GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #12

[Sandstorm]

snipped for brevity -
It is extremely hard for me to believe he posted this after he did it,

Agt Frank - I concur with your opinion - but I do wonder how he could have calculated his reaction regarding the discovery of Lauren's torso and his TV interview.
Am I underestimating the cunning tactics of a sociopath?
Answer: YES

“She’s out cold. I finally lose my V-card. Oh, no, she OD’d and died. I barbecue her legs and arms to celebrate losing my V-card. Not into organ meat, but throw her torso out, lose it on TV while the cops are discovering her remains, you mad virgins.”

 

[Sandstorm]

snipped for brevity - It's very unlikely he would've been able to chat online.?

Bessie, IMO , this is precisely how McD will WALK - the jury will under estimate McD's cunning abilities and conclude in their logical minds that McD could not have chatted on line.

Following that same line of reasoning, when the jury is presented with the heinous facts of Lauren's death and dismemberment, they will conclude that is is 'unlikely' that McD could have committed such a crime. In the meantime, McD will be laughing behind that stoic mask and walking out of the court house a free man.

I am convinced that McD is capable of many things, all things, that us law abiding people cannot begin to conceive as possible. He is much more evil than we can allow ourselves to imagine.

That is the painful reality I have so sadly come to accept at this point in this tragic crime.

 

[bessie]

I see ya'll are all over what kept me up last night about the case. The internet posting, and it sounds to most all of us that this is the first time we have heard of it . I did not go through everything on opcahn, but I know we had other sleuthers that did , and I feel 100% positive we would all have posted about that one or remembered it. So, perhaps it was some weird e mail to someone or a post on opchan that got deleted and retrieved from their archives by police. IDK. It is extremely hard for me to believe he posted this after he did it, he can't be that stupid. Perhaps right after graduation, he posted it like a joke or a fantasy, but then he actually followed through on it to see if he could actually do it. The family genealogy stuff is just to show that he has ties to the community, would not flee. It can't hurt to present. He has a smirk on his face I would like to blast off with a shotgun. And his eyes, those eyes, I have seen them before somewhere ... http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/manson/manson.html

I agree, Agent Frank. From the images we've seen, the LE presence was strong that afternoon. It is very difficult to imagine he had the opportunity to sit at his computer and post that message. The sticking point is this statement: "Lose it on TV while the cops are discovering her remains", which suggests he made the post after the on scene interview. But we might be overlooking other facts that show he wrote it prior to.

http://m.13wmaz.com/topstory/article?a=176165&f=924

It's possible, imo, that as you say, the post was a fantasy, or a rumination, something he was giving a lot of thought. This is evidenced by the use of the present tense. "Lose it on TV", not "I lost it on TV. "Make her a special drink", not "I made her a special drink. He's not reporting an event that occurred in the past. Rather, he's living it in his head as he posts! IMO

We've seen other posts from McD that indicate a preoccupation with violence and murder. Some of the descriptions reflect to various degrees the details of LG's death. For instance, disposing of a body in a trash can. He also describes committing a murder and afterward behaving incoherently. Others are in this Telegraph article from 08/26/2011.

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/26/1678356/mcdaniel-posts-describe-torture.html
This one is like the others, but more siginificant because it specifically mentions his "neighbor" of four years.

I've always believed those posts would play a key role in his prosecution, and I wonder if there are more we haven't seen. I think long before we became aware of the posts, LE had learned of them from the witness who had met McD in person when he participated in his mock trial. If I knew the name and address of someone who posted like McD, and who was later suspected of committing a violent murder, I'd be on the phone with LE in a flash. The guy probably did, and by the time we started snooping, the post in question, and perhaps others, were long removed from public view.

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

I remember that very well. LOL. MaconMom came on with the link about nine hours later, and Wondergirl was right on her heels with a googlecache full of links to his posts. Then everyone got busy.

I have screenshots of the comment from the news article and the post it references. So I was clear on that, but after reviewing all of his posts on "the other site" for the umpteenth time, by 5am I was getting punchy. :aktion1::aktion1: Thanks for your help.

There is no question I've seen that post, or snips of it. I've read over all of the post I have copied, which include the ones posted downstairs plus others I found more recently, and it's not there. I might've seen it referenced by another poster in one of the discussions about his arrest, and dismissed it as a hoax. That's the only conclusion I can come to now because obviously if I'd seen it posted by "Sol", I would've noted it. But that's neither her nor there.

The question at hand is whether or not the post is properly attributed to McD. I believe the evidence is true. Proof would not rely on user names alone. It would come from date stamped files on McD's computer and/or the site's server, which would show the IP address and location of the computer that transmitted the post.

