GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #15 *appeals denied*

[pearl]

Does anyone know of another case where the original indictment was discarded in favor of a differently worded indictment? This development this late in the case worries me. I can't help but think this DA is having to play clean-up for Winters.

 

[Wondergirl]

Does anyone know of another case where the original indictment was discarded in favor of a differently worded indictment? This development this late in the case worries me. I can't help but think this DA is having to play clean-up for Winters.

I don't like it either. I would be grateful for a legal analysis on this move.

 

[Backwoods]

Does anyone know of another case where the original indictment was discarded in favor of a differently worded indictment? This development this late in the case worries me. I can't help but think this DA is having to play clean-up for Winters.

bbm: Whether or not Cooke really is having to do that, or would say so, I don't know -- but IMO that "excuse"must lie within tempting reach, should things not go smoothly.

I've heard of indictments being "added to" and of charges being dropped and then defendants being re-indicted later, but can't say I know of another case offhand where the defendant was re-indicted in this kind of situation, to correct ambiguity in the original indictment without it being quashed. (But maybe we aren't getting quite all the steps reported here? Maybe it was quashed by the court and then the re-indictment went forward.) I'm sure similar things have happened before -- I just am not familiar with any cases where they have. I would like to know how often it happens.

I don't like it either. I would be grateful for a legal analysis on this move.

bbm: Me, too.

But in the meantime, my :twocents::

I think maybe this has grown out of defense pre-trial motions filed. In the first set of motions at this link:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/540762-mcdaniel-defense-motions-351-pages.html

"Motion 3.1 - Special Demurrer to Count One (Malice Murder)" touches on some of this, especially in the introductory portion and then again as you read on down into its "Conclusion" section. This motion definitely indicates the defense saw some problems with the indictment and I believe that filing this motion was part of preserving the ability to do more about it, if and when the time came.

It may be that further motions filed in the second set -- which we do not have right at hand, since the macon.com folks chose not to post it as they did the first set -- take this further, I don't know.

I found the case linked below, from the Court of Appeals of Georgia, interesting reading, as it does seem to touch on some of the same issues:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-court-of-appeals/1614861.html

The recent macon.com article says, bbm:

...Had the initial indictment stood until the scheduled January trial, McDaniel might have been acquitted by a directed verdict, said Franklin J. Hogue, one of McDaniel’s lawyers....

http://www.macon.com/2013/10/29/274...-giddings.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

I think the operative word may be "might" here. I think -- NOT sure, as I surely am not a lawyer -- that the defense (if the original indictment had stood, after the defense's pre-trial motion/s regarding it) might have asked for such a directed verdict but the judge might not have gone for it -- and then maybe it would have been an appeal issue, if the jury returned a "guilty" verdict.

I do think, if it had reached that point, that the defense would have asked for the directed verdict -- they would be remiss in their duty to their client not to do so, IMO, and if they neglected to, that also would be an appeal issue, if SM were convicted.

If the judge DID go for such a directed verdict of acquittal -- well, that's where my real question lies. In that case, would the DA have been able to re-indict? At that point, I am thinking maybe NOT -- but again, I really do not know.

Anyhow, as I said in my earlier post, just sounds like a good thing that it was taken care of at the point it was. (Though it may rear its head again in some way, for all I know.)

These from the macon.com article are welcome words, to me:

...Cooke and Hogue said the new indictment should not affect plans for jury selection in the case to begin Jan. 6.


“Both sides are ready to try this case,” Cooke said....

http://www.macon.com/2013/10/29/274...-giddings.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop


Here's a link to the wording of the original indictment, just to have handy during these discussions -- in fact, it might not be a bad idea to SAVE a copy, now that there's a new indictment:

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/wmaz/docs/stephen-mcdaniel-murder-indictment.pdf

As far as I know, no local media outlet has yet chosen to favor us with an online copy of the new indictment.

 

[cocomod]

Have they searched the private property yet? I hope that they have a good team including great dogs when they search.

 

[Backwoods]

Have they searched the private property yet? I hope that they have a good team including great dogs when they search.

Sure haven't heard a thing about that, cocomod -- guess we (the public) are not likely to, until all is done, at least.

I do think that, if the schedule proposed in the last document we had from the civil case is being adhered to, some of the witnesses (is that the right term?) are to be deposed this month.

 

[Indy Anna]

Sure haven't heard a thing about that, cocomod -- guess we (the public) are not likely to, until all is done, at least.

