i can promise you, i would hurt myself before i would get one of them. >> the alex murdaugh trial in the deep south captivating the nation. >> there are a lot of conversations i had where i misled my clients, and i stole their money. >> a case of wealth, power, privilege, and murder. >> one side, i continue to lie. >> but is there enough evidence to convict the man at the center of it all? >> i did not shoot my wife or my son anytime. ever. >> tonight, we lay out the facts. the mysterious clues,

the trials studies, in this primetime special. >> good evening everyone, i am laura coats, the closing argument today in the alex murdaugh double murder trial will resume tomorrow. they come after five weeks of intense, emotional, and graphic moments. as a jury of 12 in south carolina will soon decide alex murdaugh's face, and for the very first time today they visited the scene of the murders of maggie and paul murdoch, traveling to the families hunting property. we also got to look at the crime scene of close we have video released today. here is how tonight is going to work. we have assembled some of the nation's most prominent trial and jury veterans to analyze the key pieces of evidence. and

which side may have the best argument. on the defense table, mark o'mara, who defended george zimmerman. jennifer vaughan jean who defended bill cosby, and r. kelly. and lonnie coombs, a former los angeles criminal prosecutor and a veteran former homicide prosecutor in brooklyn. in our makes a jury box, the neutral voices at least four tonight, richard gabriel, a jury consultant in many high-profile cases, including the og simpson and casey anthony chiles. judge glenda hatchet who was the first african american chief judge of the state of georgia, and ken --, who everyone from hold hogan to sarah palin. before we begin, if you have not been following this trial

we are going to give you the quick overview of just how we get here. let's go live to right randi kaye has been following every twist and turn, randy? >> laura, his all started nearly two years ago. with a double murder not far from this courthouse on a property known as moselle. ever since then, it has turned into a twisted tale of greed, lies, and more lies and the state says that there is one man orchestrating all of it and that was alex murdaugh. >> [inaudible] my wife and child [inaudible]. >> june 7th, 2021, alec murdaugh says that he called 9-1-1 after finding his wife and youngest son debt other hunting property known as moselle. >> did you touch maggie at all? >> i did. i touched them both. i mean, i try to do it as limited as possible. but i tried to take their pulse on both of them. >> 52-year-old maggie murdoch has been shot four or five times with a black out rifle.

paul murdoch has been shot twice with a shotgun. >>.,. horrendous. horrible. but during. >> both were murdered near the dog kennels on the family's property, not far from the main house where alex murdaugh said he was not being at the time. that was a lie. >> was that you on the cannelville eo at 8:44 pm on june 7th the night that maggie and paul were murdered? >> it is. >> he was backed into the corner. investigators found this video on his cell phone after his death. it was recorded at 8:44 pm just a few minutes before prosecutor say that the murders occurred. alex murdaugh can be heard talking in the background. >> i was nowhere near paul and

maggie when they got shot. >> despite his denials, prosecutors say that murdaugh killed them from distracting from his financial schemes that were coming to light. he was conflicted about missing funds and his law firm, and his personal finances were about to be exposed at an upcoming court hearing. >> there are plenty of times where i took money that i should not have taken. >> murdaugh's defense team pushed back on the alleged motive in this defense witness told the jury that after analyzing people's trajectory he determines that someone much shorter than alex murdaugh who is about 65 likely was responsible for killing his wife.

>> it puts the shooter or whoever fired the weapon, if they were that tall, it puts them in an unrealistic shooting position. >> now you have been up to speed. i want to go right to the evidence. it comes down to two things that every single prosecutor has to contend with. we are talking motive, and opportunity. and without direct evidence, or eyewitnesses, or even the weapons themselves, the prosecution is going to have to prove the latter. opportunity, better known as time. let's focus first on the timeline. the prosecution is laid out and the big question, did murdaugh has time to commit murder, get rid of the guns, clean himself up, leave, and return in about an hour and 17 minutes? or, is there reasonable doubt? let's drill down on that key kennel video that was mentioned. i want to turn to the prosecution first because listen, he is emitting now that he is on the scene of the crime, moments before the murders. is that enough? >> with everything else, yes. it is not cell phone that is the cornerstone of the prosecution's case. paul gave an investigator, and the prosecution the exact tools they needed to figure out who it was that killed maggie, and paul, and it was his father, his wife, and he can get away from it when you put all of the pieces together. >> you can't get away in the sense of this, you are playing devil's advocate, but look, it

