KY - Gabriella Doolin, 7, Allen County, 14 Nov 2015 #1 *Arrest*

[giagreen]

You know, I started to Google that, but with everything I've Googled about this in the last 24 hours, I'm afraid I might wind up on some sort of watch list! Gah. Interesting point, though, and one I've never thought about.

Lol I'm pretty sure I'm a watch list with all the crazy crap I google...haha if anything ever happens to anyone I know a quick check of my Google searches and I'll be a #1 suspect.

 

[DexterMorgan]

It's not like I just came up with this as a thought. I would be interested to see a case that was brought to trial with only DNA as evidence. I'm not talking about what a jury would decide. I'm talking about corroborating evidence that, along with the DNA, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime/s he/she is charged with.

It seems like some of the witnesses may be Gabbys age. So it will definitely take time to get a play by play.

But he mentions them as well. But never says if she caught up to her friends. Or how did they pass him again without him seeing them again.

But I still don't know the layout and the reporter could have made him pinpoint on a diagram of something.

 

[Madeleine74]

Being on drugs is not a mitigating factor to premeditated murder. Intent was still formed. Lots of heinous crimes are committed while a perp is high on something. They still end up in the slammer and, occasionally, on death row.

 

[roselle]

Agree. Wasn't a bridge crossing there.

I've been back there and don't remember a bridge crossing there. When we went, we accessed that pond/creek from the nature trail above that water...If I remember correctly. If I could talk a BIG male friend into going back there with me, I might be willing to go walk that trail again and see...But it would be hard.

 

[EllieBee]

“We know it’s not true, he’s not that kind of person,” said Madden. “He would never put his hands on a little girl and molest her.”

http://wkrn.com/2015/11/20/wife-of-suspect-in-murder-of-7-year-old-claims-husband-is-innocent/

What about killing? How about "my husband could never kill anyone."

That isn't even my issue though.
She is doing this interview with her own small child next to her?
Seriously? Wow. I hope that home is being looked into.

Ya know, I think about this quite a bit when a perp will admit to all kinds of crimes- including murder, but will insist that no sexual assault took place. Almost as if "regular" killing and beating of a child is copacetic, but "I never raped her! What kind of monster do you think I am?"

It's a weird thing to be sure.....

 

[DexterMorgan]

I've been back there and don't remember a bridge crossing there. When we went, we accessed that pond/creek from the nature trail above that water...If I remember correctly. If I could talk a BIG male friend into going back there with me, I might be willing to go walk that trail again and see...But it would be hard.

Thanks. I just remember a platform above the water supposedly. I thought someone spotted her from overhead. Idk. But thanks

 

[roselle]

Being on drugs is not a mitigating factor to premeditated murder. Intent was still formed. Lots of heinous crimes are committed while a perp is high on something. They still end up in the slammer and, occasionally, on death row.

I'm glad to hear that! I wasn't thinking about this being premeditated....Seems impulsive, but this is a stupid man, so he could have planned for a long time, and still have left enough evidence to have LE right on his doorstep, shortly after he committed this heinous crime.

 

[Madeleine74]

Lol I'm pretty sure I'm a watch list with all the crazy crap I google...haha if anything ever happens to anyone I know a quick check of my Google searches and I'll be a #1 suspect.

That's a common thought on WS and other sleuthing sites. All in context though. If you have a significant other get murdered and you're the last one to see them alive then maybe there would be interest. Hopefully that will never happen to anyone here. Otherwise, no one in authority cares if one is following true crime cases. Millions do.

 

[blue22]

It's not like I just came up with this as a thought. I would be interested to see a case that was brought to trial with only DNA as evidence. I'm not talking about what a jury would decide. I'm talking about corroborating evidence that, along with the DNA, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime/s he/she is charged with.

I see what you are saying. And I agree that in most cases, you can't rely on DNA alone. Although child cases a bit different just IMO, since consensual sex can't be argued.

But in this case, I don't believe they just have DNA. They have plenty of circumstantial evidence that puts him in her path during this time. Her body was found almost immediately after she went missing. You have a suspect who admits to seeing her in the time directly before she went missing/was found, you have his DNA, you have his statements that can be used against him. I'm sure they have more than this, since they've been tight lipped. If he has any of her DNA on his clothing from that night, I think he's 100% done without any doubt. Or, if their DNA is mixed. I wonder if they fast tracked the DNA from her autopsy and rape kit to ID a suspect, and now the rest of the evidence is being tested. I'm curious as to how all that will turn out.

 

[roselle]

Thanks. I just remember a platform above the water supposedly. I thought someone spotted her from overhead. Idk. But thanks

There could be...I asked the kids and they don't remember. It has been years since we have been back there. The place was creepy to me, long before this crime happened.....AND we love the woods, ponds, nature...

 

[Madeleine74]

I'm glad to hear that! I wasn't thinking about this being premeditated....Seems impulsive, but this is a stupid man, so he could have planned for a long time, and still have left enough evidence to have LE right on his doorstep, shortly after he committed this heinous crime.

