IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #14

[EllaMae]

I do drink 1 glass of wine too... I'm not talking about coming home and drinking a beer or two...

However, as long as we keep saying that getting intoxicated and over drinking is normal, bad things will continue to happen to teens. Be it what might have happened to Lauren, fatal drunk driving, or turning people into addicts (like my mom) in the future.

Seriously, heavy drinking should NOT be considered normal.

I agree with you. It isn't really a moral issue anyway. It's a health and safety issue. These young people make themselves very vulnerable to disaster when they are incapacitated by substance abuse. The problem is exacerbated by that feeling of invincibility that teens and young people in their early 20's have that causes them to take risks or ignore threats to their well-being.

It's not blaming the victim....it's simply stating the truth.

 

[Frogzilla]

Bloomington police dogs search homes of Lauren Spierer's friends-
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-laur...rs-friends-20110630,0,5617179.story?track=rss

Bloomington Police Captain Joseph Qualters released the following statement:
"We have previously acknowledged the use of canines as part of this investigation. The activity observed today is an indication that this investigation remains active and ongoing, but we will continue with our policy of not discussing the details of the investigation, including specific names, or anything related to evidence obtained."

A news conference will be held again Friday at 11 a.m.

 

[Janeumayer]

Some random musings:

Anyone here find it odd that after the altercation, LS didn't want to call it a night? I would find a small fight like that a bit sobering. She does her good deed and helps CR home (did I read that they were supporting each other?) But apparently she musters the energy to visit JR?......

RSBM Maybe she wanted to make Jessie jealous? I would love to know the reason they went to Smallwood, was it to get her shoes or stay there? If LS was planning to stay then I hope those kids feel really guilty for making her leave Smallwood.

 

[justmethinking]

The last thing I want to do is get involved in a morality issue or discussion here. I did say one thing, and whether or not you like it , it is the truth. Excessive risk taking is normal in this age group. I never said excessive (binge) drinking should be considered "normal". It is a symptom. Now, it is up to society as a whole to figure out ways to keep young adults safe and away from excessive drinking, since their risk of indulging in this behavior is higher than average.

Sorry...have to disagree a bit. We do have a way to keep them safe from binge drinking...alcohol is illegal for anyone under 21. You are considered a legal adult at 18 capable of making adult decisions. If you choose to drink before 21, you are breaking the law. After 18 you are a legal adult and it is your personal responsibility to follow the law, drink or not drink, look both ways before you cross the street, get out of bed and go to class, feed yourself, etc. If you are old enough to move out of your parents' house and go to college, you are accepting responsibility for yourself.

Now, LS was at particular risk if she drank or did anything else because of her heart condition. But she was old enough to make that decision for herself. Not making a moral judgement here, just saying no one else was responsible for protecting her from alcohol, drugs, or even walking home alone barefoot. Would it be the right thing to do to try to protect her? Of course, but ultimately adults are responsible for themselves.

I am choosing to skip the argument about the hypocrisy of being an adult at 18 and able to serve in war but can't drink until 21 or rent a car until 25, and so on. That is a whole different topic. The point is every 18 year old knows the legal drinking age is 21. And an adult with a heart condition is responsible for deciding whether or not to take risks that are further complicated by that condition. The law is clear on drugs and alcohol.

Just to be clear: No decision LS made about alcohol or drugs that night means she deserves to have been hurt by another person. IMHO

 

[elmomom]

Sorry...have to disagree a bit. We do have a way to keep them safe from binge drinking...alcohol is illegal for anyone under 21. You are considered a legal adult at 18 capable of making adult decisions.
snip

Disagree? You aren't disagreeing with me at all. The only thing I said was "it's up to society". If society deems passing laws is the way to go, then that's the way society handles it. I wasn't saying that they need do more, just that it is up to all of us to decide how we should handle it.
Incidentally -and I am NOT arguing in support of this, just presenting the idea - there is a big push amongst college presidents to drop the drinking back down to 18. Like it was when I was 18... in any case they seem to feel that binge drinking has become more of a problem now that it is only legal for the older students. I haven't looked at their evidence, so I don't have much of an opinion.