shows it in the kennel. i don't see direct evidence of the murder yet. what do you think? >> there is no direct evidence of the murder whatsoever. this case, as we all know, is a substantial evidence case. the prosecution has got to do away with, to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. that there is someone else who may have done it and quite honestly, without that type of direct evidence i think that it is a very questionable case that 12 people are going to say without question we have no doubt that he did it. >> but he did a disservice here, which is your point as well, why did he lie? you could have said it at anytime, anytime in the last two years, i was at the kettles. when it comes in witness after witness, suddenly it is like i was there. >> absolutely. i think this video is the most important piece of evidence. because it explodes the big lie. i'm not talking about the hundreds of lies that he told in the past i'm talking about the big lie, his alibi, where he said that i was not there are the crime scene, i was at the house taking a nap. he told this from

the first moment he called 9-1-1 to the first responder, to the first interview with law enforcement on night to do more interviews with law enforcement, to all of his family members, to friends to everyone. until as you said, this video came up and in court, witness after witness came in and said that is him on that video. so that explains, it blows that up. and now we have to explain, why did he tell that lie? if his family has just been murdered, and he wants to help law enforcement find the real killer, he knows that telling them the last time that he saw them was a critical piece of evidence. he lied, why? because he knows when the time of death is because he wasn't there. that is why he went through so much lengths to make his alibi -- >> the ally is the crown jewel of the prosecution. however, it does not provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. because people lie in circumstances like this all the time. i represented plenty of people, factually innocent, who have told them lies because in the moment the stress, the how does this look, do i look like i might be guilty, i know i am not guilty, and it is an instinctive lie. it is true it creates a problem because there are so many lies that have to throw from it. but i think that the video also raises interesting questions like what happened in those few minutes? you have a seemingly normal

video, this kennel video, there does not seem to be anyone in distress. versus does not seem to be yelling, anything unusual. and then all of a sudden this horrendous crime happens, what happened? as much as the prosecution wants to say that this is a mastermind, this was not a very well thought out crime. if in fact, you are saying he calculated this, it was a big scheme to deflect from all of these financial crimes. so i think that the defense could use the video to their advantage although i believe it started off as a big problem. >> this is not a direct evidence case, but i think there is so much stronger. because of the, and the puzzle has to show one face, and one face, alone and here it is. alex murdaugh, yeah, people live for innocent reasons. that is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. but when you couple it with all of these small evidence, every different thing that happened, all the lies, this is a tsunami about to hit this man to rip apart this legacy that his family has been the meaning of there being in the area for years. and you look at the fact, the motive, means, opportunity, every small piece, large piece, in that case the lies coupled together with the other pieces i think the jury sees what the prosecution has been putting together, can overcome that extremely high burden as it should be proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

>> it is an enormous stretch to say that i will steal from people but not to cover up that ice toll from people, or my opiate addiction, whatever, i will kill my son, and i will kill my wife. that is such a stretch. if the states case was so strong, circumstantial as it, is why the big focus on the finances ? why the big focus on

the try? why try to convict him for that which he is not being prosecuted for in front of the jury? it is because they do not have a strong case on the actual murders. >> i want to hear your point but i also want to hear how this is landing. because this has been a really big question for so many. not only the idea of motive and opportunity but the idea of the big lie. let's hear from our fact finders and of course, you are not here to decide guilt or innocence, you are not the actual jurors in this case. but i want to lean on your neutrality nonetheless. tell me, who do you think has a stronger argument, is that a justifiable lie or is it that he lied, therefore he killed? >> can i just say two things? because we are all lawyers. and

i just want to make sure that we remember that the people who are viewing this typically are not. so i want to do two things quickly, it one is the point about reasonable doubt. it doesn't mean that you have to prove beyond any doubt, it means that you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. and secondly the prosecution under the law is not required to outline or prove the motive. i just want to frame that as we are talking about that. having said that, i think the fact that he waited until there was testimony, in this courtroom, for multiple people. and then said yes, i was there, and i was paranoid. really, i think that the credibility has a gap, and once you have that credibility gap i think that it also can take your other testimony. whether you are credible or not. think about that as we are having this conversation. >> what about to you? >> i think you hit on an important point here. juries

