IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #17

[eqh]

I am apoplectic that the landfill hasn’t been searched. Holy Gawd. Although dumpsters were searched on Saturday/Sunday, she could have been off to the landfill on Friday morning.

It wouldn’t have been that difficult to search the landfills at the same time they were searching the lakes on the first weekend. At least take dogs out there and poke around.

The people she was with are neither hardened criminals nor Einsteins, they could have put her in a dumpster – and they’ve gotten away with it if they did. I am just floored. I hope the Spierers are angry about this.

We no longer have to wonder if BPD are competent in this case. They. are. not.

 

[eqh]

Even though it was reported the dumpsters were checked-the question remains as to when they were checked? If police didn't get to them in time, and landfill was not searched, then the possibility remains the body is in the landfill.

Dumpsters that would have been collected on Friday were surely not checked before they were emptied.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I realize that they were hoping to find her elsewhere, but really - waiting to search a landfill will only make it MORE labor-intensive if they do decide to do it!

 

[sueC]

thinking back I remember someone posting a link to the IU student newspaper and AB was a student and I think maybe even an editor at some point. Don't know how that slipped my mind!

jennie, I'm not sure about the IU paper, but AB was on the staff of his high school newspaper in Indianapolis (where ZO was also a student).

 

[Gabby66]

We no longer have to wonder if BPD are competent in this case. They. are. not.

Whether competent or not, they certainly appear to be driven more by finances than concern. However, the whole work-force and money thing was the reason I felt so certain that starting to search unlikely places like the Indianapolis long-term parking, didn't make sense. I just strongly believed that there were more logical places to search, before making that 'stretch' and this proves me right. I didn't want to bring up money, because I don't want to sound insensitive but truly, there are only so many people and so many dollars. Once you start going to extremes of searching places that while possible, just seem so unlikely, it opens up the entire globe. There's not enough manpower or money, sadly. BUT - to not be spending funds to search very likely places, is absurd! I really just don't get this.

 

[mibright]

There is a transfer station here south of town that all trash (city, county, private) is taken to prior to going to the landfill about an hour away. Perhaps that area was searched since it is the intermediate step? The article does not state that the transfer station was not searched -- just not the landfill.

 

[CocoChanel]

This article about an unrelated murder in DC talks about why the police decided against a landfill search in that particular case. It is unbelievably expensive, complicated and time-consuming to conduct one. Of course if you are a family member, none of that would matter. It just seems, unfortunately, that there are very valid reasons why a landfill search is not done. I hate that.

From the article about an unrelated homicide:
"Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said in an e-mail that the decision was not based solely on cost. Lanier said the main issue was the safety of the recovery officers weighed against the likelihood of finding the remains.

Crews could encounter hazards such as the escape of methane gas, exposure to disease and the collapse of tons of trash and dirt.

"The remains are likely buried at a minimum of 70 feet, and the search would take a minimum of six months," Lanier said. "With the high potential of injury and the low probability of recovery, we made the very difficult decision that this search was not feasible. This decision is disappointing for us as well."

http://http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/03/AR2011030304912.html

 

[Gabby66]

"Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said in an e-mail that the decision was not based solely on cost. Lanier said the main issue was the safety of the recovery officers weighed against the likelihood of finding the remains.

Crews could encounter hazards such as the escape of methane gas, exposure to disease and the collapse of tons of trash and dirt.

"The remains are likely buried at a minimum of 70 feet, and the search would take a minimum of six months," Lanier said. "With the high potential of injury and the low probability of recovery, we made the very difficult decision that this search was not feasible. This decision is disappointing for us as well."

http://http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/03/AR2011030304912.html

(snipped). I am surely no expert, but I'd think that they could use cranes to get the layers of garbage lifted out and gone through more easily. Surely, they don't need people down there, so why worry about the collapse. People work daily around things more toxic than methane gas, and there are masks and protective gear available, of course. Yes, there's a hazard but good grief, being a Police Officer certainly involves lots of risk. I just feel that these are excuses to not have to say, "It's too expensive."

 

[Jupiter812]

jennie, I'm not sure about the IU paper, but AB was on the staff of his high school newspaper in Indianapolis (where ZO was also a student).

I checked IU People Finder and no, AB is not a student.

 

[Jupiter812]

Dumpsters that would have been collected on Friday were surely not checked before they were emptied.

