GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 # 8

[Givsmetheshivers]

Me, too! I came across that article again recently and was surprised it hadn't been mentioned in awhile. Winters' statement is very direct. "He would walk into other apartments and take items." I wonder why he was charged with the "condom burglaries" and not the others, or instead of the others. What was different about them? Just a guess, but could it be the condoms were the only stolen property found in his possession?

I have thought about this. The only thing that I can possibly figure is that either A. someone, DD or BB, suspected he was going in the apartments and these were the only items he admitted to taking.
B. they found a stash of items that were obviously out of place.

Does anyone have any other ideas?

 

[Knox]

My hubby, who you don't know from Adam's housecat, has said that this may never go to trial because McD will kill himself if he gets the chance.

Good point your Hubby Makes.

We discussed the possibility that McD is not capable of telling his Mom the truth (if he did indeed kill Lauren). I could see the possibility of a suicide attempt, rather than face a Mom/family who believes in his innocence so completely.

If certain points can be conclusively proven by lab analysis and are disclosed at the Aug 27th commitment hearing, I wonder if he would confess?

 

[angelanalyzes]

I have thought about this. The only thing that I can possibly figure is that either A. someone, DD or BB, suspected he was going in the apartments and these were the only items he admitted to taking.
B. they found a stash of items that were obviously out of place.

Does anyone have any other ideas?

I like something along the lines of A considering that the article said he could have been charged with other burglaries as well. It also leads me to believe somehow the discovery of the master key may have factored into the Thursday search, since I did hear about the master key almost immediately after he was arrested, and perhaps when McD was confronted about the master key he admitted to the condom thefts in order to make it seem like some kind of prank or just something petty.

Although, it would have been smarter to claim he didn't realize he had a master key, which is what he later stated in so many words, so I'm not sure how much sense my theory makes, lol. Then again, he may have been so panicked at that point he said and did things that did not make sense tactically and then later recanted some portion of what he admitted to during the search.

The condom theft issue is one of the most perplexing aspects of this whole case in terms of how that ever came to the investigator's attentions, which leads me to believe there is some factor of the whole thing that is not being released to the public due to it being somehow crucial to the murder investigation.

Lawyers, any ideas here? :waitasec:

 

[bessie]

Great links Bessie, thank you

It would be interesting to know how many of the Table 1 behaviors McD exhibited as a child. Not sure we will ever have that level of knowledge about him though.

Snipped from bessie's link:
[SIZE=+1]
[/SIZE]The linked articles discuss serial killers and their traits. This would apply to McD as well? How and Why, if someone would be so kind as to explain the subtleties. TIA

That's a good question, Knox. A good place to start is to look at the definition of a serial killer. The FBI updated it's definition in 2008:

The different discussion groups at the Symposium agreed on a number of similar factors to be included in a definition. These included:
• one or more offenders
• two or more murdered victims
• incidents should be occurring in separate events, at different times
• the time period between murders separates serial murder from mass murder

In combining the various ideas put forth at the Symposium, the following definition was crafted:
Serial Murder: The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#two

Also consider that profiles are based to a large percent on case histories of perpetrators, and perpetrators of multiple crimes are studied more frequently than a single crime perpetrator. The same childhood and adolescent characteristics of a multiple offender were present when he committed his first adult crime. Often, the nature of the crime is more telling than the number of crimes.

 

[tut med]

Bessie,
Please remove this post if it is off topic too much.

Angel,
I have a question I want to ask you. It is not about SM but it does tie in to the previous discussion about whether or not there may have been past behaviors of SM's that could have alerted to a severe problem. Can you give me any information about the below scenario.
You meet a person. You interact with this person on a daily basis for several months. After some time has passed, you develop a gut reaction that this person will do something violent to another person at some time in the future. You are personally certain that this will happen. You do not know of any violence in this person's past or see any in his/her interactions with others. Just some hinky meter in your subconscious based on your observations that this person is distrubed in some manner makes you believe this person will be trouble in the future. And then, it does come to pass. The person does in fact kill someone or rape someone or molest a child. How could this happen?