I do think that, if the schedule proposed in the last document we had from the civil case is being adhered to, some of the witnesses (is that the right term?) are to be deposed this month.

Who are the "witnesses"? Would they be the people who last saw Lauren alive and the friends who searched for her before her torso was found?

TIA

 

[Backwoods]

Who are the "witnesses"? Would they be the people who last saw Lauren alive and the friends who searched for her before her torso was found?

TIA

It does look like a good number of them are friends/searchers, but there are others as well.

First, on this topic, reaching back in the thread a bit to bring forward my post with the link to the discovery document that contains the names of "witnesses who may be deposed" in the civil suit and proposed dates of depositions, etc.:

more at: http://www.13wmaz.com/news/topstori...-Doesnt-Object-to-Searching-Grandfathers-Farm

ETA: And... thanks very much, 13WMAZ, for providing a link to a pdf of the discovery document!!




http://www.13wmaz.com/assetpool/documents/130912034445_McDaniel Discovery Order.pdf

... and also bessie's reminder to use initials when discussing these potential witnesses:

Just a friendly reminder, everyone. If discussing the witnesses, please remember, initials only.

:tyou:

Below is an (initials only) list, in the order the names are stated in the document, and my summary of "who they are" -- of course, I don't know everybody's "role" or their complete role, but just some identifiers that might be helpful. Additions/corrections welcome!

Persons the plaintiffs may depose:

SM - the defendant. Of course, as we touched on earlier (in the previous thread, I believe), with the criminal case pending, he has a choice to make about testifying or not. The tentative date for any deposition from him is December, before the scheduled start of the criminal trial.

TM - former undergraduate roommate of SM, from whom we first heard reports of "perfect murder" discussions during their undergraduate years.

Dr. A. S. - a Mercer professor. I'll say a little more about an interesting tidbit regarding his possible connection in a separate post later (because it involves some links I'll need to post).

WI - friend of TM (above) about whom we read recently in a macon.com article, who also has been interviewed by LE about "perfect murder" discussions with SM and related things. I don't think WI was a Mercer student -- I think he met and interacted with SM through TM.

JH -- not sure who this is

GM - mother of the defendant

MM - father of the defendant

DW - older guy, former Univ. of Ga. professor, I believe; former Mercer Law classmate of Lauren and SM; talked to media some about SM's attendance at the bar exam review class, etc.

DD - former Mercer Law student who for a time was the resident contact and/or maintenance man at the Barristers Hall apartment complex; this is the guy that SM's mom said SM had seen on Lauren's balcony, etc. (from early in the case)

KG - Lauren's mother, and plaintiff in the civil suit

BG - Lauren's father, and plaintiff in the civil suit

AMM - she used to be AM. Lauren's friend (and former law school classmate of Lauren and SM) who was instructed (by Lauren's sister, I believe) to use the "hidden key" to enter Lauren's apartment after it became apparent that Lauren was missing. (She has since married GM, below, apparently, judging from the name change and the fact that the address given in the document is the same for both.)

GM - law school classmate of Lauren and SM and one of the searchers, I believe. His name is one mentioned by SM in the infamous interview.

JK - I think (not sure) he was also a law school classmate and probably involved in the search. I believe SM mentions him in the interview as well.

JT - not sure

LB - a law school classmate of Lauren's and SM, I believe, and also, I think, one of the searchers. SM mentions his name in the interview.

AWP - not sure

BG - not sure

AB - law school classmate of Lauren and SM, and also the mostly-moved-out-already tenant of the downstairs apartment

BB - not sure of exact title, but owner and/or manager of Barristers Hall apartment complex

MB - BB's brother, I believe, and in a similar position/role at the apartment complex

MQ - the Macon television reporter who interviewed SM in the "full version" SM interview, in which she informs him that a body has been found, etc. I think she left Macon some time ago and, IIRC, the document locates her in Florida now.

TS - not positive, but I believe this is the trainer/handler in one of the HRD dog searches

JK - the male half of a Macon reporter-duo who have done the greater portion of local newspaper coverage of the case

ALW - the female half of the newspaper team

Det. DP - lead detective in Lauren's murder investigation


Persons the defendant may depose:

KG and BG, the plaintiffs; Lauren's parents.

DV III - Lauren's Atlanta-lawyer boyfriend

Det. DP - lead detective in the case

Det. KC - another detective in the case


Also, from the wording of the document, it seems that names could possibly be added to either list.

