GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #11

[SuperMom1995]

Keep in mind that we've seen only the preliminary evidence, and I agree it's sketchy. I feel sure LE has the right guy, but I couldn't vote to convict him on the evidence presented thus far. But we haven't seen the important evidence, like the autopsy report for instance. It might be very strong. Whatever evidence LE has will come to light in due time. Until then, we can't make a valid determination about the weight of the case against McD. So don't lose hope just yet.

As for trying a murder case without a body, it poses a challenge for LE, but not an insurmountable one by any means thanks to advances in forensics. Here's a site that everyone here should find interesting. It's definitely worth a look. The blog owner is a former U.S. prosecutor and a LE consultant who specializes in "no body" cases. He tracks these cases and provides a list of over 300 U.S. cases tried sans a body, the vast majority ending in convictions. He also offers a detailed list of "tips" for investigators and other information on missing persons and "no body" cases. It's good stuff, and a must read for regular "sleuthers".

http://www.nobodymurdercases.com/index.html

Besides, they do have a major part of a body - that's not the same as no body.

 

[bessie]

Hmmm... Does this help answer your question, bessie?

http://www.masscops.com/f105/search-seizure-trained-dog-k9-controlled-substances-firearms-62764/
1. The governing law. The motion judge measured the affidavit under the standard of Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-156, 171-172 (1978). In that decision the United States Supreme Court prescribed a process by which a defendant could challenge the validity of an affidavit supporting a search warrant and generating evidence against him. First, he must make a substantial preliminary showing that the affidavit contained one or more false statements made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth and providing information necessary to the finding of probable cause. That initial showing, by papers or otherwise, entitles the defendant to an evidentiary hearing. Id. at 171-172. If, at the evidentiary hearing, the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the intentionally or recklessly false statements proved necessary to the finding of probable cause and the issuance of the warrant, the warrant becomes void and the products of the search excluded from trial as violative of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Id. at 155-156.



What a mess, huh?

I think so, Oriah. I'll read it after work, but yes, it seems to be just what I'm looking for. Thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SmoothOperator]

Thanks so much to you both, Oriah and Sarx

for helping us to better understand not only how the actual dogs go about the various type searches of which they are specifically trained to do(or even cross-trained in multiple type searches..

**think I finally got it!**).. but also helping us to better understand that if they are presented and used in a court of law, that indeed is a whole new and entirely different ball of wax..

Hopefully in this case it will indeed be as what I'd stated before that their purpose has already been served and that the DA will not even need to use the dog searches as evidence once we finally get to trial..:fingers crossed:
Thanks for lending us you guys knowledge!! You both are greatly appreciated!!:blowkiss:

 

[Backwoods]

Is anyone hearing anything about the further search of the Twiggs County landfill? I think at one point we heard it might happen in early September, but seems it's been a while since any further mention of it has been made.

 

[Backwoods]

This is kind of interesting.

Maybe I was asleep, or missed this detail.

LE removed "other items" besides the refrigerator from the vacant apartment.

[/color][/left]

Your post is from a few days ago, Wondergirl, but still wanted to reply. I was just thinking of one "other item" that might have been removed from there -- that is, any large trash bags that happened to be in the apartment. I bet any found in LG's, SM's, and the vacant apt. were taken for comparison to those the torso was wrapped in.

You're right, would be interesting to know what all "other items" were taken from there.

 

[Backwoods]

MAAYYBEE, the hacksaw was PLANTED, AFTER, the torso was discovered, hasty hasty, trying to quickly frame someone, and the packaging left in his apt unawares??

The torso was never supposed to be discovered. Hastily, plan B. That may have never been planned prior.

Good a place as any to throw this out: One thing I've thought about, visiting on the OTHER side of the fence, so it won't be popular, but -- IF someone made an attempt to frame SM, keys and a flash drive could be pocketed and easily sneaked inside his apartment -- a hacksaw, on the other hand, would draw a little more notice, so would require a different placement... . Just food for thought on the other side of the fence...

 

[Backwoods]

I was curious about the object in his mouth, Oriah. I suspect it's a reward, and I wondered if that was a normal part of the routine. I hate to say it, but I wasn't terribly impressed with his reaction, but then I don't much frame of reference. He sniffed, sat down, raised his head and yawned (I think). I didn't see behavior that looked like an "alert". :couch:

I wish we could know more about when in the course of events the photos were taken -- during the active, main part of the search, or maybe during a wait time or after the work was done ... We could examine the dog's behaviors captured in the shots better, if we knew for sure.

