It's been a busy week here in Lake WebSleuth . . .
1. Child
charges
2. The <modsnip> website posts (that many of us had heard about) went public
3. The commitment hearing went as scheduled (and as predicted bound over the case)
WS posts have focused on each event as they unfolded. Here's one attempt to summarize where we were last week and where we are now:
My opinion (JUST MOO) is that most WS posters last week thought SMD killed LG but also thought that LE had not released enough information about evidence to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Several of us WSers have said that, but I believe it to be generally true as well.
After all this past week's events, I think we're still right where we started (at least, I am). Here’s why:
Child -- isn't really relevant to the murder (doesn’t make it more likely that SMD killed her). For some people, what had been reasonable doubt evaporated in the light of child
charges because:
1. They had a gut instinct that SMD is a pitiable, harmless, social recluse who loves kittens and children (and guns and knives). For those folks, the child
probable created enough nausea to make their gut say “guilty.” OR
2. They believe one of the totally baseless scenarios that used the child
crime as a motive for murder -- such as LG discovered his flashdrive (or he used her computer to download his
while she was out running) and he killed her to escape getting caught. Those folks were willing to believe anything just because they could imagine it.
So, maybe a few potential jurors would be prejudiced enough by the child
charges (not even asking whether they are true) to erase any benefit of the doubt they had been willing to give SMD.
<modsnip> Website posts -- Again, I'm not able to see how they are relevant, except that showing what we already knew: that SMD was a gun-nut, survivalist, birther, gamer; and they show what many suspected: that the games (and movies) he preferred were violent in the extreme. Based on the <modsnip>website posts one could add to our information that SMD boasted on a macho website to be so macho that he is desensitized to what turns most folks' stomachs. But we (I) already thought he was capable of the dismemberment & murder, so that's really not a change and it doesn’t prove that he is if you believed that he wasn’t. . . . And, all the ink spilled on the fake catatonia idea in the hypothetical Westboro Baptist Church funeral protestors massacre, is simply window dressing. How he acts now -- whether interested and engaged, or totally in another world -- simply does not make it more or less likely that he murdered LG. It might make it less likely he could use a not guilty by reason of insanity defense, but it doesn’t affect the likelihood that he killed Lauren.
Take note that the <modsnip>website posts were not mentioned in the commitment hearing. LE, instead, used the recollections from 7 years ago by his college freshman roommate TM. It MIGHT be that LE didn’t know about the <modsnip>website posts (say it isn’t so, Greg!), but if they knew and surely they did, they chose other evidence instead because the <modsnip>website posts just don’t tend to prove he did it.
Commitment Hearing-- Now this is where we all hoped that we'd really learn something to change our collective opinion that LE had not shown us that they have enough evidence to convict. We learned a few things: the cadaver dog alerted at SMD's apt, FBI confirmed the DNA to be LG’s that was found on the hacksaw that was the same brand and type as packaging found in SMD’s apt, but FBI results added nothing else to LE's probable cause to suspect SMD, GBI results that DID add to probable cause were just one computer item (that, perhaps, was the
or the <modsnip>website postings), that Det. Patterson could use some more coaching, that Winters knows what he's doing, but that Buford does, too. Finally, we heard about the college roommate’s recollections from 7 years ago.
Now, how does the hearing affect the troubling pre-hearing conclusion that evidence known to exist was not enough to convict?
For my money (pun intended), Det. Patterson’s summary of the evidence made me MORE fearful that LE has insufficient evidence to convict. The best stuff they have (that they revealed) is the hacksaw package and DNA match on the blade. We knew about these facts last week -- if that wasn’t enough to convict in our opinions last week, it still isn’t.
Now we know about the cadaver dogs’ hitting on SMD’s apartment. I personally think dogs know a ton of stuff humans will never discover, but the validity and reliability of dog alert testimony is very problematic. The science just isn’t there to create certainty beyond reasonable doubt even if the evidence is admitted (which is not certain in Georgia). Jurors will need to be convinced that these particular dogs know their stuff, that their handlers know their stuff, and believe that the dog's reported behavior (unlikely it was video-taped) proves that the victim's torso had been in SMD's apartment.
Finally, show me the money – the college roommate’s story about SMD talking 7 years ago about the perfect murder will be admissible as evidence, but just imagine the defense lawyer’s cross-examination. What else, besides the perfect murder, did SMD often tell you about? Answer: “uh, zombie attacks.” Follow up questions: Did you also think up perfect murders? Did anyone else? The dorm room discussion context of these stories – if the roommate is the only source – creates plenty of doubts that just might be too tough to dispel for one man or woman out of 12.
I was really hoping that FBI lab results would positively connect SMD with the torso of the victim.
According to Patterson, the answer to Buford's question about additional FBI evidence was a resounding “no.” That one answer is the biggest news of the week.
So – I conclude: after an exciting week and lots of activity, we’re right where we started. I, personally, believe that SMD did it and I have not yet been shown evidence that makes me think he will be convicted. Damn!
