I believe that was the first search warrant.
So 3 weeks go by, and that is how long it took them to find the panties, the piece of evidence that may prove to be the "smoking gun" surfaces.
Alrighty then. The motions were filed 1.5 years after the search warrants. 1.5 years ago Buford and his investigator were busy finding "bloody gloves" in the laundry room. LOL.
Troll internet posts, graphic perfect murder statements, bloody panties found in obvious places after 3 weeks searching, painted gloves found in laundry rooms, Indian Folklore and Astrology, Swamp Douche Barbie, stealing condoms from your sister, sleeping with THREE guns on the bed.
A whole lot of hinky going on.
bbm: Well, the first search
is one example -- I think there may be at least one other, will have to check -- where LE apparently (according to the defense motions) took items they were not authorized by the warrant to take. (The defense is challenging that search, first, on the grounds that it was the "fruit" of earlier unconstitutional searches and asks that
all the evidence seized in it be excluded -- but, if that doesn't fly, they ask that the items seized outside of what the warrant described be excluded.)
for reference to the quotes below:
https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...l#wgt=rcntnews
On that first one, according to Motion 2.6, they apparently were authorized to take:
...blood and blood spatter, body parts and body tissue and fluids, knives, cutting implements and instruments capable of dismembering a human body, cleaning and laundry supplies, garbage bags, paint and painting tools, which are evidence of the crime of Murder
This is what they apparently actually did seize:
Knife,curved, in a black case
Knife, "Maxim",folding pocket knife, black in color
Knife, red in color, Swiss Army, in black case
Ka-Bar knife, in plastic,black in color, holster
Knife, folding style, in brown leather case
Sword, red in color, wooden handle, in black case
Pair of white and blue, New Balance shoes
White, cotton "V" shaped cloth
White, cotton T-shirt
White, Hane's underwear
Gray bath towel
Gray T-shirt
Knife, in black cloth case, folding type, with red oval in handle
Gray towel
13 cutting equipment Knives & Swords"
(in the quote above, I corrected "Kaites" to "Knives" in the last item -- looking back at the handwritten notes, that obviously is what was meant)
If those clothing/towel items had detectable (by dogs, possibly ...?
hmmm*) or blood spatter, body tissue, or body fluids on them, they may have felt they had authorization to take them in terms of the warrant. Otherwise -- not so much. (I guess they could really s-t-r-e-t-c-h, maybe, and say that almost any clothing or towel item that has been used would have at least some tiny amount of
someone's body tissue or fluid on it, but..."evidence of the crime of Murder"...?)
*ETA: It occurs to me that, if dog reactions were
the qualifying factor for the clothing/cloth items, in the eyes of LE, and if the defense manages to get "dog testimony", as we discussed earlier, thrown out ... seizing these items may prove very hard to justify. Could be a real blow for the prosecution. (As bessie kind of said earlier: We need some lab results to really make heads or tails of a lot of this that's coming out.)
And yes, checking back, same basic situation with the second warrant search: Now, in Motion 2.7, defense challenges that search -- again as tainted "fruit" of earlier unconstitutional searches, also noting that this warrant sort of "grew" out of the execution of the first one (which defense, of course, says was also tainted) -- and, again, if that argument doesn't get everything excluded that came from this warrant, the defense asks that the items seized that were not described in the warrant be excluded.
The warrant for this one repeats the same "authorized to take" types of items as the one above and also adds some (in the quote below, I
bolded the ones I saw that were added.)
...blood and blood spatter, body parts, and body tissue and fluids, knives, firearms, or any other instrument capable of inflicting bodily injury, cutting implements, instruments capable of dismembering a human body, cleaning and laundry supplies, garbage bags, paint and painting tools, computers, cameras and any other digital storage devices, which are evidence of the crime of Murder
It seems, this time, they actually came away with:
Century Arms International Model GP1975 7.62 Caliber Rifle Serial number: GP7508169.
Tangfolio Model: Witness Caliber: 1Omm Pistol Serial number: EA42183 Tangfolio Model: Witness Caliber: 9mm Pistol Serial number: EA41214 Black Canon camera
Rope, secre line, white in color, nylon
wooden stick, 4 foot long
wooden stick, 6 foot long
strip of duct tape, gray in color
Mesh, chain mail vest
White in color rope in clear bag
4 Baseball bats
hand sheaves, black tip, wooden handle
wad of hair
laptop, gray in color
ext hard drive, black in color
SD card reader Pack of writing papers with handwriting on it
Cell phone, gray in color, "Nokia" Foam cup with" Lauren" written on it
Wal Mart receipt for 06-23-11
"P" trap
Shoelace
Bayonet
One "Wal Mart" key
Silvercase with journal and laptop
Stack of Kroger receipts
Several pieces of cloth strips
One "Georgia" key
Bibb County Law Clerk ID
green scrub sponge
Again, here, it does look as if (barring things we don't know concerning these items -- and there sure may be some) LE took a few things that don't really fit the description in the warrant of what they were authorized to take.
ETA #2: Example -- and question: Receipts. Certainly not really capable of doing bodily harm, etc., so -- if not blood-spattered, tainted with fluids, etc. -- can LE take receipts that show
purchase of things (weapons, cleaning products, paint, etc.) described in a warrant, even if the authorization in the warrant does not specifically name/describe "receipts"? Anybody?
I think --just IMO, now -- LE was (understandably) going at the searches really hard in the aftermath of Lauren's partial remains being found; the dogs; feeling they had a likely suspect; Lauren's family headed down to Georgia; etc. And I think probably they did jump the gun a bit on some of these items -- unless there's a good explanation we don't know yet for every one of the "out of place" items that justifies them under the descriptors in the warrants.
(I wonder if maybe there was a thought that Stephen would not be taking up residence at the jail right away -- maybe they didn't have the "burglary" thing worked out yet and felt there might not yet be enough evidence to arrest him for murder -- so they were overreaching to get that evidence and/or to at least remove all they could, lest he return...? Just a thought. I've even wondered, at times, if they
considered letting him go and keeping him under surveillance.)
I do kind of think the panties must not have shown up during these searches, or they likely would have taken them -- why not, especially if they seemed to have blood on them, since they were taking things like a T-shirt, towels, etc. I believe we heard at a hearing that they were found in SM's sock drawer, "balled up" -- wonder if they could have been rolled up into a pair of socks, something like that...? (That last part is just me speculating -- not from a hearing.)
Anyhow, I do think it kind of strange that they showed up so late in the game.
Whew, that last part of your post could be a jumping-off place to lots of discussion! (And I have just tonight noticed some stuff in the recent coverage/documents that I
missed entirely before and that kind of has me reeling... so there is lots to discuss, isn't there, after nothing new for so long?) But, for now, since this is long, I'll just say: Yeah, the "guns on the bed" thing stood out for me, too. We can talk about it later!
