GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #15 *appeals denied*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Backwoods said:
There are new details up at macon.com, albeit under the same headline as earlier reports of today:


http://www.macon.com/2014/04/21/3057637/mcdaniel-to-plead-guilty.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1

This is so strange -- I have been pondering all evening about that stick -- video surveillance -- Lauren's windows.... Now this.

I have also felt for most of the afternoon and evening as though someone kicked me in the stomach. Not handling this all that well, to tell the truth.
Click to expand...
I had a feeling there was more to come. As always, kudos to Amy Leigh Womack and Joe Kovac, Jr. at the the Telegraph. Though controversial at times, IMO, their coverage of Lauren's story has been excellent.

BW, you've been so faithful in your support for Lauren and her family, and at the same time staunchly open-minded. I'm really sorry you're having a hard time now, and I know you're not the only one.

Since the very first time I saw a clip of McD's interview, I've felt so strongly about his guilt, that nothing I heard today came as a surprise. Listening to Karen Giddings' statement was very difficult. The rest of it, McD's statement, wasn't particularly moving because it's an oversimplified version of events, imo. The evidence, and my instincts, tell me the truth is far worse. Like this latest item.

A creeper peering through a window with a camera taped to a stick? Somehow that's even more vile than setting up a hidden camera in LG's apartment, or peeking through a hole in the wall, both of which I'd considered when I likened him to Norman Bates (and I wasn't being facetious). But this... A person who would do that has severely malevolent intentions, and is capable of the worst kind of malice. IMO. What was that the judge said? Truly evil? I agree.
 
Last week, after learning of the FBI’s scouring of his camera and finding the deleted surveillance video, McDaniel agreed to a deal.
Click to expand...

Is anyone else having a hard time believing this was the straw that broke the camel's back? I mean, there was a lot of other circumstantial evidence like the underwear and the hacksaw packaging found in his apartment. Not to mention other evidence we don't have the full details on, like the possible blood stains and earring in his car. I just can't believe that if he didn't confess after the other evidence was brought to light, that this would be the one thing to make him confess. I obviously don't know but have a sneaking suspicion that there was more to it than surveillance video (given his internet search/forum history and images found in his apartment).
 
MaconMom said:
Is anyone else having a hard time believing this was the straw that broke the camel's back? I mean, there was a lot of other circumstantial evidence like the underwear and the hacksaw packaging found in his apartment. Not to mention other evidence we don't have the full details on, like the possible blood stains and earring in his car. I just can't believe that if he didn't confess after the other evidence was brought to light, that this would be the one thing to make him confess. I obviously don't know but have a sneaking suspicion that there was more to it than surveillance video (given his internet search/forum history and images found in his apartment).
Click to expand...

All I can think of is perhaps McDaniel was angling for conviction of a lesser included offense, i.e., voluntary manslaughter. If he could convince the jury that maybe he killed her, but he hadn't planned on it and it was a sudden event, then perhaps they would decide a manslaughter conviction was more appropriate. But the camera shows clear premeditation -- ain't no way he's going to convince anyone this wasn't premeditated with that evidence.

But I can't even remember right now what the situation was with McDaniel's charges, or how that would apply in this case.
 
Hyrax said:
All I can think of is perhaps McDaniel was angling for conviction of a lesser included offense, i.e., voluntary manslaughter. If he could convince the jury that maybe he killed her, but he hadn't planned on it and it was a sudden event, then perhaps they would decide a manslaughter conviction was more appropriate. But the camera shows clear premeditation -- ain't no way he's going to convince anyone this wasn't premeditated with that evidence.

But I can't even remember right now what the situation was with McDaniel's charges, or how that would apply in this case.
Click to expand...

You may be right. He was charged with felony murder but maybe there is something in his plea bargain that reduces it to voluntary manslaughter. I haven't seen that anywhere.

I did see on one of the articles that it was likely he would have gotten life without possibility of parole if he went forward with the trial, so that's probably why he took the deal.
 
MaconMom said:
You may be right. He was charged with felony murder but maybe there is something in his plea bargain that reduces it to voluntary manslaughter. I haven't seen that anywhere.
Click to expand...

I meant at trial... The plea was definitely for malice murder, but maybe he was hoping he could convince a jury he was only guilty of manslaughter. Once he realized there was no chance of that happening, he might as well take the plea deal.