This question so reminds me of criminal prolifer Van Zandt's quote about ask a teacher who on the playground will become a criminal or killer-that teachers are the best criminal profilers.
I don't know if thats true but I bet they get a good view of some abnormal behavior.

 

[AgentFrankLundy]

I think I have an answer to one of the questions that has been asked here. If folks are wondering if the police have McD on Walmart Video surveillance , I believe the answer is yes. I base this on what I saw on 48 Hours mystery last night on CBS. A Michael Oates was taped buying items which he then used to dispose of the body of the guy he killed ( he said it was self defense ,the jury didn't believe him ) They not only had him at the check out counter but on video coming into and leaving the WalMart. Others have posited on here that Wal-Marts video surveillance is state of the art, and it appeared so on this show.

 

[bessie]

I like something along the lines of A considering that the article said he could have been charged with other burglaries as well. It also leads me to believe somehow the discovery of the master key may have factored into the Thursday search, since I did hear about the master key almost immediately after he was arrested, and perhaps when McD was confronted about the master key he admitted to the condom thefts in order to make it seem like some kind of prank or just something petty.

Although, it would have been smarter to claim he didn't realize he had a master key, which is what he later stated in so many words, so I'm not sure how much sense my theory makes, lol. Then again, he may have been so panicked at that point he said and did things that did not make sense tactically and then later recanted some portion of what he admitted to during the search.

The condom theft issue is one of the most perplexing aspects of this whole case in terms of how that ever came to the investigator's attentions, which leads me to believe there is some factor of the whole thing that is not being released to the public due to it being somehow crucial to the murder investigation.

Lawyers, any ideas here? :waitasec:

The burglary charges are pending, so it's a separate, ongoing case. The charges came about through questioning him about the murder. In that respect alone, the two are tied together. But I agree there's more to it, and I've said so since the very beginning. I still believe it's possible that through some some faulty reasoning he confessed to the burglaries to exonerate himself of the murder.

We did hear about the master key fairly early. BB claimed she didn't know he had one. If she did know he had the key, or suspected he was burglarizing apartments, she would have been foolish to admit it. As the apartment manager, having knowledge of either and not reporting it would have been negligent on her part, even more so if she's the one who gave him the key. To a lesser extent, the same could be said for DD as the resident contact. Like BB, he was an employee of the apartment complex and had an obligation to report a suspected burglar.

 

[Lawette32]

Thank you for sharing this observation, Lawette. It dovetails with what Mrs. Giddings noted when she saw him at the Hummingbird two nights before graduation.
Another observation from Mrs. Giddings:
In that same article, we hear from a member of the Federalist Society:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...-heartache/2011/08/05/gIQAj47IzI_story_4.html

These statements all have a ring of honesty, and together they form a snapshot.

I'm curious about something, Lawette. When you saw him sitting near the group, what was he doing?

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond- I've been away from the computer for the weekend and am now trying to catch up.

He was studying, and the people at the other table were eating lunch and talking. It just stuck out in my mind because it's always tugged at my hearstrings to see someone look excluded in any way.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Has it ever been mentioned whether Lauren was dating or friends with the victim(s) of the condom thefts?



But - - the condom thefts were in the winter of 2008-2009 and LG didn't start dating the K&S lawyer until later, right?. Even if we knew the names of the occupants of apts 5 and 9 (at the time of the condom thefts from those apts), we'd have to learn whether they dated LG in her first year of law school.

It might be easier for someone (a classmate?) to determine who (if anyone) LG dated during her first year and then determine whether any of them also lived in Barristers' Hall during their first year and, if so, in which apts.

Lauren started working at K & S in 2007 and started dating her boyfriend then. Not necessarily exclusive since that far back though.

 

[bessie]

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond- I've been away from the computer for the weekend and am now trying to catch up.

He was studying, and the people at the other table were eating lunch and talking. It just stuck out in my mind because it's always tugged at my hearstrings to see someone look excluded in any way.

Thanks, Lawette. I thought that's what you'd say. It stood out from the articles I posted that while McD desired social interaction, he could only tolerate it if he could remain focused on a task to quell his anxiety. He attended the party, but played darts. He was a member of the Federalist Society, but was happier to get the ice and run errands than interact with his fellow members. In the situation you described, he wanted to be part of the conversation but stayed on the edges of it protected under the guise of studying.

