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

[SouthernKate]

The Macon Telegraph is promoting a story in tomorrow's paper called "A Light from the Shadows." That was preceded by, "The slaying of Lauren Giddings has raised an almost impossible question." Written by Joe Kovac, Jr (saw it on his Twitter) - he's done some really well written articles about the case thus far, so this sounds interesting.

 

[Knox]

The Macon Telegraph is promoting a story in tomorrow's paper called "A Light from the Shadows." That was preceded by, "The slaying of Lauren Giddings has raised an almost impossible question." Written by Joe Kovac, Jr (saw it on his Twitter) - he's done some really well written articles about the case thus far, so this sounds interesting.

I saw the teaser on the website

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/27/1680432/coming-sunday-a-laurens-giddings.html

 

[Backwoods]

The Macon Telegraph is promoting a story in tomorrow's paper called "A Light from the Shadows." That was preceded by, "The slaying of Lauren Giddings has raised an almost impossible question." Written by Joe Kovac, Jr (saw it on his Twitter) - he's done some really well written articles about the case thus far, so this sounds interesting.

On the macon.com home page it says that, too, and also (quote): "The slaying of Lauren Giddings has raised an almost impossible question. One the accused himself has asked, and one that police, lawyers or a trial may never quite answer."

link: http://www.macon.com

I bet the question is: "Why would anybody do this?"

eta: Knox, looks like we posting this link at the same time

 

[ThinMan]

I AM SORRY EVERYONE, IT IS A CERTAIN TIME OF AUGUST (IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN) and we just found out that we HAVE to buy a new car because the car we bought last year has a broken part that is literally thousands of dollars to repair and is not covered by the warranty. :banghead:

So maybe I need to ask more questions.
Why would LE even consider the cadaver dogs allerting in McD's apt as good evidence if decompositioning body is so easily tracked everywhere? It seems like LE has a great deal of faith in the practice, but if it is not that convincing as evidence, why have them for anything other than finding a body?

Also, I do have faith in the FBI.

Sorry for your troubles, Shivers. Hang in there.

LE would see the alerting dogs as convincing evidence if they need to convince a judge (not a jury) of the low standard of probable cause (not proof beyond reasonable doubt), especially if they have little else. It's that last thought that worries me!

If LE had good evidence that SMD did it, they wouldn't use the dog alert story for the hearing. While Winters doesn't want to reveal his entire case at this point, it is to his advantage to create in the mind of the public and the accused the conviction that LE can prove for sure that SMD did it.

I share your respect for the FBI, generally, and I believe that LG's DNA actually IS on the hacksaw blade. That's all that Det. Patterson said the FBI could tell them in support of the murder warrant.

But the FBI did not train the dogs in question, nor handle them at the scene. We're talking about local dogs and local trainers. I'm doubtful that a jury would find that testimony convincing beyond doubt that LG's torso had been in SMD's apt.

 

[Backwoods]

I AM SORRY EVERYONE, IT IS A CERTAIN TIME OF AUGUST (IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN) and we just found out that we HAVE to buy a new car because the car we bought last year has a broken part that is literally thousands of dollars to repair and is not covered by the warranty. :banghead:

So maybe I need to ask more questions.
Why would LE even consider the cadaver dogs allerting in McD's apt as good evidence if decompositioning body is so easily tracked everywhere? It seems like LE has a great deal of faith in the practice, but if it is not that convincing as evidence, why have them for anything other than finding a body?

Also, I do have faith in the FBI.

about the bolded: You are thinking, then, that something will yet come in from the FBI to bolster the case? I'm thinking there are still some results not in, but not sure -- uncertain of when the last time was we heard that from LE.

 

[ThinMan]

More about what yesterday's hearing didn't provide:

Nothing about any fiber evidence connecting LG with SMD's apt, SMD's car or SMD's clothing. That would not be troubling by itself, because LE only has to convince the magistrate that there is probable cause to believe SMD killed LG.

But, there is that troubling admission from Detective Patterson that nothing other than LG's DNA on the saw from Quantico (the FBI) supports the probable cause. I think this means that all the fiber evidence sent to the FBI came up a total zero.

