Still Missing MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #15 *ARREST*

[loreet]

I have been thinking about these exact same questions. My recollection from a much earlier thread is that those parking spaces were NOT assigned, but Dani did often park in that exact space. As Bette Davis has wisely said (sorry Bette. I paraphrase and please correct me if I misunderstand you) what we ‘know’ or believe and what we can prove in a court of law to a jury may well be 2 different things in this case.

I also believe FG must have been stalking Dani to know where she lived and exactly where she parked. Proof? I have none. And there were no cameras at the apartments. I believe the same happened with his Hines Park victim. There’s an extremely creepy thought. Did he follow her? Out of the park? Proof? It will be helpful if she is allowed to testify as the victim was allowed in Worley’s trial, indicating FG’s behavior could have followed a pattern of abduction and violent criminal sexual misconduct that applies to Danielle.

The burden of ‘proof’ to bind someone over for trial in a preliminary hearing before a judge is different from that required in a felony murder jury trial. I am certain the prosecution has more evidence we haven’t seen. But with the evidence we have seen right now, I wouldn’t be convinced enough of FG’s premeditation of murder if I was sitting on a jury. Of abduction, yes, but not murder. Not enough to sentence him. Not yet.

However in Michigan a felony murder conviction can also include murder that occurs during the commission of other crimes: criminal sexual abuse, extortion, carjacking, kidnapping, etc. Most relevant to Dani I think is the abduction/kidnapping. Her family and friends testimony carries a great deal of weight — Dani would never have left her life willingly.

 

[Bravo]

IMO there is enough for premeditation. It can be formed in an instant. I don't believe it was in an instant in this case. His car is supposedly disabled in the very parking lot where Dani works. He no longer worked security at that building. Why else would he be there? Why did he pick Dani to give him a ride home? Dani was to become his victim. IMO

 

[loreet]

IMO there is enough for premeditation. It can be formed in an instant. I don't believe it was in an instant in this case. His car is supposedly disabled in the very parking lot where Dani works. He no longer worked security at that building. Why else would he be there? Why did he pick Dani to give him a ride home? Dani was to become his victim. IMO

I just edited my post to be more precise. I absolutely believe there is enough evidence of FG’s premeditation to abduct and assault Danielle. But I don’t have the evidence I would need to convict him of premeditated murder. Yet.

 

[Bravo]

I just edited my post to be more precise. I absolutely believe there is enough evidence of FG’s premeditation to abduct and assault Danielle. But I don’t have the evidence I would need to convict him of premeditated murder. Yet.

No worries I did understand. I just don't happen to agree (lol) and I mean this in a nice way.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I just edited my post to be more precise. I absolutely believe there is enough evidence of FG’s premeditation to abduct and assault Danielle. But I don’t have the evidence I would need to convict him of premeditated murder. Yet.

Thank you, and I concur. That said, I think there are folks who have already decided that FG is guilty and should be convicted of first degree premeditated murder. Juries don't render verdicts based on what they think happened or what others have told them happened, what might have happened, or what must have happened. Juries should determine guilt or innocence based on the facts presented at trial. We are a few months, at least, from the trial, so we don't have all of the evidence. The limited evidence that is available is largely circumstantial and would certainly not be enough for me to find FG guilty of first degree premediated murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[Bravo]

Since premeditation was charged let's see if the State has more. I am confident they do.

 

[Bravo]

I am most interested in hearing from the Defense during Opening. Why was Floyd's car at that building. How did he get it home? If towed there would be a record. Did he need a friend at some point to help et. etc.

 

[tresir2012]

Yes, there's that. Defense will likely issue a motion for that case information to be disallowed. Not sure how Judge will rule.

DH and I have served on juries previously (in Oakland County). DH was selected to be foreman on a criminal trial; both of mine were professional malpractice - one medical, one legal. I would be unable to render a guilty verdict based on statements about "what anyone thinks might have happened". I would want to know the facts about what actually happened, and I don't know - at this time - whether that evidence will ever be known.

The DNA in his bedroom, missing comforter and she was seen leaving Met Life with him and never seen again plus the phone and Fitbit found are all facts so is that enough in your opinion? What else would they need? I am wondering if they have any CCTV at all. Was there any surveillance cams at Dani's apartment?

 

[Bravo]

No cameras at Dani's apt. It was reported early in and doubt I will find the link now.

 

[Bravo]

Above posters are speaking to whether this crime was premeditated. And feel there is not enough that we know of right now for the premed. charge. They are not disputing the crime itself. Wanted to clarify.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

The DNA in his bedroom, missing comforter and she was seen leaving Met Life with him and never seen again plus the phone and Fitbit found are all facts so is that enough in your opinion? What else would they need? I am wondering if they have any CCTV at all. Was there any surveillance cams at Dani's apartment?