ETA: Re: the bolded part, I understand because I'm senstitive to that, myself.

 

[bessie]

Lauren started working at K & S in 2007 and started dating her boyfriend then. Not necessarily exclusive since that far back though.

Did you read the question Angel raised about the burglary charges. Any thoughts on why we haven't heard more details about the burglaries?

 

[pearl]

This question so reminds me of criminal prolifer Van Zandt's quote about ask a teacher who on the playground will become a criminal or killer-that teachers are the best criminal profilers.
I don't know if thats true but I bet they get a good view of some abnormal behavior.

While teachers don't try to be profilers, they do have the opportunity to observe a person's behavior over a good amount of time. Teachers see this person in classroom settings interacting with other students and the teacher, in social settings while he/she is interacting with friendship groups, in conferences with parents, and in sports competitions. Most importantly, the teacher sees the student when he/she thinks no one is watching. The teacher is often required to fill out an evaluation form from a psychologist or psychiatrist as to the teacher's evaluation of the student. A teacher is not qualified to do this, in my opinion. The questions on these forms are so far out of a teacher's knowledge of this child or so generic as to be worthless in my opinion. Yet many of the students that teachers think will have problems down the road are not even on the radar of a person who could help them. This is a quandry because a teacher cannot just go say that my instincts tell me that this student is going to hurt someone someday. If a teacher makes a statement like that, he/she better have some kind of concrete documentation to back it up in our lawsuit-happy world today.

 

[Givsmetheshivers]

This question so reminds me of criminal prolifer Van Zandt's quote about ask a teacher who on the playground will become a criminal or killer-that teachers are the best criminal profilers.
I don't know if thats true but I bet they get a good view of some abnormal behavior.

My mom is a teacher and she used to take note of certain students...but the one that she told my father "would kill someone someday" did so two years later. :waitasec:

 

[ThinMan]

Lauren started working at K & S in 2007 and started dating her boyfriend then. Not necessarily exclusive since that far back though.

So the K&S lawyer, then 40 something, started dating her as a 23 year old?

Ewww~

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Did you read the question Angel raised about the burglary charges. Any thoughts on why we haven't heard more details about the burglaries?

Just read it, trying to catch up. I wish I had someting to add with regard to the burglaries. I too am very curious about the condoms and what caused LE to take an interest in them. I'd like to know what brought about the conversation wherein he told LE about being a virgin. I think the way that all came about could be very telling. As far as charging him with additional burglaries, they certainly still could but the murder charge is so much more important. There's always the possibility we'll here more from more victims about things that were taken out of their apartments or about how someone may have suspected McD of snooping/burglarizing apartments. As with the rest of the evidence in this case, LE just isn't saying much.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I personally do not see the "Ewwww" factor in Lauren and DV's relationship regarding an age difference.. It really is completely within the category of personal preferences and those are as widely varying and as polar opposite of others as black is to white.. IMO it is not even a subject that is really any of any of our business..just sayin.. Due to the fact that DV is in no way involved with anything that happened to Lauren I just personally do not see that it would even be a subject of conversation.. Again ONLY my opinion..

Lauren evidently cared a great deal for this man whom she'd had a relationship with for several years{and from what I know it was a very close and special relationship to them both}.. To me I have never understood why some seemed to even have an opinion one way or the other about other people's relationships and who they personally chose to date{be it age, sex, race, religion, career choice, or otherwise}and tho I personally have not ever for whatever reasons been in a long term relationship with someone that was not in my close in age range, but know and have known many both men and women whose preference were either several years older or several years younger than their own age and from all I'ver personally witnessed it truly has had zero bearing neither positively nor negatively on whether the relationship lasted, was a positive experience, or be that it was short lived.. I've seen it run the whole gamut just as with all relationships..some good..some bad.. and some good for a while til turning sour..lol.. All the same and no matter the age range of the two involved in the relationship they have just as good chance as any in making it as a meaningful, longterm, monogamous relationship..