Bessie, after reading this post again I sware I have seen it as well. I know I have seen it. Again there were so many scary posts...and I agree this was most likely written as a fantasy before. He lived in a fantasy world where he had even written a fantasy novel that he carried in a briefcase in high school.

Sick, sick sick. I am confident the police department has evidence, and they did a very good job on this case, despite the naysayers

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

Not directly related, just jumping off from here: In the comments on the latest macon.com story, there is a mention of hearing that an article of clothing was found with/on the torso. Could be just a rumor, I know -- but wondering, have we ever heard that?

http://www.macon.com/2012/04/03/1973472/mcdaniel-pleads-not-guilty-to.html

Not that I know of.

 

[Backwoods]

How can we have it both ways, folks?

For those of us who feel that the post rings a faint memory bell -- and I'm one of them, as I told bessie earlier -- how could it possibly be that if we read this post, with the details as given, we wouldn't have immediately "made the connection" and zoomed in on it as the most incriminating post of all??!!!

I can buy (barely) that maybe he posted it under another name -- but then why would we have read it to begin with, to be having it ring that faint bell??

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

Bessie, after reading this post again I sware I have seen it as well. I know I have seen it. Again there were so many scary posts...and I agree this was most likely written as a fantasy before. He lived in a fantasy world where he had even written a fantasy novel that he carried in a briefcase in high school.

Sick, sick sick. I am confident the police department has evidence, and they did a very good job on this case, despite the naysayers

I know I have never read this particular one because I would have remembered this....

I do think this has been part of his plans for a long time. For me this only sounds familiar because it sounds like the post that I read and what his Mercer undergrad roomie shared with the paper.

 

[bessie]

bbm: I'm not ready to accept it as good evidence myself. Do understand that a lot could be used to id the post, but I still think -- JMO -- someone has goofed (maybe Winters) ... OR, more likely, someone is going for a sensational impact in a tricky although probably legal manner. I can hardly see either of those happening, but it's what I'm believing at the moment.

bessie, sounds like you have visited the "other site" in latter times, too, as I have from time to time. Did YOU ever see someone post as SoL or something obviously meant to look like SoL, after the time SM was in jail? I wish some of our buds from that site would come forward on this one... the downstairs area is still there, guys!

Yes, I did. That's why the user name is irrelevant. Most boards, like this one, won't allow you to post with a name that is already taken. Other boards have less restrictions. I don't know about that "other site", but if you surf around the web you'll often see a dispute about one poster impersonating another. That's why it would be utterly ridiculous to present an internet post as evidence in a murder trial based solely on the user name. The DA can't possibly be that incompetent. JMO

 

[MaconMom]

And now for something completely different that I thought of earlier today. Assume SMD really did this - killing Lauren, raping, mutilating, dismembering, cannibalizing, etc. Do you really think this is his first time doing something like this? I don't know much about profiling or anything like that, but is it normal (or should I say, common)for someone to go straight from not having killed someone to something this grotesque?

 

[bessie]

How can we have it both ways, folks?

For those of us who feel that the post rings a faint memory bell -- and I'm one of them, as I told bessie earlier -- how could it possibly be that if we read this post, with the details as given, we wouldn't have immediately "made the connection" and zoomed in on it as the most incriminating post of all??!!!

I can buy (barely) that maybe he posted it under another name -- but then why would we have read it to begin with, to be having it ring that faint bell??

I think the original post had been removed, but another poster left a comment like, "remember what Sol said that time about his neighbor, something about..." then repeated part of it, but not the whole thing. Some of us might've read that. If it didn't ring true, and the other members disgreed with him, we might've just dismissed it as baloney.

ETA: Here's the link to the thread downstairs

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147948&highlight=burning&page=4

 

[Backwoods]

Yes, I did. That's why the user name is irrelevant. Most boards, like this one, won't allow you to post with a name that is already taken. Other boards have less restrictions. I don't know about that "other site", but if you surf around the web you'll often see a dispute about one poster impersonating another. That's why it would be utterly ridiculous to present an internet post as evidence in a murder trial based solely on the user name. The DA can't possibly be that incompetent. JMO

I did, too, and I think MAYBE this post came in that form, from a joking SoL-impostor, later. The V-card part would make better sense then -- one of those folks picking up on the "he told LE he was a virgin" theme and working it in there. The best I can tell on that site, you could probably post with any name you choose, though I'm not SURE -- and certainly you can post anonymously. Someone could have done that and just said, "This is SoL checking in", etc.