 

[Backwoods]

Now, the additional info connecting to Dr. A. S. in the potential-witness list above:

First, remember T.M., also in the list above. A roommate of SM's from undergraduate days at Mercer, T.M. gave an interview to Macon's The Telegraph/macon.com after his name was revealed at SM's commitment hearing on the murder charges as being a source of information about alleged "perfect murder" discussions.

Along with relating some details pertaining to that, T.M. also touched on some other topics in his comments (bbm in the quotes):

...McDaniel and (TM) were in a campus production of a play called “The Disciples.”


(TM) played “an overzealous Christian guy” and McDaniel was “a gay, Jewish psychology major who was just really confused,” (TM) said.

(TM) had, at the time, been “bitter” about missing out on becoming a pilot. McDaniel cheered him up by encouraging him to try acting.


“He helped me through a lot. ... He gave me an outlet that I needed badly,” (TM) said, “and I really appreciate him for that.”


(TM) said he knew that going to the police with what he said he knows about McDaniel was the right thing to do. ...

And also this:

...One of (TM's) former Mercer professors got in touch with him in early July.


Stephen Mark McDaniel had been named by police as a “person of interest” in the killing and dismemberment of Lauren Giddings....

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

Now I can't say for sure that Dr. A.S. was the professor who contacted TM in July 2011, but I feel he may have been, because (bbm again in the quote):

...This commitment to transformative education has been forged by several key events in Mercer’s past. These include a heresy trial conducted in 1939 when thirteen students, led by John Birch accused professors in Christianity and other departments of teaching ideas that contradicted Baptist beliefs in the Bible and creation. Although all professors were cleared of charges, this event has come to be a key part of Mercer’s lore and self-identity. The trial is chronicled today in the Mercer Reader (1st ed), pp. 511-524. It has also been dramatized by Mercer Professor (Dr. AS) in an unpublished play from 2007, The Disciples. ...

from: http://phronesis.mercer.edu/

Also, more on Dr. A.S.:

• (He) regularly teaches FYS 101 & 102, Christianity and Literature, Introduction to American Literature, Introduction to Drama, American Renaissance, Realism and Naturalism, Modern Drama, Contemporary Drama, Southern Literature to 1945, and English capstone. He dreams of teaching on the sitcom from The Honeymooners to South Park, and on graphic novels and comic books

(He) has written two plays, Combustible/Burn and The Disciples, both of which have been produced and staged at Mercer's Backdoor Theatre.

more at: http://departments.mercer.edu/english/faculty_staff.html

So Dr. A.S. wrote the play in which TM and SM performed and likely was involved in its production, perhaps even directed it.

Back when macon.com was still being really nice and sharing documents with us, the first set of the defense pre-trial motions posted here ...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/540762-mcdaniel-defense-motions-351-pages.html#wgt=rcntnews

...reveals, on page 148 of the document at the link, that TM had additional things to say about SM's performance in the play and how he saw it connecting up with the interview SM gave Macon media outlets the day Lauren's torso was discovered. From an LE affidavit referenced and reproduced within one of the motions, here is what TM reportedly said:

...When I heard the news about the murder in Macon and heard that Stephen was somehow involved I watched the interviews he gave to the news media at the scene. While watching one particular interview it struck me that Stephen's tone of voice, demeanor, and hand movements were not Stephen's normal mannerisms but instead nearly mirrored dialogue which he gave during a theater performance when we were both undergraduates at Mercer University.

I also recalled when seeing this he informed me that he had no interest in the theater but wanted to test himself to see if he was believable when telling a story....

So, I'm thinking that perhaps Dr. A.S. is on the list to lend some sort of support to theories along that line.

 

[Backwoods]

I've tried not to intersperse posts about the criminal case with ones about the civil case very much because that starts to get confusing, to me anyhow. So, since I've recently made two long posts about the civil suit, and noone else's posts are intervening, I think I'll take this opportunity to mention one of the things that puzzles me in the wording of the civil suit.

It's this:

A thumb drive of pictures of Lauren Giddings that was stolen from her apartment by McDaniel prior to her murder was found in McDaniel’s apartment.

from: http://media.macon.com/smedia/2013/06/18/17/40/JLYDh.So.71.pdf#storylink=relast

The civil suit was the first we had heard publicly of any such thumb drive. (I believe that, as far as we knew until then, the only "item of interest" alleged to have been found among the computers/media seized from SM's apartment was child *advertiser censored*.)

