IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #13

[curiousgirl2010]

I'm a Journalist, and the type of reporting I'm seeing on this case goes against everything I learned throughout my college career. And my lack of faith on the profession is the reason I do not work with it anymore.

But anyways, Tony Gatto writes a blog, he is free to talk about whatever he wants. However, IMO, it would be courteous of him not to expose possible innocent students... This is only my personal ethical/moral position as a human being.

I apologize if it feels like I'm attacking TG when I do think he is doing a good job covering the case. My only constructive criticism would be to expose these people a little less. Just my opinion.

 

[Jupiter812]

While I too have some issues with the recent articles on Mr. Gatto's blog, photos that are posted on the internet are not exactly "private".

I found a very similar photo (same party, different angle, different photographer perhaps?) and I wasn't even looking that hard. Just surfing around on Twitter one evening.

But just because someone puts a photo on the Internet, thereby making it public, does not give the right for someone else to use it. And I do mean a legal right when I say this. The author of the photo owns the copyright to it and does not even have to have the photo registered with U.S. Copyright. I know this because I won a case of just this. Interested to know about TG's use of that photo/video shot and other media for that matter. Like the one of JR. I'm not media so I don't know. I guess the rules are are different for them because it's done all the time.

 

[Gabby66]

This it what happens when we old people try to use the internets. :floorlaugh:

Facebook Fail.

Define "old" :great:

And above is what happens when young people tease old people..... "40 Somethings" have to point out that there's only ONE Internet. Singular and capital. :floorlaugh:

(I hope you know I'm just playing with ya.)

 

[epiphany]

Thanks for the video link!

HT emphasizes -- and with a smile I might add -- when she says, "But we weren't [there that night]. Why do I not trust her?

That's how HT probably knows about the pre-party activities at JR's. She may have been there.

 

[jennyb629]

This it what happens when we old people try to use the internets. :floorlaugh:

Facebook Fail.

haha...but really, the use of this picture is just sloppy reporting-the news agencies should do better. I fear we have been given misinformation throughout this case.

 

[wisco23]

TG: It seems a lot of WSers have been dancing around it (unless I missed it) but I'll just go ahead and ask, because I guess I need clarity. Where did you get:

"JR...has been named an un-cooperative person of interest"?

That language is certainly not in the NY POST article you linked. I know you have a right to put whatever you want up on your blog and that's fine, but I just don't understand where you found that? Are you referring to the unnamed person involved with the search? If so, that is extremely vague and I think anybody could read the above quote and assume you are referring to LE/BPD.

thx

 

[Jupiter812]

I'm a Journalist, and the type of reporting I'm seeing on this case goes against everything I learned throughout my college career. And my lack of faith on the profession is the reason I do not work with it anymore.

But anyways, Tony Gatto writes a blog, he is free to talk about whatever he wants. However, IMO, it would be courteous of him not to expose possible innocent students... This is only my personal ethical/moral position as a human being.

I apologize if it feels like I'm attacking TG when I do think he is doing a good job covering the case. My only constructive criticism would be to expose these people a little less. Just my opinion.

H-T has over-exposed herself from the get go. She jumped on that media bandwagon. She can't have it both ways. There is nothing unethical or immoral about putting the heat on someone who has not been cleared. "Possibly innocent" is not a good enough reason. This is the real world, not the Smallwood Bubble.

 

[jennyb629]

AR is one of two friends who is believed to have filled out the missing person's report after JW discovers LS is missing and calls LS's parents. They know LS's parents are on the way.

So, LS has been reported missing to the police, a missing person's report has been filed by AR and Sara, LS's parents have been notified and are on their way to Bloomington.

Yet, AR tweets to call Tamir.

Not the police. Not LS's parents. Not a hospital.

http://tonygatto.wordpress.com/2011...er-friends-in-panicked-effort-to-find-lauren/

Although I am tired of being suspicious of these people when I have very little reason to be, I agree it seems strange that AR would ask people to direct their tips to HT. Like HT is the official who should be fielding any potential leads/filtering information. Maybe at that point they thought LS would still just turn up/that one of their friends would feel more comfortable contacting HT to tell her something relatively innocuous like LS was sleeping off a crazy night at a guy who's not her boyfriend's house. That kind of thing would probably be something rather tweeted to the friend than the police/parents. Still...it could be an indication of yet another weird thing going on...

 

[Jupiter812]

Think HT doesn't have it in her? When I first saw her Twitter pic I noted, with a chill, the name of her image file: RAGE

 

[TonyGatto]

But just because someone puts a photo on the Internet, thereby making it public, does not give the right for someone else to use it. And I do mean a legal right when I say this. The author of the photo owns the copyright to it and does not even have to have the photo registered with U.S. Copyright. I know this because I won a case of just this. Interested to know about TG's use of that photo/video shot and other media for that matter. Like the one of JR. I'm not media so I don't know. I guess the rules are are different for them because it's done all the time.

The photo is public. Let's make it clear. It is among thousands of photos that a number of people in this case have uploaded to the Internet (a whole nother angle)-- with no protection whatsoever. There is no expectation of it being private (CURIOUSGIRL accused me of posting a "private" photo -- nothing of the sort).

If the person who took the photo wants to go after me for copyright infringement, I suppose they could. But so far I have received no letters to cease and desist, and noone has come forward to say they are the copyright holder. If I were to be sued I would argue "fair use". The WRONG photo that Fox TV stations (and maybe others) used is actually a better of example of problems with using photos. I represented the photos as what they actually are. These other guys are identifying an innocent person, and misidentifying him as a person of interest in a missing person case.

