Murdaugh Murder Trial, Day 25: Alex Murdaugh's brother takes the stand; defense rests

COLLETON COUNTY, S.C. (WCIV) — The Alex Murdaugh double murder trial resumes Monday, likely for its final week.

The defense is expected to call less than a handful of more witnesses Monday, and the State plans to call a few more in their rebuttal. That would put closing arguments beginning as early as Wednesday.

Alex Murdaugh himself closed out last week, spending nearly two full days- and a cumulative 14 hours- on the stand, testifying on his behalf.

Read More:

• PODCAST: Murdaugh Day 25 Recap I Unsolved South Carolina
• Alex Murdaugh charged with new misdemeanor
• Murdaugh murder trial enters Week 6: How soon we can expect a verdict?
  
• 'I was overwhelmed': Murdaugh's brother shares frustrations with 'unsecured' crime scene
• Murdaugh Murder Trial, Day 26: Jury could visit Moselle crime scene this week
  

Alex Murdaugh stands trial accused of killing his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, 52, and son, Paul Murdaugh, 22, at the family's Colleton County property in June of 2021.

He's charged with two counts of murder and two counts of possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime. He pleaded not guilty to the charges.

A full livestream of the trial is also available on the ABC News 4 Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube pages.

Live blog embed below authored by Drew Tripp.

Monday

Defense expected to rest Monday after presentation of final expert witnesses. Court starting now.

Dick Harpootlian says he feels it would be useful for the jury to visit the Murdaugh property at Moselle. Harpootlian asks Judge Newman if he'll ask the jury if they want to do it.

Creighton Waters says the state isn't asking to have the jury see the site because it has changed since the time of the murders. He also objects to the jury being asked to take a vote if they want to see the property.

Newman says if either side wants to request a site visit, they can, but he will not poll the jury if they want to go.

Harpootlian says he does want a jury view of the property (after initially saying he didn't necessarily want it). Harpootlian also says there were people trespassing on the Moselle property over the weekend trying to take "selfies" and such at the kennels and house.

Newman assures Harpootlian that the scene will be secured by law enforcement and the jury will not be subjected to "paparazzi" or a carnival atmosphere at the site.

First witness: Dr. Jonathan Eisenstat

Now on the witness stand for the Defense, Dr. Jonathan Eisenstat, forensic pathologist.

Eisenstat is now in private practice after working with law enforcement in the Atlanta area for many years.

Eisenstat is qualified as an expert witness. He's been paid by the defense so far $3K, and will bill $5,500 for testimony.

Harpootlian begins by asking Eisenstat about Coroner Richard Harvey's testimony about checking the bodies the night of the murders.

Eisenstat says the standard he goes by is to put a thermometer down to get ambient temp, then insert rectal thermometer to get core body temp, then check for signs of rigor mortis (body stiffening) and blood settling in the body.

Eisenstat says touching the bodies under the armpit as Harvey did would amount to essentially a guess when determining the time of death, not truly useful. Worth noting here why Harvey said he didn't insert a rectal thermometer. It was an active crime scene, there were lots of people around, it was raining, trying to disturb scene as little as possible, etc.

The defense has tried to introduce Dr. Ellen Riemer's autopsy notes into evidence because Eisenstat reviewed them. The State objects, citing something about Dr. Riemer having already testified to these records and they shouldn't be allowed into evidence. (Not sure I understand this one).

Judge Newman admits the documents into evidence over the state's objection.

Backing up a moment, it's worth noting the State never asked Dr. Riemer about time of death, and Richard Harvey was the defense's own witness by which the Defense first tried to establish time of death.

Eisenstat agrees with nearly all of Dr. Ellen Riemer's findings on Maggie Murdaugh, except for the bullet that went through her breast and jaw. Riemer theorized the bullet that went through Maggie's breast had come from behind her, through her breast and up through her jaw and injuring the head.

Eisenstat says he thinks the shot came from the same direction as the lethal one into her head, hitting her first in the side of the head near left ear and jaw (blowing her earlobe off) then going down into her breast.