That's how the evidence of the spying might have been the straw that broke the camel's back. But I can't remember if the new indictment would've allowed that or if we knew if there was going to be an instruction on any lesser included offenses.
 
With duct tape, Stephen McDaniel lashed a video camera to a 6-foot-long wooden stick and, standing beneath her second-floor apartment, peered in a living room window.


Several videos recorded between about 9 p.m. and 12:30 a.m. lent him peeks through the blinds at her front door and the burglar bar bracing it.
http://www.macon.com/2014/04/21/3057637/mcdaniel-to-plead-guilty.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1
Click to expand...
Tomcat, that solves the mystery of the long stick McD was seen with by the renter's girlfriend. We sure didn't think that was what it was used for did we?
 
SM is a disturbed, creeping, perverted murderer. IMO, his statement was written to fit the known evidence. We'll never know the entire truth of what happened to Lauren.

Continued prayers for her family and those who loved and cared about Lauren.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wow, so many mixed feelings. Thank you everyone for your continued updates!

I guess some of his legal education and basic common sense went into writing that statement. Admitting the absolute minimum, and only that which evidence has already, or would have, shown.

alwaysonmymind said:
SM is a disturbed, creeping, perverted murderer. IMO, his statement was written to fit the known evidence. We'll never know the entire truth of what happened to Lauren.
Click to expand...

sbm. Absolutely right. :(

Best sign of a liar, forever JMO, is when they're obviously working backwards on their story, pretending to be an outside observer looking for discrepancies. As though "If you didn't assault her, where were her shorts?" would've been the damning question..

The account of the initial struggle is indeed very strange. Like he's using it to answer "how could you have overpowered her?" when he knows it was something much worse, that wouldn't have shown up in toxicology?

What purpose does mentioning the heavy internet usage serve? Just showing state of mind/sticking to routine?

"..still in a dreamlike delusional state [...] I am not delusional."
Click to expand...

When did the torso/neck scratches happen? I always thought they implied he was at least partially disrobed. It's hard to imagine where they would've physically been in relation to each other for her to lift his shirt up to scratch him, and I don't think that would've been the instinctual defense move.. but I've never been in that position and I'm sure she was fighting however she possibly could.

Biggest, most pointlessly speculative question.. What had he done with the footage such that he was so confident the prosecution didn't have it, if we're to believe that was truly the reason for the plea? Was the out-in-the-open child *advertiser censored*, underwear, etc an attempt to misdirect LE to believe he was too stupid to hide anything else? Same reasoning as the shorts thing, and just as insulting.. "If I had filmed the murder or dismemberment, they would've found it, I can't even hide my *advertiser censored* or internet history, see?"

My thoughts are with Lauren's family, as always. I hope a proper burial will be possible now.
 
MaconMom said:
I thought so too, but assumed he must have cut them into tiny pieces and flushed several times.
Click to expand...

I don't see why he would lie about what he did with them unless it was to benefit the MPD. Sheesh if he wanted to be vengeful he could have said he put them in the trash along with the torso and the police never found them, kwim? The confession was carefully crafted.
 
On another note...for those that think he will do "hard time" and be raped and such in prison. He won't do hard time for long, if at all.

He is a jail house lawyer! He graduated from Mercer Law! Bundy was afraid of jail/prison (and he had a lot more kills to his name) but quickly learned that his law student experience made him friends fast and he never even graduated.

I suspect Stephen will be well known when he enters prison (How could he not be? The geeky skinny white dude with the long hair in a maximum security prison?) and he will find friends to protect him fast in exchange for his advice on their next appeal.

It is safe to say they know he is coming and a lot of them want him as their friend and helper. They want his brain and knowledge and they will protect him to get it. He will probably be practicing law for many decades to come.
 
Sonya610 said:
On another note...for those that think he will do "hard time" and be raped and such in prison. He won't do hard time for long, if at all.

He is a jail house lawyer! He graduated from Mercer Law! Bundy was afraid of jail/prison (and he had a lot more kills to his name) but quickly learned that his law student experience made him friends fast and he never even graduated.

I suspect Stephen will be well known when he enters prison (How could he not be? The geeky skinny white dude with the long hair in a maximum security prison?) and he will find friends to protect him fast in exchange for his advice on their next appeal.

It is safe to say they know he is coming and a lot of them want him as their friend and helper. They want his brain and knowledge and they will protect him to get it. He will probably be practicing law for many decades to come.
Click to expand...