But, bottom line, it's not about me or photos, who really cares, and I'd rather talk about the case itself.

 

[TonyGatto]

TG: It seems a lot of WSers have been dancing around it (unless I missed it) but I'll just go ahead and ask, because I guess I need clarity. Where did you get:

"JR...has been named an un-cooperative person of interest"?

That language is certainly not in the NY POST article you linked. I know you have a right to put whatever you want up on your blog and that's fine, but I just don't understand where you found that? Are you referring to the unnamed person involved with the search? If so, that is extremely vague and I think anybody could read the above quote and assume you are referring to LE/BPD.

thx

So you're saying the NY Post article was not saying that JR is being un-cooperative?

 

[curiousgirl2010]

TG - Can you answer the question about Jay Rosembaum not not cooperating??

Jupiter - Tamir is not even a POI, I mean, the black widow?

 

[ingra1327]

Can we not tell the difference between someone who is cooperative, gives one story from Day 1, and someone who puts out conflicting stories, and is all too happy to smile and pose for the cameras while supposedly looking for her friend?

We can't tell the difference, really?

You judge her much more harshly than I do.

 

[elmomom]

TG: It seems a lot of WSers have been dancing around it (unless I missed it) but I'll just go ahead and ask, because I guess I need clarity. Where did you get:

"JR...has been named an un-cooperative person of interest"?

That language is certainly not in the NY POST article you linked. I know you have a right to put whatever you want up on your blog and that's fine, but I just don't understand where you found that? Are you referring to the unnamed person involved with the search? If so, that is extremely vague and I think anybody could read the above quote and assume you are referring to LE/BPD.

thx

I am not TG, nor do I play him on TV. So FWIW this is my opinion.

I think it is a probably a paraphrasing of the following:

Jason "Jay" Rosenbaum -- the last person to admit having seen her alive -- has ignored her parents' pleas for information that could lead them to their daughter, family friends told The Post.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/mom_vs_mum_ugY7m4oec8dcMheGbA0PYI#ixzz1Qbi8y9V4

He is being uncooperative, he is a POI. No?

 

[Jupiter812]

The photo is public. Let's make it clear. It is among thousands of photos that a number of people in this case have uploaded to the Internet (a whole nother angle)-- with no protection whatsoever. There is no expectation of it being private (CURIOUSGIRL accused me of posting a "private" photo -- nothing of the sort).

If the person who took the photo wants to go after me for copyright infringement, I suppose they could. But so far I have received no letters to cease and desist, and noone has come forward to say they are the copyright holder. If I were to be sued I would argue "fair use". The WRONG photo that Fox TV stations (and maybe others) used is actually a better of example of problems with using photos. I represented the photos as what they actually are. These other guys are identifying an innocent person, and misidentifying him as a person of interest in a missing person case.

But, bottom line, it's not about me or photos, who really cares, and I'd rather talk about the case itself.

Understood. And if you crack this case, which I hope you do, then using the photo will have been worth it imo.

 

[Jupiter812]

TG - Can you answer the question about Jay Rosembaum not not cooperating??

Jupiter - Tamir is not even a POI, I mean, the black widow?

You have the list of POI then?

 

[stillblv]

TG: It seems a lot of WSers have been dancing around it (unless I missed it) but I'll just go ahead and ask, because I guess I need clarity. Where did you get:

"JR...has been named an un-cooperative person of interest"?

That language is certainly not in the NY POST article you linked. I know you have a right to put whatever you want up on your blog and that's fine, but I just don't understand where you found that? Are you referring to the unnamed person involved with the search? If so, that is extremely vague and I think anybody could read the above quote and assume you are referring to LE/BPD.

thx

It says that in the article that I read from the link.

 

[Darcyline]

I don't really think HT has anything to do with Lauren's disappearance, but I am just baffled at her treating this like her shot at 15 minutes of fame. Like, one of your "best friends" according to you may be dead. She may never return to her loving family and friends.
It doesn't really raise suspicion that she may be involved for me though because I know loads of girls just like her. People just do weird things when cameras are pointed at them.

I don't think TG's post about her exposed her any more than she has already exposed herself, though. The inconsistent, sensationalist, or inaccurate reporting I have seen from other media sources irks me far more.

 

[AbbeyR]

... Tony Gatto writes a blog, he is free to talk about whatever he wants. However, IMO, it would be courteous of him not to expose possible innocent students... This is only my personal ethical/moral position as a human being...

(respectfully snipped)

Do you feel the same way about information discussed on an internet forum like WS? Not being snarky, I'm just curious as to what the difference might be, if the issue is exposure. As far as I know, TG hasn't posted the names or personal information of anyone who hasn't been discussed in MSM, whereas recent posts here (quoting JW's brother, for ex.) have raised similar ethical questions...

 

[Frogzilla]

A few articles from today-

Jay Rosenbaum ‘fully cooperative,’ has passed polygraph test, lawyers say
http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=82030

Experts Weigh Polygraph In Spierer Case
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/28386290/detail.html

Last Person to See Missing Lauren Spierer Denies Lack of Cooperation
http://abcnewsradioonline.com/national-news/

Police end general searches for Spierer; future efforts will be based only on specific leads
http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/loca...-efforts-will-be-based-only-on-specific-leads

Search headquarters for missing student to close this week, police say
http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=82031

Police Scale Back Spierer Search
Thousands Have Helped Search Bloomington, Surrounding Area
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/28386919/detail.html