Page 1 of 54 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 800
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,277

    GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #12

    Please continue here.

    Previous Threads:

    Thread #1
    Thread #2
    Thread #3
    Thread #4
    Thread #5
    Thread #6
    Thread #7

    Thread #8
    Thread #9
    Thread #10
    Thread #11
    Media Thread



    Lauren Teresa Giddings

    April 18, 1984 -- June 26, 2011
    Rest in Peace
    Last edited by KateB; 06-23-2015 at 07:45 PM.
    __________________________________
    Muddy water in the street
    ; Muddy water 'round my feet... as sung by the inimitable Bessie Smith, "Muddy Water (A Mississippi Moan)"

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK




  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,277

    The Indictment

    The Indictment charging Stephen Mark McDaniel with the vicious murder and decapitation of Lauren Teresa Giddings.
    __________________________________
    Muddy water in the street
    ; Muddy water 'round my feet... as sung by the inimitable Bessie Smith, "Muddy Water (A Mississippi Moan)"

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK




  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,277
    From the previous thread...

    Quote Originally Posted by MaconMom View Post
    http://macon.13wmaz.com/m/news/news/...ictment-relief

    Interview with Lauren's cousin just posted.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalterFGeorge View Post
    http://www.macon.com/2011/11/15/1786...-giddings.html

    Article is back up. 1 count of murder 30 counts of sexual exploitation of children
    __________________________________
    Muddy water in the street
    ; Muddy water 'round my feet... as sung by the inimitable Bessie Smith, "Muddy Water (A Mississippi Moan)"

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK




  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    3,223
    I am so terribly saddened by this case. She was beautiful and had such a promising future in store for her. She was kind to a sociopath and he killed her. I sincerely wish for Lauren's family that they could find the rest of her remains.
    This is where Sky belongs!! Proud member of the Sky Crew & proud supporter of Solomon's quest to find his precious son!

    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=195327


  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to cocomod For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    27

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by bessie View Post
    From the previous thread...
    Warning! This explicit indictment regarding sexual exploitation of children under 18, prepubescent children and infants With adult males is graphic and extremely disturbing. I feel sick. Read at your own risk.


  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Idreamofgenie For This Useful Post:


  11. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    tomkat: I still don't know how to bring over a post from the previous thread...but before it closed, you had just posted:

    "So the Indictment repetitiously stated they do not know how or with what but that they think McD did commit her murder...............is that all you need for an indictment????? Does that mean they know NOTHING............STILL???

    I just wanted to say, no, I don't think it necessarily means LE/prosecution has no evidence toward how or with what Lauren was killed -- though it could mean that, and that they are still hoping results toward that will come in. What I think it does mean is that any evidence toward that they might have was not part of what they decided to present to the GJ. Prosecution must have felt pretty secure that an indictment would come in without it.

    Remember, too -- an indictment is really just a way of formalizing the charges and starting the trial process.
    Last edited by Backwoods; 11-15-2011 at 07:54 PM. Reason: add comment


  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  13. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    Quote Originally Posted by Idreamofgenie View Post
    Warning! This explicit indictment regarding sexual exploitation of children under 18, prepubescent children and infants With adult males is graphic and extremely disturbing. I feel sick. Read at your own risk.
    Where is the link to this indictment...?

    ETA: never mind... it's here:

    http://download.gannett.edgesuite.ne...indictment.pdf
    Last edited by Backwoods; 11-15-2011 at 08:23 PM. Reason: add link


  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  15. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    624
    Ya'll please help me get my mind wrapped around the child exploitation indictment wording. Does "prepubescent" mean younger than a teenager? They all sickened me. What does the one worded "infant child" mean? A baby? There is a special place in hell for this man just based on this indictment alone, in my opinion.

    Also, glad to see ya'll returning to Lauren's thread.


  16. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to pearl For This Useful Post:


  17. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    QUOTE:

    McDaniel attorney now considering whether to seek bond



    As of Tuesday afternoon, Stephen McDaniel’s attorney had not determined whether he will continue to seek bond for McDaniel. ...



    read more at: http://www.macon.com/2011/11/15/1787...nsidering.html


  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  19. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    Pretty extensive coverage on 13WMAZ newscast this evening, well worth a look:

    QUOTE:

    Grand Jury Indicts Stephen McDaniel for Lauren Giddings' Murder


    ...The two-page murder indictment did not shed new light on forensic evidence collected by investigators, who sent more than 200 items to the FBI Crime Lab for analysis, according to Macon Police Chief Mike Burns. ...




    much more at: http://www.13wmaz.com/news/article/1...iddings-Murder


  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  21. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    Macon television station FOX24's coverage is pretty sparse at this point, but for the record:

    QUOTE:

    McDaniel Indicted By Bibb Grand Jury

    a bit more at: http://www.newscentralga.com/news/lo...133880818.html


  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  23. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    ...and here is local station 41WMGT's coverage:

    QUOTE:

    Grand Jury Indicts Stephen McDaniel in Murder of Lauren Giddings

    ...Today, a Grand Jury formally charged the McDaniel on 1 count of murder and 30 counts of sexual exploitation of children. This decision means there is enough evidence for the district attorney's office to head to trial. ...


    more at: http://www.41nbc.com/news/local-news...auren-giddings


  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  25. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Backwoods View Post
    tomkat: I still don't know how to bring over a post from the previous thread...but before it closed, you had just posted:

    "So the Indictment repetitiously stated they do not know how or with what but that they think McD did commit her murder...............is that all you need for an indictment????? Does that mean they know NOTHING............STILL???

