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

[bessie]

What I was thinking is that if someone thought they were SAR dogs rather than HRD dogs specifically (since the group had not been told a body had been found), there could have been a legitimate concern from any of the "searchers" that LG's scent would be on them, or in their vehicles or residences, since they had recently been in her apartment, handling some of her possessions -- thus leading the dogs astray if they were searching for a missing person by that person's scent.

As for the decomp scent -- you may be right, bessie. But then again, I am thinking of that carpet study article you posted for me a while back ...? I don't think the remains came into direct contact with the carpet in that study...but not sure? Trying to find it, was sure I saved it somewhere.

The bodies were wrapped in cotton blankets, but the bodies and the carpet squares made contact, albeit with a blanket acting as a barrier. I'll post the link again later.

It is a fact that the scent of advanced decomposition will permeate fabric and porous materials. What I question is whether that can happen simply by walking through an apartment where a deceased body was present, after the fact and in the absence of any detectable (by the human senses) odor.

 

[Wondergirl]

Floyd Buford comments on the Commitment Hearing:

The reporter asks him about the bloody gloves his investigator found, and he says he can't talk about it.

http://videos.macon.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=108495641&item_index=2&all=1&sort=NULL

 

[bessie]

It seems to me that McD has went from excessive verbal vomitus to deadpan silence. If you go back and look at his earliest court appearances on video, he showed no emotion or real interest in what was going on around him then. Did not smile and nod at his parents, nothing.

Granted, in this latest appearance he does seem catatonic, reminds me of a turtle sitting there in the courtroom. His shoulders all slumped and head jutting forward. I haven't made up my mind if it's an act and he is following the script he wrote in the post on OPChan, or if he simply realizes his goose is cooked and is looking at either death or life in prison. Not exactly a rosy picture either way.

Some have theorized McD fantasized a lot, wanted to gain and exert control over others, felt he was smarter, better and more intelligent than those he interacted with. I think LE has proved him wrong, not much to fantasize about when you're in isolation with no stimuli other than a jail approved book.

Exactly. Facing the possibility of either fate, who wouldn't be depressed?

I haven't been able to watch the video yet, only the snippets that were available last night. So, I don't have a fixed opinion at this point. Just knowing the circumstances, however, I'd say either truth is possible.

 

[Knox]

Exactly. Facing the possibility of either fate, who wouldn't be depressed?

I haven't been able to watch the video yet, only the snippets that were available last night. So, I don't have a fixed opinion at this point. Just knowing the circumstances, however, I'd say either truth is possible.

Another thing, just an observation. In the June 30th interview, McD's arms never quit moving. Pointing here, there and everywhere, LOTS of arm movement. Now when we see him on video, his arms are completely limp. The difference in body language is just bizarre.

Anyone else having buffering issues with the uncut video of the hearing?

 

[PsychoMom]

I do see a problem with a jury since no other apartments were searched with the dogs. It can look skewed if framed correctly. And I don't know if these other friends had their places searched or just offered to let them be searched. I can see that as being problematic if framed right to the jury. I think it can make LE look like they did not bother looking elsewhere. Not that it is or isn't true, but a jury could see it that way. I have a real concern what those small things can mean in a trial. Not to mention whatever evidence they do have being turned and twisted. The exact same thing can make you look guilty or innocent depending on how it is presented in many cases.

As for his depression. We don't know what kind of psychiatric history he has. IF he has a history, then you still have to determine whether it has any meaning for the crime. Most likely, he will still know right from wrong, so it won't matter. I can imagine he is dealing with some shock and depression right now, but it shouldn't impact his case.

And the neurological disorder mentioned earlier can mean a lot of things. It is not necessarily damaging enough to create a criminal brain. Could mean they have some shaking issues, or some balance issues, or even some difficulty holding or grasping objects.

Sorry for the posting and running. I have a busy weekend on hand. Not sorry about that! I need a break!

 

[Backwoods]

Another thing, just an observation. In the June 30th interview, McD's arms never quit moving. Pointing here, there and everywhere, LOTS of arm movement. Now when we see him on video, his arms are completely limp. The difference in body language is just bizarre.

Anyone else having buffering issues with the uncut video of the hearing?

Also just an observation (not meaning to offer a "diagnosis" for SM, by any means): Those who have ever known someone with manic depressive illness/bipolar disorder have probably seen the drastic changes in body movement and posture that can come with the different phases.

