wouldn t take long to wash yourself off. getting that cart, and head back to the house. and then at 9:02, the defendant over there who wouldn t even admit until forced to that he was even at the scene, all of a sudden he is as busy as he s ever been. 9:02 to 9:06, 283 steps. 9:03, we see the system start up on the car, that could mean he s close by the car, as he returned with maggie s phone and placed it in that car, and then, what do we see from 9:02 to 9:06, not on four-minute period, but he s su doing. what were you doing? and everybody though he has a photographic memory, he could not answer what he s doing during this four-minute period that is so illustrating of what we re talking about here. for four minutes he is not only going 283 steps. this is a defense exhibit, defense 156. 283 steps. and they put in the distance. we heard the distance isn t as accurate. it illustrates the point. that s 208 meters. meter, you know, roughly is a yard, a little bit more, a little b
firearms. those major points the prosecution should stick to, and the whole financial crime motive they should back away from. hey, jack, as they re wrapping up the defense arguments, the prosecution i should say again arguments today, we ve been watching this for so many days now, when we look ahead, of course, to tomorrow as the defense begins their closing arguments, what are you expecting? from what i understand, jim griffin may be doing the closing argument for the defense. and he s very effective. he does use power points to make sure that he gets all the facts in and conveys those to the jury. but here s what i think the main problem is for the prosecution. yeah? most is not you don t have to prove motive in a murder case. but their motive that they suggested in this case just doesn t work in my opinion. no one is going to kill their spouse and their son to go ahead
was to commit this heinous crime to invoke sympathy in everyone so that they wouldn t worry about the financial crimes. you can debate whether or not that s a good, effective technique as a motive, but it s hard for, i think, them to make that case, so instead, what you see now is to really focus on the time line, and really focus on how this doesn t add up, and now what they re doing just minutes ago, most effective, i think, is to show his history of past lies, to show how easily he does it, when you hear him invent this new story, prosecutor waters says a new story, to show them he lied to you ladies and gentlemen because you ve seen him lie repeatedly time and time again about being at the scene of the crime which of course again is the heart of the case. andtories transpired throughout time. jack, i m going to go around the horn here, danny cevallos, standing by. jack, what has stood out to you in the prosecution s case?
that, in fact, alec murdaugh was the man who was the third voice that was heard in the snapchat video. i want to bring in nbc news senior legal correspondent laura jarrett, and south carolina criminal defense attorney jack swirly as well, a close associate of murdaugh defense attorney, dick harpootlian. we have been watching this thing all day. what has stood out to you so far in the defense s closing arguments? or the prosecution s i should say? we re finally now getting to the heart of the prosecution s case, and perhaps the most strong piece of their case, which is the time line. and how the time line is just not plausible for him. and so what you finally see now is getting away from all of the financial crimes, getting away from what prosecution says is the motive, which is that alec murdaugh wanted to distract from his financial storm as the prosecution puts it, and so the motive apparently in their view