    I just wanted to say, no, I don't think it necessarily means LE/prosecution has no evidence toward how or with what Lauren was killed -- though it could mean that, and that they are<B still hoping results toward that will come inB/>. What I think it does mean is that any evidence toward that they might have was not part of what they decided to present to the GJ. <BProsecution must have felt pretty secure that an indictment would come in without it.B/>

    Remember, too -- an<B indictment is really just a way of formalizing the charges and starting the trial processB/>.
    So we really just don't know, still....but it seems rediculously easy to indict I guess is my point. They have presented nothing more than the fact that Lauren was murdered and dismembered. I just was shocked that there wasn't more and that one only has to be accused of a crime without any real evidence presented, to be indicted for murder. I know what we all think but I'm just, well I guess I was hoping for more from the prosecution.


    But your last statement kind of put it more into perspective for me.

    I just feel for his family and of course we all feel for Lauren's family. I pray they search the grandfathers land soon. I guess that will possibly be part of the prosections efforts?

    Thanks BW


  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to tomkat For This Useful Post:


  27. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,356
    Quote Originally Posted by tomkat View Post
    So we really just don't know, still....but it seems rediculously easy to indict I guess is my point. They have presented nothing more than the fact that Lauren was murdered and dismembered. I just was shocked that there wasn't more and that one only has to be accused of a crime without any real evidence presented, to be indicted for murder. I know what we all think but I'm just, well I guess I was hoping for more from the prosecution.


    But your last statement kind of put it more into perspective for me.

    I just feel for his family and of course we all feel for Lauren's family. I pray they search the grandfathers land soon. I guess that will possibly be part of the prosections efforts?

    Thanks BW
    you're welcome --

    and bbm: Well, not all of us think that. I am still not convinced.

    Because I'm not, this is maybe going to be a delicate time for me to continue posting here, though I want to. So, I just want to say something upfront here -- and this is to everyone -- I am not here to argue SM's innocence -- I don't feel I am privy to enough of the evidence to make me (and I'm just talking me here, not anyone else) feel justified to argue that any more than I feel I am privy to enough to argue his guilt. I am just still looking at all the angles I can find, indictment or no.

    I want to know who killed Lauren, and under what circumstances. I want to follow this case as closely as I can, and WebSleuths is the best place I know of to do that, and I will continue trying to contribute here as best as I conscientiously can.

    Since I also am not here for the purpose of offending anyone, though, I have taken the stance of no longer sharing all my thoughts that might be viewed as on the innocence side of the fence (though I will speak out if something seems crucial). I figure that, in most of those instances, for the most part, things I say or don't say here are going to make little to no difference in the real-world outcome -- so to risk causing a firestorm does me nor anyone else any good.

    There are plenty of posters here whose intelligence, insight, and presentation I really respect, never mind that we don't hold the same position on this case right now.

    back to your post, tomkat: The GJ may have heard a little more than the indictment directly reflects -- we just don't know. Don't know that I think it is "ridiculously easy" to indict, but sometimes it isn't all that hard, for sure. To me, that is why all the rules of evidence and many other legal factors that will come with the trial process are so very important in trying to deliver justice.

    Like pretty much everybody else, I expect, I would like to know more at this point, but guess it just isn't the time.
    Last edited by Backwoods; 11-15-2011 at 10:26 PM. Reason: misspell


  28. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  29. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,277
    Quote Originally Posted by tomkat View Post
    So we really just don't know, still....but it seems rediculously easy to indict I guess is my point. They have presented nothing more than the fact that Lauren was murdered and dismembered. I just was shocked that there wasn't more and that one only has to be accused of a crime without any real evidence presented, to be indicted for murder. I know what we all think but I'm just, well I guess I was hoping for more from the prosecution.


    But your last statement kind of put it more into perspective for me.

    I just feel for his family and of course we all feel for Lauren's family. I pray they search the grandfathers land soon. I guess that will possibly be part of the prosections efforts?

    Thanks BW
    It's not that easy, Tomkat. The prosecutor didn't go in empty handed. What we can tell from the indictment is that there was no evidence to show cause (manner) of death, nor what instrument was used to sever her head from her body. But, the indictment doesn't tell us what evidence the GJ did see. It might have been very strong. McD's DNA might have been all over Lauren's remains. That wouldn't reveal the weapon that was used, or in exactly which way he killed LG. It would, however, strongly suggest that he is the killer.

    In other words, some evidence points to how, and some evidence points to who. At this point it's only the "who" which matters.
    __________________________________
    Muddy water in the street
    ; Muddy water 'round my feet... as sung by the inimitable Bessie Smith, "Muddy Water (A Mississippi Moan)"

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK




  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 54 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #10
    By bessie in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 716
    Last Post: 09-01-2011, 02:31 AM
  2. GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #9
    By bessie in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 487
    Last Post: 08-25-2011, 07:53 PM
  3. GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #8
    By bessie in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 690
    Last Post: 08-21-2011, 09:12 PM
  4. GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #7
    By bessie in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 695
    Last Post: 08-12-2011, 09:57 AM
  5. GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #4
    By bessie in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 675
    Last Post: 08-01-2011, 02:44 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •