GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #15 *appeals denied*

[Backwoods]

Slaying suspect McDaniel told cops repeatedly, ‘I didn’t do anything’

...Thursday, for the first time since Stephen McDaniel became a suspect in the June 2011 slaying and dismemberment of Lauren Giddings, his voice was heard in public from the night that detectives accused him of killing her....

read more at: http://www.macon.com/2013/12/14/2833513/slaying-suspect-mcdaniel-told.html

Well -- I ran out for a few minutes expressly to buy some earbuds or headphones (well, and a couple of other things we were needing) so I could make a try at transcribing that video clip of the interrogation -- and while out I saw the headline in the print Telegraph. Lots of transcription at the link, so I don't have to try to do that -- but I'm ready now, if something else comes along!

 

[Backwoods]

I don't know if Macon Mom is still around, but, I am pretty sure I still have on an old drive, some postings and pictures he posted. I was so weirded out by that site and the stuff I found, not to mention what happened after, that I dropped everything and ran. Sounds like LE was on the receiving end of a bunch of it anyway.

It's possible that nobody knew Lauren was missing an earring, but one was found and determined to be Lauren's through DNA.

Most important to me is what may have been found along side the earring in the earring recovery location. I may have missed precisely where it was found in his car. Was there biological material along with the earring? Her earring being there by itself may not amount to much other than to say she was in the car. WHEN was Lauren last seen with that earring on (if it's hers)?

I still can't believe her other remains haven't been located and it makes me so depressed.

I can only pray when the evidence is revealed and he is convicted, that one of his family members might convince him to reveal the location(s).

I have a good many of the OC posts but I know my "file" is not complete. (Looking through them tonight, I even found one where he posts about a way of cutting a person's carotid artery and windpipe -- but the posting year is "wrong", since they are saying the post mentioned at the most recent hearing is from 2008.) I have none of his posts from 4C or 99C.

I have sort of a hunch this newly-mentioned post might be from a different type of site (not a chan site), but it is only a hunch.

The earring: You are right, if it's Lauren's, it could bear her DNA. (That didn't jump to my mind immediately, so I'm glad you mentioned it -- I was busy wondering if anybody knows anybody else's earring collection by heart! What I came up with is, while another person might not be able to "recite" the list, someone close might very well recognize a particular earring and be able to say, "Yes, that's hers.")

The earring was found in the glove compartment of the car. If you look at the first set of pretrial motions (the only ones we have seen in print), you can see the warrant and the warrant return for the car search, included as background material for the motion (it's Motion 2.8 in the document at the link below):

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/540762-mcdaniel-defense-motions-351-pages.html#wgt=rcntnews

Also in the background documentation included in that motion is mention of "dark stains" on the front and rear seats, which are described as appearing to be possible blood stains. What we don't know, of course, is whether anything in there tested to BE blood.

I did notice that the recently-filed motion (the one the judge granted, linked a page or two back) regarding the exclusion of luminol testing from trial described such testing in Lauren's apartment, Stephen's apartment, the downstairs apartment and refrigerator, and the laundry room. We know now that luminol suggestion of the presence of blood in any of those places was NOT confirmed by other testing.

The car is not mentioned in the luminol motion, and luminol or other testing for blood in the car is not mentioned in any of the background documents for any of the motions we have seen. (We have not seen everything there is to see, of course -- only the warrants, reports, etc., that the defense needed to include in support of its motions... and only for the first "set" of motions.)

So, I'm left wondering if luminol was possibly used in the car? IF it was, and the car was not included in the motion to exclude luminol results, it could mean (a) any luminol results in the car were negative or (b) luminol tests in the car were suggestive of the presence of blood and further tests confirmed the presence of blood. (Quite a difference between those two possibilities!)

ETA: Adding to this that all I have said here has to be taken with the knowledge that there was much of the hearing the other day that I did not get to see -- so some of my "we don't know"s and ???? could have been covered there and I (and the print media reports) just missed it.

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

Backwoods, yes Facebook was wild. Since I do not have any more of the rants as I believe what I had is now private, and I don't think I would be allowed to post them either.

Let's just say it did not paint a good picture for his family at all.

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

I have no idea what you are referring to, since I didn't then and don't now do Facebook -- but, gotta admit, this is one of those instances where I almost wish I had/did. I miss a part of sleuthing without it, no question.

