Elisa Lam - What Happened?

[Sillybilly]

Pressing the "Hold" door open is not something that is recommended by any safety experts. What is your explanation for that? Why would she also press the button on the floor she is already on?


I've never seen someone push the button for the floor they are on and also push the Hold door open button over and over again to try to get an elevator to move.

I just asked the expert ... and that's fine if you choose to discount it based on that. Personally, I choose not to disregard it due to what could possibly be her poor eyesight.

 

[gitana1]

The police looked for them. If the police would have found them, we know by now and would it be only, to get the pressure of the LAPD's back. Now, I am not a certified shrink (nor a certified nut case), but as of yet, I have three kinds of profiles written: Open Cases, correct profiles and the Jessica Ridgway case (if it feels, as if I'm bothered by that failure, yeah, it still stings). So, give me the credit of a little experience too. So, I am well aware, that patients in a psychotic state of mind tend to disrobe and when we have time, we can for example discuss Richard Trenton Chase and the joys of hunting rabbits naked. But I can assure you, I have never seen a psychotic t-shirt wander off on it's own after the wearer disrobed and died. Not even if the wearer didn't die. T-shirts, not even psychotic t-shirts, wander off on their own in my experience. Nor do pants, shoes, bras and undies. Even the most psychotic clothes usually just lay there and wait that someone carries them off. So, no offense, but I see that still as a serious problem with your theory.

I'm not sure how long you have been on websleuths, but LE very rarely divulges anything much at all to the general public about a case until they are ready to make a legal conclusion. That includes evidence you believe makes LE look better.

LE can often form an opinion quickly but they must investigate all angles. The silence form them is evidence that that is precisely what is happening here. And little to no evidence will be released until they are through or completely, irrevocably at a stand still.

Psychotic knickers and misadventures aside, I would like to know why our mental health experts here feel that they do not have to take evidence into consideration. Truth is that the likelihood of EL having a psychotic episode are also very slim based on evidence. Please enlighten us as to how these things would be a part of psychosis:

Upon learning from Interpol and the RCSM, the LAPD made a Missing Persons announcement to the world. I looked up what areas Interpol takes an interest in and bi-polar psychotic episodes did not make the cut.

EL was last seen later in the night of Jan 31st by an employee in the lobby who said all looked normal. Late night to me means 10-midnight. The video is time stamped Feb 1 12:20 am. How is it EL looks normal and then 1-2 hours experiences an acute psychotic breakdown which is rather conveniently captured on camera?

Has the criteria for DSM IV criteria for diagnosing a Brief Psychotic Disorder been revised to include the Interpol, teleportation and a sudden onset (1-2 hours)of mood incongruent behavior?

No evidence that has been released contradicts the theory of psychosis and death from misadventure. Interpol often gets involved in high profile missing person cases or tourist deaths. Al that means is that LE is not narrowly conforming their investigation to one theory.

I don;t know, do those of you surprised at a psychosis theory have a lot of history with homeless populations or psychosis? Maybe a person just has to be super observant and curious. I don't know.

I have seen it a lot, though and it;s easy to recognize for me, at least. And like Rougelatete said, a person can function and seem normal right in the middle of a psychotic episode, at times. That's why diagnosing it can sometimes take some time - because a person rbought in may be acting relatively normal for a moment or two and the tell tale behavior may not be readily apparent to the medical professional who is assessing the patient.

 

[gitana1]

Her behavior looks extra distorted because the speed of the video has been altered plus we are missing 54 seconds of footage. This further undermines any expert input. I agree with you OCSlacker, it is scary. If you sink, you are a witch is what it brings to mind.

This woman's behavior, imo, should not be analyzed in any mental health capacity whatsoever based on this video. It is really not enough to go as far as you did based on what you think is hallucination: DSM IV criteria for a Brief Psychotic Episode:

Brief psychotic disorder is a short-term break from reality, or an acute episode of psychotic symptoms lasting more than a day but less than 1 month. The symptoms may or may not affect daily functioning, and may include fixed but false beliefs (delusions), hearing voices or seeing things that aren't there (hallucinations), disorganized speech, or seriously disorganized behavior.

