The tests found possible blood stains on the shirt – however the positive test could instead indicate bleach or rust. “I have no idea,” the agent said, to which he responded: “That’s right you don’t.”Īgent Worley also testified about testing that was carried out on the clothes that Mr Murdaugh was wearing on the night of the murders – including the “clean” white shirt which several law enforcement officers previously testified had no visible signs of blood. “Do you know what other evidence they may have destroyed?” asked Mr Harpootlian. She also confirmed that a bloody footprint found in the feeding room was later determined to be that of a law enforcement officer – something that supported the defence’s line of questioning that some evidence was not preserved correctly and was even “destroyed”. The mark was not examined on the scene and no impression of the imprint was taken, she testified. ![]() While Mr Harpootlian suggested it was a “footwear impression”, Agent Worley said she “couldn’t say” that was what the mark was but that it “could be”. Jurors heard that a “mark” was spotted on the victim’s leg on the night of the murders. Could someone have been a lookout, they went there to kill Paul and Maggie surprised them?” Mr Harpootlian pressed.Īgent Worley admitted that it was “possible” but insisted that it was only “one explanation” as to what may have taken place that fateful night.ĭuring much of his cross-examination, Mr Harpootlian sought to pick holes in the evidence gathered from the bloody crime scene, raising doubts about a potential footprint found on Maggie’s calf. “One reasonable explanation is there are two people there: one with a shotgun, one with an AR. ![]() He pushed the idea that, because the bullet projectiles were shot at different angles, it is a “reasonable” possibility that there was two killers. Jurors were shown photos and diagrams of the crime scene from both the night of the murders and more than one month later on 16 July, with Mr Harpootlian honing in on two bullet projectiles in particular – one that travelled through the dog house and one through the quail pen. Under cross-examination by defence attorney Dick Harpootlian, SLED special agent Melinda Worley admitted that the theory is “possible” but said that it is only one possible explanation for the evidence. In court on Monday, Mr Murdaugh’s legal team sought to push their theory that there could have been two shooters separately responsible for killing the mother and son. A diagram also reveals where Maggie and Paul’s bodies were found yards apart around the dog kennels on the 1,700-acre family estate. New crime scene photos, released on Monday, show blood spatters on the floor of the dog feed house and shell casings around the murder scene. Paul was shot twice – once in the head and once in the chest – with a shotgun while Maggie was shot five times with a semiautomatic rifle – with some of the bullets striking her when she had already fallen to the ground.įirst responders have revealed how the scene was especially violent, with Paul’s brain shot out of his skull and both victims found lying in pools of their own blood. Maggie and Paul were shot with two different guns. Also seized as evidence was a credit card receipt for an $1,021.10 item from Gucci – the item had been circled. The agent testified that several empty boxes of ammunition were also found during searches of the Murdaugh home on 8 June and 13 June. ![]() 300 Blackout rifle as well as a 12-gauge Browning shotgun, a Benelli shotgun and a 12-gauge pump shotgun which were seized from the family home were all brought into the courtroom and shown to jurors. Shortly after, Mr Gibson had four missed calls from Alex Murdaugh at 10.21pm, 10.24pm, 10.25pm and 10.30pm.Īfter interviewing Mr Gibson, Agent Croft told jurors how he seized firearms and ammunition from the Murdaugh home – including a semiautomatic weapon and ammo which both matched the type used to kill Maggie.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |