Page 4 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 800
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Macon, GA
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
    If SM had at least these 30 images on his flash drive, from July 2010, when he was arrested in 2011, and each charge represents a wide variety of varying images, then there is a reason for that, IMO. He kept that flash drive around a while. Why?
    So what is the reason, do you think? Or are you just saying there has to be one? I have no idea. I wondered why there was such a variety as well (as in, varying ages and both genders). And I still wonder how the CP ties in with the murder. If he's a pedophile, why kill a grown woman? Maybe there's no link there and he's just all around a sick individual. Maybe both things are just a way to have power over people which he seemed to like.


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


  3. #47
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    8,369
    I am trying to decipher the specific section of the Georgia Code that SM has been charged under for these 30 counts of Child Exploitation.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, but, 16-12-100 (b) of the code (all 30 charges reference this section), seems to include the 8 sub-sections, to me.

    I could be completely incorrect here. How do we know which sub-section the charges are referring to?

    16-12-100 Section starts on Page 123:

    (b)(1) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to employ, use, persuade, induce, entice, or coerce any minor to engage in or assist any other person to engage in any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual medium depicting such conduct.

    (2) It is unlawful for any parent, legal guardian, or person having custody or control of a minor knowingly to permit the minor to engage in or to assist any other person to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual medium depicting such conduct.

    (3) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to employ, use, persuade, induce, entice, or coerce any minor to engage in or assist any other person to engage in any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of any performance.

    (4) It is unlawful for any parent, legal guardian, or person having custody or control of a minor knowingly to permit the minor to engage in or to assist any other person to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of any performance.

    (5) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to create, reproduce, publish, promote, sell, distribute, give, exhibit, or possess with intent to sell or distribute any visual medium which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit
    conduct.

    (6) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, or exchange any medium which provides information as to where any visual medium which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit conduct can be found or purchased.

    (7) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to bring or cause to be brought into this state any material which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit conduct.

    (8) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to possess or control any material which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit conduct.

    National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse National District Attorneys Association

    http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Sexual%20Off...ren_6-2010.pdf


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Wondergirl For This Useful Post:


  5. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,783
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
    I am trying to decipher the specific section of the Georgia Code that SM has been charged under for these 30 counts of Child Exploitation.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, but, 16-12-100 (b) of the code (all 30 charges reference this section), seems to include the 8 sub-sections, to me.

    I could be completely incorrect here. How do we know which sub-section the charges are referring to?

    16-12-100 Section starts on Page 123:
    Good observation, Wondergirl. The warrant specified 16-12-100(b)(8) "It is unlawful for any person knowingly to possess or control any material which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit conduct."
    link to warrant: http://media.macon.com/static/graphi...elWarrants.jpg
    The indictment is broader. Could be they are still investigating and want to leave the door open for any violations of the other seven prohibitions that might come up in the future. I'm not certain. That's simply my best guess.
    __________________________________
    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 4 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


  7. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,783
    respectfully snipped
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyrax View Post
    I do wonder if the 7 images found on a flash drive that were mentioned in the original charges are part of the 30 in the indictment, but I really don't have the stomach to go and cross-reference between them. It is also curious that all the images have timestamps within a five day period. Explanations that come to mind: (1) McDaniel only downloaded child pornography this one time, then decided never to again? Then why did he keep it? Or (2) Did McDaniel usually cover his tracks better, but for whatever reason, during this five day period failed to adequately delete/overwrite the images from his computer, and a forensic recovery by the investigators was able to pull up the images? Or maybe they were all on the flashdrive?
    The things we mods do for you guys. Just kidding. I was curious, myself, so I did compare the two, and yes, the original seven appear to be included in the indictment. Since the warrant doesn't include file names, I can't be sure, but the descriptions do match seven named in the indictment.

    FWIW, I'm reserving judgment on the CP charges. It's no secret that I'm 99% convinced of McD's guilt in Lauren's murder. And if he could murder and dismember a neighbor and fellow student who was kind to him, he's capable of anything. But I'm skeptical about how those files came to be on his computer and/or flash drive. If they were embedded in files he downloaded, and he transferred those files to his flash drive, wouldn't the embedded files go along?
    __________________________________
    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




  8. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to bessie For This Useful Post:


  9. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandstorm View Post
    Backwoods,
    I appreciate your honesty and respect your opinion in the following post # 14:

    "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."

    (snipped)

    However, on the other hand, I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that McD is the perpetrator.
    It is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around ANYONE committing this crime, but having read some of the suggested reading on Websleuth, I think I have a better idea of how a sociopath thinks.

    Most enlightening: The Sociopath Next Door by Dr. Martha Stout.
    I recommend this book if you have not read it yet.


    Thanks, Sandstorm.