I wonder if what you saw would have changed my mind about this case, taken me off the fence.

Ah well.

I want to give the Facebook Sleuth award over to Knox. She is the one who found EM's once public page.

 

[Backwoods]

Backwoods, yes Facebook was wild. Since I do not have any more of the rants as I believe what I had is now private, and I don't think I would be allowed to post them either.

Let's just say it did not paint a good picture for his family at all.

Ah -- I thought maybe you meant something was on there directly related to Lauren's murder.

But what you are describing -- I think actually someone communicated some of that type of information to me many months ago.

 

[Backwoods]

13WMAZ has also now posted video of the interrogation clip played at the hearing -- different angle than The Telegraph's. You get some facial reactions in the courtroom, etc. on this one.

http://www.13wmaz.com/videos/news/local/macon/2013/12/16/4031873/

I just wish now that 13WMAZ would make all its video of the hearing available somehow.

 

[Knox]

Curious, in that video posted above when asked about friends ... aren't the friends he names, actually Lauren's friends who came to her apartment that night? Did McD know any of them prior?

Completely deadpan, but the eye movement was interesting.

 

[Backwoods]

Curious, in that video posted above when asked about friends ... aren't the friends he names, actually Lauren's friends who came to her apartment that night? Did McD know any of them prior?

Completely deadpan, but the eye movement was interesting.

Didn't catch all four names, Knox, but at least some were both his and Lauren's law school classmates, so yes, he knew them.

 

[Backwoods]

Been meaning to note and kept forgetting: Neither the switch from Judge Brown to Judge Simms nor the changeover from DA Winters to DA Cooke interrupted the "Mercer monopoly" we have discussed before as a curious feature of this case: murder victim, defendant, judge, attorneys, and likely a good number of witnesses -- all graduates of Mercer's law school.

I believe Judge Simms also received his undergraduate degree from Mercer.

 

[tomkat]

The Quote of the Century - I am not an attorney, but does anyone else think this statement is as rediculas as I think it is?

Hogue, the defense attorney, said "the hacksaw could be evidence of a dismemberment but not a murder." He added, "There's 10,000 ways to kill a person"

person who was dismembered wasn't killed becuase of the dismemberment, they were already dead

errrr, who would find a dead body and dismember it? is my question........

 

[MaconMom]

I remember (to some degree) his explanation that SoL was a shortened form of his "old moniker" -- which I think he said was Son of Liberty. This other post, now they're saying the handle is Sons (plural) of Liberty, but he easily enough could have used that form as well, somewhere, I guess. (Where is MaconMom* -- we need her, to track this down! I tried a few searches last night -- kept coming up with knife forums/blogs and game forums/blogs.)

Noticed also they are calling this source a "blog" -- wonder if it is. At any rate, sounds like they will have FBI and GBI folks at the Jan. 6 hearing to speak to the post's authenticity and origin.

And -- though I can't find it in any print report and can no longer find any way to link 13WMAZ news reports, as they aired, on the "improved" station web site -- it was reported on the late news the night after the hearing that there will also be a person "to whom SM sent the post" (or something like that). This made me wonder if the "post" may be a comment on a blog. Guess we'll find out Jan. 6.


* Having said we need MaconMom -- we do, and I am also missing tomkat and AgentFrankLundy and, well, a bunch of other folks. Where are y'all? Hope all's OK with you folks.

Sorry for the late reply. I've been checking this site sporadically. I did already try to find the blog post they referenced and was unable to, but I imagine that it's already been pulled offline. I don't recall seeing any posts on OC from 2008. I believe the ones I saw were from 2010-2011. It appears anything posted by SMD on that site has been "lost", and I'm betting the same applies for 4C and 99C.

However, since the PD thought the fake post belonged to SMD even though it was written after he was taken into custody, I'm curious to see how they found this other post that we've all missed.

Also, the original post I made when I found his old internet posts said he used SoL which stood for "Sons of Liberty" (plural not singular). Of course his post is long gone now, but I don't see anything odd about the plural form being used in the news article. And anyway, it wouldn't be farfetched for the news to misspell his user name based on some of their other reports.

 

[Backwoods]

tomkat! MaconMom! Good to see both of you!

I called and you showeth! LOL. It's silly, I know, but when folks don't post for a while -- especially "local" ones that I don't see around and about elsewhere on WS -- I worry.

