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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sandstorm said:
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.

Click to expand...

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.
 
bessie said:
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?
Click to expand...

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
icon12.gif
 
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/152062/175/Grand-Jury-Indicts-McDaniel-for-Giddings-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!
 
Backwoods said:
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/152062/175/Grand-Jury-Indicts-McDaniel-for-Giddings-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 "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!
Click to expand...

I served on my county's grand jury this past August. The procedure was this:
Police officer presented case history and evidence and answered any questions asked by district attorney.
Police officers and district attorney and staff left the room, but the bailiff stayed.
Grand jurors discussed the case as presented in testimony and evidence. Some took longer than others.
Jury foreman then called for a vote, either true bill or no bill.
Jury member clerk recorded the information which was then signed by the jury foreman.
Bailiff then notified police and district attorney that a decision had been reached and they came into the courtroom to hear it.
Then the next case was called.
We went through about 19 cases, each one following the steps above.
The cases presented were not all that complicated except for one which isn't nearly as complicated as SM's case.
Most cases took about 10 minutes at the most with the more complicated one taking about 20 minutes.
I personally think a 30 minute presentation of the case against SM gave these jurors quite a bit of info although probably not all LE has, just enough to get an indictment.
An hour's deliberation by the grand jury makes me think they did not just rubber stamp the DA's decision.
Also, it did not take a unanimous vote to true bill; it took a majority vote.
Also, some LE officers made better witnesses than others.
 
Yes, there sure were a lot of "We don't know" and "I don't know" responses. Like , why even bother posting the question . I hope they will work on finding out the answers , some of them were pretty good questions:
Don't know what, if anything, was found inside McD's car.
Don't know if DA will seek death penalty
Don't know if anythings been received from the FBI
Don't know if they found chain mail in McD's apartment
Don't know if he has seen a psychiatrist
Don't know the difference between malice murder and felony murder or why GJ indictment differed from original warrant
Don't know if McD can watch TV
Don't know what Buford's Private Eye is up to or who he even is
Don't know if LE has ruled out all other persons of interest.

But , as said earlier, there will be a story on the relationship between the two , and , if I am reading between the lines correctly it sounds like old Glenda isn't quite so happy to hear her phone ring when its Amy Leigh or Joe on the other end.
 
Haven't followed this case at all ... but read the initial comment and recent.

Sooooo, did the underwear neighbor thief do it, the husband, or a gang? Who is charged?
 
Otto, the neighbor has been charged. Not a gang.

In the first post of the thread is a link to the media thread. If you want to get up to speed on this case, take a quick scroll through and look over the highlights. :)
 
Sandstorm said:
"Potential evidence in the Lauren Giddings slaying investigation sent to an FBI lab includes a pair of the victim’s underwear discovered in her suspected killer’s apartment, sources familiar with the investigation say."

Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/11/23/1797024/sources-giddings-garment-found.html#ixzz1eW5Mgd1q
Click to expand...

Sickening, but can't say I'm surprised. Poor Lauren. She mentioned Macon "hoodlums" in that e-mail to her bf, but I wonder if that wasn't a cover. I mean, was it actually McD she feared? Did she try to brush it off and tell herself she was imagining things? From all we've learned about Lauren, I think she was too astute not to pick up on the vibes that were probably coming through the walls! She must've known and was probably counting the hours until she would be out of there. :(
 
Methinks this is just the beginning of the stream of evidence we will see about the sick perverted forbidden fruit relationship McD was imagining in his mind with LG
 
AgentFrankLundy said:
Methinks this is just the beginning of the stream of evidence we will see about the sick perverted forbidden fruit relationship McD was imagining in his mind with LG
Click to expand...

Agree. This sounds like build-up to the article about Lauren and SMD's "relationship" that the reporters mentioned they were working on.

I'm guessing he had the underwear for a while and got it while he was creeping around in her apartment.
 
Oriah said:
Don't blame him. :(
Click to expand...

I don't either. I just found his comment interesting because it confirms this story is true.

Can't say that I'm not interested in getting a new bit of evidence to consider though.. And who knows, maybe this was deliberately leaked regardless of what Winters said.
 
Wondergirl said:
More than one pair, and listed here as "undergarments"?
Click to expand...

The Telegraph article said "a pair of the victim’s underwear" so I'm assuming they mean one singular piece of underwear. Even though they said "undergarments", it's kind of like saying "panties" or a "pair of panties" even though there was only one item (panty). Weird.

Of course, I have no idea, but I'm thinking its just poor wording on WMAZ's part.
 
MaconMom said:
I don't either. I just found his comment interesting because it confirms this story is true.

Can't say that I'm not interested in getting a new bit of evidence to consider though.. And who knows, maybe this was deliberately leaked regardless of what Winters said.
Click to expand...

bbm: That's kind of what I'm thinking -- because, otherwise, why wouldn't he have stopped at "no comment"...? (Unless it's NOT true but he wants to give the impression it is...?? Nah...)

I'd been getting rumors of something to this effect for several days (may have been out there earlier, but I hadn't heard it, if so) and so was thinking it was maybe a grand jury leak. Now... I don't know. Bet Telegraph was hearing rumors too and got someone they felt comfortable enough with as reliable to confirm...

During this crucial time before the arraignment, wouldn't surprise me if they "leaked" some things to put pressure on for a confession or willingness to deal ...? Just as I'm sure the defense is playing its cards with great care, too. It's bound to be an interesting, tense interval, IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 218 more.
Total: 3,822 (members: 219, guests: 3,603)

Online statistics

Members online
219
Guests online
3,603
Total visitors
3,822
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,648
Messages
17,956,948
Members
228,575
Latest member
Onaquest
Back
Top