GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 # 3

[Backwoods]

^above^ BBM.. This is Kaitlyn's words.. She says that Lauren was not afraid like the neighbor had stated in his interview..

She is making a direct statement that what was said by the neighbor was not correct.. She brings up the neighbors comments and says that things were not like he stated them to be.. She rebuts what the neighbor stated..

Hmmm, actually the sentence "She was not afraid of her apartment, like had been said in an interview by her neighbor." could be interpreted a couple of ways... but I'll accept that it means that "she wasn't afraid and the neighbor said she was" -- but my point is, he DIDN'T say that. Go look at the transcript you posted -- he is saying the email said she was afraid!!

Not wanting to quibble with you, Smooth, really, about this. Not our purpose for being here, I know you agree.

 

[cww]

So because this sister says on national television that the neighbor said she was scared, but that wasn't the case, we just take her opinion as scientific fact? I mean, I get the inclination to give deference to family and friends of victims, but rationally, those are the last people we should be giving deference to. They can't view the crime with clear eyes.

I agree with Backwoods that nothing in the SM interview said anything about him having knowledge of her being scared to be in her apartment, outside of that email mentioning a specific instance. True, he was a bit more dramatic about it than she was- she appeared completely emotionless- but that doesn't change the fact that they both said the same thing about the same email. That it mentioned a possible break-in and that she was a bit uneasy about it. Likewise, neither of them was implying that she had been scared there for some time.

 

[Backwoods]

I am bothered by something and just can't seem to find what I am looking for or pinpoint exactly what is nagging me ... so I am going to start all over at the beginning.

link for the original missing person's report.

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/wmaz/docs/giddingsreport1.pdf

Just wanted to say thanks for posting (or reposting, because I imagine it had been posted before and I missed it) the link to the original missing person's report. I hadn't read it until now.

I can't help but wonder about that dead-battery cell phone found on the bed ...while the other stuff was found on the couch. Would love to know, too, if the calls made "late Saturday night" were before or after the time of the much-discussed email. Maybe if the phone went dead, that's why she emailed (if indeed it was her?) from her laptop when, as some have said, she often emailed from her phone.

 

[Backwoods]

Yes, SM refers to himself as a "True Born Son of Liberty." The email itself was not extremist, but his response to critique was extreme. Based on my searches, it appears that it is a reference to the tea party movement.

As for the trashcans, I am saying that even in a hurried frenzy, there are multiple much better options for dumping the body that would not draw any additional suspicion.

<emphasis above is mine>

Harry Potter, can you tell us what his extreme response was?

Interesting about the trashcans, too -- does seem like there were other options there.

 

[angelanalyzes]

Hey angelanalayzes.. I'm not familiar with a bump key.. Will u explain what it is.. You said similar to a master key but would be easier to access than a master key..

Thanks in advance..

Basically a bump key is a key you make yourself to fit a lock. You can purchase them pre-made for certain kinds of common locks [ http://www.bumpkeyshop.com/?gclid=CIH74KKEnKoCFZBT7AodIngewg ]. You don't have to have any ownership or authority over the target lock to make work, you just need access to the lock basically.
The keys are based on lock-types/key-ways, and presumably the same locks are used on all the apartments in the complex, so if you have a bump key that works for one it should work for them all.

 

[pearl]

i think we could probably learn what types of evidence were taken from the 3 apartments by learning what, if any, repairs are being made or will be made to them. For example, if the downstairs apartment's refrigerator is not returned and a new one is installed, we can pretty much surmise that evidence has been collected from it. A plumber would indicate work being done to replace, maybe, drains and pipes. New flooring being installed would indicate replacing carpet, etc. A carpenter would indicate structural work like replacing drywall or floorboards, etc. They did take a lot out of the 3 apartments so maybe new stuff may be coming in. Just a thought.

 

[angelanalyzes]

Hello, and welcome, Givesmetheshivers. The locals might be familiar with other recent dismemberment cases in Georgia. I can't think of any off hand, but in general, dismemberment is not that all that uncommon.

:welcome5:

Very true. If one were to comb through all the cases of unsolved or cold cases involving dismemberment without realizing how common it is in terms of acquaintance murder and through the lens of the Lauren Giddings case, they would believe there must be some crazed dismembering serial killer at large. In reality it's just a rather common, mundane way of obscuring a victim's identity and avoiding detection.
It is not the dismemberment that makes this crime stick out, to me at least, so much as the location the body was found and her last known whereabouts.