Eisenstat says the skin tags (damage to skin indicating direction of bullet) indicate the shot to the jaw, breast came likely from the same direction as the lethal one into the head that killed her, likely in back-to-back succession. He agrees with Dr. Riemer that Maggie was likely doubled over or down on all fours for the shots.

Eisenstat called the wound to Maggie's breast a "beautiful" example of a bullet wound. He quickly apologized and clarified he meant it was a textbook, perfect example of something you'd see in a medical pathology textbook.

Eisenstat disagrees with Riemer about the gunshot wound to Paul's head. He believes the fatal shot to Paul came from a direct contact shotgun wound to the back of Paul's head -- meaning the gun barrel likely was directly against his head when the shot was fired. He explains contact range gunshots from shotguns would result in destruction of the back of the head like what Paul suffered, the pellets traveling tightly threw his head, out of his jaw and into the shoulder -- in the exact opposite direction of what Riemer suggested.

Harpootlian and Eisenstat note that Paul's head wasn't shaved to determine if there was burning on Paul's head to indicate if it was or wasn't a contact shot.

Riemer's primary argument against the contact gunshot to Paul's head is his brain wouldn't have been intact after the shot (as it was found on the ground outside his body). Rather, she said it would've been decimated by the pressure of the gun blast. She also noted the splatter of brain matter, blood and biological tissue all over the top of the feed room door, indicating the shot had come from below.

Eisenstat says further proof of the location of the shot being above Paul is the fact X-rays show birdshot pellets were found in Paul's left rib cage, following the angle of the wound in Paul's jaw. Eisenstat further says there are numerous fractures in the remainder of the skull, which he says is textbook for a contact gunshot wound to the top of the head.

For Dr. Riemer's scenario, Eisenstat says the top of Paul's skull wouldn't have been gone. There would've been fractures, but not the total decimation of the top and back of his skull.

Eisenstat disagrees with Riemer, saying brain evisceration is textbook for a contact shotgun wound. He also notes there would be a significant backspatter from that type of shot -- blood, tissue, etc. In Eisentstat's opinion, the person firing the gun at that range would be covered in that backspatter.

Eisenstat says he would've liked to see Paul's head shaved. If so, it would've potentially shown gunpower residue and burns on the tissue and skull. He is confident just by looking at the wound it was an entrance wound.

In Eisenstat's opinion, Paul was likely doubled over from pain and somebody shot him in the top of the head. (Kin Kinsey testified from the angle of the blood drops on the floor of the feed room, Paul had remained standing upright at least for a few moments after the shot).

Eisenstat is drawing diagrams of different shotgun wounds.

The diagram Eisenstat has drawn is being used to demonstrate the Defense's position the shot to Paul's head came from left to right downward, not right to left upward.

Eisenstat says it's not unusual for the brain of a subject in contact gunshot wound cases to remain intact as Paul's did. Sometimes there's more pulverization of the brain matter, sometimes not. Not out of the ordinary for the brain to be eviscerated from the brain case in any event.

Harpootlian has no further questions.

Savanna Goude now doing cross exam for the State.

Eisenstat didn't produce a written report citing his sources and showing his work, wasn't asked to.

Goude is questioning Eisenstat about Paul's brain. He agrees it's not splattered or macerated (liquefied), but does note their appears to be injuries to the brain.

Goude notes there is blood spatter on the top of the door. Eisenstat believes this is blowback from the gunshot to Paul. Goude brings up the line of blood in the feed room. Eisenstat says that's getting into the area of shot trajectory, not something he's qualified to opine on. No more questions from Goude, none from Defense. Eisenstat is excused.

Next witness: Tim Palmbach

Next on the stand for the Defense, Tim Palmbach, a forensics expert.

We took a minute to go back and listen to State crime scene expert Dr. Kin Kinsey's testimony supporting Dr. Ellen Riemer's position Paul was shot at an upward angle.

Kinsey noted there were birdshot pellet defects in the top of the door and doorframe of the feed room, and the blood spatter pattern shown on the door supported the trajectory of an upward shot angle.