Agreed.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I checked IU People Finder and no, AB is not a student.

Someone upthread had mentioned that in many or most schools, an individual can opt out of being included in the directory. Is this accurate, in your experience? I go to a Big 10 university (Penn State) and I really have never heard of this. We also have the directory available via e-mail and I had always just assumed that everyone was automatically included. Even our summer students (they are undergrads at a different U) have psu.edu accounts and are findable in the directory (I just checked).

 

[jennyb629]

This article about an unrelated murder in DC talks about why the police decided against a landfill search in that particular case. It is unbelievably expensive, complicated and time-consuming to conduct one. Of course if you are a family member, none of that would matter. It just seems, unfortunately, that there are very valid reasons why a landfill search is not done. I hate that.

From the article about an unrelated homicide:
"Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said in an e-mail that the decision was not based solely on cost. Lanier said the main issue was the safety of the recovery officers weighed against the likelihood of finding the remains.

Crews could encounter hazards such as the escape of methane gas, exposure to disease and the collapse of tons of trash and dirt.

"The remains are likely buried at a minimum of 70 feet, and the search would take a minimum of six months," Lanier said. "With the high potential of injury and the low probability of recovery, we made the very difficult decision that this search was not feasible. This decision is disappointing for us as well."

http://http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/03/AR2011030304912.html

Yeah, I read about that DC case too. It's really sad and unfortunate that they often can't/don't do a landfill search. At least on day 1 of this case they could have done that-as someone else mentioned-when it wouldn't be quite as time-consuming or dangerous. I know no one automatically assumes that the missing person is dead in a landfill but if it's not checked on day 1 it seems like they've missed their chance to ever find it there. It is really distressing because think if you are someone who wants to dispose of a body, you will be encouraged by the fact that police do not check landfills and it would be so easy to go that route. Body and evidence in dumpster, dumpster emptied a few hours later, odds are no one will ever find that body and evidence and it would be very easy to get away with it. I'm surprised, in a way, that more murderers/people involved in death cover-ups don't put bodies in dumpsters...

 

[CocoChanel]

Yeah, I read about that DC case too. It's really sad and unfortunate that they often can't/don't do a landfill search. At least on day 1 of this case they could have done that-as someone else mentioned-when it wouldn't be quite as time-consuming or dangerous. I know no one automatically assumes that the missing person is dead in a landfill but if it's not checked on day 1 it seems like they've missed their chance to ever find it there. It is really distressing because think if you are someone who wants to dispose of a body, you will be encouraged by the fact that police do not check landfills and it would be so easy to go that route. Body and evidence in dumpster, dumpster emptied a few hours later, odds are no one will ever find that body and evidence and it would be very easy to get away with it. I'm surprised, in a way, that more murderers/people involved in death cover-ups don't put bodies in dumpsters...

That's exactly what I was thinking....a veritable "how-to" for those with criminal intent. And sadly, it may have well been a disposable technique used successfully in many missing person cases where the person has not been found. Ugh. What a terrible thought.

 

[Darcyline]

Gabby-I would be oblivious to cameras EXCEPT if I was doing something illegal. Like, if I was hiding a body suddenly security cameras would become much, much more important. I think most people know in the back of their heads they exist, but it usually isn't an issue or something you would think about unless...well, you have a dead body on your hands.
But, the truly unfortunate thing is even if I am wrong there it could have been just missed on camera. The area I am leaning toward being most likely that she died if it was an OD is not covered by cameras as well as Smallwood or the main strip. JR/CR/MB's place is not as covered and neither is JW's for that matter. Locals have said it is very possible that something could have happened there and not been caught on camera for that reason.
Extremely frustrating-I am starting to feel like we need to Big Brother it and put high res cameras everywhere

Oh and searching the landfill-most landfills I know are absolutely huge and very dangerous. I know that doesn't excuse it, but how DO people effectively search for a needle in a haystack-a dangerous haystack that normal people cannot just enter? Cranes, yes, but if she was wrapped up well would those even be effective?

 

[OldSteve]

That's exactly what I was thinking....a veritable "how-to" for those with criminal intent. A sadly, it may have well been a disposable technique used successfully in many missing person cases where the person has not been found. Ugh. What a terrible thought.