 

[JeannieC]

Early in the investigation LE stated that they had two POI's. Have they ruled out either of these or added to the list? Does anyone have an idea who the second poi is?

 

[Sandstorm]

Can't say I am fully in harmony of thought with this entire post, but it is well-thought out and worded -- thanks for some good thinking and the presentation.
Did want to ask about the one point bolded above -- is this official? I mean, of course we know that the three apartments were sealed and searched and all of that, but did LE officially declare that all or any of them are/is a crime scene? Not disputing, just wanting to be sure about this.

Delete ReplyReply ForwardSpamMovePrint Actions NextPrevious

Backwoods,
The declaration on my upstream post which states:
The Macon LE declared 3 apts in Barristers Hall Apts the crime scene.
is based on the physical actions of the Macon LE retrieving evidence and sealing off specific areas and was not based on a written or spoken decree.

To answer your question: Did LE officially declare that all or any of them are/is a crime scene?

Answer is yes.
Based on the actions and procedures of the Macon LE and FBI three apartments at Barristers Hall Apts. were considered the crime scenes:
1. Lauren's 2. McD's 3. the apartment below Lauren's where the refrigerator was removed.

CRIME SCENE:
A crime scene is a location where an illegal act took place, and comprises the area from which most of the physical evidence is retrieved by trained law enforcement personnel, crime scene investigators (CSIs) or in rare circumstances, forensic scientists.

(definition from wikipedia)

***************

Please see the two photographs attached.
Notice that all 3 apartments were declared crime scenes.
They each had evidence removed by LE and all 3 were sealed with DO NOT ENTER signs by LE.


A few of the articles regarding the three apartment crime scenes:

Late Wednesday afternoon, investigators removed a refrigerator from the ground-floor apartment next door to Spencer

 

[SurfieTX]

Very true. If one were to comb through all the cases of unsolved or cold cases involving dismemberment without realizing how common it is in terms of acquaintance murder and through the lens of the Lauren Giddings case, they would believe there must be some crazed dismembering serial killer at large. In reality it's just a rather common, mundane way of obscuring a victim's identity and avoiding detection.
It is not the dismemberment that makes this crime stick out, to me at least, so much as the location the body was found and her last known whereabouts.

BBM: I'm slowly starting to realize this. Another torso found....

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145072

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

Seeing shoes wouldn't mean anything. I have more than one pair of shoes. Heck, I have more than one pair of running shoes. So, just seeing a pair of shoes wouldn't mean she couldn't have been out with another pair on.

And in all fairness, we do not know the attacker was in the apartment. We simply know she made it back from Zaxby's before disappearing from the apartment.

Sorry, I forgot to write JMO, but I figured the way I wrote my thread a few pages back it would come across that way (referring to another possible attack option that we have discussed in the past on here as well)

Maybe you psychomom, have more than one pair of running shoes, so do I now that I am working and out of school, but in college and/or grad school, I only had one pair of running shoes, two pairs were not on my agenda when I was still going out and still needed monies for shopping etc JMO. Plus from the looks of the Barrister Halls apts, I believe most students stayed there for proximity, and it was cheap. It is possible LG had two pairs of running shoes that she switched back and forth from, but in law school; I highly doubt it, JMO. (not wanting to argue but just pointing out some important source information and I pick very wisely because I do not want to jeopardize this case in any way)

 

[McMunn]

Judge denies motion to disqualify DA's office in McDaniel case

By Liz Fabian - lfabian@macon.com


Judge Tillman E. "Tripp" Self III has denied a motion to disqualify the District Attorney's office from prosecuting Stephen McDaniel, a person of interest in the Lauren Giddings slaying.

In a 10-page ruling issued Monday morning, Self found no "personal interest" in the outcome of the case among the staff members of the district attorney's office that should disqualify them from prosecuting McDaniel, who worked in the office for about three months this spring as a third year law student.

Court documents show McDaniel performed legal research, wrote memos and prepared to try cases in Juvenile Court.

The alleged burglaries happened between late 2008 and early 2009.

Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/07/25/1642994/judge-denies-motion-to-disqualify.html

 

[southern_comfort]

Wow. There is an awful lot of conjecture and opinion being passed off as fact in this thread. It's almost to the point where useful discussion is impossible.