Preplanning is different than premeditation. One is a legal concept (premeditation) and the other is a piece of circumstantial evidence. In order for 1st degree murder to be proved, premeditation must also be proved. Preplanning is not necessary to prove premeditation, though it's certainly compelling if it exists, and it is corroborative, and it can be thought of as icing on the cake.

The very act of strangulation itself meets the legal premeditation burden in that this act takes time, the perp *knows* if they continue to strangle or asphyxiate the victim will die, and thus they made a conscious decision to continue doing it. Intent can be formed in a matter of seconds. Intent = premeditation.

Was this crime "preplanned?" Probably not before that game. It was most likely a decision formed at the time right before he committed the 'kidnapping' part of the crime. However, the crime shows premeditation since he thought through his actions and killed her, knowing his actions (strangulation) would kill her. That is premeditation.

 

[borndem]

Can anyone point me to wherever LE said his DNA was found? Can't find it.

According to the arrest citation, Madden consented to a cheek swab for DNA comparison. Police wrote his DNA matched evidence taken from Gabbi Doolin's body. The police report says evidence indicates Gabbi Doolin was raped and then was strangled and drowned.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/30571307/...kidnapping-rape-murder-in-death-of-7-year-old

 

[roselle]

Thanks. I just remember a platform above the water supposedly. I thought someone spotted her from overhead. Idk. But thanks

There may be some little bridges back there, but not even sure of that....Wish I could remember.

 

[Rayemonde]

It's not like I just came up with this as a thought. I would be interested to see a case that was brought to trial with only DNA as evidence. I'm not talking about what a jury would decide. I'm talking about corroborating evidence that, along with the DNA, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime/s he/she is charged with.

I just had a quick google and sometimes people are convicted and the only evidence is DNA evidence. They call it a "cold hit" when they just run a DNA sample through a database and find a match, but have no idea if the person was even in the right country at the time.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...v4PZhuiH0QYqGrnFQ&sig2=mknQoC71-N7wq5LCJg-_jw

 

[ILOKAL]

I see what you are saying. And I agree that in most cases, you can't rely on DNA alone. Although child cases a bit different just IMO, since consensual sex can't be argued.

But in this case, I don't believe they just have DNA. They have plenty of circumstantial evidence that puts him in her path during this time. Her body was found almost immediately after she went missing. You have a suspect who admits to seeing her in the time directly before she went missing/was found, you have his DNA, you have his statements that can be used against him. I'm sure they have more than this, since they've been tight lipped. If he has any of her DNA on his clothing from that night, I think he's 100% done without any doubt. Or, if their DNA is mixed. I wonder if they fast tracked the DNA from her autopsy and rape kit to ID a suspect, and now the rest of the evidence is being tested. I'm curious as to how all that will turn out.

To be sure! I certainly wasn't suggesting that DNA was the only evidence they have. No doubt there is more and there will BE more. They have to build their case. And to build that case, they need more than his DNA. Some people might not realize that.

 

[blue22]

To be sure! I certainly wasn't suggesting that DNA was the only evidence they have. No doubt there is more and there will BE more. They have to build their case. And to build that case, they need more than his DNA. Some people might not realize that.

So true. I do agree that people tend to think DNA is all there needs to be.

 

[ILOKAL]

I just had a quick google and sometimes people are convicted and the only evidence is DNA evidence. They call it a "cold hit" when they just run a DNA sample through a database and find a match, but have no idea if the person was even in the right country at the time.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...v4PZhuiH0QYqGrnFQ&sig2=mknQoC71-N7wq5LCJg-_jw

When that happens, as it does, then they have a suspect (from the cold hit) upon which to build their case. I would like to see the case where the ONLY evidence is DNA and yet the person was without a doubt not even in the country when the crime took place.

 

[ptandj]

When that happens, as it does, then they have a suspect (from the cold hit) upon which to build their case. I would like to see the case where the ONLY evidence is DNA and yet the person was without a doubt not even in the country when the crime took place.

Just to clarify for my own understanding... He has said he was there and saw her shortly before she went missing and police documents indicate his DNA was found at autopsy. How could that NOT lead to conviction? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm sincerely wondering. Is it that he could argue it down to "just" rape and or sodomy, not murder?

 

[Madeleine74]

A murder absolutely can be proved with just a DNA match. How many murders have eye witnesses or the perp confesses or there's a video of the crime? Very few. Most murders are "circumstantial only" cases, and DNA is counted as circumstantial evidence. It's probably the most compelling circumstantial evidence there is. It's not needed to be able to prove a murder, but when it's there and it can point to the perp, it's something almost no one can dismiss. And, it also has the power to exclude a perp and is used for that purpose too which is how wrongful convictions get overturned.

 

[Rayemonde]

When that happens, as it does, then they have a suspect (from the cold hit) upon which to build their case. I would like to see the case where the ONLY evidence is DNA and yet the person was without a doubt not even in the country when the crime took place.

There are some cases where someone was convicted and DNA was the only evidence. Some are mentioned in the article I linked to, and you can find others through google.