None of the evidence known to date confirms or proves premeditation.

 

[tresir2012]

Thank you, and I concur. That said, I think there are folks who have already decided that FG is guilty and should be convicted of first degree premeditated murder. Juries don't render verdicts based on what they think happened or what others have told them happened, what might have happened, or what must have happened. Juries should determine guilt or innocence based on the facts presented at trial. We are a few months, at least, from the trial, so we don't have all of the evidence. The limited evidence that is available is largely circumstantial and would certainly not be enough for me to find FG guilty of first degree premediated murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the YIng Ying Zhang case the most damning evidence was the video of Ying Ying getting in the perp's car, the tape of his confession, the DNA in his apartment plus the phone evidence IIRC. There are some similarities as the death occurred in the perps' bedrooms both times, and they were both last seen in a vehicle with the perp. The defense will have to explain how his car broke down in the car park at Met Life but then was ok when he went back to it later, how Dani's DNA was in his bedroom, and why he was in the vicinity of her discarded items. These are all facts and hopefully there are more.

 

[tresir2012]

None of the evidence known to date confirms or proves premeditation.

The faking of a broken down car in a private car park he should not have been in proves premeditation IMO. I.e. he tricked her into giving him a lift.

 

[tresir2012]

No cameras at Dani's apt. It was reported early in and doubt I will find the link now.

Thanks for answering. There are some witnesses though, I believe, but am not positive of that.

 

[Bravo]

Dani was to go home grab an overnight bag and head to her friends. She had a Saturday I believe 8 a.m. seminar to attend. I feel like FG used his wife as a ruse to get Dani into his house. Dani and others likely knew his wife had Cancer. Kindhearted Dani would likely go in for a quick visit. Meanwhile the wife is in Hospital. Once he had her in that house...…..Dani must have been terrified.

 

[Bravo]

Thanks for answering. There are some witnesses though, I believe, but am not positive of that.

The only witnesses I am aware of are those who saw the Jeep parked. Not who put it there.

 

[tresir2012]

The only witnesses I am aware of are those who saw the Jeep parked. Not who put it there.

Oh I thought they saw it being parked. I may have misunderstood. I also thought there may have been someone who saw her at his place, but this was from a long while ago and I may be misremembering.

 

[Bravo]

Oh I thought they saw it being parked. I may have misunderstood. I also thought there may have been someone who saw her at his place, but this was from a long while ago and I may be misremembering.

I do think there was a witness who saw the Jeep at FG's. Not that I recall did they say they saw Dani. IIRC.

 

[Ozoner]

None of the evidence known to date confirms or proves premeditation.

I disagree; I see conclusive proof of premeditation of murder.

The faking of a broken down car in a private car park he should not have been in proves premeditation IMO. I.e. he tricked her into giving him a lift.

Absolutely. Are we to believe that he intended to abduct and rape Danielle and then let her live even though she knew his identity? Jurors are allowed to use their logical reasoning skills to put the pieces together. There is only one logical conclusion: premeditated murder—and that's even if the jury is not told about the Hines Park attempted rape. If the jury gets to hear about that, they'll need about five minutes to deliberate.

 

[tresir2012]

Family speaks out in Danielle Stislicki missing-person case

This is the article that mentions witnesses saw Danielle at FG's apartment.

"After police searched his house several times, FG was not charged in connection with Danielle's disappearance.

Still, his own sister-in-law was convinced he had something to do with it.

"What if F is someone else and I didn't know about it?" said Elizabeth Rose Newton, F's sister-in-law.

Immediately after finding out about the police raids, Newton heads down to the Farmington Hills Police Station. She meets with a sergeant, who confirms the recent searches at her brother-in-law's home. And then he mentions something else -- and it's a game-changer for Newton.

"The reason they were searching F and Iley's house was because there had been witnesses that saw F and Danielle at F's house together on the day she disappeared," said Newton. "And then they said that was the last time she had ever been seen."

Because it's an open investigation, cops can't confirm or deny these witness accounts. But if true, what happened inside that home?

Elizabeth Newton leaves the police station and recalls a conversation she had with her brother-in-law a year and half before Danielle went missing.

"It turned into a conversation about sex addiction," said Newton. "He admitted that he had an addiction to and had thoughts of cheating, and my sister was just then starting her chemo treatment. I was like 'Just don't cheat on my sister, dude.'"

But now Newton believes her brother-in-law wasn't just looking to cheat.

"He was just waiting for the right victim," said Newton."

Name changed to initials in quotes.

So basically they have witnesses she was there too.