ETA: And the buffering issues? Haven't tried the uncut video yet, but <sigh> seems I always have buffering issues! Archaic computer.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I have a question regarding the dogs, their searching, and the dissatisfaction some on the defense team seem to be taking issue on how that search was conducted...

What has me a little confused is that IMO seems the defense's issue with their only being certain apts searched with the dogs somehow indicates that they were already zeroed in on ONLY his client to the point of not seeking out further evidence that possibly was behind the closed doors of other apts.. If this were so wouldnt it have made more sense that only Lauren and Stephen's apts ONLY were the ones searched.. That IMO would be more indicative of the buck stops here on Stephen.. but LE did NOT just search these only 2 apts...but rather something led them to search apt 1[directly beneath Lauren's apt]..

So my question is what led to their even deciding to enter into that downstairs apt??..was it strictly because they were informed it was unoccupied residence that had already removed the vast majority of his belongings???.. But weren't there other unoccupied apts in the BH complex??? I was under the impression that there were actually more vacant than there were occupied as of this last week of June..

So, I'd like to know what led to their having searched this additional unit besides just the units of the victim and alleged perp?? Those two naturally, of course make sense..but why the on a separate floor[1st floor vs 2nd]..one of many, many unoccupied units..
what led to their having decided to make it the only other unit out of all 16 that would be used with the cadaver dogs??

Just some inquiries regarding the choice of apts that were chosen to use the cadaver dogs..

Icky story from my brother, who used to work for a company that cleaned up after fire, water, and bio damage (which includes crime scenes in add'n to deaths from natural causes): a reclusive man died in the second floor of his home, and when his body was discovered, some of the fluids had leaked into the room below. :sick: I don't know the details of how long he was there before discovery. Were any of the other units searched directly below LG's or SM's? If so, maybe there were concerns about leakage of fluids.

 

[ThinMan]

It's been a busy week here in Lake WebSleuth . . .

1. Child *advertiser censored* charges
2. The <modsnip> website posts (that many of us had heard about) went public
3. The commitment hearing went as scheduled (and as predicted bound over the case)

WS posts have focused on each event as they unfolded. Here's one attempt to summarize where we were last week and where we are now:

My opinion (JUST MOO) is that most WS posters last week thought SMD killed LG but also thought that LE had not released enough information about evidence to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Several of us WSers have said that, but I believe it to be generally true as well.

After all this past week's events, I think we're still right where we started (at least, I am). Here&#8217;s why:

Child *advertiser censored* -- isn't really relevant to the murder (doesn&#8217;t make it more likely that SMD killed her). For some people, what had been reasonable doubt evaporated in the light of child *advertiser censored* charges because:

1. They had a gut instinct that SMD is a pitiable, harmless, social recluse who loves kittens and children (and guns and knives). For those folks, the child *advertiser censored* probable created enough nausea to make their gut say &#8220;guilty.&#8221; OR

2. They believe one of the totally baseless scenarios that used the child *advertiser censored* crime as a motive for murder -- such as LG discovered his flashdrive (or he used her computer to download his *advertiser censored* while she was out running) and he killed her to escape getting caught. Those folks were willing to believe anything just because they could imagine it.

So, maybe a few potential jurors would be prejudiced enough by the child *advertiser censored* charges (not even asking whether they are true) to erase any benefit of the doubt they had been willing to give SMD.

<modsnip> Website posts -- Again, I'm not able to see how they are relevant, except that showing what we already knew: that SMD was a gun-nut, survivalist, birther, gamer; and they show what many suspected: that the games (and movies) he preferred were violent in the extreme. Based on the <modsnip>website posts one could add to our information that SMD boasted on a macho website to be so macho that he is desensitized to what turns most folks' stomachs. But we (I) already thought he was capable of the dismemberment & murder, so that's really not a change and it doesn&#8217;t prove that he is if you believed that he wasn&#8217;t. . . . And, all the ink spilled on the fake catatonia idea in the hypothetical Westboro Baptist Church funeral protestors massacre, is simply window dressing. How he acts now -- whether interested and engaged, or totally in another world -- simply does not make it more or less likely that he murdered LG. It might make it less likely he could use a not guilty by reason of insanity defense, but it doesn&#8217;t affect the likelihood that he killed Lauren.