make decisions in a different way than what lawyers and judges do. they have an interesting way of saying that it is not really about the evidence. for them, it is about the story. what are they putting together? they may think okay, he has the means, he has the opportunity, it is really the why. it is how they constructed it. what is going through his head? a lot of times, i think that a lot of attorneys here know that trial sometimes is about rational explanations for rational behavior. they are trying to figure out the explanation of this. they are trying to construct their own either reasonable doubt, because the real issue for a jury is what they want to believe, and that is do they want to believe that he is guilty, and that actually happens much earlier in the case. it sometimes happens as early as jury selection where they go look at this guy, and then they go i don't know about the murdochs. and i don't like them. >> i will put on one more piece of evidence because you talked about the idea of constructing. and mind you, this is a team that wants the jury in front of the people who might say i know murdaugh let me point this out to you guys, because i want to

point out what has been happening in terms of what the prosecution has been saying about the movement. we know he was at the scene of the crime because he said it, he admitted to it. the question is, what was he doing in between the time that he was at the kennel, and called the police? listen to this. >> cell phone data, filling the gaps in a case with dramatically little physical evidence. state investigators piece together a detailed timeline of events using cellular and gps data. >> there are 4820 data points that make up these lines here. >> prosecutors pointed out that alex murdaugh, who is more active at the time of the murders that at any point that night. >> 283 steps, he was a busy guy. >> and he tried to indicate that murdaugh disposed of his wife's phone using data to show that he drove by slowly where it was later found. >> after passing that location, the vehicle started to accelerate. >> they wanted to show that their phones were never

together tonight and that her phone did not appear to be motion activated at the time that the state suggested that alec murdaugh tossed it out of his moving car. >> at that time the screen never came on. >> that is correct, they indicated it was off. >> they talked about 4000 data points, how about nine? the idea that the points in time, his phone records, what it really means, think about the volume of information that a jury as the judge points out, they are not used to doing this all day long. they do not live, eat, and breathe the case. how is it playing to have so many different points, and then coming down to the cell phone timeline? >> it is terribly difficult for me to be neutral. i am hearing so many things that i like, and

when you piece them all together, i don't think that jurors sit there and concentrate on 283 steps. i think they concentrate on a story. that story has got to be authentic. when i want to stop doing this, authentic means the facts with the bad ones and the good ones. being able to tell a story that will make sense to people in a way that you can win your case. if you can't win the, case you should not -- i don't think of the steps, all of that, there are 1 million ways. these phones and how they track your steps, i don't think that is what this breaks down. i don't think they put him on the stand until the take comes up and. they know he is there. he's got to explain this away and i will tell you this, when i first started looking at this, and what they don't know they're in tv land is that we do not courtney dislodged. we

all looked at this, and when i first looked at the motive jumped out at me because there was no authenticity to the story, it does not make sense that a guy is going to murder his wife and his son to distract from a financial crimes investigation. i mean, this guy is a lawyer, he would take the hit on the financial crimes. it is a much more defensible scenario than this. >> i'm hearing all of this murmuring, you're talking about, it i want to go here because i hear you talk about it. >> i will talk about your point, as the prosecution team and the defense, talk to me about this. because what is jumping out, in theory, is emotive issue. it was in the middle of all of this, and the idea of the minutiae, the devil being in the details, but is the devil in the details helpful to this case? i think it is, because this is someone who is a true narcissist. who puts his interest above everyone's, his son, his wife, look who he was

stealing, from his housekeeper's family, people who had almost nothing. he was willing to take it all the way for his own personal gain. and you know what can testing about these steps, i absolutely agree. however look at that, i wish that i could do 283 steps every few minutes of my day. we would all be in a lot better shape. this is a man who says that he had taken a nap, and that has gone to see his ailing mother. that is not 283 step. that becomes part of a cohesive story, which is that this is someone who has thought this out, who has decided in his warped mind that this is the way to get out from under, so he is putting his plan in action. i agree with jennifer, it is not a great plan, but the most mastermind -- it is why people are convicted, and in the end of the day -- >> we will keep it down everyone for a moment, i want to talk about this issue. it is hard not to get riled up with these arguments, and what is going on. she saying that this is all the concocted alibi. if the motive evidence is so loud, the prosecution does not have