 

[dodie20]

Sorry...have to disagree a bit. We do have a way to keep them safe from binge drinking...alcohol is illegal for anyone under 21. You are considered a legal adult at 18 capable of making adult decisions. If you choose to drink before 21, you are breaking the law. After 18 you are a legal adult and it is your personal responsibility to follow the law, drink or not drink, look both ways before you cross the street, get out of bed and go to class, feed yourself, etc. If you are old enough to move out of your parents' house and go to college, you are accepting responsibility for yourself.

Now, LS was at particular risk if she drank or did anything else because of her heart condition. But she was old enough to make that decision for herself. Not making a moral judgement here, just saying no one else was responsible for protecting her from alcohol, drugs, or even walking home alone barefoot. Would it be the right thing to do to try to protect her? Of course, but ultimately adults are responsible for themselves.

I am choosing to skip the argument about the hypocrisy of being an adult at 18 and able to serve in war but can't drink until 21 or rent a car until 25, and so on. That is a whole different topic. The point is every 18 year old knows the legal drinking age is 21. And an adult with a heart condition is responsible for deciding whether or not to take risks that are further complicated by that condition. The law is clear on drugs and alcohol.

Just to be clear: No decision LS made about alcohol or drugs that night means she deserves to have been hurt by another person. IMHO

We haven't even been told how much she was drinking or if she even did any drugs. According to 2 different reports, she had stopped drinking several hours before and also was sober enough to walk home alone. So, going by her friends' testimony, it seems that something else cause LS's disappearance, All of this other stuff has been speculation. The real issues are where is LS or her body and how did she get there? If she's deceased, the reason can be determined after her body is found. All of this speculation about her lifestyle and whether she was following the law, is beside the point. It's more about what her friends were doing. None of them are missing, so all roads lead to them. moo

 

[sherbetjello]

Bloomington police dogs search homes of Lauren Spierer's friends-
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-laur...rs-friends-20110630,0,5617179.story?track=rss

I was getting worried that they were just sitting at their desks waiting for phone calls to roll in.

This news makes me happy!

God speed to the Spierer family!!

 

[Blythe]

So what does the fact that a body hasn't been found after extensive search tell us about the case?

 

[elmomom]

So what does the fact that a body hasn't been found after extensive search tell us about the case?

Most prosecutors do not want to try a case without a body. Unlike cases where there is reason to think a murder was committed, in this case we really have nothing to prove the cause of death - was it accidental - was it a murder - is she not even dead and being held captive -

in short, I say this: What case? there's not a case for anything here.

 

[mountainguy777]

I really think she left in a suitcase with one of the POI's.

 

[revampz]

re this drinking issue..it really is a case of nothing has changed. And until society and mainly the youth deem it uncool to party and drink, nothing will change.

I am sure many on here partied and drank way too much and put themselves in dangerous situations when they were young.

I certainly did and I thank my lucky stars, god, Buddha, Allah whatever you beleive in that nothing too bad happened to me, though I have alot of regrets, which I am sure again alot of you can understand.

I am 45 and live in Northern Australia where the legal age is 18, I started drinking at 16 like most of my friends. I now have teenage nieces and stepdaughter and yep, history is repeating itself............it's what is seen as "partying" that needs to change.

 

[Lilcheese]

Most prosecutors do not want to try a case without a body. Unlike cases where there is reason to think a murder was committed, in this case we really have nothing to prove the cause of death - was it accidental - was it a murder - is she not even dead and being held captive -

in short, I say this: What case? there's not a case for anything here.

This is true. There is no case. There is a missing person, but nothing that would point to the fact that she is no longer with us, other than the fact that she isn't, well, right here this second. The keys, shoes and phone have all been explained by the drinking/what have you. Sad as it is if this girl had been stone cold sober and lost all her belongings like that someone could make a case that something awful must have happened for a 20-something to have lost all her items in such a manner, but add in the drinking and the "culture" of the area well, there is nothing that makes it particularly out of the norm.