Take note that the <modsnip>website posts were not mentioned in the commitment hearing. LE, instead, used the recollections from 7 years ago by his college freshman roommate TM. It MIGHT be that LE didn&#8217;t know about the <modsnip>website posts (say it isn&#8217;t so, Greg!), but if they knew and surely they did, they chose other evidence instead because the <modsnip>website posts just don&#8217;t tend to prove he did it.

Commitment Hearing-- Now this is where we all hoped that we'd really learn something to change our collective opinion that LE had not shown us that they have enough evidence to convict. We learned a few things: the cadaver dog alerted at SMD's apt, FBI confirmed the DNA to be LG&#8217;s that was found on the hacksaw that was the same brand and type as packaging found in SMD&#8217;s apt, but FBI results added nothing else to LE's probable cause to suspect SMD, GBI results that DID add to probable cause were just one computer item (that, perhaps, was the *advertiser censored* or the <modsnip>website postings), that Det. Patterson could use some more coaching, that Winters knows what he's doing, but that Buford does, too. Finally, we heard about the college roommate&#8217;s recollections from 7 years ago.

Now, how does the hearing affect the troubling pre-hearing conclusion that evidence known to exist was not enough to convict?

For my money (pun intended), Det. Patterson&#8217;s summary of the evidence made me MORE fearful that LE has insufficient evidence to convict. The best stuff they have (that they revealed) is the hacksaw package and DNA match on the blade. We knew about these facts last week -- if that wasn&#8217;t enough to convict in our opinions last week, it still isn&#8217;t.

Now we know about the cadaver dogs&#8217; hitting on SMD&#8217;s apartment. I personally think dogs know a ton of stuff humans will never discover, but the validity and reliability of dog alert testimony is very problematic. The science just isn&#8217;t there to create certainty beyond reasonable doubt even if the evidence is admitted (which is not certain in Georgia). Jurors will need to be convinced that these particular dogs know their stuff, that their handlers know their stuff, and believe that the dog's reported behavior (unlikely it was video-taped) proves that the victim's torso had been in SMD's apartment.

Finally, show me the money &#8211; the college roommate&#8217;s story about SMD talking 7 years ago about the perfect murder will be admissible as evidence, but just imagine the defense lawyer&#8217;s cross-examination. What else, besides the perfect murder, did SMD often tell you about? Answer: &#8220;uh, zombie attacks.&#8221; Follow up questions: Did you also think up perfect murders? Did anyone else? The dorm room discussion context of these stories &#8211; if the roommate is the only source &#8211; creates plenty of doubts that just might be too tough to dispel for one man or woman out of 12.

I was really hoping that FBI lab results would positively connect SMD with the torso of the victim. According to Patterson, the answer to Buford's question about additional FBI evidence was a resounding &#8220;no.&#8221; That one answer is the biggest news of the week.

So &#8211; I conclude: after an exciting week and lots of activity, we&#8217;re right where we started. I, personally, believe that SMD did it and I have not yet been shown evidence that makes me think he will be convicted. Damn!

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

When they've got dismembered human remains, and cadaver dogs alerting in 3 separate apartments (the only 3 they entered), and a master key found in one of those apartments that opens the door to every other apartment and room in the building, why would they not take the dogs into every apartment??

It would be meaningful to me to know that the dogs went into one of the other apartments and didn't alert, as a control. I don't have a search timeline handy, but if the dogs came through after the initial search, maybe the detectives tracked something in.

He let them in with the dogs and they allerted. If it was traveling around on peoples' shoes then the dogs would have allerted in the halls and all over the apt complex.

I really want to know what the problem is? Do you not have faith in LE?

I just wonder if they found the actual torso in his bed, if you guys would be saying "maybe he thought it was a pillow, bodies don't really start to smell until about 24 hours after TOD."

If I were Buford, I would sit on this site and actually see just how easily people are easily swayed. ...like OK, my client can actually have a freaking cadaver dog pick up the scent of a cadaver in his bedroom and bathroom and if the jury doesn't quite understand the logistics and search timeline, then my client will walk free. AWESOME! :rocker:

 

[Backwoods]

It's been a busy week here in Lake WebSleuth . . .

