Hello everyone! This is my first post here. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading the discussion since I first heard about the case a few weeks ago. I kept myself purposefully in the dark regarding certain developments and instead read them as they unfolded, like some strange, retrospective mystery. As a current Georgia resident/native with ties to both Mercer and Agnes Scott (several friends were enrolled concurrently with Lauren), this case has definitely touched me more than others have, not to mention everyone's respectful handling of it here.
I'm going to do my best not to be redundant or attempt to revive any long since passed-on horses, but am I mistaken in thinking that thing about somebody coming forward (by contacting the defense) as the author of the BBQ post hasn't been discussed yet? I only read this information on a "law" site I'm not certain we're allowed to discuss specifically, so bear with me as I get a feel for the rules.
Onto some late-to-the-party speculation.. The more I read up on all the motions filed recently by the defense, the more I wonder if this wasn't the "plan" all along. It seems like so many pieces of (highly circumstantial) evidence are downright unrelated to each other. The extent of SM's meticulous planning vs. his carelessness has been widely debated, especially with regards to the torso disposal, but I'm starting to think that might have been part of the plan too. If SM was expecting authorities at the apartment complex, he would've known a grotesque discovery like that would've prompted panic and potentially hasty action on the part of LE. Having a presumably in depth understanding of what is and isn't admissible, and with Casey Anthony's case fresh on his mind, what if SM was banking on some subtle procedural errors in evidence seizure to significantly weaken the state's case? I don't know how frequently the defense gets evidence thrown out, and what they want thrown out now is a BIG deal (IMO), so this is obviously all just weak speculation.
If we're to believe TM's testimony, SM has been thinking about details like shoe size and being identified by his hair for years now. The fact that he let himself be identified by security camera looking at boat anchors—that he didn't buy, right?—makes me think he could've been playing a game of circumstantial evidence, a choose-your-own-murder-method wherein LE has to see how rain ponchos, rope, boat anchors, etc all fit in, and whether any of them do at all. Perhaps he intentionally used some sort of weak legalese when he allegedly did not consent to a search, knowing they would enter his apartment anyway—where he left further puzzle pieces (as promised to detectives) like the three (!) guns on his bed, the decorative weapons, and the cooler, none of which garnered any forensic evidence (AFAIK), but all of which appeared immediately suspicious to LE. If he went as far as painting over walls and scrubbing every impacted surface, surely he'd have time to arrange these things in a less bizarre manner, or even leave them in Lilburn (again, knowing what connotations their discovery would have to LE, especially after what would then appear to be an erroneous mention of a "small handgun" in the interview. Is it still a red herring if it's planted with the expectation that someone will identify it as such?)
This doesn't necessarily explain the condom confession, since as you all have pointed out, he could've so easily just said they were his sister's/free from health events on campus/etc that he had lying around just in case. I don't buy that he confessed to that to explain the keys, because he could've tossed those in a river in the days he had between the murder and the arrest. It's equally unlikely to think he threw those tidbits in to play his game on extra hard mode as it is to think he was playing a game of circumstantiality in the first place—but IMO, he knew he couldn't guarantee a complete lack of forensic evidence, so why not try to hide it in a mess of unrelated detail that would self-destruct in confusion before it could even make it to trial, all the while making it look like prosecution was crying wolf?