We are also adding with slightly nomadic young adults as well and the timing of the incident, in my opinion, has made it even easier for them to hide what truly happened. They have all taken off for home. They had cars, they drove from point a. to point b., many of them, to get home and anywhere along the way was a "good enough" spot to dispose of things they wouldn't want the police to know about.

On another forum a friend of JW's mentioned that JW drove him to class the morning LS had gone missing. So we can assume, by virtue of rumor only, that JW had a car and likely drove home to NY. We know that at least ONE other poi had a car on the scene and probably drove that to his home state as well.

 

[jjenny]

The last thing I want to do is get involved in a morality issue or discussion here. I did say one thing, and whether or not you like it , it is the truth. Excessive risk taking is normal in this age group. I never said excessive (binge) drinking should be considered "normal". It is a symptom. Now, it is up to society as a whole to figure out ways to keep young adults safe and away from excessive drinking, since their risk of indulging in this behavior is higher than average.

Once the person is an adult, it's up to that person to keep away from excessive drinking and such.

 

[eqh]

This is true. There is no case. There is a missing person, but nothing that would point to the fact that she is no longer with us, other than the fact that she isn't, well, right here this second. The keys, shoes and phone have all been explained by the drinking/what have you. Sad as it is if this girl had been stone cold sober and lost all her belongings like that someone could make a case that something awful must have happened for a 20-something to have lost all her items in such a manner, but add in the drinking and the "culture" of the area well, there is nothing that makes it particularly out of the norm.

We are also adding with slightly nomadic young adults as well and the timing of the incident, in my opinion, has made it even easier for them to hide what truly happened. They have all taken off for home. They had cars, they drove from point a. to point b., many of them, to get home and anywhere along the way was a "good enough" spot to dispose of things they wouldn't want the police to know about.

On another forum a friend of JW's mentioned that JW drove him to class the morning LS had gone missing. So we can assume, by virtue of rumor only, that JW had a car and likely drove home to NY. We know that at least ONE other poi had a car on the scene and probably drove that to his home state as well.

When did they all head for home?
I can't imagine Lauren was in someone's trunk for 8 or 12 hours or more.

 

[Btown]

So we can assume, by virtue of rumor only, that JW had a car and likely drove home to NY. We know that at least ONE other poi had a car on the scene and probably drove that to his home state as well.

Drive it back? Your funny.

The car carriers come and pick up their BMW's and haul it back to NY while they fly back.

 

[Blythe]

So LE has discovered no body because:

1. The disposal team did not want her found.
2. She found her way into a very unusual space.
3. She is alive.

I'm going with #1. They know as well as we do - "no body, no case".

 

[jjenny]

There have been instances of people charged with murder and convictions obtained without a body found. But usually prosecutors do not like to bring a case to trial without a body. Especially a case like this one if there is no physical evidence to suggest that she is even dead, unless the body is found, it's very unlikely anyone will be charged.

 

[cba1956]

While we deal with very little info from LE this week, let us all be careful not to fill our sleuthing time with judgements about alcohol and drugs. They were almost certainly key to this case, but until we get more details confirmed, IMO we need to focus on facts, and not character assessments re: that drug/alcohol use. Lauren is missing. Her friends are chosing not to speak. Her parents are aching. We are searching. THAT is the focus, again, IMHO....

 

[jjenny]

I still don't think this is a OD/hide body story. I don't believe that theory at all.

IMO, it is either a stranger perp or one of the POI's purposedly hurt Lauren.

No matter the degree of intoxication, youR friend is passing out, you dial 911. You drop her on a hospital. They are rich kids. They can get a lawyer for drug use. Definetly better than having to fight murder charges. This is all MOO.

Without a body there is not likely to be any kind of charges.

 

[elmomom]

There have been instances of people charged with murder and convictions obtained without a body found. But usually prosecutors do not like to bring a case to trial without a body. Especially a case like this one if there is no physical evidence to suggest that she is even dead, unless the body is found, it's very unlikely anyone will be charged.

Yes they have - there was a big case (Anne Marie Fahey) here that the Prosecutor got a lot of flack for bringing, but after he won it, he was a hero. But in that case FWIR there was a crime scene, and a motive that they could prove.