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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, simple. Because I have hard time believing that the last POI who reported seeing her would dispose her body instead of taking her to the hospital had she OD'd. He was apparently her friend and, if he was afraid about drugs, he could have simply disposed any drugs prior to taking her to a hospital ER. So, that makes me think that there was a rape/murder done by someone of the POIs. Thats all.

One of the POIs who don't know her as a good friend might not be so inclined to take her to the hospital if it was drug-related.

So do you have any thoughts about why a POI would hurt her? Like, is it personal (directed to her specifically) or is he violent (and possible to do it again)?
 
It could also be a picture of her being tossed over someone's shoulder and carried..
When I was listening to that and another press conference it was before I knew about the supposed 3:38 sighting. But even then something in the way he describes the person LS was seen with disturbed me. I know that even if it was CR he would not have given his name, but for some reason I was wondering if it really was CR that she was seen with, just in the awkward way he described him. I'm sorry that I can't quote it.. it was more a feeling I got while listening. And again, it was before I ever heard about the 3:38 thing, so there really wasn't a reason for me to suspect that anyone else may have been with her other than CR.

I've also wondered about the person in the video. Again, if it's CD (the most likely person), why not just say so? I honestly don't see how holding that back is pertinent to the case. So I have wondered.....

Tong Gatto made mention once that he believed the altercation took place quickly and that CR left immediately. OK - so I'm picturing him stumbling fast or maybe even running down that alley. He also believes (and I think this is based one talking with people around campus) that LS left after him. So I'm picturing this petite little girl going after him. Could she REALLY catch up to him? What if the fight really was about CR's advances? What if CR is ahead of her, and one of the punchers comes out after LS? If one wants to take the theory that the fight was b/c they wanted to protect LS, then wouldn't they want to go after her? So, this makes CR ahead of them and it makes LS in the alley with someone else. They could be arguing, etc. (activities) and could even be running a bit. So they finally catch up to CR near the gravel pit an a fight ensues. I don't know, again - just speculating. There are so many possibilities to play out.
 
I don't know if this is all everyone is relying on for the cited "activity". Does anyone else have a link? I thought for sure that I heard this in one of the press conferences. Regardless, I for one believe that if there wasn't something relevant, why bother mentioning it? LE has avoided giving us many details at all, if any really, yet they make certain to point out that they could watch the activities that took place on that video. If she was just skipping along in a flowery dress without a care in the world, why bother being so secretive about everything else, but mention that they were able to see her activities here? It seems to me that they're trying to make it clear to someone out there that they have seem SOMETHING. If the activities involved her dropping her purse, then yeah, I can see them feeling that's relevant b/c it shows her state of being perhaps, if she were stumbling and drunk, but why not say that then, since they've already alluded to that by saying she left behind her shoes and cell. IMO they want us to know there's something there, but there's a reason that they aren't being more specific. I see no reason if it's just that she stumbled, or something trivial.


The term "activity" as used by LE seems to mean something specific IMO. When they use it as professional jargon I think it can mean something related to the case; not necessarily evidence, but information that helps them understand what's happening. Maybe??
 
So if that timing is correct Lauren spent like...little time with JR? That really changes things. Before, we had been discussing what Lauren did with JR in the length of time he was there with her. But, if the new corrected timeline says the majority of the time was spent with CR and MB that really changes how I feel about things. I am not sure how yet :p
So, she didn't even go to JR's until after 4, supposedly called DR at 415, and then left shortly after? Hmmm. That leaves less time for some of the "supposed" activities I was imagining with JR.
 
The term "activity" as used by LE seems to mean something specific IMO. When they use it as professional jargon I think it can mean something related to the case; not necessarily evidence, but information that helps them understand what's happening. Maybe??

A little bit more background to the context from which Qualters was responding to with the quote mentioned above. I don't want to give the impression that I'm arguing against any "activity" happening, merely trying to establish that I don't think we have enough info to say that it did or didn't.

From the Jun 12th conference, I believe it is fair that he was getting a bit flustered by the questions, even misspeaks about the direction that they last have her traveling in. The following exchange occurs after the attempted directional clarification:

Q: So she's walking south to north through that back alley, kind of parking lot area
A: Yes
Q: Does the video show you how that set of keys ends up on that railing
A: <Pause> We have information from that video, um, that again gives us an indication of not only the direction, but the activities that have taken place from where that video shows. So we're we're, ya know, we have that, but that's not something that we're willing to share at this point.


IMO, after listening, he is dodging the question related to the keys and going back to trying to give a general clarification about the video that they have of her.
 
So if that timing is correct Lauren spent like...little time with JR? That really changes things. Before, we had been discussing what Lauren did with JR in the length of time he was there with her. But, if the new corrected timeline says the majority of the time was spent with CR and MB that really changes how I feel about things. I am not sure how yet :p
So, she didn't even go to JR's until after 4, supposedly called DR at 415, and then left shortly after? Hmmm. That leaves less time for some of the "supposed" activities I was imagining with JR.

