: Thanks to you, Brian Fitzgibbons, USPA Nationwide Security Way in.
28:49
Speaker 13: Yeah, this kennel video.
28:52
Speaker 14: Is often referred to as Paul somewhat testifying from the grave.
28:57
Speaker 14: And while this doesn't prove that Alec Murdoch pulled the trigger,
29:03
Speaker 14: it certainly can tests his alibi and shoots down the
29:07
Speaker 14: credibility of his alibi and points out.
29:11
Speaker 13: That this some of the circumstantial evidence has quite a
29:15
Speaker 13: bit of weight to it, so it remains something that
29:18
Speaker 13: the prosecution going into the second trial is certainly going
29:22
Speaker 13: to present.
29:23
Speaker 2: To the jury.
29:24
Speaker 1: Back to Blanca to Biatte Simpson joining us, author of
29:28
Speaker 1: Within the House of Murdoch, Blanca Maggie texted about you
29:33
Speaker 1: that evening around six ten pm to son Paul, who
29:38
Speaker 1: was about to be murdered, stating love you, Blanca cooked
29:43
Speaker 1: you dinner. What were the events that night leading up
29:47
Speaker 1: to the murders as you know them?
29:50
Speaker 8: Alex had texted her and asked her to come. His
29:54
Speaker 8: father was not doing well, and Maggie was kind of
29:58
Speaker 8: reluctant at that point.
29:59
Speaker 6: She really did not want to go back to Mozillica.
30:02
Speaker 8: She had some workers at Edistow that were finishing up
30:06
Speaker 8: and she was kind of like on the fence about
30:10
Speaker 8: whether she wanted to.
30:11
Speaker 6: Go, whether she wanted to go back to Edistone.
30:14
Speaker 12: So I just.
30:18
Speaker 8: I remember she said, she asked me to cook. I
30:22
Speaker 8: cooked dinner for them, and she said Paul was going
30:28
Speaker 8: to be coming out there to mix to fix the
30:30
Speaker 8: screw up, you know, on the sunflower fields, and.
30:34
Speaker 6: He wasn't happy about it. She said, he's not happy
30:36
Speaker 6: about having to come back. And that's all.
30:41
Speaker 8: That's all, you know, when we when we discussed, so
30:44
Speaker 8: she wasn't looking forward to coming, but she said he
30:49
Speaker 8: had asked her to come out there.
30:51
Speaker 1: Well, she knew she was being lured out there. She
30:54
Speaker 1: didn't want to go. And the reality is he stated
30:58
Speaker 1: that he wanted her to come out there to go
31:00
Speaker 1: visit his ailing dad. I believe it was in the
31:02
Speaker 1: Savannah Memorial Medical and they never went. What was for
31:06
Speaker 1: zupper that night, Rice and beans, rice.
31:09
Speaker 8: Green beans and country fried State or state Burger, which
31:14
Speaker 8: is how she called it.
31:15
Speaker 1: So looking at the timeline, I mean, he is right
31:22
Speaker 1: there at the scene when we think the murders go down,
31:27
Speaker 1: but yet at this juncture Joe Scott Morgan, the defense
31:30
Speaker 1: is claiming, we really don't know when the murders occurred. Well,
31:35
Speaker 1: that's bs. And they're arguing that the medical examiner determined
31:40
Speaker 1: the tod time of death by getting the temperature under
31:44
Speaker 1: Maggie's armpit. What is that all about.
31:49
Speaker 9: Yeah, it's called an axillary an accillary temperature, which means
31:53
Speaker 9: that you would place the thermometer externally beneath the armpit
32:00
Speaker 9: held down just like this. Okay, it's something we've done
32:03
Speaker 9: for years and years, but it's it's highly inaccurate because
32:09
Speaker 9: now kind of the gold standard is to do what's
32:11
Speaker 9: referred to as a core body temperature doing a liver stick.
32:17
Speaker 9: Some people resist doing this, and there's a lot of
32:20
Speaker 9: good reasons why not to do it. And so if
32:25
Speaker 9: you know, people need to completely disbuse themselves of thinking
32:28
Speaker 9: that determining time of death is like an absolute science.
32:34
Speaker 9: Most of the time, the best we can do is
32:37
Speaker 9: hit somewhere between three to four hours. It's really hard
32:41
Speaker 9: to dial it in any tighter than that, So at
32:45
Speaker 9: best it's an educated guest. Nancy.