to prove motive but it is the one thing that juries really want to hear. they really want to know why. and this motive makes no sense. let me get this straight, i have this house of cards ready to tumble down all of these financial crimes. let me throw a double homicide on. that will fix everything. it makes zero sense. and why two? you could kill one person and have the same effect if you really want to just -- it doesn't make sense. i think that it is the weakest point, and yet still, the most important point, notwithstanding the prosecution doesn't have to prove it. >> i agree, even as the trial unfolded just from the opening

statements, when he laid out that the motive for the double murder of your wife and son was to distract, nobody is going to buy that. you don't just have a horrific, violent murder and that is where the defense got up and described the brain going up, and eventually you are like no, there's no way that he could have done that. however, as this case unfolded, i agree that the prosecution spent way too much time on the financial crimes. the details were important because they could talk about how he was so cold about stealing from friends who are dying and taking their money and saying i'm sorry you are doing so poorly, but in the closing argument, he expanded the motive. he said that it wasn't just the financial thing, it was the family's legacy. and that is one thing that came out very clear. his legacy that goes back 100 years, it is the most important thing for him. his prominence in the community, all of it was tied in with what

was going on on the financial side that was being covered up and it was all going to be exposed. it was going to tear down his family legacy and that was part of the reason why. it is more of the motive. but the reason why we don't have to prove motive is because there is no rational motive for murder. we are never going to understand that a person's motive is. >> we were also told that there was a rocky patch in their marriage. and i both paul and maggie were starting to give them a hard time about the opioid addiction. and does a lot of bad things to people, unfortunately we have seen that. so a lot of us don't go around murdering other people. it goes towards the guilt when you put it towards the content of all the other people. >> by the context, the motive, we still don't have direct evidence. but we have conversations and testimony throughout, about what he was wearing. so teasing about discussions about the blue jacket, was it a tarp? was it not? the change of clothes, why

was that significant? we will hear from our jury box and our prosecution, next. if your business kept on employees through the pandemic, getrefunds.com can see if it may qualify for a payroll tax refund of up to $26,000 per employee, even if it received ppp, and all it takes is eight minutes to get started. then we'll work with you to fill out your forms and submit the application; that easy. and if your business doesn't get paid, we don't get paid. getrefunds.com has helped businesses like yours claim over $2 billion but it's only available for a limited time. go to getrefunds.com, powered by innovation refunds. ♪3, 4♪ ♪ ♪hey♪ ♪ ♪are you ready for me♪ ♪are you ready♪ ♪are you ready♪ my name is joshua florence, and one thing i learned being a firefighter is plan ahead.

you don't know what you're getting into, but at the end of the day, you know you have a team behind you that can help you. not having to worry about the future makes it possible to make the present as best as it can be for everybody. ya'll gotta sniff this stuff! ♪ woop woop! ♪ whooo! smells great, downy! ♪ ugh, cul de sacs. downy unstopables. you gotta sniff it to believe it. i was thinking, i should probably set up that 90 day refill.

walgreens is all about making life easier. i can help set that up right now for you. i'll be honest, there are days i forget what she's supposed to be taking. hey, i get it... and you're not alone in this, ok? so james, all these prescriptions. are they covered? that's right. with your medicare plan you get low-cost copays. thank you. let's talk about making things easier. walgreens is here. ♪

closing arguments for the defense are set for tomorrow, and alex murdaugh double murder trial. prosecutors out their case, not before the jury got to do and not a lot of jury got to, do is visit the crime, seen and walk in the footsteps of the two victims. a latest now from randi kaye. >> plunges june 7th 2021 -- alex murdaugh and paul murdoch where maliciously murdered at the kennels by alex murdaugh. just a fork, closing arguments, the jury visited those candles, the crime scene, up close for the first time. video of the scene, were allowed to be acquitted by the media. the jury saw the small meet federal or palmerdale was killed. >> to this model so shot to the chest, better than we can.