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


  11. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by MaconMom View Post
    The dates on the images strike me as odd. I wonder what he was doing on those days. I looked at his forum posts for those days but it all seemed irrelevant.

    Does anyone remember when it was that he was burglarizing the other apartments? I can't remember the dates/time periods and was wondering if it was the same time frame. I doubt it though.

    I assume the time stamps being referred to are the dates the images were saved to the flash drive or hard drive by SMD, and not the dates they were actually created..
    Looks like you looked down some trails I've been thinking of, too.

    I had trouble going far with the posts, as I didn't copy them and so many of them have disappeared, it seems.

    That reminds me: At one time, some of us were compiling posts and searching for any pattern in the dates/types of posting (one theory was a type of cycling mental illness might be involved). Is anyone still posting that actually completed that project and, if so, did you find any patterns that stood out...?

    I've certainly thought, too, that there is a possibility that SM took the images off someone else's computer, or even took the flash drive itself (not too far-fetched that there likely would have been lots of those school-issued drives on lanyards around...and not sure if it can be proven which belonged to who originally...? and remember, there were hints that LE had evidence of his taking stuff besides the infamous two condoms). Seems (from postings) that SM has fancied himself in the role of a vigilante at times -- possible he would take them for some sort of purpose along those lines, I've thought.

    I was going with the same thinking you did about the timestamps.


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


  13. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernKate View Post
    When he burglarized the apartments, it was late December/early January (when people were gone for Christmas break) I believe.
    ... though, of course, there has been theorizing that he may have been creeping about at other times, as well


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


  15. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by MaconMom View Post
    So what is the reason, do you think? Or are you just saying there has to be one? I have no idea. I wondered why there was such a variety as well (as in, varying ages and both genders). And I still wonder how the CP ties in with the murder. If he's a pedophile, why kill a grown woman? Maybe there's no link there and he's just all around a sick individual. Maybe both things are just a way to have power over people which he seemed to like.
    bbm#1: I think that strikes a lot of folks odd at first glance ... but we have discussed before how some serial killers (for example) have favored victims from one category but "sampled" others... so, I don't know...

    bbm#2: IMO, it's unlikely prosecution will be able to tie the CP to the murder -- barring something like a "Lauren discovered it" scenario (which I think is unlikely though not impossible). I really don't think it will get in the door at the murder trial. And I know that if I was a defense attorney, I would be scrutinizing all the media reports, etc., that tend to "link" the CP charges with the murder in people's minds, in looking toward any motions toward change of venue or "imported jury" or whatever that I wanted to introduce.

    That said, though, if SM is the killer and if he had the CP for his own, uhm, use, your last statement, IMO, is probably a good explanation of how the two fit together.
    Last edited by Backwoods; 11-17-2011 at 12:57 AM. Reason: insert word


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


  17. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    25,783
    I've got that project almost complete, Backwoods. I went through many of the posts just the other night. I can't say that I've discerned a particular pattern is his demeanor. His mood changes depending on the topic of discussion. Chronology doesn't seem to be a factor, however.

    Regarding the cp files, he was actively posting in July 2010. But as you've pointed out, we don't know if those are the actual dates the files were downloaded. Until we know, I've given up on that angle.
    Last edited by bessie; 11-17-2011 at 10:03 AM. Reason: corrected typos. darn iPhone
    __________________________________
    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




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


  19. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    New story up on macon.com

    QUOTE:

    McDaniel will enter not guilty plea


    Stephen McDaniel will plead “not guilty” at an arraignment hearing sometime in the next few weeks, his lawyer said Wednesday.

    McDaniel, 26, who was indicted Tuesday in connection with the murder of his Mercer University law school classmate Lauren Giddings, “wants this case resolved,” defense attorney Floyd Buford said. “His family does, too.”...


    read more at:http://www.macon.com/2011/11/17/1788...ot-guilty.html


  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Backwoods For This Useful Post:


  21. #56
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by bessie View Post
    respectfully snipped

    The things we mods do for you guys. Just kidding. I was curious, myself, so I did compare the two, and yes, the original seven appear to be included in the indictment. Since the warrant doesn't include file names, I can't be sure, but the descriptions do match seven named in the indictment.

    FWIW, I'm reserving judgment on the CP charges. It's no secret that I'm 99% convinced of McD's guilt in Lauren's murder. And if he could murder and dismember a neighbor and fellow student who was kind to him, he's capable of anything. But I'm skeptical about how those files came to be on his computer and/or flash drive. If they were embedded in files he downloaded, and he transferred those files to his flash drive, wouldn't the embedded files go along?
    bbm: also FWIW -- yeah, it would be really interesting to know what else (if anything) was on the flash drive.