32:49
Speaker 1: Well, put him up, Joe Scott. We've got more than
32:55
Speaker 1: her armpit, for Pete's sake. We have her on a
32:59
Speaker 1: video at a specific time alive, so we know she
33:05
Speaker 1: was alive. Then then we have Murdoch back on the
33:09
Speaker 1: scene and correct me Gg or Dave if I'm wrong
33:12
Speaker 1: on this, and about an hour about an hour later,
33:16
Speaker 1: so we've got it down to one hour, don't we
33:22
Speaker 1: through extrinsic evidence, not just her armpit? Temp? What about it?
33:26
Speaker 5: Gg, Well, if you look at the timeline, eight forty
33:30
Speaker 5: nine pm was the last time phoned Paul's phone was
33:34
Speaker 5: unlocked by pass code. Now, that could have been anybody.
33:36
Speaker 5: It doesn't mean it was Paul. The bodies were discovered
33:39
Speaker 5: at ten thirty four pm, or that's when the first bachelor.
33:42
Speaker 5: Law enforcement arrived on scene. So you do have that
33:44
Speaker 5: window of the kennel video in eight thirty four pm
33:48
Speaker 5: when law enforcement was on scene. So clearly the murders
33:51
Speaker 5: had to have taken place somewhere within that timeframe.
33:54
Speaker 1: Well, I mean the nine to one one call is
33:56
Speaker 1: it ten zero six? Take listen.
34:03
Speaker 2: And timing. Now I I one win your emergency. Forty
34:09
Speaker 2: one forty Mozelle Roads. I need to policem my wife
34:15
Speaker 2: and job sadly. Okay, you said forty one forty seven
34:19
Speaker 2: road and Knowlson, Sir. You said forty one forty seven
34:25
Speaker 2: Mozelle Road and Knowlton. Yes, sir, forty one forty road.
34:30
Speaker 2: Stay on the line with Hilly, Yes, sir, Stay on
34:32
Speaker 2: the line with me. Okay, it's hello, I'm still here.
34:46
Speaker 2: Still on the line. I'm still here. Okay Collinson, I
34:51
Speaker 2: have an Alex Murdoch on the line, caller from forty
34:53
Speaker 2: one forty seven Moziell Roads. He's advising that his wife
34:57
Speaker 2: and child was shot. Mister Murdock, go ahead of the collar.
35:01
Speaker 6: From Mobill wrote up up to it now it's bad.
35:08
Speaker 1: You know what I love about this, Brian Fitzgibbons is
35:11
Speaker 1: based on all of the digital data. We can even
35:14
Speaker 1: see how many steps he walked, based on his iPhone,
35:19
Speaker 1: the time he got into his vehicle, turned it on,
35:21
Speaker 1: put it in reverse, put it and drive the speed,
35:25
Speaker 1: the letting down the windows, hitting the gas to get
35:28
Speaker 1: to his mom's and then coming back. I mean it's
35:31
Speaker 1: very very detailed. I wonder what Harputlin has to say that.
35:35
Speaker 13: Yeah, we don't just have the armpit temperature.
35:39
Speaker 12: We have Maggie's phone in the activity and the time
35:44
Speaker 12: stamps of that activity and when it stops. We also
35:47
Speaker 12: have Paul's phone and the normal usage stopping abruptly. Right,
35:54
Speaker 12: So there's a deep pattern of life of how often
35:57
Speaker 12: Paul was opening and.
35:58
Speaker 6: Using that phone prior to the date of the murder.
36:02
Speaker 13: And you know to your point about the step activity
36:05
Speaker 13: and the telemetrics from the vehicle. There's a mountain of
36:11
Speaker 13: circumstantial evidence here, digital evidence that corroborates the estimation.
36:17
Speaker 2: Of this time of death.
36:22
Speaker 1: Dave matt we know that the nine on one call
36:24
Speaker 1: is at ten zero six. What more can you tell
36:27
Speaker 1: me about the timeline is established by digital forensic data, Nancy.
36:33
Speaker 4: It is shocking what is available with that digital forensic
36:37
Speaker 4: data when you actually start with from the time Rogan
36:41
Speaker 4: Gibson sends his message to Paul Murda asking.
36:45
Speaker 3: If he can see a video of the dog. It
36:48
Speaker 3: the forensic show that Maggie.
36:51
Speaker 4: Murdaw's iPhone shows fifty nine steps travel at that particular time.