1. Child *advertiser censored* charges
2. The <modsnip> posts (that many of us had heard about) went public
3. The commitment hearing went as scheduled (and as predicted)

WS posts have focused on each event as they unfolded. Here's one attempt to summarize where we were last week and where we are now:

My opinion (JUST MOO) is that most WS posters last week thought SMD killed LG but also thought that LE had not released enough information about evidence to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Several of us WSers have said that, but I believe it to be generally true as well.

After all this past week's events, I think we're still right where we started (at least, I am). Here&#8217;s why:

Child *advertiser censored* -- isn't really relevant to the murder (doesn&#8217;t make it more likely that SMD killed her). For some people, what had been reasonable doubt evaporated in the light of child *advertiser censored* charges because:

1. They had a gut instinct that SMD is a pitiable, harmless, social recluse who loves kittens and children (and guns and knives). For those folks, the child *advertiser censored* probable created enough nausea to make their gut say &#8220;guilty.&#8221; OR

2. They believe one of the totally baseless scenarios that used the child *advertiser censored* crime as a motive for murder -- such as LG discovered his flashdrive (or he used her computer to download his *advertiser censored* while she was out running) and he killed her to escape getting caught. Those folks were willing to believe anything just because they could imagine it.

So, maybe a few potential jurors would be prejudiced enough by the child *advertiser censored* charges (not even asking whether they are true) to erase any benefit of the doubt they had been willing to give SMD.

<modsnip> posts -- Again, I'm not able to see how they are relevant, except that showing what we already knew: that SMD was a gun-nut, survivalist, birther, gamer; and they show what many suspected: that the games (and movies) he preferred were violent in the extreme. Based on the <modsnip> posts one could add to our information that SMD boasted on a macho website to be so macho that he is desensitized to what turns most folks' stomachs. But we (I) already thought he was capable of the dismemberment & murder, so that's really not a change and it doesn&#8217;t prove that he is if you believed that he wasn&#8217;t. . . . And, all the ink spilled on the fake catatonia idea in the hypothetical Westboro Baptist Church funeral protestors massacre, is simply window dressing. How he acts now -- whether interested and engaged, or totally in another world -- simply does not make it more or less likely that he murdered LG. It might make it less likely he could use a not guilty by reason of insanity defense, but it doesn&#8217;t affect the likelihood that he killed Lauren.

Take note that the <modsnip> posts were not mentioned in the commitment hearing. LE, instead, used the recollections from 7 years ago by his college freshman roommate TM. It MIGHT be that LE didn&#8217;t know about the <modsnip> posts (say it isn&#8217;t so, Greg!), but if they knew and surely they did, they chose other evidence instead because the <modsnip> posts just don&#8217;t tend to prove he did it.

Commitment Hearing-- Now this is where we all hoped that we'd really learn something to change our collective opinion that LE had not shown us that they have enough evidence to convict. We learned a few things: the cadaver dog alerted at SMD's apt, FBI confirmed the DNA to be LG&#8217;s that was found on the hacksaw that was the same brand as packaging found in SMD&#8217;s apt, FBI results added nothing else to LE's probable cause to suspect SMD, GBI results that DID add to probable cause were just one computer item (that, perhaps, was the *advertiser censored* or the <modsnip> postings), that Det. Patterson could use some more coaching, that Winters knows what he's doing, but that Buford does, too. Finally, we heard about the college roommate&#8217;s recollections from 7 years ago.

Now, how does the hearing affect the troubling pre-hearing conclusion that evidence known to exist was not enough to convict?

For my money (pun intended), Det. Patterson&#8217;s summary of the evidence made me MORE fearful that LE has insufficient evidence to convict. The best stuff they have (that they revealed) is the hacksaw package and DNA match on the blade. We knew about these facts last week -- if that wasn&#8217;t enough to convict in our opinions last week, it still isn&#8217;t.

Now we know about the cadaver dogs&#8217; hitting on SMD&#8217;s apartment. I personally think dogs know a ton of stuff humans will never discover, but the validity and reliability of dog alert testimony is unreliable. The science just isn&#8217;t there to create certainty beyond reasonable doubt even if the evidence is admitted (which is not certain in Georgia). Jurors will need to be convinced that these particular dogs know their stuff, that their handlers know their stuff, and believe that the dog's reported behavior (unlikely it was video-taped) proves that the victim's torso had been in SMD's apartment.

