Wow, how do you all think SM will plead at the arraignment for the child exploitation charges on Monday? Not guilty?
You know, this takes me back to when we had LONG discussions about whether, under current Georgia law, LE had been able to obtain a legally-usable DNA sample (a buccal swab) from SM for comparison purposes. We wondered if maybe not having a sample was the reason Det. Patterson responded rather strangely when Buford asked him at the commitment hearing on the murder charges whether SM's DNA was on the hacksaw along with Lauren's. (Patterson hesitated, finally answered "Not that I know of.")
Remember, we determined that, in Georgia, the current state law did not compel a sample from arrestees, even on a murder charge. And one thing that was suggested was that maybe the child exploitation charges would bring a conviction -- or perhaps somewhere along the way would bring federal charges, to which different rules about compelling a sample apply -- and thus allow a sample to be compelled.
Since then, we had a poster -- I believe it was AgentFrankLundy -- tell us that "they have his DNA", meaning a comparison sample. And I think we all just kind of proceeded along with that information.
But, to be honest, I STILL am not so sure about it, the more I think about it. Not that I don't trust our posters who "hear stuff" from reliable sources locally -- but just that some wrong info might have been out there on this one?
It seems funny to me that we have heard nothing -- not officially in a court proceeding, not "from sources close to the investigation" via a Macon Telegraph/macon.com story -- about SM's DNA being on anything. I know we have heard rumors ... and, granted, maybe the Grand Jury heard about SM's DNA ... but I just can't help but wonder: Could they still not have an official comparison sample...??