From: jcs
The evolution of technology over the past two decades has significantly enhanced the efficiency of forensic investigations [00:00:30]. A key component in this advancement is the internet, and more specifically, internet search history [00:00:44].
Internet Search History as Crucial Evidence
Disclosure of web browser data is often a crucial piece of evidence for building a case [00:00:52]. It can unveil many aspects of a suspect’s personality that would otherwise remain hidden [00:00:56]. This type of evidence can be far more effective than other information presented in court, including details extracted during a full confession [00:00:59].
Application in Stalking Evaluations
When forensic health professionals evaluate stalking, four essential items are considered:
- The nature of the relationship between the stalker and victim [00:00:04].
- The stalker’s motivations [00:00:08].
- The psychological, psychopathological, and social realities of the stalker [00:00:10].
- The psychological and social vulnerabilities of the victim [00:00:15].
Internet search history can now provide insight into at least two of these items, a process that would have previously taken weeks or months for forensics to conduct [00:00:36].
Case Study: Stephen McDaniel
The case of 25-year-old Stephen McDaniel illustrates the impact of internet search history. His web browser data revealed significant aspects of his personality and motivations [00:00:56].
A large majority of McDaniel’s online activity involved watching pornography themed around violence and torture [00:01:07]. He also conducted repeated searches on “how to commit sexual assault” and typed several variations of the phrase “how to molest sleeping girl” [00:01:13].
Psychological Analysis
To forensics, this behavior is an overt sign of desensitization to sexual activity [00:01:21]. Excessive exposure to online pornography can build a tolerance to traditional sexual activity, leading individuals to seek more potent stimuli for the same “rush” [00:01:29]. This online behavior for Stephen McDaniel evolved from watching abstract material to planning and carrying out what he viewed on screen [00:01:39].
His target was 24-year-old Lauren Giddings, his next-door neighbor [00:01:47].
Victim Vulnerabilities and Hindsight
Lauren Giddings possessed few social vulnerabilities; she was outgoing, popular, well-liked, and had a strong social support system [00:01:59]. However, in terms of psychological vulnerabilities, the concept of “perceptual naivety” may come to light during a forensic investigation [00:02:10].
Stephen McDaniel had asked Lauren on a date within six months of their acquaintance, which she declined, stating she wished to remain friends [00:02:16]. Lauren later confided to friends that Stephen made her feel uneasy and uncomfortable [00:02:30]. While seemingly non-essential at the time, in hindsight, her instinctive senses appear to have been signaling danger [00:02:37].
Lauren had repeatedly told friends she felt someone had been inside her apartment and started getting an “eerie vibe” when returning home alone, especially late at night [00:02:45]. She even considered moving multiple times but never did [00:02:56].
The reality was that Stephen McDaniel had stolen a master key from a security guard, let himself into her apartment on several occasions to look around, and began filming her movements [00:03:02]. Lauren had no concrete proof of the danger she was in, only a conviction that was unfortunately not strong enough when needed most [00:03:23].
The Crime and Subsequent Investigation
Stephen McDaniel snuck into Lauren’s apartment while she was sleeping [00:03:49]. When she awoke and panicked, he strangled her for approximately 15 minutes [00:03:56]. Lauren died of asphyxiation after a struggle [00:04:05].
After the murder, Stephen dismembered Lauren’s body in the bathtub using a hacksaw, cutting her into five pieces [00:04:14]. He then placed each piece in a trash bag and disposed of them in separate trash cans around campus [00:04:21].
Three days later, Lauren’s concerned friends found her belongings still inside her apartment [00:04:27]. McDaniel offered to help, having noticed their arrival from his window [00:04:31]. A missing person’s report was filed, and a search party located the victim’s torso in a trash can next to the apartment complex [00:04:43]. The rest of her remains were never recovered [00:04:53].
Interrogation and Evidence
The investigation shifted to murder, and police began interviewing neighbors, including Stephen McDaniel [00:04:57]. McDaniel was first interviewed by local news, unaware that remains had been found [00:05:08]. Upon learning of the discovery, he exhibited a reaction that appeared to be fear and shock over evidence discovery, disguised as sorrow [00:06:19].
During police questioning, McDaniel was fidgety and apprehensive [00:07:10]. He claimed to be a virgin saving himself for marriage, but detectives found scratch marks on his face and stomach, which he attributed to scratching himself in his sleep [00:07:20]. He then became the prime suspect [00:07:33].
A search of his apartment revealed an unusual collection of items, including swords, guns, stockpiled provisions, and a mask made of women’s underwear [00:07:41]. The most significant discovery was a pack of condoms, which contradicted his celibacy claim [00:07:54]. He confessed to stealing them, providing probable cause for arrest [00:08:02].
The Interrogation Tactics
McDaniel’s interrogation began with a monotone voice and lifeless demeanor, a conduct that baffled investigators [00:08:53]. His “abnormal and extremely creepy character” dictated the pace of the interrogation, even causing a detective to break eye contact, a rare occurrence that typically boosts a suspect’s confidence [00:09:34].
Detectives employed various interrogation techniques, including aggressive questioning, character attacks, and the “futility technique” (suggesting overwhelming evidence makes resistance useless) [00:13:41] [00:22:38]. A bluffed claim about blood in his apartment, based on the assumption he dismembered the body there, was debunked as the act occurred in Lauren’s apartment [00:22:52].
A shift to sympathetic and understanding tones failed as Stephen immediately shut down the attempts to create rapport [00:23:25]. His demeanor remained catatonic for nearly 90 minutes [00:25:18]. The repeated “did you hurt that girl?” question, which went on for 20 minutes, aimed to induce mental exhaustion but had no effect [00:31:16]. Frustrated, detectives resorted to belittling and humiliating him [00:32:17].
The entire interrogation lasted over two hours, yielding nothing from McDaniel, whose performance was deemed “remarkable” [00:36:15]. His behavior was so abnormal that investigators were at a loss for a specific plan of attack [00:37:17]. He snapped out of his “zombie-like character” only when his mother came to speak with him, though he maintained his innocence [00:36:54].
Irrefutable Physical Evidence
Despite the lack of confession from the interrogation, the evidence against Stephen McDaniel was irrefutable [00:37:24]:
- Hundreds of pictures of Lauren were found on his flash drive [00:37:27].
- Multiple video recordings of the inside of her apartment were discovered [00:37:32].
- A hacksaw, marked red with Lauren’s blood, was found in a supply closet of the apartment complex [00:37:34]. This was later confirmed through DNA testing [00:37:40].
- The packaging for the exact same hacksaw was found in Stephen’s apartment [00:37:42].
Confronted with this evidence, Stephen McDaniel took a plea deal to avoid the death penalty [00:37:47]. He received a life sentence without the possibility of parole and is currently held at Hancock State Prison in Sparta, Georgia [00:37:51].