Warning signs reported by the family may include changes in eating or sleeping habits, energy level, or weight; confusion, inability to make decisions; hallucinations, delusions, ideas that do not connect or make sense; repetitive actions; hours of immobility; and strange statements and behaviors. They may stop socializing or going to work, and may be inattentive to personal hygiene.
Source: http://www.mdguidelines.com/psychotic-disorder-brief

It seems like people would have commented on seeing EL behave oddly prior the video.

There were warning signs from Elisa according to anecdotal evidence on her blog and Reddit from people who claim to know her. Elisa talked repeatedly about inability to sleep and serious depression, for example. A woman in the book store in L.A. reported that Elisa was inappropriately effusive.

To equate viewing this video and recognizing signs of psychosis with trying to sink a witch is pretty incredible to me. It is, in fact, education, and science that brought us out of the dark ages and the witch burning days. Now, bizarrely, the very people with the scientific knowledge to make some sort of assessment of Elisa;s behavior are being equated with medieval zealots. That is quite odd to me. I think it may actually simply be just a case of anger that the experts disagree with a certain theory.

Finally, I saw the video in whioch the speed i9s fixed. Nothing seemed much different to me.

For those who think she was having a breakdown, what is your explanation for discounting the fact that she was a female travelling alone and advice from travel safety experts tell people that, if they think they are being followed, to push numerous buttons so the person doesn't know what floor they are getting off at?

As for doing it again, when a button doesn't seem to work the first time, what do we normally do? We push it again, no?

It was her methodical and dramatic manner of doing so. When she first came in that elevator and began methodically pushing buttons down the row, she did this twisty, little thing with her hand and wrist and after twirling it briefly in the air, dramatically pointed her finger down and systematically pushed several buttons. That just does not indicate a person who has safety concerns. And I don't think you need to be a mental health professional to know that.

Yes, that 54 second reference is based on the work of someone who may have a bit of an agenda. I do not at all think that Aleister Crowley peeps, thhe Illuminati, poltergeists, or a Tuberculosis Mary had anything to do with altering this video in any capacity. I referred to it mainly because it was proof the speed of was altered and to highlight how I think any person should acknowledge a potential confounding variable before he or she over emphasizes the video again as evidence. I added in the 54 seconds to suggest that likely the police had much more footage of her in the hotel that they did not show- they have their reasons, and I am sure they are sound ones. I didn't want to explain all that because I already blather, and the credibility of the source was of no relevance. If I had a PsyD or MD, I would be interested in seeing if the speed might have biased my professional assessment in any way.

I'm not a medical professional but I saw the fixed speed and it seemed the same. You don;t have to accept the professional's opinion but at some point I think it seems prudent to wonder why every single one has the same response.

The speed has ntohing to do with it, IMO, because the same people who insist it's a witch hunt to believe Elisa was having a psychotic break felt that way when the tape was first released, in it;'s speeded up version. More would have felt something was off with her and then changed their minds once the other tape was released. That didn;t happen.

I'm not sure if I understand, but I am not sure why verified experts should be ghettoized into specific threads, and thus penalized for their expertise. I am also hard pressed to see them as the source of the 'bickering', nor do I see them as a hindrance to the 'insightful exchange of ideas.'

Me either. I frankly am just seeing anger that they have the opinion they do and it;s thus being dismissed as a witch hunt, unprofessional and shrill. I'm sorry about that. :twocents:

 

[Qrious]

We don't know about her clothes do we. There was no official statement regarding her clothes and if she was or wasn't wearing them

That's right. We don't know anything about her clothes. In fact it's not even confirmed whether she was found completely naked or even partially naked at all. As far as I can remember, the statement of her being found naked came from a Chinese video news report's commentary. After that, many reports say she was found naked. But there has been nothing direct or even indirect quote from LAPD's mouth.

 

[Newton]

First time posting-go easy on me.

Just some thoughts, observations and questions.

QUESTIONS
1. Does anyone have a source link to LE stating that she was found unclothed? I can't seem to find any official declaration of that fact.

2. When she found out that the boy she liked did not like her back (Jan 19th) was she still in Canada or was she in San Diego?

