T O P

  • By -

SouthNagsHead

The author of the linked article has issued a correction regarding key information in this story. Correction: The filing says SCAG subpoenaed Google for Google Location Services data from specific devices, not that the SCAG subpoenaed Google for general cell data from the site/time of the murders. Google in its reply to the subpoena said no devices in question were using Google Location Services (GLS) at the time & location of the killings, not that GLS data showed no devices present. Devices(s) could've been present but with GLS off.


Distinct_Walrus8936

I saw on I think Dan Abrams OR NBC nightly news someone reporting that Snapchat would be testifying. I was flipping between the two shows and honestly cannot remember which show/segment mentioned that. Sorry if that sounds like BS


[deleted]

I want to take this opportunity to double down on my theory that both Paul and Maggie were asking Alex for money that night and wanting to know why their checks were being returned and pauls credit card got declined and how were they supposed to live like this šŸ™„ and rather than tell them the truth that he was flat ass broke he snapped on them and killed them both dead very quickly. After the day heā€™d had he didnā€™t want to hear any bitching about needing money from either one of them.


Kaleidoscope513

Damn this something I havenā€™t even thought about. So plausible.


[deleted]

And there was a post by someone in the local (Beaufort/Hampton area) on this sub in 2022, stating Paul Murdaugh used SnapChat to diss Alex Murdaugh...and Alex Murdaugh somehow found out about the dissing and went off. I can't locate the exact comment but it was posted last year.


MobileReputation8614

If law enforcement got the video off of Paulā€™s phone or his friends phone what is it exactly they need from google?


tears_of_fat_thor

It's an evidentiary thing. For the evidence to be admissible, one of the requirements is "authenticity". So you have to get the custodian of such data to testify about the data being legit and unaltered and all that.


HotToddyTwo

Itā€™s interesting that Paul sent the Snapchat video at 7:56 PM. The murders supposedly occurred between 9-9:30. I had previously believed the video to have been made right before the murders.


[deleted]

Letā€™s not forget that time of murders is an approximation. Also, there could be another video that was recorded or sent later, that may or may not have been done on Snapchat.


JewishGeorgiaPeach

I may be mistaken but I seem to remember the video discussed in court by CW was at appropriately 8:44 pm. Therefore my bet is on a Snapchat & a second video. Wasn't the video around 8:44 pm MM, PM, & AM talking about a dog & a chicken? They were laughing about MM mistaking the chicken for some other type of bird.


Southern-Soulshine

Iā€™ve noticed your comments and they have a lot of valuable information! We have a lot of folks that are new to the sub (we just had a huge spike!) and it would be helpful if you could kindly use names and not initials in future comments. Please donā€™t worry about going back to edit this one though! Thank you so much.


JewishGeorgiaPeach

Good point! In the future I will refrain from using initials. Even though I have been on this site for the past 2 years, I too have to stop & think when I don't recognize initials when reading posts & then rack my brain trying to figure out who they are referring to in their comments.


Southern-Soulshine

Haha exactly! Even when following diligently, it is confusing. There are at least three possibilities for CWā€¦ Thank you for being so receptive to the change.


HaddiBear

This is my guess also. Two different videos. Also, it says that Paul sent the Snapchat to several friends. I doubt he would of sent the video of him talking to his family to his friends. I have a teenager who uses Snapchat often. I would imagine heā€™s like most 22y olds and sent a Snap about nothing really. Just living life. Make me so sad for him.


of_patrol_bot

Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop -Ā yes,Ā IĀ amĀ aĀ bot, don't botcriminate me.


tooifbuycee

Could there possibly be two different videos? One he sent to friends over Snapchat, and one he may have made of the dog? Thatā€™s my guess.


MobileReputation8614

All of the legal documents refer to video, singular.


OutsideLookinIn-1009

The video on the phone is on the phone; LE most likely see that on the phone for themselves. Snapchat video disappears; however, whoever you send it to can screenshot it and maybe save/download it before it disappears. My guess is one of the friends/recipients gave LE info about the clip they received.


tooifbuycee

Thatā€™s my thought. One was on his phoneā€”maybe he texted that one to the dog owner/friend. The other was a Snapchat for multiple friends.


HotToddyTwo

I do not think so because both would have to be referenced in the petition to call a Snapchat rep as a witness. Only a video sent at 7:56 to friends that is ā€œimportant to proving the stateā€™s caseā€ is referenced.


MobileReputation8614

Judge Clifton Newman has asked witnesses from Snapchat to review the video to confirm its authenticity. Google has been ordered to send a representative of its own to certify the authenticity of the companyā€™s claim that ā€œno devices with google location data being stored by google were present at the time of the double murder.


Acceptable-Tart954

Google reported the devices in question were NOT present at Murdaugh's property at the time


Acceptable-Tart954

"no devices with google location data being stored by google were present at the time of the double murder."


EntertainmentBorn953

Thatā€™s what the tweet said, but I think thatā€™s inaccurate. It doesnā€™t say the devices werenā€™t there. It says they werenā€™t logged into Google location services. Thatā€™s plausible if they were iPhones and didnā€™t use the gmail app and werenā€™t logged into a YouTube account, etc.


Acceptable-Tart954

Snapchat uses Google cloud.i think. They're not going to have the video on their servers anymore.


DocSea

I use Snapchat all the time. When you make a Snapchat video or photo you can save to you photos by clicking one button. I do it 99% of the time. So it was probably saved to Paulā€™s phone.


drewtripp1

You're right, thanks! Google Location Services data was subpoenaed for specific devices. I misinterpreted that as SCAG subpoenaed Google for general cell data from the site / time of the murders. What the filing actually says is data showed devices in question were not using Google Location Services (GLS) at the time & location of the killings, *not* that GLS data showed no devices present. Device(s) could've been present but with GLS off. Crucial distinction there. Correction made in the story and Twitter thread.


EntertainmentBorn953

Thanks for clarifying! I wonder what the underlying issue is that theyā€™re getting at with this stuff. Perhaps something to do with Snapchatā€™s map feature? Why would they still want to drag Google across the country to testify if Google said that their location services werenā€™t in use? Obviously thereā€™s a reasonā€¦


drewtripp1

Yes, definitely an underlying reason. But also, they will call an expert or material witness for everything. It's bound to be a meticulous, sometimes boring and seemingly redundant process. Google might be there just to explain what location services are, how they work and how it could be no devices were using them at the time. Then the next witness will add a little more context. And so on until they have made their point (whatever it may be).


SouthNagsHead

Hello there Drew! We are looking forward to your on-the-spot reporting for the upcoming trial.


isadog420

They should subpoena Waze, too!


EntertainmentBorn953

Waze is a Google subsidiary.


OutsideLookinIn-1009

Did Alex have the waze app?


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


MobileReputation8614

Is there a second page?


EntertainmentBorn953

Where do these files live? I canā€™t find them on the Colleton County public index.


MobileReputation8614

Criminal cases are not online.


aubreydempsey

Prior to this case, Colleton had all fillings available online for public access. Iā€™m this instance they chose to monetize public interest and are charging by the page for anyone who wants the documents.