‘I don’t know why they think I’m an expert’: OJ weighs in on Alex Murdaugh’s double murder trial

OJ Simpson predicted today that Alex Murdaugh will beat the case in his double murder trial after “everyone asked for their opinion.”

The disgraced NFL star, who was infamously acquitted of the murders of his ex-wife and her male friend, posted a video to Twitter saying, “I don’t know why they think I’m an expert…people ask me about this Alex Murdaugh trial.’

The Juice, 75, said he initially believed Murdaugh’s decision to take the stand last week was a mistake because the disgraced legal scion “is an admitted liar” but, he added, “lying and money stealing is a little different from murder.”

Simpson said, “From what I’ve seen, I think it’s more likely he did it?” Yes. But more likely is reasonable doubt, from what I’ve seen there’s a lot of reasonable doubt.”

The former Buffalo Bills running back added, “I wouldn’t be surprised if this guy beats this case.”

Simpson said, “When I saw him testify I realized he was just trying to relate to one or two of those jurors that he was a good ‘Ole Boy, that he was one of them and I’m not sure he wasn’t did. can you manage that.’

Murdaugh, 54, is accused of shooting his wife Maggie, 52, and youngest son Paul, 22, at the family’s sprawling hunting estate in Moselle, South Carolina, on the night of June 7, 2021.

However, the state’s case is based on circumstantial evidence that they say puts him on the spot.

No murder weapon has ever been recovered and there is no forensic evidence to prove he committed the brutal murders in the kennels on the estate.

The state says instead that a video taken by his son Paul proves Murdaugh was at the murder scene just before the couple were killed.

The legal heir denied ever being in the kennels until the trial when the video was revealed. Murdaugh sensationally took the stand last week to admit he lied to police, but blamed his opioid addiction on making him paranoid.

Prosecutors say Murdaugh was motivated to kill his wife and son to distract from robbery from his law firm, which threatened to ruin him financially and reputation.

Jurors retired this afternoon to consider their verdict. Murdaugh faces 30 years to life if convicted.

Simpson said that even if Murdaugh isn’t convicted of the murders, “he’s going to jail for all the money he stole.”

Murdaugh stole more than $10 million from clients and partners at his firm in the decade before Maggie and Paul were murdered.

On the day of the murders, he was faced with more than $792,000 that had gone missing in a recent case.

Three days after the murders, he was due to appear in court for a hearing in a lawsuit over his son’s drunken boating accident, which had killed a teenage girl two years earlier.

The patriarch of the family, Randolph III, whom Murdaugh had continually turned to for huge six-figure loans and relied on emotionally, was gravely ill with cancer. He died three days after the murders.

In addition, prosecutors say Murdaugh’s opioid pill use increased sharply and, in the defendant’s own words, “withdrawal would make him do anything.”

Prosecutor Creighton Waters said in his closing argument yesterday: “The pressure on this man was unbearable and they all culminated on the day his wife and son were murdered by him.”

For their part, Murdaugh’s lawyers have tried to portray their client as a loving family man who, while struggling financially and suffering from an opioid addiction that led him to lie and steal, would never harm his wife and child.

They have put forward alternative theories, with Murdaugh testifying that he believed someone was upset about a fatal boating accident in 2019 where Paul likely wanted revenge on his son.

Griffin described the state’s alleged motive as ludicrous, arguing that the murders would only draw more attention, not less, to allegations of Murdaugh’s financial misdeeds.

Griffin repeatedly stressed the high legal bar in criminal cases of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, underlining the challenge faced by prosecutors who have based their case on circumstantial evidence rather than direct evidence.

“If there is any reasonable reason to hesitate to write ‘guilty,’ then the law requires you to write ‘innocent,'” he said.

Griffin also outlined a handful of examples where he claims the state fabricated evidence. They include the claim that Murdaugh had blood splattered on his shirt at high speed, a claim contradicted by testing by SLED.

One of the state’s strongest pieces of evidence is Murdaugh’s admission from the witness stand last week that he lied about his whereabouts the night of the murders, telling investigators he was not in the dog kennels before the murders.

Griffin repeated Murdaugh’s claim that he lied to investigators because of paranoia related to his drug use, as well as his mistrust of the police.

“He lied because that’s what addicts do. He lied because he had a closet full of skeletons,” the lawyer said.

The case has attracted significant media attention given the family’s immense political power in and around Colleton County, where the trial is taking place.

For decades until 2006, family members served as the area’s leading plaintiff, and Murdaugh was a prominent personal injury attorney in the Deep South state.