MI MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #13

[Whiskers16]

Just because you haven't seen anything that links Floyd to both cases, doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. Law enforcement is building a case and as such, they have no obligation to release everything they have to the public. Furthermore, they are not going to charge him until they feel they are done building their case because they only get one shot to ensure a proper conviction.

Please read again what the police chief said.

"They checked DNA they found on the victim with DNA they found in the Stislicki case," said local community editor Brad Kadrich.

And the results?

"There was a match between the two cases," said Chief Caid. "This is the right guy."

"A match between the two cases" would not be possible without Danielle's DNA, the jogger's DNA and Floyd's DNA all being part of the evidence. If all they had was Floyd's DNA and the jogger's DNA, that would not add up to a match between the two cases. Keep in mind, they removed floorboards and a mattress! More than likely, there were bodily fluids on one or both of those items. So, even though it hasn't been confirmed, I tend to believe they have more than just Floyd's DNA.

I disagree with your conclusion.

We know:
1) LE had some reason(s) to suspect FG of involvement in Dani's disappearance.
2) FG's house was searched in relation to Dani's disappearance.
3) Evidence was collected from FG's home.
4) Evidence and any associated DNA testing results are "associated with Dani's case".
5) DNA was collected from an assaulted jogger. This DNA is "associated with the jogger's case".
6) DNA associated with the jogger's case matched DNA associated with Dani's case.
7) FG has been charged with the assault of the jogger.
8) LE/MSM has not stated that Dani's DNA was found in FG's house.
9) LE/MSM has not stated that FG's DNA was found in Dani's vehicle or apartment.

We can reasonably assume:
10) FG's DNA was collected from his own house and associated with Dani's case, whether intentionally by LE or because many surfaces and items in his home have his DNA on them.
11) The DNA collected from the assaulted jogger is the DNA of her attacker.
12) There is a system which allows LE to compare a DNA result from Case X to DNA results from other cases on file.

We have some other circumstantial details:
13) Witnesses claim seeing DS and FG together on the day of her disappearance
14) Mattress and floorboards removed from FG's home during search.
etc

The DNA match between the jogger's case and Dani's case does not necessarily have anything to do with Dani's DNA. Just Dani's case, for which FG has been explored as a suspect but not yet charged. I fully agree LE is building a case and there may be evidence which they have not shared. But from what they have shared, I don't feel there is enough evidence to convict FG.

 

[tmmac]

I disagree with your conclusion.

We know:
1) LE had some reason(s) to suspect FG of involvement in Dani's disappearance.
2) FG's house was searched in relation to Dani's disappearance.
3) Evidence was collected from FG's home.
4) Evidence and any associated DNA testing results are "associated with Dani's case".
5) DNA was collected from an assaulted jogger. This DNA is "associated with the jogger's case".
6) DNA associated with the jogger's case matched DNA associated with Dani's case.
7) FG has been charged with the assault of the jogger.
8) LE/MSM has not stated that Dani's DNA was found in FG's house.
9) LE/MSM has not stated that FG's DNA was found in Dani's vehicle or apartment.

We can reasonably assume:
10) FG's DNA was collected from his own house and associated with Dani's case, whether intentionally by LE or because many surfaces and items in his home have his DNA on them.
11) The DNA collected from the assaulted jogger is the DNA of her attacker.
12) There is a system which allows LE to compare a DNA result from Case X to DNA results from other cases on file.

We have some other circumstantial details:
13) Witnesses claim seeing DS and FG together on the day of her disappearance
14) Mattress and floorboards removed from FG's home during search.
etc

The DNA match between the jogger's case and Dani's case does not necessarily have anything to do with Dani's DNA. Just Dani's case, for which FG has been explored as a suspect but not yet charged. I fully agree LE is building a case and there may be evidence which they have not shared. But from what they have shared, I don't feel there is enough evidence to convict FG.

I didn't go through your whole list but did see that you have mattress and floorboards being removed was circumstantial. That actually is a fact.

As for going back and forth about interpretation of what LE and the news have stated we will just have to agree to disagree. Hopefully he gets prosecuted for Danielle's case one day and it will all be a moot point.

 

[thekarmabus]

I noticed during the bond hearing the prosecutor repeated many times that Floyd and victim had never met. I’m assuming that defense will try to show the two had crossed paths and this is why His DNA was found on her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Momma2cam]

I noticed during the bond hearing the prosecutor repeated many times that Floyd and victim had never met. I’m assuming that defense will try to show the two had crossed paths and this is why His DNA was found on her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. I think that'll be the only argument he can begin to make given the DNA ties him to her. The only "excuse" would be to suggest it was there from a prior consensual encounter, assuming the DNA is from the rape kit. Can anyone confirm this? Was it specified where the DNA came from?

I'm hoping the jury is smart enough to see through excuses and that the defense will be able to clearly negate any prior connection.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[Whiskers16]

I didn't go through your whole list but did see that you have mattress and floorboards being removed was circumstantial. That actually is a fact.

As for going back and forth about interpretation of what LE and the news have stated we will just have to agree to disagree. Hopefully he gets prosecuted for Danielle's case one day and it will all be a moot point.

Looks like I got lazy at the end of my list Correct, it is a fact that mattress and floor boards were removed. What is circumstantial and assumed by many is, thr floor boards or mattress must have blood stains or something that are suspected to contain Dani's blood.

 

[BloodHoundSleuther]

Looks like I got lazy at the end of my list Correct, it is a fact that mattress and floor boards were removed. What is circumstantial and assumed by many is, thr floor boards or mattress must have blood stains or something that are suspected to contain Dani's blood.

I don't believe it's circumstantial or assumed. I trust in law enforcement and I'm certain they are on the right path. I'm certain also they would never say, "they have the right guy", without substantial evidence to back it up. <modsnip>

 

[BloodHoundSleuther]

I agree. I think that'll be the only argument he can begin to make given the DNA ties him to her. The only "excuse" would be to suggest it was there from a prior consensual encounter, assuming the DNA is from the rape kit. Can anyone confirm this? Was it specified where the DNA came from?

I'm hoping the jury is smart enough to see through excuses and that the defense will be able to clearly negate any prior connection.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

<modsnip> No, the fact that he tried to rape the jogger in the park accounts for his DNA on her shorts. He didn't know her previously, but I'd bet he was stalking her. I'll bet he studied her habits and she had no clue he was doing so. If the jury is ignorant to the point that Floyd and the jogger, had some sort of previous encounter, that goes against any form of common sense. The spin is out of control!

 

[Momma2cam]

I don't believe it's circumstantial or assumed. I trust in law enforcement and I'm certain they are on the right path. I'm certain also they would never say, "they have the right guy", without substantial evidence to back it up. <modsnip>

Respectfully, the comment "this is the right guy" was made by Livonia chief Caid. Dani's case is being investigated by Farmington Hills.

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that links FG to Dani:
1. FG increasingly visited Dani at her work cubicle.
2. FG was seen outside of MetLife with his hood open on the day of her disappearance.
3. Reportedly witnesses report seeing Dani and FG together outside of his home.
4. Possible DNA evidence from floor boards and/or mattress, but so far no charges.

No one is arguing with the circumstantial evidence or that it is highly suspicious that Dani was reportedly last seen with someone who has been charged with a violent attempted rape. The issue is that the comment by Livonia PD "we have the right guy" is being taken out of context to represent Dani's case.

In the same article https://crimewatchdaily.com/2017/09/29/family-speaks-out-in-danielle-stislicki-missing-person-case/

"But law enforcement isn't giving up when it comes to solving Danielle's case.

"We're moving forward," said Farmington Hills Assistant Police Chief Matt Koehn. "We are obsessed with finding Danielle and bringing the person responsible to justice."

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[Momma2cam]

<modsnip> No, the fact that he tried to rape the jogger in the park accounts for his DNA on her shorts. He didn't know her previously, but I'd bet he was stalking her. I'll bet he studied her habits and she had no clue he was doing so. If the jury is ignorant to the point that Floyd and the jogger, had some sort of previous encounter, that goes against any form of common sense. The spin is out of control!

I was alluding to the only angle the defense will really have to take. I was not suggesting I believe that angle.

Having witnessed numerous trials involving alleged sexual abuse and assault, many of which I've provided testimony and had my character & credentials questioned in attempt to discredit the victim, this is a very common defense tactic.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[BloodHoundSleuther]

Respectfully, the comment "this is the right guy" was made by Livonia chief Caid. Dani's case is being investigated by Farmington Hills.

