GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #10

[PsychoMom]

PsychoMom - this is what I am talking about - Looking at the trees and not the forest.

Thad Money is a law abiding citizen.
Thad Money has not been charged with murder and dismemberment, 2 counts of burglary, or 7 counts of child pornagraphy aka pedophilia .
Thad Money has stepped up to the plate to give assistance to LE on the case so that the Giddings may get some justice.

http://www.edwardjones.com/en_US/fa/index.html&CIRN=520004

I am looking at how a jury might see things. We can close our eyes to things, but the jury won't. If there is an issue, then it is better to address it early rather than later. Which would be worse? Finding out today that TM had some serious issues with honesty and following commands in the military? Or having the defense reveal it during the middle of the trial? I didn't say it WAS an issue, I was simply wondering what we knew about him other than the blurbs in the paper.


BTW - Do we know he has never had a problem with the law in the past? I don't know that. McD has no convictions at this point in time. But he has been arrested for things. I haven't heard about TM's history.

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

Agent Lundy, you are correct. Great article and very revealing.
Between the SoL posts and Thadeus Money's detailed, eye witness of McD's mindset I think McD can exit Catatonic Freeway take a right turn on to Guilty Road.
Looking at the forest and not just the trees.

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/30/1682872/ex-roommate-saw-2-sides-of-mcdaniel.html

Also, given SM's obvious affinity for writing, I would not be surprised if the computer forensics didn't also turn up a very detailed document outlining this "perfect murder". Even if it's in the form of a hypothetical story, it would just further corroborate TM's (and possibly others') testimony as to SM's obsession with the subject. And the OpChan posts show this persisted, and even appeared to escalate, right up until the murder.

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

I wonder why Money's dreams were "dashed" and he was discharged from the military. And he had left the Citadel for some reason. If he had issues that caused him to leave the Citadel, or if the dashing of his dreams was due to something on his part, it could make him look not so good. We know what he says now, but do we know anything about him as a person, especially during that time frame? Those things could be an issue in trial.



Not saying to sleuth him. Just commenting on the article.

Given how strict the Air Force's requirements are for pilots, this could be something as simple as a medical disqualification.
Eye exam, heart murmur, failing some G-force test, etc... :twocents:

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

I wonder why Money's dreams were "dashed" and he was discharged from the military. And he had left the Citadel for some reason. If he had issues that caused him to leave the Citadel, or if the dashing of his dreams was due to something on his part, it could make him look not so good. We know what he says now, but do we know anything about him as a person, especially during that time frame? Those things could be an issue in trial.



Not saying to sleuth him. Just commenting on the article.

Per the article we are referencing on Macon.com about TM. It reads " honorary discharge".

 

[PsychoMom]

Given how strict the Air Force's requirements are for pilots, this could be something as simple as a medical disqualification.
Eye exam, heart murmur, failing some G-force test, etc... :twocents:

Could be. Could have been a lot of things. I know tons of military people who have had an honorable discharge for some shady areas. My favorite was the one where the cadet went to the chaplain every single day to avoid doing the work they didn't want to do. They have to be allowed to go see the chaplain if requested. Finally, the military had enough and sent them packing.

Both my brothers were military, as have been many other people in my life. I am not blind to requirements. I am stating we DON'T know the history. We can make assumptions all day long, but if we are wrong and there is a problem, the case could fly out the window. This is not about McD's guilt or innocence. It is about how the jury could see things and the ultimate outcome.


ETA: The person with the chaplain thing also got an honorable discharge.

 

[SurfieTX]

Also, given SM's obvious affinity for writing, I would not be surprised if the computer forensics didn't also turn up a very detailed document outlining this "perfect murder". Even if it's in the form of a hypothetical story, it would just further corroborate TM's (and possibly others') testimony as to SM's obsession with the subject. And the OpChan posts show this persisted, and even appeared to escalate, right up until the murder.

Penny Chan's stalker/killer did just that. And buried it in a 60 page email to her family.

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

Could be. Could have been a lot of things. I know tons of military people who have had an honorable discharge for some shady areas. My favorite was the one where the cadet went to the chaplain every single day to avoid doing the work they didn't want to do. They have to be allowed to go see the chaplain if requested. Finally, the military had enough and sent them packing.

Both my brothers were military, as have been many other people in my life. I am not blind to requirements. I am stating we DON'T know the history. We can make assumptions all day long, but if we are wrong and there is a problem, the case could fly out the window. This is not about McD's guilt or innocence. It is about how the jury could see things and the ultimate outcome.


ETA: The person with the chaplain thing also got an honorable discharge.

I would think that a jury's main concern would be knowing that the witness is credible and trustworthy.
Being a financial adviser would certainly demand these qualities.

Here are some financial industry links you may find useful:
http://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment.shtml
http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/invadvisers.htm
http://www.sec.gov/investor/brokers.htm
http://www.finra.org/Investors/index.htm
http://www.nasaa.org/industry___regulatory_resources/Investment_Advisers/
http://www.brightscope.com/

 

[PsychoMom]

I would think that a jury's main concern would be knowing that the witness is credible and trustworthy.
Being a financial adviser would certainly demand these qualities.

Here are some financial industry links you may find useful:
http://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment.shtml
http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/invadvisers.htm
http://www.sec.gov/investor/brokers.htm
http://www.finra.org/Investors/index.htm
http://www.nasaa.org/industry___regulatory_resources/Investment_Advisers/
http://www.brightscope.com/

LOL! The way a lot of financial advisers do things, that might be his downfall.