And now I get to wish you a Merry Christmas! :christmastree:

And it's a good time to say to ALL who follow Lauren's thread: I wish you a blessed, peaceful, hopeful and safe holiday season and new year!

:snowflake::snowflake::snowflake:
​

 

[Backwoods]

Sorry for the late reply. I've been checking this site sporadically. I did already try to find the blog post they referenced and was unable to, but I imagine that it's already been pulled offline. I don't recall seeing any posts on OC from 2008. I believe the ones I saw were from 2010-2011. It appears anything posted by SMD on that site has been "lost", and I'm betting the same applies for 4C and 99C.

However, since the PD thought the fake post belonged to SMD even though it was written after he was taken into custody, I'm curious to see how they found this other post that we've all missed.

Also, the original post I made when I found his old internet posts said he used SoL which stood for "Sons of Liberty" (plural not singular). Of course his post is long gone now, but I don't see anything odd about the plural form being used in the news article. And anyway, it wouldn't be farfetched for the news to misspell his user name based on some of their other reports.

I know your post said "Sons" but in his OC post in which he explains his handle, he wrote "Son". But I totally agree -- not important, could be a misspell somewhere or he could also have used Sons at some point.

In my file, I have some of his posts from there going back to 2009, I think, but not to 2008.

The one that sounds as if it might fill the bill for the post mentioned at the hearing the other day, except for the year, is dated 2010.


Info we just learned about the post that will be covered at the hearing set for Jan. 6:

...Simms set January 6 for a court hearing concerning another blog post uncovered by prosecutors that they link to McDaniel.

Under the name "Sons of Liberty," the writer described using a knife on the neck of a victim to cut the carotid artery. The entry was posted in 2008. ...

http://www.13wmaz.com/story/news/local/macon/2013/12/12/stephen-mcdaniel-court-hearing/3997269/



In fact, while I was first thinking this newly-mentioned post might be from a totally different type of site, I now am eyeing that 2010 OC post closer as a candidate. Because -- speaking of errors -- I always wondered if the dating system at that site (yy/mm/dd) might not have played some part in the erroneous attribution of the Mickey Flynn post to the "real" SoL; I know I am not used to that system and I had a heckuva time with it and I think a lot of people in this country would not be particularly at ease with it.


Date format by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The post I'm looking harder at was dated 10/08/21, using that system. Possibly a casual-glancer might have misinterpreted that middle number as the year?

I don't know...the date doesn't really matter, anyhow, since it is not specific to around the time of Lauren's death. And, anyway, I'm sure the GBI/FBI will have the lowdown on the post that will be under discussion on Jan. 6, wherever it came from.

I don't want to wander too far into matters that would only be OK "downstairs" but the 2010 post (in my file, because of course you are right that all his posts from that site are long-disappeared now) speaks of a knife technique that poster says would keep the victim from crying out and would also cut the carotid artery. Of course, it's all in a hypothetical sense, not related as a plan or anything. (I've never seen how any of the posts, as, um, unusual as they may be, would make really good evidence in this case -- but I am aware that many others feel differently about that.)

 

[MaconMom]

Merry Christmas to you too, Backwoods!

Is anyone planning to attend the trial? I'm assuming it's open to the public but I'm not sure.

 

[bessie]

Welcome back, MaconMom and Tomkat! I'm always so pleased to see how many members still stop in now and then. Lauren's threads have never gotten the volume of traffic we see in some of the big, high profile cases. But I'll tell you what, we sure do have a loyal group holding on for justice.

I've considered making the trip to attend at least one day of the trial. I can't say for certain just yet because I'm not sure what my schedule will be after Jan 1. In any case, I'll be there in spirit, and following the proceedings whichever way is available. Hopefully, one of the news outlets will live stream the trial on its website. And it would be great to get a first hand report from a WS'er or two.

 

[bessie]

Sorry for the late reply. I've been checking this site sporadically. I did already try to find the blog post they referenced and was unable to, but I imagine that it's already been pulled offline. I don't recall seeing any posts on OC from 2008. I believe the ones I saw were from 2010-2011. It appears anything posted by SMD on that site has been "lost", and I'm betting the same applies for 4C and 99C.

However, since the PD thought the fake post belonged to SMD even though it was written after he was taken into custody, I'm curious to see how they found this other post that we've all missed.