biden let, shotgun picked up the -- -- >> i don't think you will be proven guilty. of course the financial part, but as far as the murders, without a shadow of a doubt, i don't think he would be convicted of that. >> once they see that this guy is capable of stealing from the most vulnerable people, if you can do that, you can do anything. >> how the jury will come down with the closing argument there is a lot more that the juries have packed away. especially what was found on one, well, blue raincoat. >> this blue rain jacket, one of the only pieces of physical evidence. gunshot residue discovered on it. it's inclusion, the subject of intense. >> this appears to be is the same thing that you saw the defendant holding. >> the amount of residue found, noteworthy. 52 particles of gunshot residue found on the jacket. >> it was a significant amount of particles. >> but the residue's location may matter most. 38 of those particles were on the inside and just 14 on the outside. >> typically people wear their clothing right side out so if they're in the vicinity, that is where the particles are going to land. >> the prosecution suggested the jack it was used to wrap up and dispose of the murder weapons. and a forensic scientist testified that could explain it. but like so much in

this trial, location and timing raised the potential for doubt. the jacket was found several months after the murders, at alec murdaugh's mother's home. with hunting and shooting so integral to the family lifestyle, the residue could be from a day of shooting years ago. the forensic scientists said. >> if the shotgun was not clean there was a potential for the transfer off of that shotgun, yes. >> there is a potential, back with our expert guest right now, keep in mind while they are focusing on the blue green jacket, there has been conversations about what he had on the day of the murder. what he had on earlier in the day, the brown loafers, the polo shirt, it is when he talks to the police officers, a change of clothing, and a week later the blue jacket. but i bet when you are thinking about what he had on, and how this weighs in, i bet that jurors are still thinking to themselves he had clothing, that is one thing, but are you trying to dress up the motive? what do you think. >> oh tell you this, jurors spent about a quarter to a third of the time just talking

about their own personal experience. so what ends up happening is they go yeah, when i go hunting, here's what i do. here's how i see it. so they are going to be using in the jury room their personal experience to talk about discharge of weapon, the special relationship, the dogs, the space and timing, and how loud these gunshots might have been. so they are going to be filtering all of this through their personal experience. and that is why -- >> that is why you want a jury of your peers who might say things that like, that could be me, does that make sense, the timeline. >> i also think it boils down to a person actually wondering, from the juries perspective, why did he change clothes? if he had on clothes here, why did he have on different close by the time the police got here? as major, i would be wondering why he changed clothes. and how did this jacket end up it week later, there is plausible explanations as we just heard, and that raises reasonable doubt. but as a juror, i am thinking that he is dressed this way, he says that he had a nap, he does, this he does this,

and one other note, this technology has been very interesting in this case. because the thing that he thought would exonerate him has been the thing that is really coming back to haunt him. the steps, nobody thought, you know, that they would go back and track the steps. nobody thought that they would go back and really look at the phone, the overlay of the phone, and he certainly did not think that he was on that video with his son last night. so the technology, interestingly enough, is going to weigh and i think very heavily in this case. >> the moment that you have been pointing out, with the sun in the kennel, why? >> i mentioned earlier, i don't think that they put him on. if they do not have to explain

that. and i don't know if anybody picked up on this, but i am obsessed with this. he gets on the stand and he starts saying i'm sorry, and he goes down in succession of everybody he knows, i apologize to my family, to the other families, to his dad, it is just this litany, he makes everyone get to the end. he is supposed to be apologizing for the lie. for telling the lie about the kennel. it is in that part of his testimony. and then he says i apologize to my eggs and paw paw. i would never intentionally do anything to hurt them, i was not thinking clearly like that night, i was incapable of reason. so i am sorry that i told the lie about the kennel. that i watched about eight times. it makes no sense. >> i would like to add, i don't think that we zeroed in on how he asked of the dogs were barking, and he said no, because somebody else was there. if a stranger had been

at that kennel that night, those dogs would have been going absolutely wild. he, in his own testimony said no. because there was no one else there. >> what is funny about this, we are hearing all of the things from the minds of the jurors and areas that we are talking about motive, everything else is going on, but really what was so impactful to the jury box, and what even non lawyers were thinking about, let me tell you, you have the kennel video, you have the jacket, the change of clothes, you have the testimony, what we will talk about next is where are the guns? where the weapons that were used to shoot these two victims, next.

avoiding triggers but can't keep migraines away? qulipta® can help prevent migraines. you can't always prevent what's going on outside... that's why qulipta® helps what's going on inside. qulipta® gets right to work. in a 3-month study, qulipta® significantly reduced monthly migraine days and the majority of people reduced them by 50 to 100%. qulipta® blocks cgrp a protein believed to be a cause of migraines. qulipta® is a preventive treatment for episodic migraine. most common side effects are nausea, constipation, and tiredness. learn how abbvie could help you save on qulipta®. we're carvana we created a brand new way for you to sell your car go to carvana answer a few questions and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds we'll come to you pay you on the spot then pick up your car that's it at carvana

everything's changing so quickly. before the xfinity 10g network, we didn't have internet that let us play all at once. every device? in every room? why are you up here? when i was your age, we couldn't stream a movie when the power went out. you're only a year older than me. you have no idea how good you've got it. huh? what a time to be alive.

introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. the future starts now. >> all right, this is a double homicide trial but he is also charged with two counts of possessing a weapon. interesting, of course, because we don't actually have the murder weapons as part of the

evidence in this case, back with our experts right now, i want to hear from you guys. what is the impact that they do not have any of the guns or the evidence, what do you say? >> i don't think it should be any because in most homicides they don't have the murder weapon, you know what happened and here they have great evidence. they have the fact that the rifle, the cases that were found nearby, they said conclusively matched. even though they don't have the gun but they know that paul had a gun like that, that was replaced year before, that is, lo and behold missing. then you go to the shotgun and they talk about, while they could not conclusively match anything, there are certain guns from that home that could have caused those injuries like, what they recovered from maggie, again, missing. for someone who likes to talk and explain this, because its favorite line should be that i look at him as

if mitch what you have, to deny what you can. he talks about things he's comfortable, within the confront him with something. so there is no answer for that, i think it is quite powerful for the prosecution what they have when they talked about the guns were used, that were owned by this family and are now missing. >> i think it is important, the defense will say that there are not family guns, you can't prove it. but the defense went to great lengths to talk about how paul would leave his guns everywhere so that apparently the argument is that this vigilante who showed up just moments before the death, he was not there when alex was down there, because the -- when they showed up they just happen to put on these guns, these family guns that paul left at

the truck and happen to use those. just how lucky was it, the first time he was coming in, he found these guns laying there and he used them to kill? >> again, the prosecution doesn't have evidence. but the harsh reality is, that you should have found those guns. they work this place for a year and a half to get ready for it, they have all the resources they could have gotten, everything from the cell phones, from the coast, everything else. yet what they do not have, two of the most significant pieces of evidence, this jury that there are fingerprints, that there is anything that would suggest that but the fact that they don't have it leaves a gaping wall through which reasonable doubt shall be found. >> and i think that we have to ask, again, the prosecution's theory is that this was the mastermind. he had this all crumbling down, and at the same time, he is committing the messiest crime really, in having this hastily put together alibi. he's using his family gun. you, know this is

not someone, if he did it, who really has planned this out in any way. so again, but does not fit with the prosecution's theory either. but why use your own guns? there is guns everywhere. so i think that the jury is going to have a lot of questions about why we use his own family guns to carry out these crimes on which clearly could be more easily connected. >> because they are there. >> well he planned the sting out -- why not go get a gun that the family doesn't own? why one that the family owns? >> he plans on getting rid of the guns. >> why not use the ak-47 that they don't own? >> i heard access, i heard opioids, i heard why, i heard questions. i hear room for a jury to contemplate all of this, but up next we will talk about an area that i think you mentioned. that is the idea of maybe another witness in this particular trial, maybe an opioid addiction? murdaugh testified that he had a severe one. i want to know what role does not play in the prosecution's case, and how about the defense case? doctor sanjay gupta is next. sanjay gupta is next. at ryder, ever better is not a tagline, it's our standard. discover how ryder transportation services

can make you ever better. every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually... well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. >> woman: why did we choose safelite? >> vo: for us, driving around is the only way we can get our baby to sleep, so when our windshield cracked, we needed it fixed right. we went to safelite.com. there's no one else we'd trust. their experts replaced our windshield, and recalibrated our car's advanced safety system. they focus on our safety...

so we can focus on this little guy. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ no, it's literally never crossed my mind. what if we live to like 100? that's 35 years of being retired. i don't want to outlive our money. and i have been eating all these stupid chia seeds! i could totally live to be 100! why do i keep taking such good care of my- since we started working with empower, we're able to get all our financial questions answered, so we don't have to worry. so you never- no. never. join 17 million people and take control of your financial future to empower what's next. start today at empower.com

i'm not quite sure how i let myself get rid of. but it came from, a battle that addiction for so many years. i was spending so much money on pills. >> so you are taking 60 a day or something like that? >> there were days where it took more than that. there were days that i took less than that. >> alex murdaugh laying bare his opioid addiction that spanned two decades. up to 60 pills. what does that do to your body? what does it do to your mind? cnn chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta is with us to break this all down. dr. gupta, i am so glad you are