No mention of the refrigerator from Apt. #1. One might hope that both LG's blood and a bit of SMD's DNA (hair?) might have been found in the fridge. Again, nothing from the FBI, said Patterson.

Thoughts?

 

[Backwoods]

More about what yesterday's hearing didn't provide:

Nothing about any fiber evidence connecting LG with SMD's apt, SMD's car or SMD's clothing. That would not be troubling by itself, because LE only has to convince the magistrate that there is probable cause to believe SMD killed LG.

But, there is that troubling admission from Detective Patterson that nothing other than LG's DNA on the saw from Quantico (the FBI) supports the probable cause. I think this means that all the fiber evidence sent to the FBI came up a total zero.

No mention of the refrigerator from Apt. #1. One might hope that both LG's blood and a bit of SMD's DNA (hair?) might have been found in the fridge. Again, nothing from the FBI, said Patterson.

Thoughts?

What about what I asked just above -- do we know whether LE is still saying that not all results are back from the FBI?

 

[SouthernKate]

More about what yesterday's hearing didn't provide:

Nothing about any fiber evidence connecting LG with SMD's apt, SMD's car or SMD's clothing. That would not be troubling by itself, because LE only has to convince the magistrate that there is probable cause to believe SMD killed LG.

But, there is that troubling admission from Detective Patterson that nothing other than LG's DNA on the saw from Quantico (the FBI) supports the probable cause. I think this means that all the fiber evidence sent to the FBI came up a total zero.

No mention of the refrigerator from Apt. #1. One might hope that both LG's blood and a bit of SMD's DNA (hair?) might have been found in the fridge. Again, nothing from the FBI, said Patterson.

Thoughts?

I am also troubled by the lack of new evidence revealed at the hearing. I said this yesterday, but I was really hoping for more. With the minimal information on the murder warrant, I thought that would just be scratching the surface as to what they have. But nothing else has been brought forth so far.

Could nothing from the FBI mean two things? As in, no, there's still more tests to be done and also, no, we've got nothing.

Obviously, if McD is indicted by a grand jury, they have to hand over everything they have to the defense. And I'm sure that won't be revealed until the trial. More waiting and hoping on our parts, I guess.

I want them to have something solid. It just seems like they don't have it yet.

And in my opinion, Detective Patterson appeared unsure of himself and not very convincing. Floyd Buford questioning him at trial might be a benefit for the defense. Buford seems like a very good attorney.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Here's an article from this past week that says they are still awaiting evidence from the FBI crime lab along with the results of a rape kit performed..

Macon police still are awaiting FBI lab results of possible trace evidence that might have been in McDaniel’s decade-old Geo Prizm or in Giddings’ Mitsubishi Galant. Forensic testing also is incomplete on guns and knives found in McDaniel’s apartment.
Results haven’t been returned from evidence collected from a sexual assault kit performed on Giddings’ body.

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/08/the-lauren-giddings-murder-investigation-some-updates/

 

[SouthernKate]

What about what I asked just above -- do we know whether LE is still saying that not all results are back from the FBI?

I just wondered that too in my response. I would think the results would all be back by now, but I can't remember if they've clearly stated one way or the other.

ETA: And SmoothOperator just answered. Thanks! I had forgotten reading that about awaiting results for the rape kit - I remembered that being mentioned a week or so ago.

 

[Backwoods]

Here's an article from this past week that says they are still awaiting evidence from the FBI crime lab along with the results of a rape kit performed..


http://abovethelaw.com/2011/08/the-lauren-giddings-murder-investigation-some-updates/

That site runs a little behind in its coverage, sometimes -- they "summarize" at intervals. Looks like the macon.com (Telegraph) article it references for info is this one, dated Aug. 18:

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/18/1669391/investigators-in-giddings-case.html

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

Why would LE even consider the cadaver dogs allerting in McD's apt as good evidence if decompositioning body is so easily tracked everywhere? It seems like LE has a great deal of faith in the practice, but if it is not that convincing as evidence, why have them for anything other than finding a body?

This is my take on the cadaver dogs as well:

LE would see the alerting dogs as convincing evidence if they need to convince a judge (not a jury) of the low standard of probable cause (not proof beyond reasonable doubt), especially if they have little else. It's that last thought that worries me!

