that's who KT is. i've seen an MSM source indicating that he is a neighbor, which full-name googling should turn up easily. given his proximity, one would imagine there might be a good chance he's a POI, but if he did not have any contact with LS or others that night, perhaps not. i believe he may (or may not) fit the description of the mystery man, but again i'm not sure i believe the mystery man report is credible, or that there's any good reason to suspect KT of anything.
i think it's certainly safe to assume that ZO is a POI.
Just to clarify this post, it is my understanding (confirmed via sources such as
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/06/0...disappearance-indiana-college-student-lauren/, which also notes "a lot of cooperation" from POIs) that anyone to have seen LS that night is a POI. Therefore, ZO is certainly a POI, as would be anyone present at the Smallwood altercation, assuming it is correct both that he punched CR and that LS was present there as well (which is not 100% clear, but I believe to be the case). KT on the other hand would not be a POI if he had not seen LS, and we have no indication that he did. Note that it is my belief that neither was involved.
It is interesting, of course, that JW is a POI having not seen LS that night (to our knowledge). That, of course, may merely reflect the natural suspicion one would have of the boyfriend in this circumstance. [I should note that my suspicion of him has grown at least slightly, but my impression of others' perspective on him has not changed]
In thinking about who is and is not a POI, I went back to the 6/9 and 10 news conferences (7 and 8 did not turn up much of interest) and transcribed the following relevant to that question as well as related questions re the altercation and the alley video:
6/9 news conference (video -
http://www.theindychannel.com/video/28183778/index.html)
circa 2:12: does not want to go into the altercation other than to say LS was not involved (this is repeated many times in response to many questions)
2:51-54
Q: How many POI?
A: I'm not going to say the exact number.
6:58-did not note (rough transcription; following up altercation questions)
Q: It's been reported by many sources that she was present, though she may not have been involved in it, gotten into an argument, maybe nobody put a hand on her, but she - it's been reported many places that she was there during this. You're saying she was not even there during the...?
A: I'm not saying that; I'm not saying anything further about it.
Re: the alley videos
8:21-9:17 (rough transcription)
Q: Has the person in that part of the video been spoken to in the investigation?
A: Yes.
Q: You previously mentioned 10 POI. Have all of them retained attorneys (indecipherable) one of them has an attorney?
A: Um... some of them have, and... Not all of them have, no.
Q: Are those 10 POI still all POI? Have you narrowed it down at all?
A: They are still all POI that, that we continue to talk to when they're willing.
[skipped Q re warrants not specific to POIs]
Q: (inaudible) You said "when they're willing." Are some of them uncooperative?
A: You know, everybody, at different times, either we can't reach somebody or, you know, they're not able to come in right when we need 'em, something like that (raised eyebrows to the side?), so, you know, we're still making appointments when we can.
Q: But they're cooperative?
A: Generally, yes.
6/10 news conference (Video -
http://www.theindychannel.com/video/28197690/index.html)
circa 8:14-19 (rough transcription):
Q: How about those 10 POI; are all of them known to LE?
A: (Pause, sigh) Not necessarily
circa 9:18-38
Q: Have all 10 of the POI now been interviewed? You said yesterday you were still, uh, arranging interviews?
A: There are still some that have not been interviewed.
Q: Is that because they're not cooperating, or they just can't be reached?
A: No, I can't characterize it like that. To some extent, it's just because we haven't received return phone calls from a couple people.
