FARMINGTON HILLS, Mich. – Danielle Stislicki, 28, disappeared eight years ago in Oakland County.
Stislicki walked out of her office in Southfield on Dec. 2, 2016, and was never seen again. Her body has never been found. Floyd Galloway, a security guard who worked in her office, was charged with her murder.
Recommended Videos
According to prosecutors, Galloway was known to seek out or flirt with Stislicki, and had previously sent her flowers. Galloway told police he had worked until 11 p.m. that night. Investigators later learned that Galloway did not work and had called off for a “doctor appointment.”
A witness said that Galloway was in the parking lot of the office with the hood up on his Buick Regal. A witness later told police they saw Galloway in the passenger seat of Stislicki’s Jeep Renegade and they were leaving the parking lot.
Stislicki had plans to go to dinner with her best friend that evening but did not show up and did not contact her friend. She was never seen again.
Where things stand in murder case
A judge denied the defense’s motion to dismiss the case for deliberate intrusion into Galloway’s attorney-client privilege, marking the latest update in the Danielle Stislicki case.
Oakland County Judge Phyllis McMillen said the motion, in which the defense argued that Galloway’s rights to due process and a fair trial were violated, was denied without prejudice.
This motion was filed over evidence that was illegally shared by James Hoppe, the polygraph operator who was hired by Galloway’s attorney.
The defendant argued that while the Michigan attorney general wasn’t responsible for illegally sharing the information, that she and her staff are responsible for furthering the spread of the information during litigation that forced then-chief of Troy police, Gary Mayer, to reveal Hoppe as being the source of the information.
The motion also pointed to the attorney general to pass the case onto “untainted individuals” to prosecute the case.
McMillen said that if someone who wasn’t exposed to illegally shared information were picked to prosecute the case, then “the taint might be contained,” but she says there is a lot of work that still needs to be done to decide if other illegally shared information needs to be suppressed.
“To properly analyze these issues, it seems clear that the attorney representing the People will have to know what confidential information was received to advocate on whether it had an impact on the discovery of other evidence,” said McMillen in the court filing. “If the Attorney General were to pass the case on to an untainted prosecutor at this time, we would be right back in the situation we find ourselves now, with the prosecutor being in possession of confidential information. It would be more appropriate to pass the prosecution to an untainted attorney after this phase of the litigation has concluded.”
Galloway is currently serving a 16-to-35-year sentence for the kidnapping and sexual assault of another woman, a jogger he encountered a few months before Stislicki disappeared.
---> View: Full interactive timeline of the Danielle Stislicki murder case
How tainted evidence was discovered
Galloway took a lie detector test seven days after Stislicki vanished. The lie detector test was ordered by an attorney that Galloway had hired. James Hoppe, a former FBI agent administered the test.
Something Galloway said during the test disturbed Hoppe so much that he called his personal friend and then chief of police of the Troy police, Gary Mayer, and relayed what he learned during the test.
According to Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, Hoppe told Mayer that “he had information on the security guard and the homicide, and he said that he wanted to relay it, it was very important, but he couldn’t relay it unless [Mayer] could keep his identity confidential.”
Mayer shared the information with Farmington Hills police Chief Chuck Nebus, who was investigating the case.
Nebus filled out a tip sheet, stating: “A caller said the security guard did it. He drove the victim’s car from his house in Berkley to her apt., then walked to Tim Horton’s at 10 and Halsted where he called Shamrock cab or something that sounds like Shamrock where he received a cab ride to within walking distance from his work where his car was parked. There should be evidence on or in the victim’s car. The subject threw the victim’s keys in a grassy area by the freeway while walking to Tim Hortons. The Fitbit should be near the keys. The victim’s cell phone was placed in the trash inside Tim Hortons. The victim’s body should be inside a beige and brown comforter. Upon further questioning, the caller had no further information and wished to remain anonymous.”
Following that tip, investigators found Stislicki’s Fitbit, keys, and obtained forensic data from her cell phone. They also obtained testimony of Galloway being spotted at a nearby Tim Horton’s, surveillance video and phone records from the coffee shop and evidence of a cab ride Galloway took that night from where near where Stislicki vanished.
---> Stislicki murder case: How tainted evidence was discovered and why it can’t be used in court
The evidence that has been excluded from the trial:
- Danielle Stislicki’s Fitbit, keys, and telephone, and forensic data retrieved from her phone.
- The testimony of persons working at Tim Hortons.
- Surveillance footage and phone records from Tim Hortons.
- Surveillance footage from a gas station near Tim Hortons.
- Information from the Green Cab company.
Prosecution pushes back against ruling
Oakland County and state appeals courts have ruled in favor of suppressing the evidence. In the state appeals case, the decision was not unanimous.
Nessel then filed paperwork with the Supreme Court asking for a writ of certiorari to be granted. Writs of certiorari is a request that the Supreme Court order a lower court to send up the record of the case for review.
The Supreme Court is not required to hear these cases, and usually only considers them if the case could have national significance, might harmonize conflicting decisions in the federal Circuit courts, or could have precedential value. The Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year.