IMO it truly has no bearing on anything whatsoever and as evil and messed up as this world is that we live in I say, to each their own, and wherever it is and whoever it is that you can find love and happiness in and with then I am absolutely 100% all for it.. As long as the significant other treats their partner with love and respect and they together as a healthy combo, bringing up each other, rather than bringing each other down{as is seen so many times in relationships}.. In my book as long as we are talking two consenting adults that IMO is all that is even of relevance that would ever be of issue..

Other than that we are talking what is to each their own and completely a choice of personal preference..

As far as it being unusual, out of the ordinary, or something rarely seen though IMO matters not if no one else in the world is choosing to date outside of their immediate age range, even if they were the only couple ever to have chosen to do so, still wouldn't make it wrong, gross, or unacceptable.. Obviously as we all know age differences in mates has long since been nothing new to even the most conservative of people.. I'm certain many here on this board could attest to their own personal relationships that are similar in the dept of age difference between partners and that some may take offense to it being seen as "Ewwwww" that they're loved one is either several years their junior or senior..again just sayin'...

My personal opinion on Lauren and DV's relationship{which in reality is as worthless as a hill of beans..my opinion that is..lol}..But my take on it is that I am happy to know that in Lauren's short life here on this earth that she was able to find love and happiness and able to experience that awesome feeling of being "in love" with someone and the whole kit and caboodle that comes along with those awesome, unmistakable, and at times sheerly overwhelming feelings and emotions that we experience only through that deep connection, close intimacy with another human being.. I personally am so very happy that this beautifully intelligent, so very full of life and a heart that was literally born to fill someone's world with love.. It gives me great joy to know that even in her much too short life and time here on earth that at the very least this was an experience that she was able to very much share with DV.. It is sadly DV who my heart breaks for that had this wonderfully rich in all those things that truly matter in life and in a woman whose heart was as loving and giving to the point of it being a fact that is pointed out time and time again by all of those who knew her.. DV sadly is left as one of the many whose life has been irreparably stripped of someone he cared for dearly and most likely had intended to spend the rest of his life with[and yes from what I have learned of their relationship as I said it was an extremely special relationship to them both and I haven't a doubt that they both knew that they wanted to spend their lives together}. Tragically that is all gone, it is all lost, as it has all been stolen from not only DV but so very many other of Lauren's family and loved ones.. The loss of this woman's life is an infinite ripple effect that through the course of time only then will the great magnitude of that effect truly be known..

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Yeah, it's quite a difference.
There probably hasn't been any discussion of this fact, since it's obvious enough
and I can't see where this has any bearing on this case.
And to do so would probably be a violation of WS's 'victim friendly' policy.
:twocents:

Yes, there was some discussion of it in some of the earlier threads and yes, it probably does violate some WS policy but even more importantly, he IS a victim in all of this and has been terribly devastated by what happened to Lauren. The age difference isn't that huge and it really isn't that odd.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I personally do not see the "Ewwww" factor in Lauren and DV's relationship regarding an age difference.. It really is completely within the category of personal preferences and those are as widely varying and as polar opposite of others as black is to white.. IMO it is not even a subject that is really any of any of our business..just sayin.. Due to the fact that DV is in no way involved with anything that happened to Lauren I just personally do not see that it would even be a subject of conversation.. Again ONLY my opinion..

Lauren evidently cared a great deal for this man whom she'd had a relationship with for several years{and from what I know it was a very close and special relationship to them both}.. To me I have never understood why some seemed to even have an opinion one way or the other about other people's relationships and who they personally chose to date{be it age, sex, race, religion, career choice, or otherwise}and tho I personally have not ever for whatever reasons been in a long term relationship with someone that was not in my close in age range, but know and have known many both men and women whose preference were either several years older or several years younger than their own age and from all I'ver personally witnessed it truly has had zero bearing neither positively nor negatively on whether the relationship lasted, was a positive experience, or be that it was short lived.. I've seen it run the whole gamut just as with all relationships..some good..some bad.. and some good for a while til turning sour..lol.. All the same and no matter the age range of the two involved in the relationship they have just as good chance as any in making it as a meaningful, longterm, monogamous relationship..