 

[PsychoMom]

One month has passed since Lauren was last known to be alive. I hope today we get some real information about where LE stands and what they have.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Judge denies motion to disqualify DA's office in McDaniel case

By Liz Fabian - lfabian@macon.com


Judge Tillman E. "Tripp" Self III has denied a motion to disqualify the District Attorney's office from prosecuting Stephen McDaniel, a person of interest in the Lauren Giddings slaying.

In a 10-page ruling issued Monday morning, Self found no "personal interest" in the outcome of the case among the staff members of the district attorney's office that should disqualify them from prosecuting McDaniel, who worked in the office for about three months this spring as a third year law student.

Court documents show McDaniel performed legal research, wrote memos and prepared to try cases in Juvenile Court.

The alleged burglaries happened between late 2008 and early 2009.

Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/07/25/1642994/judge-denies-motion-to-disqualify.html

It will be interesting to see what Floyd Buford's next move is now. This was nothing but a stall tactic. There never was a conflict of interest. Now both sides will be forced to reveal something about the direction this cases is heading. (unless Buford does nothing, then the DA won't be forced to make a move for awhile anyway)

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

Very true. If one were to comb through all the cases of unsolved or cold cases involving dismemberment without realizing how common it is in terms of acquaintance murder and through the lens of the Lauren Giddings case, they would believe there must be some crazed dismembering serial killer at large. In reality it's just a rather common, mundane way of obscuring a victim's identity and avoiding detection.
It is not the dismemberment that makes this crime stick out, to me at least, so much as the location the body was found and her last known whereabouts.

Ok. I feel like you guys are missing my point. People were speculating as to why the FBI got involved from the start.

I just pointed out that there was a torso found or a runner June 27, 2004. It just seemed similar.

I do not think that this is a serial killer situation, but was just trying to point out that there might have been a reason for them to get involved in the beginning.

Sorry.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Or again, the killer was already in her apt, by way of her hidden key or a skeleton key, and he did not attack until later, so she had put down her zaxbys, cellphone etc. He could have even been hiding and hit her from behind or chloroformed her, tazed her??

From an earlier thread question, were her running shoes gone? From a very respected source, they were in apt, and that is why I have a hard time with McDs lengthy interview, where he repeatedly says she could've been snatched while running. If he helped on the search, he would have seen her shoes, was this a red herring he was trying to throw out there?

http://www.wmac-am.com/includes/news_items/6/463/7oclockhour.mp3

I'm a regular runner, and I have a pair of running shoes plus a pair of sneakers that are for anything other than running (eg., lifting weights). It's easy enough for non-runners to get the 2 confused because to them it just looks like I have 2 pairs of sneakers. Also I do know some runners who got 2 pairs of the same shoe at a time cuz it was a great buy or they had a special coupon, and they wear them on alternate days, or one pair is saved for trail running or something.
Just a thought.

 

[Sandstorm]

Wow. There is an awful lot of conjecture and opinion being passed off as fact in this thread. It's almost to the point where useful discussion is impossible.

Maybe we could put all conjectures and opinions together and write the 4th sequel to the Millennium series.
Millennium series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

; - )

 

[clkwrks]

Early in the investigation LE stated that they had two POI's. Have they ruled out either of these or added to the list? Does anyone have an idea who the second poi is?

Chief Burns continues to say they have "several POIs" but hasn't named any of them except McDaniel. Knox, back in thread #2, posted an interesting article concerning the second POI
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6905572&highlight=second+poi#post6905572
The article quotes an unnamed source so it's likely not coming from LE. Deducing the identity of this supposed second POI isn't difficult, but I won't name her here, since LE has never done so.

 

[clkwrks]

Basically a bump key is a key you make yourself to fit a lock. You can purchase them pre-made for certain kinds of common locks [ http://www.bumpkeyshop.com/?gclid=CIH74KKEnKoCFZBT7AodIngewg ]. You don't have to have any ownership or authority over the target lock to make work, you just need access to the lock basically.
The keys are based on lock-types/key-ways, and presumably the same locks are used on all the apartments in the complex, so if you have a bump key that works for one it should work for them all.

This is interesting. McDaniel did deny having a master key.
http://www.newscentralga.com/news/local/Changes-at-Lauren-Giddings-Crime-Scene-126038238.html
It could, potentially, be more damning as well. A bump key is generally used only by locksmiths and burglars. McDaniel could explain having a master key by saying he borrowed it from the manager and forgot to give it back. But, I don't think he could very easily explain having a bump key.
Oh, and a bump key is very easy to make.