    Also: Just one possibility, not an appealing one, but ... when we were sleuthing at some other sites, I know I read comments from some there that there are, er ... porn download opportunities out in cyberspace where different types of non-cp porn are bundled together and that sometimes there is some cp sprinkled in ...


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


  23. #57
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    8,369
    Quote Originally Posted by bessie View Post
    Good observation, Wondergirl. The warrant specified 16-12-100(b)(8) "It is unlawful for any person knowingly to possess or control any material which depicts a minor or a portion of a minor's body engaged in any sexually explicit conduct."
    link to warrant: http://media.macon.com/static/graphi...elWarrants.jpg
    The indictment is broader. Could be they are still investigating and want to leave the door open for any violations of the other seven prohibitions that might come up in the future. I'm not certain. That's simply my best guess.
    Thank-you, Bessie. I only looked at the Indictment, which did not specify sub-section (8).

    I do not know if there are any implications to that more general charge, or not?


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


  25. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandstorm View Post
    Backwoods,
    I appreciate your honesty and respect your opinion in the following post # 14:

    "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."

    (snipped)

    However, on the other hand, I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that McD is the perpetrator.
    It is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around ANYONE committing this crime, but having read some of the suggested reading on Websleuth, I think I have a better idea of how a sociopath thinks.

    Most enlightening: The Sociopath Next Door by Dr. Martha Stout.
    I recommend this book if you have not read it yet.


    OH MY GOSH < YES< HIGHLY recommended. Helped me through some crazy things. I still can't wrap my mind around how they think but understand it better now, MUCH BETTER. This book is a must read for ANYONE. I supposed because I can't think like a sociopath though understand them better it's hard , very hard, to see MCD having done this. But I know the time will tell if there is any doubt.


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


  27. #59
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    11,463
    Quote Originally Posted by bessie View Post
    respectfully snipped

    The things we mods do for you guys. Just kidding. I was curious, myself, so I did compare the two, and yes, the original seven appear to be included in the indictment. Since the warrant doesn't include file names, I can't be sure, but the descriptions do match seven named in the indictment.

    FWIW, I'm reserving judgment on the CP charges. It's no secret that I'm 99% convinced of McD's guilt in Lauren's murder. And if he could murder and dismember a neighbor and fellow student who was kind to him, he's capable of anything. But I'm skeptical about how those files came to be on his computer and/or flash drive. If they were embedded in files he downloaded, and he transferred those files to his flash drive, wouldn't the embedded files go along?
    BBM- I agree with you Bessie. I'm not convinced the CP was intentionally downloaded and kept for viewing by McD.

    I think we have discussed intentional vs. non-intentional downloads, but I don't think we ever nailed down an answer. It seems to me that an IT Professional who is knowledgeable about such things, would be able to differentiate between the two.

    On another note; I'm looking forward to his arraignment in a few weeks. Buford says McD is in good spirits, I'd like to see for myself what his demeanor is. The last time we saw him in court he acted like a zombie
    You are the anchor to my soul, you won't let go ...


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


  29. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    central Georgia, USA
    Posts
    4,371
    While I have, I guess, a basic understanding of how grand juries work in the function of indicting someone, I sure don't understand all the subtleties and right now I have some questions I'd like to ask someone who feels knowledgeable enough to tackle. They are sort of general questions but of course, right now, they're focused in the direction of this case.

    Maybe some of you who have followed a lot of cases can help, or even some of you who have served on a grand jury (without breaking any kind of oath, of course). I've never served on a grand jury myself.

    First, with this case -- in the video at this link...
    http://www.13wmaz.com/news/article/1...iddings-Murder
    ...the reporter says that Tuesday morning DA Winters and Detective Patterson spent about 30 minutes with the GJ, then a little over an hour went by before the GJ handed up (or down or whatever -- never have been sure of the correct term, LOL) the indictment.

    I'm used to hearing that a trial jury spent thus-and-so hours pondering its verdict, but hearing time things about a GJ is kind of new to me. I know every case is different, but does anyone know if the spans reported are pretty typical? Does 30 minutes seem about what y'all would expect it to take to present the essentials of this case? Also -- after speaking, presenting, etc. in person, would the DA and detective then probably have left materials with the GJ to refer to while they deliberated (if that's the right word to use in speaking of a GJ)?

    Second -- I can't find a clear answer on whether the prosecution is required to present any exculpatory evidence (or any "substantial exculpatory evidence", as I'm seeing in some sources) it might possess to the GJ. I'm seeing in some references that yes, it is required to; in others, no, definitely not -- can't get it figured out. Does it vary from state to state, from federal courts to state courts ...? Can anybody address this?

    Thanks!
    Last edited by Backwoods; 11-18-2011 at 02:41 AM. Reason: add word


Page 4 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... 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
  •