3. In one of her tumblr posts she says, " Even living in residence I didn’t handle it well."
What does "in residence" mean? College dorms? Residential mental health community? Shared housing?

THOUGHTS
If she was suffering from a psychotic break, it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that she would disrobe. If she did so on the roof, it also follows that she could have thrown her clothing off the edge. According to the following site, wind gusts for dtla on 1/31/13 were up to 10mph & on 2/1/13 were up to 16mph.
http://weather.mercurynews.com/auto/mercurynews/history/airport/KCQT/2013/2/1/DailyHistory.html
In that neighborhood, relatively clean, unattended articles of clothing would quickly find a new owner.
Also there is the possibility that people had gone up to the roof after her disappearance & before the initial search and inadvertently destroyed or taken evidence.

OBSERVATIONS
Nothing about the video footage makes me feel that she was seriously trying to hide or escape from anyone real. Someone else mentioned that one would simply hit the door close button and I agree. With no one else in the elevator, I would have hit the lobby button, followed by the door close button.
It looks to me like she could either be playing around with someone she is friendly with (more animated because she likely doesn't have Adderal in her system at that time of night) or she could be having a break with reality.
After reading her tumblr posts, I feel either is possible. I've had friends that are bipolar. When medicated properly and in a low stress environment they function perfectly well and don't appear different from anyone else. Take away the meds and/or add stress and things can easily go awry. At her age, it is quite possible that her symptoms have not been fully realized before leaving for California.
I get anxiety just thinking about her situation:
1. Travelling Alone
2. Unfamiliar City
3. Unrelenting creepers
4. Losing cell phone
5. Sketchy neighborhood
6. The pressure of having to put up a strong front to her parents about being okay.

I also found it interesting that the Coroner's office referenced getting back the tox results to see what medication she may have been taking and if it was at therapeutic levels.
I think that there is indication that LE may have not ruled out her mental state as quickly as some people on this board. From the following link, it appears that an adult missing person case gets assigned to homicide and acted upon quickly when certain criteria are present-including "Missing under suspicious circumstances" or "Missing with any condition requiring continuing medication or care" or "Suicidal".
http://www.lasdhq.org/divisions/leadership-training-div/bureaus/mpp/4-16.pdf

Whatever happened, I hope she didn't suffer and I hope her loved ones will get the answers they need.
From her posts she seemed like a smart, funny and cool young person that was in the process of trying to figure out life and how to work with (or around) some not-so-ideal brain chemistry.

 

[Montjoy]

And like Rougelatete said, a person can function and seem normal right in the middle of a psychotic episode, at times. That's why diagnosing it can sometimes take some time - because a person bought in may be acting relatively normal for a moment or two and the tell tale behavior may not be readily apparent to the medical professional who is assessing the patient.

While I agree with the rest of what you wrote, I wanted to highlight this passage. Yes, things are not so black-and-white. A person in an acute psychotic episode would not be 100% psychotic 100% of the time at 100% of their activity levels; that is to say, they would not be so different from a sane/mentally healthy person so as to appear as inhuman as a bowl of Jell-O in human form. Such a person could still dress or undress, eat, pee, poop, withdraw money from an ATM, climb a ladder, dance, etc.; s/he could do all of these normal activities whilst believing Jesus or Klapto from the planet Mongotan is telling her/him to do so.

Even on only philosophical grounds, I would submit that anyone who thinks that a psychotic episode implies a total separation from 'reality' does not believe that such an episode is even possible, unless they think that psychotics are totally non-functioning.

 

[Peter Brendt]

I am still a little bit confused. There are those books (well technically CDs nowadays), like ICD, ECD, DSM. Thousands of experts have worked to compile them, to define symptom catalogs, diagnosis guides and so on. All of them agreed, to make a diagnosis for psychosis, they need to observe the patient tow to three days under clinical conditions, maybe even have to do additional research, interview the family for example. Because as Montjoy said, to some level the function still. even it's a very basic level.
<modsnip> But then, when I notice this discrepancy a little too loud, that is called rude, so ... err ... now what?