Sonya, you are probably right about all this ...IF he has time to acclimate. I think there's a big chance he may not take the time to acclimate; I feel he will be a high suicide risk right now and for an interval to come. JMO.
 
MaconMom said:
I thought so too, but assumed he must have cut them into tiny pieces and flushed several times.
Click to expand...

I think it is important to remember that confessions, while no doubt they often are crafted to fill only the "minimum requirement", do have to fit some "requirements" of the prosecution to be accepted in a plea deal. Correct?

Maybe evidence of "something" being flushed was found, but the something could not be forensically linked to the murder. And the prosecution wanted it accounted for. Or maybe they found nothing in the way of blood-stained, etc. clothing and nothing in the drains, etc., either, and so wanted an account of what happened to his "murder outfit".

Maybe he really flushed them down the toilet in apartment 1 (because he doesn't say he didn't access the downstairs apartment in any way during all this, only that he never used the refrigerator there) or at the law school, and just said "my toilet" for simplicity and to "keep a little secret" to himself.

Mask, gloves, shirt -- what about pants? Was he wearing pants?

Did the much-discussed ponchos play any part in this at all?

And -- surely it is OK now to mention this openly: What about the widely-circulated, and I believe widely accepted, report that Lauren's blood/dna was found on his shoes? Was that even true?

So many, many questions I still have...
 
Knox said:
Tomcat, that solves the mystery of the long stick McD was seen with by the renter's girlfriend. We sure didn't think that was what it was used for did we?
Click to expand...

Knox, what is spooky is that yes, we were headed in that direction.

During that discussion, I came up with that maybe he was outside the building observing Lauren's windows.

Then, yesterday, after the confession and a tidbit about a camera being used came out -- but before the video-camera-on-a-stick info came out -- my head got filled with heavy pondering about stick ...windows...camera...hmmm. I couldn't stop thinking about it.

That's why when I first saw and then posted the link last night about the camera on a stick I said it made me feel so weird. Kinda felt for a minute that I was in a "dreamlike, delusional state" and maybe had dreamed the whole confession story and was still dreaming...
 
Backwoods said:
Sonya, you are probably right about all this ...IF he has time to acclimate. I think there's a big chance he may not take the time to acclimate; I feel he will be a high suicide risk right now and for an interval to come. JMO.
Click to expand...

Nahhh...I don't think he is a high suicide risk. Hogue and Buford and Stephen have seen it unfold for a while, I expect Hogue and even Buford prepared him for this and also told him what valuable skills he has!

Wasn't Buford cited in a recent article stating SMD would have been an excellent attorney?

Not a suicide risk. This isn't coming as a shock to him (just to us).
 
I want to know what the snippet from a pre-trial hearing in which a search warrant "ordered by a Bibb County judge for a search in DeKalb County" was all about!

Did they net some of the computer/camera evidence in that search? Had he mailed something off somewhere...? :pullhair:
 
Sonya610 said:
Nahhh...I don't think he is a high suicide risk. Hogue and Buford and Stephen have seen it unfold for a while, I expect Hogue and even Buford prepared him for this and also told him what valuable skills he has!

Wasn't Buford cited in a recent article stating SMD would have been an excellent attorney?

Not a suicide risk. This isn't coming as a shock to him (just to us).
Click to expand...

I think he is.

He ain't "normal", Sonya. He seems so very focused, very obsessive -- I bet he believed right up to the latest that he would walk free one day. He was able, at some point, to shift his energy toward working toward that goal -- yes, with boosting from his attorneys.

But that's gone now. It will be a dismal prospect for him for a while, I think. If he can make it for a while, and refocus, maybe it will be as you say. If not... .

I also still strongly feel that he likely has something mental/neurological going on "besides" being a sociopath. (In fact, I still am not completely sure that he IS a sociopath ...but that's a different discussion.) That will not work toward "adjustment", either.
 
Backwoods said:
But that's gone now. It will be a dismal prospect for him for a while, I think. If he can make it for a while, and refocus, maybe it will be as you say. If not... .
Click to expand...

How long has he been in jail now? Over 2 years? He will be fine. If he were going to off himself he would have done it early on.

He has been in solitary confinement for his own safety thus far, he has had time to prepare. Plus I truly believe Hogue would see to it he was mentally prepared, they have spent a LOT of time together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 72 more.
Total: 258 (members: 73, guests: 185)

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
185
Total visitors
258
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,492
Messages
18,254,811
Members
234,664
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top