What were you imagining? We've heard JR had a friend in town with him as well, if that changes anything.
 
Cluciano-Well, my original understanding of the timeline was this
2:51 Camera sighting
3 Arrive at CR/MB apartment. CR collapses in bed.
3:15 Go to JR's after speaking to MB briefly

That leaves over an hour with JR and his guest that is unaccounted for and plenty of time for drugs, sex, death, etc.

However, if she did spend an hour with CR/MB my understanding changes. Now it goes-
3 arrive at CR/MB.
4 or later-arrive at JR's so...does CR not pass out? Does she speak to studying paper writing MB for an hour??
4:15 Call DR shortly after arriving
4:30 leave spending possibly less than a half hour with JR


The second timeline leaves much less time in my head for something to happen because she spends a much, much shorter time physically with JR and his guest and a much, much longer time with CR (who is supposedly unconscious) and MB. **scratches head**
 
I don't know if the amount of time spent at MB's was really confirmed, was it? I may have missed it, but I know he said she wanted to "party" and he didn't. But you are right, if she hung around at MB's, then she really barely stopped off at JR's. Maybe he told her he did not want to party either and then she asked to use his phone. Assuming she did make the call, of course, and assuming she did walk away as he has said.
 
A little bit more background to the context from which Qualters was responding to with the quote mentioned above. I don't want to give the impression that I'm arguing against any "activity" happening, merely trying to establish that I don't think we have enough info to say that it did or didn't.

From the Jun 12th conference, I believe it is fair that he was getting a bit flustered by the questions, even misspeaks about the direction that they last have her traveling in. The following exchange occurs after the attempted directional clarification:

Q: So she's walking south to north through that back alley, kind of parking lot area
A: Yes
Q: Does the video show you how that set of keys ends up on that railing
A: <Pause> We have information from that video, um, that again gives us an indication of not only the direction, but the activities that have taken place from where that video shows. So we're we're, ya know, we have that, but that's not something that we're willing to share at this point.


IMO, after listening, he is dodging the question related to the keys and going back to trying to give a general clarification about the video that they have of her.

This is not the same quote I'm thinking of. I think he uses just the word "activity." However, the above is a very informative quote because in essence he's saying 'we know how the keys got to be on the railing.'
 
This is not the same quote I'm thinking of. I think he uses just the word "activity." However, the above is a very informative quote because in essence he's saying 'we know how the keys got to be on the railing.'

I have to disagree again, I believe he is referring back to just having video of her. I'll also say its really hard to try and decipher meaning from quotes without follow ups that expressly ask precisely what you think them to mean.
 
You know the saying "Follow the money"? I'd like to "Follow the drug suppliers" in order to get at someone's possible MOTIVE to hurt LS.

* ZO is a supplier. Rumor has it his apartment was raided by DEA in the past year or two. Was he kicked out of SW for drugs?

* JR has a history of drug-related citations as a freshman in the dorm and then again when his frat was ousted off campus.

* DR is a supplier so I've read. Rumor has him as an informant.

Thoughts or clarifications? How do any of these fit into the sequence of events? Again, I'm trying to get at motive and don't want it to turn into a snowball of rumor.
 
First post here, but I've been reading since soon after LS went missing.

This is not the same quote I'm thinking of. I think he uses just the word "activity." However, the above is a very informative quote because in essence he's saying 'we know how the keys got to be on the railing.'

I'm thinking of a different quote, too, but can't find it. Qualters referred to activity and another individual. If I come across it, I'll post the link.

re the landfill issue, I can understand why the landfill wasn't searched early in the investigation because initially they were looking for an alive LS, I would imagine. I do wonder if cadaver dogs searched at the transfer station. Seems like that would be a good move, does it not?
 
Can i just say something???
AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
I am beyond frustrated w/ this case. :(
Her poor family....
Would SOMEONE please just tell the truth already?????
 
The term "activity" as used by LE seems to mean something specific IMO. When they use it as professional jargon I think it can mean something related to the case; not necessarily evidence, but information that helps them understand what's happening. Maybe??

If the video wasn't evidence, they would have released it, like they released other videos. Also, I'm not certain this is the only video showing the activity. She exits the alley and enters the gravel lot. The pictures of the gravel lot clearly show 2 cameras, one mounted to the left and one mounted almost dead center on the apt building. Whatever happened in the gravel lot must have been caught on camera, not just the 2:51 camera with the exit of the alley and entry to the gravel lot.
 
I think we are each interpreting this differently. IMO he is talking about THAT VIDEO (not videos - plural), so he's talking about one here. IMO he is saying that on the video, they get an indication of her direction of travel (towards 5 North) AND the activities that took place in the area where that particular video shows. If these "activities" weren't related to the crime (as in other people walking to/from) then why mention them at all? IMO LE is specifically wanting it known that they can see those activities.