Also, the original post I made when I found his old internet posts said he used SoL which stood for "Sons of Liberty" (plural not singular). Of course his post is long gone now, but I don't see anything odd about the plural form being used in the news article. And anyway, it wouldn't be farfetched for the news to misspell his user name based on some of their other reports.

Back in April when the Mickey Finn post was brought up in a hearing, the OC guys told us the site's server crashed last year, and all of the data was lost. I was still able to find quite a few google cached posts that I'd missed on previous searches. Now, even those don't come up. So after digging around for close to a year, I have 58 pages of text in a Word doc, ranging from the mundane, to the horrific, to the absurd. A few are from 2008, and the OC posts date back to 2009. If I'm not mistaken, that's the year that site was created. Unfortunately, the links no longer work, but the thread downstairs is still open if we want to discuss specific posts. Personally, I think they hold a lot of insight.

I tend to agree that there's an error in the recent article. My c&p reads "Son", and that's how it was reported in the Telegraph last year. I happened to come across it the other day when I was reviewing the news articles.

“SoL” appears to stand for Son of Liberty. In his first year of law school on a student message board, McDaniel refers to himself as a “true-born Son of Liberty.”

http://www.macon.com/2011/08/25/1677683/internet-posts-about-death-linked.html

Like BW said, one post dated 10/08/21 sounds much like the one included in the evidence. Actually two mention "carotid", but only one talks about cutting. The other describes using compression. So I'd also agree the date might have been stated incorrectly. I had a tough time with the dates for two reasons. First of all, a couple of sites used a mm/dd/yy format, and the later one used yy/mm/dd. That drove me crazy in the beginning when I was searching for entries from particular dates. On top of that, many of the entries I found from 2009 and 2010 were posted in the latter part of the year. When trying to sort them, and not being used to the date format, 08, 09, and 10 would run together. That said, I would not be surprised if the date is correct, and the post is actually from 2008, as it would fit in with the ones I've read from that year.

 

[bessie]

Curious, in that video posted above when asked about friends ... aren't the friends he names, actually Lauren's friends who came to her apartment that night? Did McD know any of them prior?

Completely deadpan, but the eye movement was interesting.

Like BW said, he knew them from school. If you recall the infamous interview, he mentioned one or two of the friends by name in a familiar way, but also in a manner that left some of us with the impression he was trying to point a finger at them.

 

[Sonya610]

As far as I know, it's never been publicly stated that Lauren was missing an earring or that the earring found in SM's car belonged to her.

If I recall the car used to be GM's and then she gave it to SM. If that is the case the lost earring could have been his mothers or sisters or others.

 

[Backwoods]

Merry Christmas to you too, Backwoods!

Is anyone planning to attend the trial? I'm assuming it's open to the public but I'm not sure.

I'm thinking I might go some. It's hard for me to know just yet if I'll be able to arrange things so that I can.

I want to -- I think. I say that because I still, to this day, have not made a swing by Barristers Hall. I'm in that part of Macon often enough that I could have done so a number of times but somehow I've always said, Oh, well, not today. (I've probably been right by there at least a few times before Lauren's murder, just never particularly noting the little apartment complex.)

I think part of me really doesn't want to be -- I don't know -- a gawker? And generally, I'm really not, I think -- but this case has kind of made me one. (If that makes any sense at all!)

ETA: And no, I've not seen any indicators either that the trial might be closed to the public -- could be wrong, but I just don't see that happening. Now seats might be hard to come by ... but I am not even sure about that.

 

[Backwoods]

If I recall the car used to be GM's and then she gave it to SM. If that is the case the lost earring could have been his mothers or sisters or others.

I really think it's most likely NOT Lauren's. I was remembering (I thought) some earlier links that made me especially think that but when I went hunting them, I either didn't find them or they said stuff a little different from what I thought I remembered. (But didn't find any indication the earring IS hers either.) So, one more thing we have to wait and see on, I guess.

ETA: But let me add -- I've kind of wondered if somehow Lauren's boyfriend DV coming out, in his interviews with The Telegraph, about the other jewelry (the bracelet that turned out not to really be missing and the necklace that, as far as I know, is missing) might tie in with the earring somehow.... Could be that the necklace wasn't found but an earring was -- and dropping that info about the necklace might have been planned, hoping to sweat out a plea --? Oh, I don't know -- doesn't really make sense. It's just that I've kinda wondered why he (DV) put that info out there. (Maybe just to let folks know that he gave her some nice jewelry?)