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that links FG to Dani:
1. FG increasingly visited Dani at her work cubicle.
2. FG was seen outside of MetLife with his hood open on the day of her disappearance.
3. Reportedly witnesses report seeing Dani and FG together outside of his home.
4. Possible DNA evidence from floor boards and/or mattress, but so far no charges.

No one is arguing with the circumstantial evidence or that it is highly suspicious that Dani was reportedly last seen with someone who has been charged with a violent attempted rape. The issue is that the comment by Livonia PD "we have the right guy" is being taken out of context to represent Dani's case.

In the same article https://crimewatchdaily.com/2017/09/29/family-speaks-out-in-danielle-stislicki-missing-person-case/




Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I don't believe so, the police department's have stated on many occasions, they are working in tandem. <modsnip> Both police departments are working the case!

 

[tmmac]

I noticed during the bond hearing the prosecutor repeated many times that Floyd and victim had never met. I’m assuming that defense will try to show the two had crossed paths and this is why His DNA was found on her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure they said it only to emphasize that it was clear that they didn't have a relationship like defense attorneys might try to say. His DNA was found on her because he tried to rape and kill her. I feel awful for her.

 

[tmmac]

I agree. I think that'll be the only argument he can begin to make given the DNA ties him to her. The only "excuse" would be to suggest it was there from a prior consensual encounter, assuming the DNA is from the rape kit. Can anyone confirm this? Was it specified where the DNA came from?

I'm hoping the jury is smart enough to see through excuses and that the defense will be able to clearly negate any prior connection.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Oh I bet he will try to say he and Danielle and the jogger all had previous relations. I am confident that the evidence and testimony will prove otherwise.

 

[BloodHoundSleuther]

Oh I bet he will try to say he and Danielle and the jogger all had previous relations. I am confident that the evidence and testimony will prove otherwise.

Yep, me too! Spin is spin and as narcissistic as it gets, it's just not believable!

 

[Sillybilly]

Folks, just a heads up here. If you see a thread going south, please use the Alert feature immediately rather than expecting a Mod to be around to see what is going on. We are busy with many, many other threads and can't sit on any one of them in real time.

It is so much easier to nip these things when they start up rather than having to go back through post after post, removing, editing, snipping, etc. We rely on members to let us know quickly when there is a problem.

:wave:

 

[thekarmabus]

I'm sure they said it only to emphasize that it was clear that they didn't have a relationship like defense attorneys might try to say. His DNA was found on her because he tried to rape and kill her. I feel awful for her.

I agree with you. That is why the DNA is present on her. I was only stating when listening to prosecution it occurred to me this might be the defense approach. It’s an intricate chess game. Understanding defense moves before they are stated. We can say DNA was on her because of A however it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I feel terrible for this victim. Unthinkable terror she endured. When stating the above regarding the DNA I am coming from a more analytical approach vs emotional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bravo]

it made me sad to read ^ for hunters to be on the look out for Dani/items. Reality can be so very harsh.

 

[DakotaMayi]

I'm sure they said it only to emphasize that it was clear that they didn't have a relationship like defense attorneys might try to say. His DNA was found on her because he tried to rape and kill her. I feel awful for her.

Absolutely. Whatever crap the DA's try to say to explain the DNA is just ****. They may as well not waste their breath with it. Anyone who believes that this poor victim is anything BUT a victim, should be ashamed of themselves. I hope she is on the road to recovery now he is off the streets.

 

[tmmac]

I check daily to make sure he is still locked up. That he appears to be the one who did something terrible to two women scares me. I wonder how many more he hasn't been caught for. Scary world we live in.

 

[DakotaMayi]

I check daily to make sure he is still locked up. That he appears to be the one who did something terrible to two women scares me. I wonder how many more he hasn't been caught for. Scary world we live in.

BBM.

This is interesting. I wonder this too. Is it typical for this type of criminal to start at 30? Or whatever age he was. I would assume it would be likely that he wouldn't be innocent prior to these two attacks.

 

[DakotaMayi]

Also, I was just looking at a 10 mile radius on a map for another case. It opened up so many places for where she may be. And that's just 10 miles because the perp drove for only one hour. With Danielle's case, we have no idea what exactly the last time Danielle was seen with him or the time he was next seen by someone else. It could have been 30 minutes from her last being seen to him dumping her body wherever or it could have been a whole day or more. The possibilities are endless for where Danielle could be, unfortunately.