here because for so many people who were looking at this trial and there are many looking at it, they are wondering what happened? so i want to start now with that huge dosage in particular. because the amounts they are talking about, things that he was taking almost daily, obviously you don't know the specifics and the details having not been, you are not treating him specifically. but just for any human being, what would be the physiological impact on that very high dosage? well it could be a pretty significant impact. but i can tell you this, that depending over what period of time, and you said, you know, over a couple of decades perhaps in his case. people can gradually build up increasing tolerance to this these drugs. these opioids. this is not unheard of, even though you are talking maybe

2000 milligrams a day. i think you do the math on this is a lot, typically a dose would start at 10 or 20 milligrams, perhaps a few times a day. maybe even less than that if someone is taking these medications after an operation for example. but over time people can increase the dose. and we talked to an anesthesiologist on the effect of patients taking even more than that. a couple of things are unusual. what is that over the last 20 years, laura, the landscape has changed. you heard about people taking this many pills in the past. when pills were really being overprescribed. and they are still being prescribed too much. but they have also been replaced by things like heroin and fentanyl for example. so that is where people often transition into taking that much opioids. but even within a short time people can start to develop

significant tolerance. to the point where they are no longer taking the medication to get high to develop euphoria, but rather just to feel normal and not have withdrawal. let me just show you this real quick, laura. the tolerance and withdrawal that these symptoms might have happened very quickly. okay? so even if you are taking this for a few days only then if you stop taking it within hours you could start to have withdrawal symptoms, 6 to 12 hours. within a few days, three days after you stop taking it you could have all of the symptoms you see in the middle of the screen. you feel terrible. you feel miserable. that is the acute withdrawal. and that is what sort of prompts people to start taking pills again. your question specifically about the impact physiologically, you name it in terms of what it can do the body. people look and feel very nauseated, it can feel very constipated, they can have brain fog. they may not have their faculties. they may exercise poor judgment. you name it when somebody who is in the throes of, you know, significant opioid use. it also turns off your body's natural opioids. so as soon as you stop taking the opioids you start to have pain. so you are taking the sting for pain and you stop taking it and you actually have more pain and

you did before. so lots going on there, laura. >> how in particular, because of course we are in the midst of a murder trial with alex murdaugh. and the impact it could have on your brain pretty significant. what you are touching. on and interestingly enough when you talk with the tolerance, one, dr. gupta, does that mean that you could hide what is happening? and the impact on your body if you have built up a tolerance? and to, could it be a circumstance where it could very well impact your judgment, impact your ability to perceive things in realtime? or heighten paranoia? because that seems to be part of his defense? >> i think the answer to the first part of your question, could you have? and i think the answer is yes. if you basically are taking enough opioids to overcome the withdrawal that you could have, if you know, again within hours of stopping and taking it.

you can hide it. and at some point you are taking it to essentially achieve some sense of normalcy as opposed to acting like you are in some euphoric high state. that is the goal, ultimately for people who are opioid addicts. what is interesting when it comes to the brain, people think about opioids affecting pain centers in the brain. which they do. there is these old new receptors in the rain. and this is a new agnes, 20 to remember that but these view receptors are all over the brain. not just in pain areas but also in emotional areas -- responsible for a word. as the top screen. that is where all the receptors are. but it overlaps with all of these different areas in the. brains of somebody who takes opioids gets a really significant response to all of these different areas of the

brain. i will show you on this brain model if you can see. so i talked about the reward centers of the rain. the emotional centers of the brain. but to your question economic so effect this area. the prefrontal frontal cortex. and that area of the brain is responsible for judgment and your ability to determine what is real, what is not real. maybe that has something to do with paranoia. perhaps, i, mean it is depends. but overtime i think it is safe to say that the circuitry in your brain as a result of not being an opioid addict changes. you require higher and higher doses to achieve the same effect. but the receptors and all of these areas of the brain that i just outlined, they change. and so, you, know what is the impact? ultimately on how somebody behaves, it is a little bit tough to know. but it could be different, obviously than before the sort of taking opioids. >> dr. gupta, fascinating to hear your insight on this. and your expertise. thank you so much. next, the taboo topic from this trial that is not getting talked about enough. my retirement funds allow me to enjoy what i love to do. i volunteer with the medical reserve corp.