If LE had good evidence that SMD did it, they wouldn't use the dog alert story for the hearing. While Winters doesn't want to reveal his entire case at this point, it is to his advantage to create in the mind of the public and the accused the conviction that LE can prove for sure that SMD did it.

I share your respect for the FBI, generally, and I believe that LG's DNA actually IS on the hacksaw blade. That's all that Det. Patterson said the FBI could tell them in support of the murder warrant.

But the FBI did not train the dogs in question, nor handle them at the scene. We're talking about local dogs and local trainers. I'm doubtful that a jury would find that testimony convincing beyond doubt that LG's torso had been in SMD's apt.

I see them in this instance as a tool for LE to better understand how they should proceed.
IMO, They were brought in by LE to identify where the crime/dismemberment took place - and if it took place at the apts.
The scene was so clean to the naked eye, they really had little to go on.
And as ThinMan pointed out, this information was good enough to present at a probable cause hearing,
but it's not going to be offered up as evidence to convict. I suppose this would be similar to the idea of a polygraph.

I do think if there were other empty apts at the complex, they probably should have checked them out with the dogs.
However, given the finding in the front apts, location of the torso, discovery of the keys in SM's apt...
it's fair to say the logical conclusion would be that the crime itself did not extend into other apts.

 

[Backwoods]

I just wondered that too in my response. I would think the results would all be back by now, but I can't remember if they've clearly stated one way or the other.

ETA: And SmoothOperator just answered. Thanks! I had forgotten reading that about awaiting results for the rape kit - I remembered that being mentioned a week or so ago.

Maybe it's time the Telegraph tried to get an update on that. Yoo-hoooo -- reporters --!!

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

I am also troubled by the lack of new evidence revealed at the hearing. I said this yesterday, but I was really hoping for more. With the minimal information on the murder warrant, I thought that would just be scratching the surface as to what they have. But nothing else has been brought forth so far.

Could nothing from the FBI mean two things? As in, no, there's still more tests to be done and also, no, we've got nothing.

Obviously, if McD is indicted by a grand jury, they have to hand over everything they have to the defense. And I'm sure that won't be revealed until the trial. More waiting and hoping on our parts, I guess.

I want them to have something solid. It just seems like they don't have it yet.

And in my opinion, Detective Patterson appeared unsure of himself and not very convincing. Floyd Buford questioning him at trial might be a benefit for the defense. Buford seems like a very good attorney.

BBM

I think Winters would be wise to suggest to Patterson that he get some coaching between now and the trial :twocents:

 

[Backwoods]

BBM

I think Winters would be wise to suggest to Patterson that he get some coaching between now and the trial :twocents:

I really felt kind of sorry for him, up there on the stand. You know, he may be a great detective out in the field, really know what he's doing, but just not be too great at this part of the job. That's a pretty big weight to carry, having to on-your-lonesome (at this hearing) get up there and be responsible for getting the main points across.

 

[bessie]

That site runs a little behind in its coverage, sometimes -- they "summarize" at intervals. Looks like the macon.com (Telegraph) article it references for info is this one, dated Aug. 18:

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/18/1669391/investigators-in-giddings-case.html

You beat me to it, Backwoods. ATL is a blog, and not MSM. ATL sources news from MSM, which is great, and I'm not questioning its integrity. I just want to point out that for posting purposes, it's good form to link to the original source.

 

[SmoothOperator]

The commitment hearing went much as was expected as well as even discussed here prior to its being held Friday morning.. There was discussion where this was spoken about at length that there would be no smoking guns, bombshells, dramatic showdown of key pieces of evidence tying Stephen directly to Lauren's murder[that they do have].. The commitment hearing would not be where we would see any of those and atleast in speaking for myself it went much like what was expected..

The thresh hold is not exceedingly high when speaking in terms of what is necessary to meet the burden of probable cause.. The DA's office and attys are very well aware and familiar with exactly what level that thresh hold is and exactly what little it takes to meet their burden of proof and that is exactly what they prepared and released as far as details or info about the evidence that they have thus far in Lauren's murder.. They did not fail or fall short in any way whatsoever..not even close.. They only gave the tiny modicum of evidence necessary to meet their burden of proof and not a dot more..