But, like you, I have a real hard time thinking this is an actual screw-up, that the DA would bungle THAT bad. Let's hope not!

I do think it is possible, however, that if such a post was made by another "SoL", the DA might, might, might -- make reference to SM's real internet postings as SoL, then bundle this one on in for effect. It would not be completely untruthful to state, then, that the post was made by SoL.

This was a highly-anticipated bond hearing... and one that was bound to receive major media coverage. Kind of like with the commitment hearing, I'm sure careful thought was given to what previously-unannounced evidence could be "sacrificed" to make an impact yet not tip the prosecution's hand any more than needed, any sooner than necessary.

The underwear evidence had been leaked, so its value to-save-for-trial got a little diluted -- the sheet, well, I have a feeling that the blood, for whatever reason, has not been identified as Lauren's --don't believe Winters stated it has, anyway. And this post -- well, if things were something like I'm hypothesizing, it might look really handy, for the need of the moment. The only stumper for me would be that Winters would have the gall to present it in such a tricky fashion directly to the judge...but I do think it's possible.

I know I am being bull-headed about this -- if I turn out to be wrong, I'll take my lumps. But this is important to me, because (a) if it turns out to be true, it will probably knock me off the fence, and (b) I just have a gut-level hunch something is hokey with this one.

Most folks out in media-land don't read here, don't have the history we have with these posts. They are not going to scrutinize and wonder and ponder like us -- it will just bombshell them, maybe undo a little of the questioning in this case that seems to have arisen of late with some of the public at large.

bessie, you, with many others, say you have always deemed the posts very important to the case, while I have said several times before they are probably what I weight the least -- with one of the main reasons being that, disturbing as some might be, I see no direct connection with the crime. This post, if genuine, of course, would be a way different story.

Nobody answered me a page or so back when I asked whether anyone knew whether the April 20 deadline for disclosure to the defense that is stated in one link I posted is correct. If it is -- if this post is to be presented as evidence -- I sure hope the defense gets all the details on this one. And not because I wish to see a murderer go free, either.

Which brings a question to mind: If Winters referenced this post but does NOT plan to present it as evidence (if it has served its purpose already, in other words) -- would it still have to be included in disclosure?

 

[Backwoods]

Far be it from me to claim any expertise on the matter, but that post reads like channish trolling to me. Someone impersonated him for the lulz, as it were, and is now laughing pretty hard that the result (including the jabs at McD's sexual inexperience) would be taken as evidence in a court of law.

I could be wrong, but in the absence of compelling digital forensics I'm skeptical. Still think he's guilty, but I'm not convinced he wrote the post.

Pretty much what I am thinking about the post, in a nutshell. (When I get fired up, I have a hard time fitting thoughts into nutshells!)

 

[Sonya610]

The post struck most everyone here as "hokey" to say the least, struck me as hokey when I read it on another site (I have not visited here in months).

Note the post must have been written AFTER McDaniel was told about the discovery of the torso (unless he is psychic and just happened to predict the news media would be interviewing him when the "torso found" announcement was made).

So if it was written AFTER McDaniel had that interview when did he have time to write it? It reads utterly crazy, illogical in too many ways, ways that will not likely stand up in court and prove it to be any sort of confession. Crazy folks often confess or ramble about murders that they had nothing to do with when they HEAR ABOUT the disturbing murders.

Or did someone else write it and yet the prosecution enters it into evidence when surely if someone else posted that it would be obvious?

Whether or not McDaniel committed this crime, it looks like the prosecution's case is an utter failure. This is a capital murder case, mistakes like this are not acceptable, plus real physical evidence or eye witnessess help a lot when asking jurors to sentence a man to death.

 

[Backwoods]

The post struck most everyone here as "hokey" to say the least, struck me as hokey when I read it on another site (I have not visited here in months).

Note the post must have been written AFTER McDaniel was told about the discovery of the torso (unless he is psychic and just happened to predict the news media would be interviewing him when the "torso found" announcement was made).

So if it was written AFTER McDaniel had that interview when did he have time to write it? It reads utterly crazy, illogical in too many ways, ways that will not likely stand up in court and prove it to be any sort of confession. Crazy folks often confess or ramble about murders that they had nothing to do with when they HEAR ABOUT the disturbing murders.

Or did someone else write it and yet the prosecution enters it into evidence when surely if someone else posted that it would be obvious?

Whether or not McDaniel committed this crime, it looks like the prosecution's case is an utter failure. This is a capital murder case, mistakes like this are not acceptable, plus real physical evidence or eye witnessess help a lot when asking jurors to sentence a man to death.