I agree, and luck plays into this... that is getting away with not being seen by anyone while disposing of something in a dumpster... wonder if surveillance cameras around dumpsters were checked?

 

[CocoChanel]

Gabby-I would be oblivious to cameras EXCEPT if I was doing something illegal. Like, if I was hiding a body suddenly security cameras would become much, much more important. I think most people know in the back of their heads they exist, but it usually isn't an issue or something you would think about unless...well, you have a dead body on your hands.
But, the truly unfortunate thing is even if I am wrong there it could have been just missed on camera. The area I am leaning toward being most likely that she died if it was an OD is not covered by cameras as well as Smallwood or the main strip. JR/CR/MB's place is not as covered and neither is JW's for that matter. Locals have said it is very possible that something could have happened there and not been caught on camera for that reason.
Extremely frustrating-I am starting to feel like we need to Big Brother it and put high res cameras everywhere

Oh and searching the landfill-most landfills I know are absolutely huge and very dangerous. I know that doesn't excuse it, but how DO people effectively search for a needle in a haystack-a dangerous haystack that normal people cannot just enter? Cranes, yes, but if she was wrapped up well would those even be effective?

BBM above.
If not for cameras, little Leiby Kletzky would not have been found. I am becoming a BIG advocate for more cameras. In the small neighborhood next to my subdivision, there are cameras at all 3 roads that enter/leave from it. I find myself envious of that. My own subdivision has more than 3 dozen access streets in and out, and suddenly, I feel more vulnerable.

 

[Jupiter812]

Someone upthread had mentioned that in many or most schools, an individual can opt out of being included in the directory. Is this accurate, in your experience? I go to a Big 10 university (Penn State) and I really have never heard of this. We also have the directory available via e-mail and I had always just assumed that everyone was automatically included. Even our summer students (they are undergrads at a different U) have psu.edu accounts and are findable in the directory (I just checked).

I found him from within e-mail system address book, as you suggested. There could be more than one student with this name, but since there was no one in People Finder it's probably him. Listed as undergrad.

 

[Alliecog]

thinking back I remember someone posting a link to the IU student newspaper and AB was a student and I think maybe even an editor at some point. Don't know how that slipped my mind!

He wasn't the editor of the IU newspaper, he was one of the editors of his high school paper, North Central HS in Indianapolis. Both he and ZO were in the paper, ZO was quoted on a page about underage drinking that he didn't care he was underage, because he had a fake ID. IN HIS STUDENT NEWSPAPER! If that doesn't show lack of regard for authority and rules, I don't know what does.

 

[Gabby66]

Someone upthread had mentioned that in many or most schools, an individual can opt out of being included in the directory. Is this accurate, in your experience? I go to a Big 10 university (Penn State) and I really have never heard of this. We also have the directory available via e-mail and I had always just assumed that everyone was automatically included. Even our summer students (they are undergrads at a different U) have psu.edu accounts and are findable in the directory (I just checked).

Funny. I was the one who mentioned about opting out. Coincidentally, I have a "child" at Penn State. I don't think we were given this option, but one of my other kids goes to another University in PA and that one was given the choice. Some schools do offer this. It's a letter that is sent which is easily missed and basically says "If you do not reply to this, your name will go in the directory". I'm not sure if we missed it for PSU or just didn't get one.

 

[Jupiter812]

Gabby-I would be oblivious to cameras EXCEPT if I was doing something illegal. Like, if I was hiding a body suddenly security cameras would become much, much more important. I think most people know in the back of their heads they exist, but it usually isn't an issue or something you would think about unless...well, you have a dead body on your hands.
But, the truly unfortunate thing is even if I am wrong there it could have been just missed on camera. The area I am leaning toward being most likely that she died if it was an OD is not covered by cameras as well as Smallwood or the main strip. JR/CR/MB's place is not as covered and neither is JW's for that matter. Locals have said it is very possible that something could have happened there and not been caught on camera for that reason.
Extremely frustrating-I am starting to feel like we need to Big Brother it and put high res cameras everywhere

Oh and searching the landfill-most landfills I know are absolutely huge and very dangerous. I know that doesn't excuse it, but how DO people effectively search for a needle in a haystack-a dangerous haystack that normal people cannot just enter? Cranes, yes, but if she was wrapped up well would those even be effective?

Good point about being wrapped up -- or otherwise concealed.