Finally, show me the money &#8211; the college roommate&#8217;s story about SMD talking 7 years ago about the perfect murder will be admissible as evidence, but just imagine the defense lawyer&#8217;s cross-examination. What else, besides the perfect murder, did SMD often tell you about? Answer: &#8220;uh, zombie attacks.&#8221; Follow up questions: Did you also think up perfect murders? Did anyone else? The dorm room discussion context of these stories &#8211; if the roommate is the only source &#8211; creates plenty of doubts that just might be too tough to dispel for one man or woman out of 12.

I was really hoping that FBI lab results would positively connect SMD with the torso of the victim. According to Patterson, the answer was a resounding &#8220;no.&#8221; That one answer is the biggest news of the week.

So &#8211; I conclude: after an exciting week and lots of activity, we&#8217;re right where we started. I, personally, believe that SMD did it and I have not yet been shown evidence that makes me think he will be convicted. Damn!

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?

 

[Inspector Gidget]

After reading this post by SMD posted in 2010.I do believe he might be displaying mind control.Some people can do this and I believe he can.The staring blankly in space not acknowledging anyone or speaking to them.Here
he explains what he would do in an arrest situation.I think these posts are speaking from his inner thoughts.JMO

Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/08/26/1678356/mcdaniel-posts-describe-torture.html#ixzz1WGwWmVtn

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

I don't think any of the searching friends lived at the complex.

But, LE had other residents from the complex in for questioning (according to transcript), and they were asked it their places could be searched.

Also, wouldn't BB's apt get a hit? She was just as much in LG's apt as anyone else.

 

[bessie]

:chillout: and knock it off!

 

[~SuperSleuth~]

I'm kind of in a hurry to get some other things done, but I don't want to get too far behind
So, I just wanted to address a few things...

SS, I certainly see where you are coming from ~ but I look at the flip side of the same coin... I think he continues to play the game that he described in the SoL post when he explained the demeanor and faux catatonia to display after the premeditated murder is executed. Of course, this is only my theory, but I certainly do not think he is insane; I think he is 'intelligence gone wrong' in a cold and calculating way due to some disturbing home life experiences. I am not in the medical field so I cannot say, but I have read some on the characteristics/behaviors of a sociopath. McD exhibits a lot of those traits including the extreme confidence. IMO he is going for an Oscar.

To be clear, I do believe this catatonic state he's portraying is definitely an act.
However, even though he theorized about this, I don't believe this was part of his plan for this crime.
IMO, he never intended for this to be anything other than a missing person.
Once they found the torso, it changed everything and his MM story and excuses about the hacksaw
and this "act" he's putting on is all part of him trying to now get out of a situation he never intended to be in.
On top of this, his superiority facade has been crushed. LE beat him!
And now, due to that arrogance, LE searched his apt and discovered all sorts of things
which he was not prepared for and now has to deal with.
Not only in connection with this murder, but other thefts, his CP, he now has to deal with
his family finding out about all these things, his internet postings, etc...
Probably even more to come which we're not aware of yet.
So, yes, he's putting on an act, but it's certainly not what he had planned

Thanks to both Sandstorm and SuperSleuth. I think it may very well be likely as you two have explained it to be in terms of why the blood on the hacksaw, for instance.. I can see it definitely being a part of his buying his own bs, believing his own hype!! Becoming that arrogant, take no prisoners type of stance and that he was always 2 steps ahead of LE.. I hope like hell thats the case because that means his arrogance and overconfidence allowed for some major foul ups to his overall plan..thus making it that much more sure to procure a successful conviction on the murder charge..

Precisely. His over-confidence in his own intellect has hung him.
He thought he was prepared.


Also... Even though he could sit and theorized in his mind how things
would play out and how he'd interact with LE in the investigation, etc...
All this may have worked in his mind, but real life is a different story.
Especially when you're as socially inept as SM was.
Remember his email to the student body, him almost falling over at LG's mom saying "hello" to him, etc...

Commitment Hearing (Uncut) - 50 Minutes - Complete : August 26, 2011

http://videos.macon.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=108495641&item_index=2&all=1&sort=NULL

For those having buffering issues... it's best to just download it. Here's the link (right-click, save as...)