I have no criticism for the DA's office and I do not know at what capacity they usually perform in court.. But the only thing I will say is this and it is nothing more than an opinion.. I really, really feel as though the DA's office needs to go all out.. and when they do go to trial pull out all the stops.. I personally hate that our court rooms have become this way but there is strong evidence that this is exactly what it has come to.. With the defense attorneys many, many times being great and magnificent "showman" and "entertainers"..much time spent charming the ladies and the gentlemen of the jury..much time and money and manpower put into literally working every nook and cranny of our system to find that loop hole to weasel the defendant through.. Due to it literally coming down to absolute elaborate displays, testimonies, and the more outrageous and over dramatic they can paint both the negative to BE REALLY NEGATIVE..and the positive TO BE REALLY POSITIVE.. the better it is for their client..

Sadly IMO due to these elaborate and unnecessary strategies of wowing, dazzling, and entertaining the jury, media, and public[of course jury being there main focus with the other just secondary]..sadly I believe due to all this that the truth of the entire case and whats at the heart of it gets completely lost..lost and forgotten..

It happens! It absolutely happens and guilty men/women walk free today due to this masterful and skillful manipulation of our justice system to work for the defendant..to seek out and find at all costs, money, time, etc what their defense team of experts and attys can find a hole that can be manipulated to aid the defendant..

Sadly DA offices now have to compete with this and as I said with the stone cold truth of a case not standing a chance against the Las Vegas style glitter and glam thats being used to manipulate and disguise a guilty defendant.. Its sad but true and the DA's gotta step it up!!!

I don't mean to stoop to their level but I do mean to step it up and be as top notch and tight as they can be..especially with their strong witnesses or experts.. they need to be thoroughly rehearsed and re-rehearsed where the truth will even stand half a chance of even being noticed much less actually paid attn to, looked at, and considered as being extremely indicative of a defendants outright guilt..

They can be nothing less than 110+% and to be that way 110+% of the duration of the trial..

But of course nothing more than jmo, tho!!

 

[Backwoods]

Buford doesn't real strike me as the showman type, just a good, solid very competent defense attorney.

 

[ThinMan]

Buford doesn't real strike me as the showman type, just a good, solid very competent defense attorney.

Agreed. Smooth's points about the criminal justice system sometimes producing bad results when a celebrity buys "dream team" defense lawyers may generally be true -- and we can all think of such cases -- but I don't think that's what's happening in our town.

Floyd Buford is a very competent lawyer, a good one, but nobody would even call him the best criminal defense lawyer in Macon. So, that general concern surely doesn't apply here.

 

[ThinMan]

Really great post, IMO, Thin Man.

I bolded a few parts in red to ask, and this is for anybody: What do you think the computer evidence from the GBI is? If it is the child *advertiser censored*, how could they tie it to the murder, short of one of those scenarios mentioned in the earlier part of the post? Or might it be something much more directly related to the murder?

I've been turning this over and over and I think Patterson must've been talking about the child *advertiser censored* on the flash drive based on his use of language about the GBI evidence. Patterson says the GBI evidence isn't part of the probable cause on which the warrant was based, but that it is relevant to and does support the "overall case."

I've concluded that he IS talking about the child *advertiser censored*. As I mentioned above the fact that SMD possessed child *advertiser censored* does not make it more likely that he killed LG (thus not relevant to the warrant's probable cause). But, it is likely that some courts might admit the child *advertiser censored* evidence on the theory that it somehow is probative of SMD raping LG. That would make it relevant to the murder, if the final theory LE adopts in the indictment is felony/murder and the underlying felony is rape.

I personally have a lot of doubts that the mere fact that one posses child *advertiser censored* makes it more likely that he will sexually attack an adult. There are others who are better qualified here to make that assessment, so I'll let them. (and I DO recall the prior posts speculating on this when the CP news came out).

But, remember, that this scenario requires some heavy theorizing by the DA at trial -- he would have to undertake to prove that SMD was attempting to rape LG when he killed her. The child *advertiser censored* evidence might somehow weakly support the likelihood that he would sexually attack an adult. But attempting to prove a rape would be very difficult unless yet-to-be-returned DNA evidence from the FBI were to make that proof easy.

We won't really know how Winters intends to use the "GBI evidence" in the "overall case" until the trial and Lord knows when that will be.