ISLANDTON, S.C., — The two-shooter theory was a central point of debate during the Alex Murdaugh trial, with multiple witnesses, experts, and commentators weighing in on the possibility that more than one person could have been responsible for the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. Here’s a breakdown of how various individuals, from family members, news experts to legal experts, contributed to this theory:
1. Buster Murdaugh – Alex’s Son
Buster Murdaugh, Alex’s surviving son, did advocate for the two-shooter theory, but his presence as a figure tied closely to his father’s defense raised implicit questions. Given Buster’s testimony and involvement, his defense of his father naturally aligned with the argument that Alex Murdaugh alone couldn’t have committed the murders. Buster’s perspective, coupled with the emotional and public nature of the case, left many speculating whether he supported the notion of multiple people being involved as part of the broader defense strategy.
2. Melinda Worley – SLED Agent
Melinda Worley, a forensic scientist from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED), provided critical forensic evidence during the trial. Although she didn’t directly propose the two-shooter theory, her findings contributed to it. Worley’s testimony, especially her analysis of ballistics and the angles of the gunshots, was crucial for defense attorneys to build the case that the logistics of the murders—two different weapons, varying angles—could suggest more than one shooter.
3. Alex Murdaugh – Boat Wreck Connection
Though Alex Murdaugh didn’t explicitly testify about the two-shooter theory, the defense drew upon the broader context of the Murdaugh family’s troubled history, including the 2019 boat wreck involving Paul Murdaugh. The defense implied that enemies of the family, possibly connected to the boat wreck incident, could have had a motive to target Paul and Maggie, suggesting a potential two-shooter scenario. This theory helped to frame the idea that there were other potential threats to the Murdaugh family, aligning with the defense’s strategy to introduce reasonable doubt.
4. Ronnie Palmbach – Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory
Ronnie Palmbach, a forensic expert and former director of the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory, was a critical figure in advancing the two-shooter theory. He testified for the defense, arguing that based on the evidence—such as the gunshot angles, the use of two different firearms, and the chaotic nature of the crime scene—it was highly improbable that one person could have committed both murders alone. Palmbach’s expert opinion added significant weight to the defense’s argument, reinforcing the idea that two shooters could have been involved.
5. Avery Wilkes – Reporter
Avery Wilkes, a reporter who spent every day at the trial, observed the unfolding two-shooter theory from a journalistic perspective. Wilkes reported on the defense’s strategic push to suggest multiple assailants and highlighted how this theory became a cornerstone of Alex Murdaugh’s defense. Wilkes’ coverage offered readers a real-time perspective on how this theory was received in court and by the public, contributing to its prominence as a potential explanation for the murders.
6. Mark Geragos – World-Renowned Attorney
Mark Geragos, a highly respected attorney, offered commentary on the trial from a legal analysis standpoint. Geragos discussed the plausibility of the two-shooter theory, indicating that while it was a bold defense strategy, it had enough merit to introduce reasonable doubt. Geragos noted that presenting this theory could complicate the prosecution’s narrative, especially given the logistical challenges of committing the murders with two different weapons.
7. Sara Azari – Attorney
Sara Azari, another legal analyst, weighed in on the two-shooter theory, pointing out the defense’s attempt to poke holes in the prosecution’s timeline and narrative. Azari emphasized that while the theory was plausible, it was ultimately up to the jury to decide whether the evidence strongly supported it. Azari also highlighted how introducing the possibility of two shooters added a layer of complexity to an already convoluted case.
8. Kenny Kinsey – State Witness
Kenny Kinsey, a crime scene expert and state witness, challenged the two-shooter theory. Kinsey provided a detailed breakdown of the evidence that suggested Alex Murdaugh could have acted alone. His analysis of the gunshot wounds and the trajectory of the bullets contradicted the defense’s assertion of two shooters, arguing that the evidence could still support a single-shooter scenario. Kinsey’s testimony provided a strong counter-narrative to the defense’s claims. But could not say it wasn’t two shooters.
9. Buster Murdaugh and Stephen Smith – SLED’s Early Questions
In a significant twist, SLED questioned Buster Murdaugh just three days after the murders about the mysterious death of Stephen Smith, a young man whose body was found under suspicious circumstances in 2015. This questioning sparked rumors about a possible connection between Buster and Smith’s death, although no formal charges were filed. Some have speculated that SLED’s inquiry into Buster so soon after the murders could hint at broader, undisclosed motives or connections, though this remains speculative. The timing of this questioning added to the overall intrigue and complexity surrounding the case and its potential ties to other incidents involving the Murdaugh family. Could SLED have been trying to see if the real killers of Stephen Smith may have also killed Paul Murdaugh and his mother, Maggie?
10. Thomas Haynes – Retired Investigator
Thomas Haynes, a retired investigator for the Nashville Medical Examiner’s Office, also raised concerns about the prosecution’s narrative. In an interview, Haynes suggested that the physical evidence didn’t align with a single-shooter theory. He questioned the lack of forensic evidence tying Alex Murdaugh directly to the crime and emphasized the possibility of multiple perpetrators. Haynes’ expertise in analyzing crime scenes contributed to the ongoing debate over whether Alex could have acted alone.
Tying It All Together: The Two-Shooter Theory and Its Impact
The two-shooter theory introduced during the Alex Murdaugh trial created significant doubt about the prosecution’s narrative. Defense experts like Ronnie Palmbach and legal analysts such as Mark Geragos and Sara Azari highlighted the logistical challenges of committing the murders alone. Meanwhile, state witnesses like Kenny Kinsey sought to counter these claims with detailed forensic evidence.
Adding to the intrigue, the questioning of Buster Murdaugh about the Stephen Smith case just days after the murders led to further speculation about the Murdaugh family’s involvement in other unresolved incidents. This, combined with Alex Murdaugh’s troubled history, including the boat wreck and other controversies, cast a long shadow over the trial, leaving the jury with much to consider.
In the end, the two-shooter theory may not have been definitively proven, but it played a crucial role in shaping the defense’s case and introducing reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors and public observers alike.