 

[southern_comfort]

He let them in with the dogs and they allerted. If it was traveling around on peoples' shoes then the dogs would have allerted in the halls and all over the apt complex.

I really want to know what the problem is? Do you not have faith in LE?

I just wonder if they found the actual torso in his bed, if you guys would be saying "maybe he thought it was a pillow, bodies don't really start to smell until about 24 hours after TOD."

If I were Buford, I would sit on this site and actually see just how easily people are easily swayed. ...like OK, my client can actually have a freaking cadaver dog pick up the scent of a cadaver in his bedroom and bathroom and if the jury doesn't quite understand the logistics and search timeline, then my client will walk free. AWESOME! :rocker:

Nobody has to sway me to think SM is innocent. I came in that way.

Yes, I know this isn't a courtroom, we are entitled to our opinions, etc. But you should understand that people use these boards for different purposes. Not everyone is interested in gossiping about the life and troubles of a clearly guilty person and digging up as much dirt about him as they can to support their preconceived ideas. Some of us are here because we are interested in analysis, or because we like playing devil's advocate, or because - while we don't have to - we choose to employ the "innocent until proven guilty" standard in framing our personal perspectives.

There is no problem, unless you consider not thinking as you do to be a problem. To put this as simply as I can, I look at things in two tiers. One of them is an all-encompassing, broad view in which I survey everything I know and I weigh the sides and I come to a conclusion. The other tier, which is far more important to me personally and which necessarily precedes the broad view, is to look at each individual piece of information discretely and evaluate it standing alone. It is on this micro level, without a foregone conclusion, that I analyze the bits and pieces that come to light. I don't look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a guilty person. I look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a person who is neutral in my mind, and I ask myself, "What does this mean? What else could it mean? What does it most likely mean?"

IMO, it is misguided to leap from my analysis of an individual point of evidence and attempt to ascribe to me a conclusion. That is not how I operate, and I have not shared my general conclusion here.

When I ask questions about the cadaver dogs... when I wonder what it could potentially mean to know that the dogs alerted in every room they entered... I am weighing this piece of evidence. It's not as simple as you put it. As appealing as some of us might find the idea of putting SM to death without a trial, unless he decides to plead guilty, LE will have to explain these things. I am questioning them in advance.

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

Nobody has to sway me to think SM is innocent. I came in that way.

Yes, I know this isn't a courtroom, we are entitled to our opinions, etc. But you should understand that people use these boards for different purposes. Not everyone is interested in gossiping about the life and troubles of a clearly guilty person and digging up as much dirt about him as they can to support their preconceived ideas. Some of us are here because we are interested in analysis, or because we like playing devil's advocate, or because - while we don't have to - we choose to employ the "innocent until proven guilty" standard in framing our personal perspectives.

There is no problem, unless you consider not thinking as you do to be a problem. To put this as simply as I can, I look at things in two tiers. One of them is an all-encompassing, broad view in which I survey everything I know and I weigh the sides and I come to a conclusion. The other tier, which is far more important to me personally and which necessarily precedes the broad view, is to look at each individual piece of information discretely and evaluate it standing alone. It is on this micro level, without a foregone conclusion, that I analyze the bits and pieces that come to light. I don't look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a guilty person. I look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a person who is neutral in my mind, and I ask myself, "What does this mean? What else could it mean? What does it most likely mean?"

IMO, it is misguided to leap from my analysis of an individual point of evidence and attempt to ascribe to me a conclusion. That is not how I operate, and I have not shared my general conclusion here.

When I ask questions about the cadaver dogs... when I wonder what it could potentially mean to know that the dogs alerted in every room they entered... I am weighing this piece of evidence. It's not as simple as you put it. As appealing as some of us might find the idea of putting SM to death without a trial, unless he decides to plead guilty, LE will have to explain these things. I am questioning them in advance.

Ok...I am sorry. I just have the utmost faith in the FBI. If the FBI was not involved and this was some small town LE picking on the "long haired freaky people" I might understand. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, but when some of the logic seems more like argument for argument sake it just seems like a waste of time.
It is also frustrating that IF McD did this, then obviously his musings about getting away with murder were correct.