I am not saying he has done anything wrong. I am saying we don't know. You can think anything you want. The problem is IF something is out there and it is not resolved prior to the trial, he could be detrimental to the prosecution's case. I am not trying to be argumentative. I am only pointing out a potential problem that may impede the case.

There may be nothing at all bad about him. He may be a saint who knows the cure for cancer and passes out blankets to the homeless every weekend. We don't know that either. My only point is we can't raise him to God status without knowing more about him as a whole person and why he didn't make it following his dream. Heck, maybe he donated a kidney to a sick friend. It could be anything. But it is an issue hanging in the air.

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

LOL! The way a lot of financial advisers do things, that might be his downfall.

I am not saying he has done anything wrong. I am saying we don't know. You can think anything you want. The problem is IF something is out there and it is not resolved prior to the trial, he could be detrimental to the prosecution's case. I am not trying to be argumentative. I am only pointing out a potential problem that may impede the case.

There may be nothing at all bad about him. He may be a saint who knows the cure for cancer and passes out blankets to the homeless every weekend. We don't know that either. My only point is we can't raise him to God status without knowing more about him as a whole person and why he didn't make it following his dream. Heck, maybe he donated a kidney to a sick friend. It could be anything. But it is an issue hanging in the air.

Poor TM. People can't just be good people doing a good deed. Even he can't be innocent until proven guilty....and he hasn't been charged with anything.

 

[PsychoMom]

I guess many of you would prefer Buford drop a bomb about something regarding TM during the trial instead of resolving it sooner. I have not said he is a bad guy, but many of you seem to assume that is what I am saying. Maybe you guys already know something bad about him that I do not. Gee. Wish you would share it.

All I have pointed out is by NOT knowing what skeletons may lie in his closet (irony noted), it is set up to explode during the trial. That could decimate the case against McD if it happened. If you want McD convicted, wouldn't you want to make sure nothing was going to pop up regarding this lovely man who was so jovial at meeting his roommate?

 

[Wondergirl]

BBM: This has me a little confused, and I do wonder if it is the reporting, or an interpretation of the warrant?

That was in August 2007. Now, four years later, McDaniel faces murder charges -- charges based, in part, on Money’s memories of some of their conversations.


Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/08/30/1682872/ex-roommate-saw-2-sides-of-mcdaniel.html#ixzz1WX1DNObR

 

[Cas128]

Does anyone honestly believes that LE and the DA are not going to fully vet TM before he goes on the witness stand?

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

LOL! The way a lot of financial advisers do things, that might be his downfall.
I am not saying he has done anything wrong. I am saying we don't know. You can think anything you want. The problem is IF something is out there and it is not resolved prior to the trial, he could be detrimental to the prosecution's case. I am not trying to be argumentative. I am only pointing out a potential problem that may impede the case.

There may be nothing at all bad about him. He may be a saint who knows the cure for cancer and passes out blankets to the homeless every weekend. We don't know that either. My only point is we can't raise him to God status without knowing more about him as a whole person and why he didn't make it following his dream. Heck, maybe he donated a kidney to a sick friend. It could be anything. But it is an issue hanging in the air.

The bolded statement is offensive.

 

[PsychoMom]

The bolded statement is offensive.

GOOD GRIEF! It was a joke. And I never said ALL. Gee whiz!

 

[Cas128]

Quote from PsychoMom:
"Of course, we can look the other way and pretend nothing could go wrong. Maybe it won't."

Funny how when you're challenged or disagreed with, you assume the rest of us have our heads in the sand. And when you're regularly misunderstood, it couldn't possibly have to do with the way that you express your thoughts, beliefs, opinions, could it?

 

[PsychoMom]

Funny how when you're challenged or disagreed with, you assume the rest of us have our heads in the sand. And when you're regularly misunderstood, it couldn't possibly have to do with the way that you express your thoughts, beliefs, opinions, could it?

No. I don't have a problem with it. I do have a question though. What have I said bad about TM? Anywhere. Have I accused him of a single thing? The most I have stated is we don't know anything about him.

I don't want to bury my head in the sand and think everything will magically work out. I want to know what might pop up. I like to gather as much info as possible to be prepared. And I hope the prosecution and the defense both do that. However, I am not willing to accept this person as the be-all, end-all of this case without knowing more about him.

ETA: I do have support for my views. I am not the only one on here, or even in the community. It is a matter of who is available and online at the moment for this board regarding what is posted.

 

[AgentFrankLundy]

As Bessie would say, Ya'll knock it off !!

 

[PsychoMom]

As Bessie would say, Ya'll knock it off !!

Aye! Aye! Captain!

 

[Knox]

BBM: This has me a little confused, and I do wonder if it is the reporting, or an interpretation of the warrant?

Hi Wondergirl, what is confusing about the charges being based in part, on the statement Money gave Detectives?

The warrant says that the accused "has previously commented that he could commit murder and provided details of methods to avoid detection which are similar to the facts and circumstances surrounding the killing of Lauren Giddings."

 

[southern_comfort]

No. I don't have a problem with it. I do have a question though. What have I said bad about TM? Anywhere. Have I accused him of a single thing? The most I have stated is we don't know anything about him.

I don't want to bury my head in the sand and think everything will magically work out. I want to know what might pop up. I like to gather as much info as possible to be prepared. And I hope the prosecution and the defense both do that. However, I am not willing to accept this person as the be-all, end-all of this case without knowing more about him.

ETA: I do have support for my views. I am not the only one on here, or even in the community. It is a matter of who is available and online at the moment for this board regarding what is posted.

I'm with you, PsychoMom. I am curious and concerned also, and some of the quotes in the MT article made me raise an eyebrow.

I'll probably add more later when I have time to collect my thoughts.