36:57
Speaker 1: Espec she's getting shot or is it that where she's
37:00
Speaker 1: helping take the video.
37:01
Speaker 4: I think that's where she's helping take the video.
37:04
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're right, And what time is that, Dave mac
37:09
Speaker 1: eight fifty three? Okay, Look at nine zero six on
37:14
Speaker 1: the timeline we constructed at nine zero six fifty three
37:20
Speaker 1: Murdoch suburban shows he's in the car device connection to
37:26
Speaker 1: iPhone three connections. He's in the car. That's nine oh
37:33
Speaker 1: six fifty three, nine oh seven, Maggie Murdock's phone back
37:37
Speaker 1: light off nine oh seven oh six. He scratches out,
37:42
Speaker 1: So nine O seven six, nine O seven six okay.
37:49
Speaker 1: At nine oh eight he starts texting Maggie, saying, going
37:54
Speaker 1: to check on m be right back. He just left her.
37:58
Speaker 1: Why is he having to text her that? That's at
38:01
Speaker 1: nine to oh eight. At ten oh six, less than
38:06
Speaker 1: one hour later, he's already gotten back to the scene,
38:11
Speaker 1: found the bodies and is making the nine to one
38:15
Speaker 1: one call. So in the space of about forty minutes,
38:20
Speaker 1: Mark Pepper, an unknown killer comes to the scene, shoots
38:26
Speaker 1: them dead and gets away clean. Really, and I think
38:29
Speaker 1: we're going to be able to isoate down even tighter.
38:35
Speaker 7: Well, I would suggest strongly that the AG should narrow
38:39
Speaker 7: that down because forty minutes is a long time, a
38:42
Speaker 7: long long time for many people to have made it
38:46
Speaker 7: to that property to commit the Chiness acts. I understand
38:50
Speaker 7: where everything's going. Where the timeline, you know, points to
38:54
Speaker 7: at least a phone call, a video being sent Alec leaving.
38:59
Speaker 7: But no one is going to be able to take
39:01
Speaker 7: the stand and say when the crime occurred. The best
39:06
Speaker 7: they're going to be able to do is come up
39:08
Speaker 7: with this theory that it had to be prior to
39:12
Speaker 7: Alec leaving, based solely on DNA.
39:16
Speaker 1: Well, of course it's before he left, according to the defense.
39:20
Speaker 1: Why would he leave with the bodies laying right there?
39:23
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't even make any sense, but I
39:26
Speaker 1: appreciate your double talk. Mark. There's been a lot of
39:30
Speaker 1: confusion regarding whether the death penalty will be sought. Typically,
39:37
Speaker 1: if it's put on the table the first trial and
39:39
Speaker 1: the jury forewent it and went with life, you can't
39:44
Speaker 1: then retry him and seek the death penalty. It's kind
39:48
Speaker 1: of like punishing him forgetting a new trial, right, you
39:52
Speaker 1: can't seek a greater sentence than what he got the
39:54
Speaker 1: first time. Here is the difference. DP wasn't sought the
39:59
Speaker 1: first time. Now we understand the DP death penalty may
40:04
Speaker 1: be sought.
40:07
Speaker 7: It's very possible. I still think it's unlikely for a
40:10
Speaker 7: couple of reasons. One is that we are in an
40:13
Speaker 7: election year. As you may know, Nancy Alan Wilson, who
40:17
Speaker 7: is the Attorney General at the time, will not be
40:19
Speaker 7: the Attorney General when this case is retried.
40:22
Speaker 1: If you know or think you know anything regarding the
40:25
Speaker 1: murders of Maggie and Paul Murdock, please dial eight zero
40:29
Speaker 1: three eight nine six two six zero five. The state
40:33
Speaker 1: is rebuilding its case, as is the defense. Tonight we
40:37
Speaker 1: remember an American hero Officer, Lewis Canty, Grand River, Dampd, Oklahoma,
40:44
Speaker 1: died in the line of duty after forty two years,
40:48
Speaker 1: leaving behind a grieving wife, Stacy, two sons Jason and Jeff,
40:55
Speaker 1: and daughter Addie. American hero Officer Lewis can't he thank
41:01
Speaker 1: ye to our guests, but especially to ye for being
41:03
Speaker 1: with us. Nancy Grace signing off, I'll see you to
41:06
Speaker 1: morrow night, and until then, good night, friend.