 

[bessie]

Icky story from my brother, who used to work for a company that cleaned up after fire, water, and bio damage (which includes crime scenes in add'n to deaths from natural causes): a reclusive man died in the second floor of his home, and when his body was discovered, some of the fluids had leaked into the room below. :sick: I don't know the details of how long he was there before discovery. Were any of the other units searched directly below LG's or SM's? If so, maybe there were concerns about leakage of fluids.

If the body had been in the apartment long enough for fluids to leak through the floor, cadaver dogs would have been unncessary.

 

[ThinMan]

He let them in with the dogs and they allerted. If it was traveling around on peoples' shoes then the dogs would have allerted in the halls and all over the apt complex.

I really want to know what the problem is? Do you not have faith in LE?
<snipped>

Gee, Shivers. I don't know where to start, so maybe the place to begin is at the beginning of your logic that the dogs would alert in the halls. There are no halls at BH -- I know you've seen the photos, if not the actual apartments. If, and I said if, the particles from which the dogs pick up scent and alert can be picked up on shoes (such as Detective Patterson's who earlier visited the trash can torso site and then went with SMD into his apartment), it is entirely likely that the particles would not adhere to the bare concrete walkways, staircases, but would adhere to carpet inside SMD's apartments. Anybody that's ever stepped in dog poop knows what I'm talking about.

I'm not saying this IS what happened; as I've posted above, I believe SMD did it. What I'm saying is that the dog alerting evidence has to be strong enough to overcome the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.

More importantly, no -- of course I don't "have faith in LE." The entire justice system doesn't trust LE. That's why we have trials before juries with lawyers testing the state's case against the accused. If we trusted LE, as you appear to, there would be no need for a justice system or for this website for that matter. We'd just let LE take care of it on their own and lock up or execute whomever they wish.

 

[bessie]

:goodpost:

Nobody has to sway me to think SM is innocent. I came in that way.

Yes, I know this isn't a courtroom, we are entitled to our opinions, etc. But you should understand that people use these boards for different purposes. Not everyone is interested in gossiping about the life and troubles of a clearly guilty person and digging up as much dirt about him as they can to support their preconceived ideas. Some of us are here because we are interested in analysis, or because we like playing devil's advocate, or because - while we don't have to - we choose to employ the "innocent until proven guilty" standard in framing our personal perspectives.

There is no problem, unless you consider not thinking as you do to be a problem. To put this as simply as I can, I look at things in two tiers. One of them is an all-encompassing, broad view in which I survey everything I know and I weigh the sides and I come to a conclusion. The other tier, which is far more important to me personally and which necessarily precedes the broad view, is to look at each individual piece of information discretely and evaluate it standing alone. It is on this micro level, without a foregone conclusion, that I analyze the bits and pieces that come to light. I don't look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a guilty person. I look at the cadaver dogs as having alerted in the apartment of a person who is neutral in my mind, and I ask myself, "What does this mean? What else could it mean? What does it most likely mean?"

IMO, it is misguided to leap from my analysis of an individual point of evidence and attempt to ascribe to me a conclusion. That is not how I operate, and I have not shared my general conclusion here.

When I ask questions about the cadaver dogs... when I wonder what it could potentially mean to know that the dogs alerted in every room they entered... I am weighing this piece of evidence. It's not as simple as you put it. As appealing as some of us might find the idea of putting SM to death without a trial, unless he decides to plead guilty, LE will have to explain these things. I am questioning them in advance.

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

Gee, Shivers. I don't know where to start, so maybe the place to begin is at the beginning of your logic that the dogs would alert in the halls. There are no halls at BH -- I know you've seen the photos, if not the actual apartments. If, and I said if, the particles from which the dogs pick up scent and alert can be picked up on shoes (such as Detective Patterson's who earlier visited the trash can torso site and then went with SMD into his apartment), it is entirely likely that the particles would not adhere to the bare concrete walkways, staircases, but would adhere to carpet inside SMD's apartments. Anybody that's ever stepped in dog poop knows what I'm talking about.

I'm not saying this IS what happened; as I've posted above, I believe SMD did it. What I'm saying is that the dog alerting evidence has to be strong enough to overcome the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.

More importantly, no -- of course I don't "have faith in LE." The entire justice system doesn't trust LE. That's why we have trials before juries with lawyers testing the state's case against the accused. If we trusted LE, as you appear to, there would be no need for a justice system or for this website for that matter. We'd just let LE take care of it on their own and lock up or execute whomever they wish.

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.