I see it more as hoping that was the reason rather than thinking it was pure hate or evil out there directed at her. If they think he did it because he wanted and loved her so much, it might make it a little easier.
Whether McD did this or not, I am not seeing any evidence he was drooling after her. Nothing. I have to think that may not be behind this crime. I feel if he did do this crime, it was to see if he could do it. Not for any lost chance at love, but an opportunity to see if he had the b@lls to do it. More of a challenge to himself. She was simply convenient. Again, that is IF he did it.
Angel, thank you so much for this post. Such good insight and knowledge you have shared with us. I will be reading this again.
Ask her another question, Whoajo!
You are inferring as much in deciding he just wanted to see if he could get away with something like this as anyone else is in deciding he was fixated on Lauren, except in the latter case, the family also agrees. To each his own.
The arrest warrant says, "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 LG".
That adds some factual support to the theory that it was an intellectual challenge for SM.
On the other hand, there has been nothing at all revealed to indicate that he was fixated on LG.
They aren't necessarily going to put motive on the arrest warrant, they would put probable cause to believe he'd commit a murder in such a manner though, which is what that bit is. We don't even know exactly what Stephen said regarding how he'd get away with murder.
Motive is VERY important to the family, and everyone close to the family that I have spoken to says the motive appeared to be some kind of fixation, attraction, obsession. To suggest that the family doesn't really want to know the real motive and would choose to believe something different is pretty bold, considering how crucial the WHY would be to any family. The family knows things the public does not know, many things, much of the information I've been given has come from family knowledge. To shrug off their opinions and beliefs about the crime as inconsequential compared to something *inferred* from the warrant is inappropriate imo.
They aren't necessarily going to put motive on the arrest warrant, they would put probable cause to believe he'd commit a murder in such a manner though, which is what that bit is. We don't even know exactly what Stephen said regarding how he'd get away with murder.
Motive is VERY important to the family, and everyone close to the family that I have spoken to says the motive appeared to be some kind of fixation, attraction, obsession. To suggest that the family doesn't really want to know the real motive and would choose to believe something different is pretty bold, considering how crucial the WHY would be to any family. The family knows things the public does not know, many things, much of the information I've been given has come from family knowledge. To shrug off their opinions and beliefs about the crime as inconsequential compared to something *inferred* from the warrant is inappropriate imo.
I think AA is correct. I'd be much more inclined to follow LG's family and their feelings/knowledge about the case. I'm sure they know things from LE that we do not know. They also were pretty close with her and know things she might have said to them in the past about SM. I'm sure they are talking to LG's friends and boyfriend....she may have confided in them over the years about things SM did or said to her that would lead them to that conclusion.
They aren't necessarily going to put motive on the arrest warrant, they would put probable cause to believe he'd commit a murder in such a manner though, which is what that bit is. We don't even know exactly what Stephen said regarding how he'd get away with murder.
Motive is VERY important to the family, and everyone close to the family that I have spoken to says the motive appeared to be some kind of fixation, attraction, obsession. To suggest that the family doesn't really want to know the real motive and would choose to believe something different is pretty bold, considering how crucial the WHY would be to any family. The family knows things the public does not know, many things, much of the information I've been given has come from family knowledge. To shrug off their opinions and beliefs about the crime as inconsequential compared to something *inferred* from the warrant is inappropriate imo.
I am curious. Since you claim to know all these people involved in the case so closely, first of all, have you been accepted as an expert in that area here? I know there is a process to becoming an expert. If so, great! We can pick your brain thoroughly about what the family thinks and what they have seen or heard. And second of all, what behavioral examples have they given to support the infatuation theory? Not just feelings, but true actions that back up that belief.
~snipped
ETA: This family has not demonstrated in any way that they have a personal ax to grind with Stephen McDaniel, they have stated repeatedly that they only lean toward believing he is the killer because of facts given to them by the MPD explaining why the MPD believes Stephen is guilty. In fact I have noticed a very fair and "legal" mindset among the parents, they appear to believe in the system and right to a fair trial, which suggests they would believe whatever the facts point to, not some alternate reality that they are contriving in their own minds. They seem more concerned with truth than anything else, so when they say something about the case, I take it seriously.
I guess that explains it. Thank you.I am not a local, nor an "expert", but people talk to me privately and tell me things. You don't need to pick my brain to discern what the family believes, they have stated it openly in the media. They aren't going to reveal certain details of the investigation to the media that the police have asked them not to. For now it's all a matter of how you interpret the facts made available to you as an individual, and you have every right to interpret them any way you choose, as do I.
You are bringing up a connection to the family again. What connection do you have with the family that puts you in a position to know intimate details of them and their thought processes any more than any other person on here? If you have been deemed an expert because of your connection to the family, I am all for it! It would be nice to have an insider. Thank you in advance for explaining your connection so we can have a better understanding from where your information is coming.
I guess that explains it. Thank you.
http://www.macon.com/2011/08/12/1662957/source-mcdaniel-missed-2nd-class.html#ixzz1UpOqFWbgShe added, “Part of the reason I have talked is because things have been overlooked. A lot of things had been put out that should not have been put out because (it) was supposed to be privileged information -- such as a warrant and what’s in the warrant, and they were talking about suppressing it and yet at the same time, they were talking about that it had already been released -- to the media and to the press and online and all over the place.”
I think AngelAnalyzes should become an expert witness for this trial, I think she has been spot on all along since day one about this thing. I also think the quotes from the Giddings family we are seeing now are typical guilt feelings one would expect now that they know what McD did, but they really believed he was harmless. Did anyone see the Joe Kovacs article about the crayon drawing on McD's mirror in his apt. with a rainbow that said "I Love You , Lauren" that MPD Paid special attention to ?
To clarify, regarding my statements about the family being fair and not having an ax to grind with Stephen, that is entirely based on how they have handled themselves in the media. It's clear to see in the interviews they've given, they've said that they only lean toward Stephen's guilt because of information provided to them by police, but that they believe in the right to a fair trial. I respect that.
Exactly! But maybe in his mind he imagined it coming from LG and therefore saved it where he could look at it every day ?? Chills is right .I did...and the way he wrote it and played it out in that article was perfect...I gasped and thought how creepy that was...Then, I read down and found out his oldest niece/adopted sister has the same name. So, therefore indicating the drawing was made and signed by her.
But if it wasn't and he had made that...that gives me chills.
I'll try to find the link.
ETA - here it is.
http://www.macon.com/2011/08/07/1657322_p2/man-on-the-street-how-fledgling.html
This is a two page article; this is the link to page 2, where the drawing description is.
I respect that, myself. It helps to know your opinion is coming from your interpretation of what you see portrayed in the media. It sounded as if you were having direct conversations with them and reporting back what they were telling you. The two are very different views.
As a therapist, and as a mother, I can tell you, I would much rather know someone loved my child so much that they couldn't bear to see them leave than to think some evil fell out of the sky totally unprovoked and uninvolved and tortured my child. It is something I believe most parents would say if they were dealing with a tragic horrifying death of a child. Even if the crime itself is evil in all aspects, you like to think something inside the monster had a moment of caring, and you can ascribe those feelings to the monster because it makes the crime a little more palatable.
That is why I wanted to see historical evidence of behaviors which supported the belief. It creates two distinct monsters. One is emotionally motivated. One is emotionally void. It gives a path to follow. In this case, I am not seeing the evidence of emotions being attached. That is a much scarier monster to me. One devoid of human caring and compassion.