 

[Backwoods]

Keep in mind that we've seen only the preliminary evidence, and I agree it's sketchy. I feel sure LE has the right guy, but I couldn't vote to convict him on the evidence presented thus far. But we haven't seen the important evidence, like the autopsy report for instance. It might be very strong. Whatever evidence LE has will come to light in due time. Until then, we can't make a valid determination about the weight of the case against McD. So don't lose hope just yet.

As for trying a murder case without a body, it poses a challenge for LE, but not an insurmountable one by any means thanks to advances in forensics. Here's a site that everyone here should find interesting. It's definitely worth a look. The blog owner is a former U.S. prosecutor and a LE consultant who specializes in "no body" cases. He tracks these cases and provides a list of over 300 U.S. cases tried sans a body, the vast majority ending in convictions. He also offers a detailed list of "tips" for investigators and other information on missing persons and "no body" cases. It's good stuff, and a must read for regular "sleuthers".

http://www.nobodymurdercases.com/index.html

That was a great link, bessie, thanks. I noticed that many of the applicable "tips" seem to have been followed by LE in this case (even though they found partial remains), which has to speak well of their investigation.

 

[Oriah]

bessie- I thought I should add this link:
http://www.socialaw.com/slip.htm?cid=18548

<The judge found and ruled that Noone's collaboration with Levasseur and Frisco over the four and one-half years before the Ramos investigation should have informed him of Frisco's training, experience, and work record; and that his attribution of more than 150 real world discoveries and his omission of Frisco's false positives constituted reckless disregard for the truth concerning the dog's reliability. He ruled that Frisco's reliability was essential to the establishment of probable cause because no corroborating information adequately supported the suspicion of the storage of drugs in the unit. He concluded that an accurate affidavit account (substituting the genuine number of five or six valid alerts for the inflated figure of more than 150; acknowledging Levasseur's specific warning against a false indication and Frisco's recent false positives; and describing the general susceptibility of dogs to error especially without extinction training) would fail to satisfy the standard of probable cause for the issuance of the warrant. Frisco's alert at the storage unit had been a false positive; it had contained no drugs. The judge therefore allowed the motion to suppress the feeders and the firearms seized from the unit.>

 

[sarx]

I don't have it handy right now as I'm remote, but there is also dog related court info. from the Scott Peterson case.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

What a mess, Jane. T.S. Lee dumped tons of rain on us over Labor Day weekend. This new storm is stronger. Prayers for everyone to remain safe and dry. rayer:

O/T...For a while I thought I was going to be stranded at work last night. The flooding got a lot worse than we were expecting. Today I am at home because we in the area have been advised not to drive unless it's totally essential. Most of the places I usually run are completely underwater. We are not used to this like some areas of the country may be, lol. Stay safe, fellow sleuthers!

 

[Knox]

I don't have it handy right now as I'm remote, but there is also dog related court info. from the Scott Peterson case.

Interesting Sarx, thanks.

http://www.findlaci2003.us/dogs-index.html

http://www.findlaci2003.us/witness-boyer.html

http://www.findlaci2003.us/trial-dogs-scent-pier.html

http://www.findlaci2003.us/trial-dogs-handlers.html

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Boyer said that the dogs are trained to alert their handlers only to the presence of the freshest predominant scent. They use a "process of subtraction" to rule out the scents of family members or others whose skin rafts may have commingled with the missing person's.

I don't know if it's immediately relevant to this case, but could someone please explain the "process of subtraction"?

 

[McMunn]

New Giddings landfill search expected
By AMY LEIGH WOMACK and JOE KOVAC JR. - Telegraph staff

A landfill search for the possibly discarded remains of Lauren Giddings, the Mercer University law graduate who was killed and dismembered in late June, is expected to begin early next week, likely on Monday, the slain woman’s family says.

The whereabouts of the 27-year-old aspiring prosecutor’s body parts have been a mystery since her torso was found June 30 in a roll-away trash cart outside her apartment.

Read more:
http://www.macon.com/2011/09/10/1697239/new-giddings-landfill-search-expected.html

 

[GypsiesTramps&Thieves]

New Giddings landfill search expected
By AMY LEIGH WOMACK and JOE KOVAC JR. - Telegraph staff

A landfill search for the possibly discarded remains of Lauren Giddings, the Mercer University law graduate who was killed and dismembered in late June, is expected to begin early next week, likely on Monday, the slain woman’s family says.