I am not even sure it counts as having been "entered into evidence" yet --just referenced at a bond hearing. I'm wondering if they have no plans to try to use it as actual evidence, it having already done its job. See my post (the long one) just above.

I don't think SM wrote this at all.

 

[Sonya610]

I am not even sure it counts as having been "entered into evidence" yet --just referenced at a bond hearing. I'm wondering if they have no plans to try to use it as actual evidence, it having already done its job. See my post (the long one) just above.

I don't think SM wrote this at all.

This is a capital murder trial! Big league stuff. Multiple appeals, huge expense. Jurors making the ultimate decision based on real evidence.

I ain't no attorney but yeah it matters and it matters a lot. I have no idea where that post came from but seriously the guys prosecuting this case should have noticed what we all noticed.

 

[Backwoods]

This is a capital murder trial! Big league stuff. Multiple appeals, huge expense. Jurors making the ultimate decision based on real evidence.

I ain't no attorney but yeah it matters and it matters a lot. I have no idea where that post came from but seriously the guys prosecuting this case should have noticed what we all noticed.

Nowhere did I say it didn't matter -- much the opposite, actually. By saying that it may not "count" as evidence, I meant that if they don't actually enter it into evidence in the trial, the rules of disclosure may not apply (I am not sure about that), and so the truth (if the post isn't genuine) about this post may never come out. It may have been used ONLY for the impact it would have at the bond hearing. NOT saying I think that's a good or admirable tactic -- but that it MAY have happened.

Of course it matters.

 

[Sonya610]

Nowhere did I say it didn't matter -- much the opposite, actually.

Of course it matters.

The prosecution made a huge big deal about that internet post. I am not arguing with you, fact is it looks like there is no real case.

Without that post what exactly do they have? Did they hold back the REAL evidence in order to stir up the public and media with the internet post?

I have followed this case closely since day one. At this point they have no real evidence other than the saw package and that is vague. I rather doubt there was only one saw that matched that model number sold in the Macon area.

The lack of "revealed" physical evidence is surprising considering the nature of the crime. Focusing on the odd internet post so heavily is even stranger. The authorities have taken this case VERY seriously so they wouldn't be likely to keep real evidence a secret and talk up very very questionable weak evidence.

 

[Backwoods]

The prosecution made a huge big deal about that internet post. I am not arguing with you, fact is it looks like there is no real case.

Without that post what exactly do they have? Did they hold back the REAL evidence in order to stir up the public and media with the internet post?

I have followed this case closely since day one. At this point they have no real evidence other than the saw package and that is vague. I rather doubt there was only one saw that matched that model number sold in the Macon area.

The lack of "revealed" physical evidence is surprising considering the nature of the crime. Focusing on the odd internet post so heavily is even stranger. The authorities have taken this case VERY seriously so they wouldn't be likely to keep real evidence a secret and talk up very very questionable weak evidence.

Sorry, guess I misread you. This whole post thing has me a little antsy, I'm afraid.

Sounds like we actually are somewhat in agreement. (Though I do think it possible that the prosecution may have some strong physical evidence that they are guarding closely as long as possible.)

 

[Sonya610]

Sorry, guess I misread you. This whole post thing has me a little antsy, I'm afraid.

Sounds like we actually are somewhat in agreement. (Though I do think it possible that the prosecution may have some strong physical evidence that they are guarding closely as long as possible.)

This is a high profile very closely watched case for the local prosecutors, career "make or break it" type of stuff. I just do not see why they would mention bogus evidence that feeds media and public hysteria if they had really solid evidence instead.

In a death penalty trial/conviction every fact and every statement is scrutinized not once but many many times should the defendant be sentenced to death. Maybe all they have is the saw wrapper? Well...if that is the case they get major huge credit for an honest investigation under pressure.

Honestly I am shocked by the whole Internet post thing and I just do not understand why they did that.

Hogue is very bright, this case is a done deal.

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

And now for something completely different that I thought of earlier today. Assume SMD really did this - killing Lauren, raping, mutilating, dismembering, cannibalizing, etc. Do you really think this is his first time doing something like this? I don't know much about profiling or anything like that, but is it normal (or should I say, common)for someone to go straight from not having killed someone to something this grotesque?

I think it was the first time he acted on it, but I think he has been thinking about it since forever.
I think his mistakes might stem from his arrogance. I think he has been smarter than the majority of the people in his life and it gave him a false sense of self. I think he knew a little about getting away with murder but just not enough to outsmart the FBI and such. He ran out of time. He should have picked someone a little less popular and less loved by all...he might still get away with it...I think his law background might let him manipulate the system. Actually, that is what I am afraid of.