I can understand how that could be -- LE might very well have held that back from public knowledge, no "leak" happened, and it happened not to be something that the defense referenced in any of the pre-trial motions to which we have been privy.

So, my first question is, that being the case, how does the civil suit "have" this to use as evidence? Easy enough answer here, I guess -- LE shared this info with the family, and thus with the civil suit lawyers. Maybe because the thumb drive would be considered stolen property if missing and then found in SM's apartment, it was even returned to the family. Especially as it contained pictures of Lauren, I could see how LE might do that.

Or, alternatively, maybe this evidence was referenced, and thus knowledge of it made accessible, in the second set of pre-trial motions, which haven't been posted for easy public view anywhere that I know of.

But my big question is, why does the civil suit allege that the thumb drive was stolen by SM "prior to" Lauren's murder? Why not "prior to or after" or just "was stolen", no time period given?

I'm thinking Lauren must have reported, mentioned, or somehow made known before her death that she was missing a thumb drive...?

Am I missing some other obvious explanation? (My mind keeps wandering to maybe some kind of computer forensics that could show the thumb drive being accessed by SM's computer on a date before June 25 ...but I don't know, that seems as if I'm kind of reaching...)

 

[Backwoods]

It looks like I'm playing catch up again. Thanks for keeping us up to date, BW. I'm not finished reading all of the articles about the hearings yet because the issue of whether McD's apartment was properly guarded and/or sealed made me curious enough to do a little review. This is what I've come across so far.

I believe there's close up of that posting on McD's door somewhere.

July 5, 2011

http://www.macon.com/2012/06/20/2064906/a-look-at-the-lauren-giddings.html

This snip is from a Telegraph article dated July 14, 2011.
From the same article, this talks about the vacant downstairs apartment. If that apartment was sealed, surely McD's was, too.

Read more here: http://www.macon.com/2011/07/14/163...om-apartment.html#ixzz1S3AqCFRw#storylink=cpy

July 13, 2011 -- The video of the night search. At about 1:20 in the video we see a detective appear to punch numbers into a keypad next to the front door right before they close up.
http://www.13wmaz.com/news/article/135428/175/Investigators-at-Giddings-Apartment-Complex
​

bessie, here's a 13WMAZ report from July 3, 2011, the date Buford* was asking about specifically, I think:

http://www.13wmaz.com/news/article/134401/153/%5BB

There's video in the main coverage, but then a little ways down the page on the left is a link to a longer video segment, titled " Lauren Giddings Sunday Crime Scene Investigation" (ok, I guess I just posted an actual link to that video.)

In the longer video, around 1:50 - 1:55, and again around 2:12, there's a pretty good look at SM's apartment door. I don't see any sign or tape, etc.

On the other hand, the apartment grounds seem to be mildly swarming with LE, and they are shown stringing crime scene tape pretty much around the perimeter.

*ETA: Sorry, seems it was Hogue, not Buford, who asked the question about July 3 specifically:

...Hogue also asked Newberry to review photos taken of the apartments July 3 to see if he saw a “Do not enter” sticker on McDaniel’s door, preserving the apartment for future searches....

http://www.macon.com/2013/09/17/2669379/mcdaniel-hearings-conclude-will.html

 

[Backwoods]

Another twist in the long road:

Phil Brown, Bibb chief judge, set to retire at the end of 2013

Phil Brown, Bibb County’s chief Superior Court judge, will retire at year’s end. ...


...Brown, who has presided over pretrial hearings in the murder case against Stephen McDaniel in the Lauren Giddings slaying, cited his age as part of his reason for leaving the bench....


...Brown said he would continue to preside over hearings set for next week in the McDaniel case, but that another judge will be assigned before the trial.


Jury selection is scheduled to begin Jan. 6, but that will probably be pushed back...

read more at: http://www.macon.com/2013/11/12/2770358/phil-brown-bibb-chief-judge-set.html

Oh, brother -- does this mean more delays?? I hope not long ones, at any rate.

Best wishes to Judge Brown on his retirement, though.

 

[Backwoods]

Reading more about the retiring judge ... I don't know.

Does this hint something weird is going on?? :waitasec:

...No decision has been made about which judge will be assigned to the McDaniel case, but the trial will likely be handled by judges Tripp Self or Howard Simms, or possibly a specially appointed judge from outside the Macon Judicial Circuit....