 

[kingsway]

To equate viewing this video and recognizing signs of psychosis with trying to sink a witch is pretty incredible to me. It is, in fact, education, and science that brought us out of the dark ages and the witch burning days. Now, bizarrely, the very people with the scientific knowledge to make some sort of assessment of Elisa;s behavior are being equated with medieval zealots. That is quite odd to me. I think it may actually simply be just a case of anger that the experts disagree with a certain theory.

They are not experts at diagnosing someone from just a video with no audio and no other surroundings.

To say that someone is "probably" sleepwalking/having a psychotic episode/on drugs, is the modern day equivalent to what you just said. Scientific knowledge is about forming hypotheses which can be tested.


<modnsip>

 

[BuzzieCat]

For those who think she was having a breakdown, what is your explanation for discounting the fact that she was a female travelling alone and advice from travel safety experts tell people that, if they think they are being followed, to push numerous buttons so the person doesn't know what floor they are getting off at?

As for doing it again, when a button doesn't seem to work the first time, what do we normally do? We push it again, no?

There have been excellent responses to this with which I agree. I did want to add my own little :twocents: - if she's determined to push a bunch of buttons to throw off a potential assailant who might be following her, why would she keep pushing the same buttons in the same sequence each time? When it doesn't work, why doesn't she try another sequence of buttons? The way she pressed the SAME buttons in the SAME sequence over and over again despite the fact that the elevator was not responding as she wished seems to me to indicate that she's having a problem thinking clearly. That could be caused by anything, really - I don't have any way of knowing.

If she wants to keep someone from following her, why doesn't she try some different buttons? Or just go to the lobby, as another poster mentioned?

The second time she pushes the sequence of buttons, she doesn't even give the elevator time to react, just immediately steps out of the elevator and walks away in pretty short order.

 

[paint]

there really isn't anything in the video that couldn't be explained by a little intoxication. this would be TYPICAL of a young person out on the town in los angeles and coming back to the hotel late.

the experts are brilliant in their field and have much experience, but sometimes i find that means they can't see the forest for the trees. common sense should be in order here.

jmo

 

[Conductor71]

I apologize for coming across as obnoxious, but I am reacting to the fact that several of us have pointed out that we think experts should consider and address any pertinent evidence that impacts their theory or conclusion. It is not an attack on their expertise. It is an expectation that anyone who is going to draw conclusions; claim 0.05 to 100% accuracy; and worse, dismiss any other viewpoint as implausible, needs to back what they are saying with other evidence BEYOND their professional observation. Not one person has acknowledged what we are asking, rather they further avoid answering any questions by either challenging us or disappearing while others go on the attack for them. This comes across as arrogant to me.

My intent in possibly setting up other threads for expert opinion is based on the observation that we seem to have differing communication standards or expectations for members, so we descend into bickering over things that are not even relevant. I did not intend to marginalize anyone. It is not a judgment statement on the substance of what anyone is contributing, it was merely to say hey took a look at what we are missing out on here. I value having experts here when we can interact in a dynamic way and learn from one another. All I see happening is someone coming in and concluding that they are the final word on the case. If that is the case, then we should just close the entire what happened to EL thread? Our experts have left 0 margin for error, and told us that all other theories our implausible.

Please note I have not maligned any one's theory as invalid. Nor did I say anything about a witch hunt; but the sink or swim test seems similar to the rigidity of thought and entitlement going on here; not the best example, admittedly. However, using only one self-defined criterion, ignoring other complexities at hand, to determine a fate or cause of death, imho, is really stepping over the line.

 

[Doruk]

I apologize for coming across as obnoxious, but I am reacting to the fact that several of us have pointed out that we think experts should consider and address any pertinent evidence that impacts their theory or conclusion. It is not an attack on their expertise. It is an expectation that anyone who is going to draw conclusions; claim 0.05 to 100% accuracy; and worse, dismiss any other viewpoint as implausible, needs to back what they are saying with other evidence BEYOND their professional observation. Not one person has acknowledged what we are asking, rather they further avoid answering any questions by either challenging us or disappearing while others go on the attack for them. This comes across as arrogant to me.