as long as you can make an impact, why stop? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. lomita feed is 101 years old this year and counting. i'm bill lockwood, current caretaker and owner. when covid hit, we had some challenges like a lot of businesses did. i heard about the payroll tax refund, it allowed us to keep the amount of people

that we needed and the people that have been here taking care of us. see if your business may qualify. go to getrefunds.com. ♪ ♪ get $1500 purchase allowance on a 2023 cadillac xt5 and xt6. ♪ visit your local cadillac dealer today.

so of all of the trials to cover. why this one? why this trial and walterboro, south carolina? home of fewer than 6000 people and this low country county seat of collinson county. well maybe it is what this man, alex murdaugh, seen sitting there in the courtroom. it is maybe what he represents. the wealthy sign is charged with double murder, but no matter what the verdict in this cases, he has also been charged with 99 financial crimes. another state investigations swirl around him.

as do almost a dozen lawsuits according to the charleston post and courier. now look at how long it took this to even get to trial. they were killed june 7th in 2021. yet here we are, nearly two years later. long enough for multiple film makers to pump out multiple high-profile documentaries. including two by our own parent company. >> we are -- murdochs go, that seems to follow. >> what was once a dynasty it's literally reduced to rubble. olympus has fallen. >> did privilege have anything to do with the delay? or the investigation? i mean, we know that money and power and connections can equal protections. it seems murdaugh had all three. for more than 85 years a member of the murdaugh family served in the local prosecutors office. their name synonymous with the law. their bank accounts were filled through a powerful personal injury law form. the murdaugh story perhaps resonates in its familiarity.

we do know there are two justice systems in this country. one for the rich and one for the poor. . as the former supreme court justice arthur goldberg suggested way back in 1964, far too often money or the lack of it can be the deciding factor in the courtroom. murdaugh had a front row seat into criminal justice system and knows who is likely to go to prison. it is possible that he thought confident with a legal system that often gives people like him a pass. but now that the spotlight is on the murdochs, it might be shining a light on more unanswered questions. a trail of suspicious deaths now under renewed scrutiny as some area residents wonder if the murdaugh money and power bought the family the benefit of the doubt for a lot longer than the time since the double murder. like the 2015 death of a classmate of alex murdaugh's son. who was found dead in the

middle of a road and no one was arrested. after the murdaugh killings, the state is looking back into that case. that hasn't said why. nor named murdaugh as a suspect. and when the family housekeeper died less than three years later, insurance paid out big settlements. but none of it went to her survivors. instead it lined murdoch's pockets. now he later admitted in the settlement that he owes them four point $3 million. the state is also investigating her death. now you combine that with a boat crash that killed a teenage girl. mallory beach. and that paul was charged in that case before his death. alex murdaugh is facing multiple lawsuits. with cases. well but his attorneys say he is not at fault for his son's alleged drinking and voting. and say someone else was driving. which brings me back to the double murder trial that we now see playing out. 12 jurors and two murders. one burden of proof. and one alex murdaugh. thank you for watching tonight.

i am laura coates. alison camerota picks up coverage next. ♪ to guide you through a changing world. ♪ with the freestyle libre 2 system, know your glucose level and where it's headed. no fingersticks needed. manage your diabetes with more confidence.

freestyle libre 2. try it for free at freestylelibre.us ubrelvy helps u fight migraine attacks. u rise to the challenge. u won't clock out. so u bring ubrelvy. it can quickly stop migraine in its tracks within 2 hours... ...without worrying if it's too late or where you are. unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks a protein believed to be a cause of migraine. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. migraine pain relief starts with u. learn how abbvie could help you save. ask about ubrelvy, the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. there's a different way to treat hiv. it's every-other-month, injectable cabenuva. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete, long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month.

cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by my healthcare provider, every other month. it's one less thing to think about while traveling. hiv pills aren't on my mind. a quick change in my plans is no big deal. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. every other month, and i'm good to go. ask your doctor about every-other-month cabenuva. i think that's carvana. let's go. let's go. adjusting the amount. adjusting the amount. yes, please. a lot can happen in a moment.

whoa. i just bought a car from carvana. like finding your perfect mix of down and monthly payments. finance your next car with carvana today.

>> hello and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the united states and all around the world. i'm rosemary church. just ahead here on cnn newsroo