...“You just kind of look for a break in the action and say, you know, ‘If I’m gonna jump out of this plane, this is my chance,” (Judge Brown) said.

“With my age and, you know, I don’t want to say more than I should, but it’s just time.”


Asked if there was anything else he could share about his retirement decision, Brown said, “Maybe one day. It’s not anything that I’d be embarrassed by. I just don’t want anybody to say anything but (that) I’ve had good experience here.


“You know, it didn’t seem like the plane was gonna come down to a quick, smooth landing right away, and I just wanted to say, you know, fine, let cases take ... their course and meanwhile I’ll leave it to some of these younger (judges) that know more or better than me.” ...

http://www.macon.com/2013/11/12/2770358/phil-brown-bibb-chief-judge-set.html

 

[bessie]

What the heck is that about? ?

 

[Wondergirl]

I can't rid myself of the sense of foreboding in Lauren's case. I don't like it.

 

[Knox]

Judge Simms will now handle the case.
http://www.macon.com/2013/11/13/2772445/new-judge-assigned-to-mcdaniel.html

https://www.facebook.com/LaurenTeresaGiddings

 

[Backwoods]

New judge assigned to McDaniel murder case

Bibb County Superior Court Judge Howard Simms will preside over Stephen McDaniel’s upcoming murder trial. ...


...Brown had said Tuesday that he would preside over pretrial motions hearings in the case scheduled for next week, but word Wednesday was that those proceedings will be postponed and heard by Simms. ...

read more at: http://www.macon.com/2013/11/13/2772445/new-judge-assigned-to-mcdaniel.html

So...now the pre-trial hearings scheduled for next week will be delayed.

(This could get interesting; locals can vouch that Judge Simms has hit more than a few bumps in the road in the recent past. He may very well be a good judge though. For some background, see this article from one year ago: http://www.macon.com/2012/11/05/2237446/judge-simms-opens-up-about-his.html )



More from today's article:

...Floyd Buford, who has represented McDaniel since his arrest in the summer of 2011, less than two months after McDaniel graduated from law school, was “disappointed” to hear about Brown’s retirement....

...Buford said Brown had “worked extremely hard” on the case.

“But I have utmost confidence in Judge Simms,” Buford said, “and I know that he will get up to speed quickly.” ...


...Buford did meet with McDaniel last week at the Bibb jail, where McDaniel has awaited trial for 28 months -- through two district attorneys, a rescinded death penalty prosecution and now two judges.


“He’s an amazing and unique young man,” Buford said. “I’ve gotten to know him very well.”...

 

[Backwoods]

Judge Simms will now handle the case.
http://www.macon.com/2013/11/13/2772445/new-judge-assigned-to-mcdaniel.html

https://www.facebook.com/LaurenTeresaGiddings

Sorry, Knox -- was typing while you were posting, apparently.

 

[Backwoods]

What the heck is that about? ?

Well, I don't know.... But, the more I look at those words from the retiring judge, I'm wondering if he was just talking mostly about his age and his desire to retire, etc., after all.

The way the quote is inserted into --heck, showcased in -- the article almost gave the impression that THIS CASE is a crashing plane he wants to bail out of ...but I'm now kind of thinking he meant more that he really felt it was time for him to retire, had thought this might be his last big case, etc. -- but that he forsees now it might drag on for a while yet, so he decided, if he could exit gracefully from it, it might be the best thing to do.

Maybe what he didn't "want to say more than I should" about and maybe can talk more about "one day" is just pretty routine legal stuff, stuff that may pend for a while, nothing earth-shattering about the case but just what he sees as likely that might stall his retirement longer than he thinks best.

I know the case "dragging on" is not what most want to hear ...but it's better than the case crashing, huh?

All JMO.

 

[pearl]

Didn't Judge Brown have health issues earlier this year? I seem to remember something with his heart.

 

[Backwoods]

Didn't Judge Brown have health issues earlier this year? I seem to remember something with his heart.

Yes, that's right -- I believe he had some type of heart surgery.

ETA: From Feb. 2012

Bibb County Superior Court Judge Phil Brown is making preparations to undergo heart surgery, meaning he will be away from the bench for several weeks....

http://www.macon.com/2012/02/02/1889392_mcdaniel-arraignment-postponed.html