He noted a void area on the door and in the feed room below and past which there was no blood, indicating Paul's body was between the door and the shot.

Kinsey also noted the blood pattern found on the feed room door would've alternatively been seen on the ground on the opposite side of Paul's body had the shot come downward from Paul's right to left rather than upward from Paul's left to right.

Back to Palmbach's testimony for the defense.

Palmbach says he was shown Paul's head wound photos, and he said it appeared consistent with a contact entrance wound, not the exit wound Dr. Riemer suggested. He told the Defense to hire a forensic pathologist, leading them to Eisenstat.

Palmbach agrees with Eisenstat the wound on Paul's head was completely consistent with a contact wound. He noted there would've been blowback of biological matter that easily could've sprayed back upward at the door.

Palmbach also notes the actual birdshot pellets would've been part of the blowback, because they would've ricocheted and bounced around the brain case, then bounced back out and upward.

That explains to him why there's birdshot in the top of the doorframe. Palmbach says it's also very likely the shooter would've been hit by the birdshot, and if not wounded than certainly might've felt "stinging" from the pellets in addition to being covered in biological material.

Palmbach believes the shooter would've been in the doorway firing downward at Paul's hunched over body as Paul stumbled from the feed rrom, which would've meant the shooter's body blocked the backspatter Kinsey noted as a void, rather than it being Paul's body creating the void.

Palmbach concludes all the crime scene evidence is consistent with his and Dr. Eisenstat's position, and none of it supports Dr. Kinsey's position.

Palmbach is now looking at the blood staining pattern on the ground in and outside the feed room.

Palmbach continues testimony, saying it's apparent to him Paul's head was about 1-2 feet off the ground when the fatal shot was fired. He feels there "clearly" was ample force from the gunshot to splatter blood and biological matter back upward at the top of the door, since we see that on the door (circular reasoning). He also notes potential brain matter, skull fragments and other tissue on the ground to the left of Paul's body.

Next witness: John Marvin Murdaugh

The Defense has called Alex Murdaugh's brother, John Marvin Murdaugh, to testify.

John Marvin has testified to Maggie and Alex's relationship. Noted a story about them holding hands and swaying at a Darius Rucker concert. Loved each other dearly.

John Marvin had a special relationship with Paul. His nickname for Paul was "Rooster" or "Little Rooster." Paul always left stuff at his house. They spent countless hours together.

John Marvin discussed how his father Randolph was in failing health and had been taken to the hospital on June 7.

The last time John Marvin saw Paul was at his house the afternoon of June 7. Paul had swapped trucks with John Marvin due to transportation complications with taking their father to the hospital. Paul took John Marvin's truck home.

John Marvin got a call from Alex the night of June 7. Alex was hysterical, said Maggie and Paul have been badly hurt. He jumped in Paul's "hunk of junk" truck and started driving. Called family friend, Yemassee Police Chief Greg Alexander to make sure he got there. The truck was sputtering and eventually broke down. Greg Alexander picked him up and drove them the rest of the way.

John Marvin affirms Alex's testimony, he can't ever remember being in his brother's house without the TV being on.

John Marvin believes Alex had showered at some point based on his appearance the night of the murders, but didn't see him go into the bathroom to shower or anything.

John Marvin describes going to the crime scene the morning after the murders. He cleared it with law enforcement first, made sure the crime scene had been cleared. He saw a horrible scene. (He begins crying on the witness stand). Blood, brains everywhere at Paul's death location.

Overwhelming disbelief. No mother or father should ever see what he saw. He started cleaning the areas, felt compelled to do it for Paul and for his dignity. He felt he owed it to him. Cleaned for 15 minutes, called his brother Randy who told him to stop, it wasn't healthy for him to be doing that to himself.

Mark Ball eventually showed up and got him to leave.

Later, John Marvin heard from someone at the scene Maggie's phone was missing. He asked Buster about "Find My Friends." Buster pulled up his Mom's name on "Find My Friends," the phone pinged right down the road from the front of the property. He said it was a "holy s---" moment.