IMO it truly has no bearing on anything whatsoever and as evil and messed up as this world is that we live in I say, to each their own, and wherever it is and whoever it is that you can find love and happiness in and with then I am absolutely 100% all for it.. As long as the significant other treats their partner with love and respect and they together as a healthy combo, bringing up each other, rather than bringing each other down{as is seen so many times in relationships}.. In my book as long as we are talking two consenting adults that IMO is all that is even of relevance that would ever be of issue..

Other than that we are talking what is to each their own and completely a choice of personal preference..

As far as it being unusual, out of the ordinary, or something rarely seen though IMO matters not if no one else in the world is choosing to date outside of their immediate age range, even if they were the only couple ever to have chosen to do so, still wouldn't make it wrong, gross, or unacceptable.. Obviously as we all know age differences in mates has long since been nothing new to even the most conservative of people.. I'm certain many here on this board could attest to their own personal relationships that are similar in the dept of age difference between partners and that some may take offense to it being seen as "Ewwwww" that they're loved one is either several years their junior or senior..again just sayin'...

My personal opinion on Lauren and DV's relationship{which in reality is as worthless as a hill of beans..my opinion that is..lol}..But my take on it is that I am happy to know that in Lauren's short life here on this earth that she was able to find love and happiness and able to experience that awesome feeling of being "in love" with someone and the whole kit and caboodle that comes along with those awesome, unmistakable, and at times sheerly overwhelming feelings and emotions that we experience only through that deep connection, close intimacy with another human being.. I personally am so very happy that this beautifully intelligent, so very full of life and a heart that was literally born to fill someone's world with love.. It gives me great joy to know that even in her much too short life and time here on earth that at the very least this was an experience that she was able to very much share with DV.. It is sadly DV who my heart breaks for that had this wonderfully rich in all those things that truly matter in life and in a woman whose heart was as loving and giving to the point of it being a fact that is pointed out time and time again by all of those who knew her.. DV sadly is left as one of the many whose life has been irreparably stripped of someone he cared for dearly and most likely had intended to spend the rest of his life with[and yes from what I have learned of their relationship as I said it was an extremely special relationship to them both and I haven't a doubt that they both knew that they wanted to spend their lives together}. Tragically that is all gone, it is all lost, as it has all been stolen from not only DV but so very many other of Lauren's family and loved ones.. The loss of this woman's life is an infinite ripple effect that through the course of time only then will the great magnitude of that effect truly be known..

Thank you for this very insightful and compassionate post. A simple click on the "Thank you" button didn't seem quite enough as someone (I believe it was Knox) posted earlier. Relationships are not necessariy easy, as anyone who has ever been in one can attest, lol. Finding the right person to share your life with is probably the single most important choice a person makes in life and I don't see how anyone can even TRY to guess at what would be right or wrong for another person, as we all have our own likes, dislikes, preferences, tolerances, intolerances, etc. Lauren was a smart and beautiful young lady. We should be able to trust that she was intelligent and mature enough to make decisions that were right for her. In a case such as this, if there were anything bad to be said about DV, we would have heard all about it already in the media.

 

[bessie]

Take a bow, Smooth!! :takeabow::clap::clap:
​

 

[angelanalyzes]

Just read it, trying to catch up. I wish I had someting to add with regard to the burglaries. I too am very curious about the condoms and what caused LE to take an interest in them. I'd like to know what brought about the conversation wherein he told LE about being a virgin. I think the way that all came about could be very telling. As far as charging him with additional burglaries, they certainly still could but the murder charge is so much more important. There's always the possibility we'll here more from more victims about things that were taken out of their apartments or about how someone may have suspected McD of snooping/burglarizing apartments. As with the rest of the evidence in this case, LE just isn't saying much.

I believe the ME on scene would be able to tell for signs of recent sexual activity and if cops were questioning with SMD in mind as a potential suspect, they may have tried to lock him into a statement about not having any sexual activity in order to keep him from coming up with some innocent reason his DNA could be found on the remains, he couldn't explain it away as he and Lauren had sex, which would contradict his initial statement about his virginity.