My intent in possibly setting up other threads for expert opinion is based on the observation that we seem to have differing communication standards or expectations for members, so we descend into bickering over things that are not even relevant. I did not intend to marginalize anyone. It is not a judgment statement on the substance of what anyone is contributing, it was merely to say hey took a look at what we are missing out on here. I value having experts here when we can interact in a dynamic way and learn from one another. All I see happening is someone coming in and concluding that they are the final word on the case. If that is the case, then we should just close the entire what happened to EL thread? Our experts have left 0 margin for error, and told us that all other theories our implausible.

Please note I have not maligned any one's theory as invalid. Nor did I say anything about a witch hunt; but the sink or swim test seems similar to the rigidity of thought and entitlement going on here; not the best example, admittedly. However, using only one self-defined criterion, ignoring other complexities at hand, to determine a fate or cause of death, imho, is really stepping over the line.

They have addressed the evidence and included it in their analysis. <modsnip>

 

[Doruk]

there really isn't anything in the video that couldn't be explained by a little intoxication. this would be TYPICAL of a young person out on the town in los angeles and coming back to the hotel late.

the experts are brilliant in their field and have much experience, but sometimes i find that means they can't see the forest for the trees. common sense should be in order here.

jmo

Where's the stats on how TYPICAL this is of a young person out on the town in LA?

<modsnip>

jmo

 

[paint]

Where's the stats on how TYPICAL this is of a young person out on the town in LA?

<modsnip>

jmo

well you're right, i don't have stats, but isn't it just a right of passage of young adulthood when one becomes of age and is on their own away from their parentage? does this even need stats??

i don't mean to be rude - i just don't know if dry statistics are needed here.

 

[noodled1]

I'm not sure if I understand, but I am not sure why verified experts should be ghettoized into specific threads, and thus penalized for their expertise. I am also hard pressed to see them as the source of the 'bickering', nor do I see them as a hindrance to the 'insightful exchange of ideas.'

Thanks well said.

To me it seems there are two ways to view this. Some it seems have come to a conclusion on a cause of death first and work to find things that support their theory.

Myself I've worked the opposite way, my theory is I don't know how she died so I'm trying to seek answers to cause of death before trying to sort out how it came to be so. The second way is certainly a lot longer road to travel and not very exciting but it feels more natural to me.

In doing so I've found I need to give all evidence and lack of evidence equal weight

 

[Doruk]

well you're right, i don't have stats, but isn't it just a right of passage of young adulthood when one becomes of age and is on their own away from their parentage? does this even need stats??

i don't mean to be rude - i just don't know if dry statistics are needed here.

In fact it isn't a rite of passage. Your statement is an assumption with very little basis in fact. That's why it's necessary to get actual stats. Otherwise it's just your personal opinion, and not a fact.

 

[fred&edna]

That's right. We don't know anything about her clothes. In fact it's not even confirmed whether she was found completely naked or even partially naked at all. As far as I can remember, the statement of her being found naked came from a Chinese video news report's commentary. After that, many reports say she was found naked. But there has been nothing direct or even indirect quote from LAPD's mouth.

This is where I read about the body being found nude, and it's not a Chinese video. However, this is not a direct quote from LE.

"KNX 1070&#8242;s Claudia Peschiutta reports guests were disturbed to learn Lam’s nude body was found inside of one of four large water tanks."


http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...-downtown-la-hotel/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[Conductor71]

They have addressed the evidence and included it in their analysis. <modsnip>

I am sorry. Where does anyone address how EL got from the hotel to the water tank when a police dog found no trace of her? Did I miss that?

 

[paint]

In fact it isn't a rite of passage. Your statement is an assumption with very little basis in fact. That's why it's necessary to get actual stats. Otherwise it's just your personal opinion, and not a fact.

yes it is a rite of passage, that's why age restrictions are placed on drinking. it's a BIG deal when you finally become of age, and one of the first things you celebrate, what, did you grow up amish? stats aren't necessary, but laws are.

 

[Montjoy]

yes it is a rite of passage, that's why age restrictions are placed on drinking. it's a BIG deal when you finally become of age, and one of the first things you celebrate

RSBM

Elisa lived in Canada, so she would have been of legal drinking age for 2-3 years (I don't recall what the age is in BC, but it is either 18 or 19), so there would have been no 'coming of age' issue here.