He went to a SLED agent and said they found it, let's go get it. SLED blew him off, said they had technology coming that would allow them to find it later. Upset, he went to Solicitor Duffie Stone's team, and there agents went immediately down the road to go get the phone. SLED agents met them at the scene, took control of the phone.

John Marvin recalls walking through the house with SLED agent Katie McCallister as she looked for guns, evidence.

John Marvin says Alex and the family had lots of guns. Alex typically used smaller gauge shotguns, not 12 gauges.

John Marvin was the point person for the family for law enforcement. He says they never asked to visit their parents' house at Almeda.

John Marvin was critical of law enforcement putting out statement there was no threat to the public. That to him implied the suspect was in custody.

John Marvin was with Alex all the time for the week after the shooting. Words can't describe how upset Alex was. He lost a lot of weight.

John Marvin says media inflamed rumors after the boat crash were totally blown out of proportion. He felt there wasn't as much community backlash as there was social media backlash.

Griffin now transitioning to Labor Day weekend 2021, taking Alex to rehab. Alex's legs were shaking and thrashing, he was squirming, sweating profusely, soiled his pants from diarrhea while in the car.

John Marvin says when SLED finally searched their parents' house in September, they told him they took a coat they found somewhere "back on the property." Later he was shown a photo of the blue raincoat, and was told it was found in the house. Never got an explanation of the discrepancy between the locations he was given.

John Marvin can't recall his father ever cleaning his gun.

Jury has been excused while the lawyers debate line of questioning to John Marvin regarding the alleged blood on the T-shirt Alex was wearing at the scene.

Objection by state to line of questioning has been overruled. John Marvin explained SLED basically told him the t-shirt Alex was wearing was covered in blood, going so far as to describe Alex using the bottom of the t-shirt to wipe blood spatter off his face.

John Marvin says Alex had a wonderful relationship with Maggie's family, especially her father "Papa T."

John Marvin says he spoke out loud to Paul's memory at the scene the day after murder. Recalls promising to find Paul's killer.

John Conrad for the State is now doing cross examination.

Conrad asks John Marvin about cooperation with the investigation. JM says he fully cooperated, and it appeared to him Alex was as well.

John Marvin says he first learned about the video showing Alex was at the kennel in 2022. Conrad clarifies for the jury it was in August 2022. John Marvin says Alex never told him that personally. Agrees that means Alex lied and wasn't fully cooperative with SLED. John Marvin says his truck that Paul drove home the evening of the murders was parked up at the house when he finally got up there at 3 a.m. after being at the scene.

Conrad asks if JM is aware of Alex loaning police chief/friend Greg Alexander several thousand dollars in years prior to murders. He wasn't aware.

JM says he wasn't aware of Alex's opioid problem before Sept. 2021.

Conrad brings up a later interview with John Marvin and Buster present. The state is asking JM about several questions Buster was asked regarding the blue raincoat. JM says he doesn't recall any questions about the topic of a blue raincoat.

Conrad asked specifically if JM recalled Buster saying "if it cost more than $15, it wasn't (his grandfather's)," indicating the jacket didn't belong to Randolph Murdaugh.

Conrad has JM clarify the family wasn't aware on June 7 that Randolph's diagnosis was terminal. If Alex told Jeanne Seckinger that and Jeanne Seckinger repeated it, they both were wrong. If Jeanne assumed it, she's wrong.

No cross redirect from the Defense. The Defense rests its case.

Defense renews its motion for a directed verdict. Motion denied.

Waters for the State says they 4 definite, perhaps a 5th reply witness to call to testify. He doesn't expect them to be lengthy, and could be done by tomorrow afternoon.

Harpootlian suggests Waters has overpromised, underdelivered on time estimates so far, suggests it'll probably be midday Wednesday now before the State is done. He's "not criticizing," he says.

Judge Newman says the court will have the jury visit the Moselle site following the conclusion of the state's reply witnesses.

Around 5 p.m., court adjourned until 9:30 a.m. Tuesday.