The whereabouts of the 27-year-old aspiring prosecutor’s body parts have been a mystery since her torso was found June 30 in a roll-away trash cart outside her apartment.

Read more:
http://www.macon.com/2011/09/10/1697239/new-giddings-landfill-search-expected.html

Hmm. I guess I was under the impression that the dogs DID alert to the Mercer trash dumpsters but according to this article, they did not. So her dad is correct, they are just acting on a hunch as they really have no evidence to lead to a search at that landfill. I hope they are right and I wish them luck.

 

[McMunn]

Hmm. I guess I was under the impression that the dogs DID alert to the Mercer trash dumpsters but according to this article, they did not. So her dad is correct, they are just acting on a hunch as they really have no evidence to lead to a search at that landfill. I hope they are right and I wish them luck.

I thought that it was Fred Golba's dog, Rhino, that alerted to the Mercer trash dumpster, wasn't it?

 

[Backwoods]

I thought that it was Fred Golba's dog, Rhino, that alerted to the Mercer trash dumpster, wasn't it?

I don't think it ever was exactly said that the dog alerted, but I do think that Golba may have been the one to first suggest a further search at the Twiggs landfill. I think he may have theorized that it was likely the law school dumpster was involved. Maybe his dog "showed interest" without a full alert?

ETA: Here's one link with some of Golba's thoughts:
http://www.13wmaz.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=138507

 

[Backwoods]

Something seems a little "edgy" about this search to me ... not quite fitting what we had heard earlier...? Didn't someone post that the Giddings family had raised substantial funds through donations for further search efforts? Now they are being told they won't be needed to help with the search ... and can "stand at the gate" of the landfill while it happens? Hmmm, I can understand that LE would want to spare the family the search experience, and would want to protect any forensic info that might still be found -- and maybe family members wouldn't want to participate anyhow -- but the wording just sounds almost like there is a little edginess there. I wonder if the Giddings' efforts kind of "pushed" LE to do further searching at the landfill.

Also sounds like Lauren's dad isn't too hopeful about success at this search site?

Also -- not on the topic of the search, but in this article -- they are calling Lauren an "aspiring prosecutor". Thought her interests had leaned more to defense work.

 

[bessie]

Spetember 10, 2011

New Giddings Landfill Search Expected
A landfill search for the possibly discarded remains of Lauren Giddings, the Mercer University law graduate who was killed and dismembered in late June, is expected to begin early next week, likely on Monday, the slain woman&#8217;s family says.

Although authorities, FBI agents believed to be among them, have not divulged many details, this new search, in the works since mid-August, is expected to be more thorough. It will employ more earth-moving machinery and better-equipped searchers

As of Thursday, authorities trying to piece together the circumstances surrounding Giddings&#8217; slaying hadn&#8217;t received any additional lab results from the FBI, said a law enforcement source close to the investigation.
The FBI hasn&#8217;t returned any results since those that revealed the presence of Giddings&#8217; blood on the hacksaw, the source said. continued at the link

Search for Giddings' Remains Underway
Twenty or so FBI agents from field offices in Georgia and Virginia with expertise in landfill searches have joined a pair of Macon police officers and a handful of volunteers for what amounts to an excavation effort that could last as long as a week, officials said.

&#8220;Right now, that&#8217;s our target, a week,&#8221; Macon police detective Scott Chapman, one of the primary investigators in the Giddings case, said. &#8220;I&#8217;m hoping we&#8217;re gonna be successful.
​

​

 

[ThinMan]

Something seems a little "edgy" about this search to me ... not quite fitting what we had heard earlier...? Didn't someone post that the Giddings family had raised substantial funds through donations for further search efforts? Now they are being told they won't be needed to help with the search ... and can "stand at the gate" of the landfill while it happens? Hmmm, I can understand that LE would want to spare the family the search experience, and would want to protect any forensic info that might still be found -- and maybe family members wouldn't want to participate anyhow -- but the wording just sounds almost like there is a little edginess there. I wonder if the Giddings' efforts kind of "pushed" LE to do further searching at the landfill.

Also sounds like Lauren's dad isn't too hopeful about success at this search site?

Also -- not on the topic of the search, but in this article -- they are calling Lauren an "aspiring prosecutor". Thought her interests had leaned more to defense work.

bbm . . . Agreed, BW. She was applying for a capital defenders position. Makes me begin to doubt everything these reporters write.

This article doesn't say anything new at all does it?