Yes, her direction was toward the gravel lot behind 5 North. The same place where her wallet/keys were found. I don't think LE needs to disclose to the public all of the evidence they have gathered via cameras. This is for a jury to decide. I truly believe they have 2 more POIs on camera in addition to CR. I believe they were waiting for LS/CR to exit the alley and head toward 5 North via the gravel lot. I believe LE has them on tape and the activity that started/ended with Lauren going missing.
 
If the video wasn't evidence, they would have released it, like they released other videos. Also, I'm not certain this is the only video showing the activity. She exits the alley and enters the gravel lot. The pictures of the gravel lot clearly show 2 cameras, one mounted to the left and one mounted almost dead center on the apt building. Whatever happened in the gravel lot must have been caught on camera, not just the 2:51 camera with the exit of the alley and entry to the gravel lot.

I'm not aware of any videos that have been released, can you clarify?

Here's a pic of the gravel lot, not sure if it's the one you're referring to, but there are no cameras that cover it.
25kn0a1.jpg
 
Some posts about the possible mental or physical states of LS & co. have made me think about how the various drugs (alcohol, Xanax, & cocaine) that we&#8217;ve been talking about could account for their behavior & memory. Here&#8217;s some information that I thought could be useful or interesting: (Sorry if I repeat some from a previous post.)

Alcohol & Cocaine:


1. When cocaine and alcohol are taken together, the combination has &#8220;greater than additive&#8221; cardiotoxic effects, specifically increased heart rate. This is what many people refer to as &#8220;synergy&#8221; &#8211; the total effect is more serious than what would be predicted based on just what is known about each individual drug. (The paper I read just didn&#8217;t call it &#8220;synergy&#8221; because of methodological limitations.)

2. Cocaine does not significantly increase BAC. Alcohol increases the level of cocaine in the blood only when it is administered before or during cocaine absorption. Also, alcohol consumption before or during cocaine self-administration increases subjective experience of the cocaine &#8220;high,&#8221; and the preference for cocaine.

3. Taking alcohol and cocaine together seems to be associated with decreased impulse control, and with increased violent thoughts.

4. &#8220;Cocaine also has quinidinelike direct cardiotoxic effects, causing intraventricular conduction delay, as reflected by widening of the QRS and prolongation of the QT segment. In large doses, blockade of the fast sodium channels prolongs the slope of phase 0 of the cardiac action potential, which may result in a negative inotropic response, bradycardia, and, often as a precursor to death, hypotension from decreased contractility and dysrhythmia.&#8221; (http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/813959-overview#a0104)

5. In general, the risk of sudden death caused by cocaine + alcohol is 25x that of cocaine alone.

Alprazolam (Xanax) & Alcohol:


1. Alprazolam is a triazolobenzodiazepine; for practical purposes we can consider it a benzodiazepine, like diazepam or lorazepam. These drugs are CNS depressants, and can be classified as anxiolytics and sedative-hypnotics. Sedation, often used interchangeably with tranquilization (aka ataraxia or neurolepsis), is a state of CNS depression in which an individual is awake but calm. The person may be aroused with sufficient stimuli, but he or she is relaxed, reluctant to move, unconcerned with his/her surroundings, and potentially indifferent to minor pain.
2. Multiple studies have shown that, at clinical dosages (.5, .75, or 1 mg) alprazolam impairs recall and recognition of stories and words. This is a dose-dependent effect (higher dose = poorer memory). Xanax bars contain 2 mg of alprazolam.
3. Although alprazolam by itself relieves anxiety, the combination of alcohol and alprazolam increases anxiety.
4. In addition, co-administering alprazolam and alcohol is associated with increased aggression.

If anyone wants references, just let me know. I didn't include them because this post is probably too long already...
 
It could also be a picture of her being tossed over someone's shoulder and carried..
When I was listening to that and another press conference it was before I knew about the supposed 3:38 sighting. But even then something in the way he describes the person LS was seen with disturbed me. I know that even if it was CR he would not have given his name, but for some reason I was wondering if it really was CR that she was seen with, just in the awkward way he described him. I'm sorry that I can't quote it.. it was more a feeling I got while listening. And again, it was before I ever heard about the 3:38 thing, so there really wasn't a reason for me to suspect that anyone else may have been with her other than CR.

We know that AA was in the gravel lot at about 3AM when he found her wallet and keys - at least that is what he tell LE. If he were in the gravel lot at that time, he prob would have been witness to some things, right?
 
What were you imagining? We've heard JR had a friend in town with him as well, if that changes anything.

JR's visitor's full name is on a comment on the Tony Gatto site. It was also stated that he has a checkered past. I believe it's toward the end of the posts under one of the Smallwood articles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
50
Guests online
1,665
Total visitors
1,715

Forum statistics

Threads
605,482
Messages
18,187,577
Members
233,388
Latest member
Bwitzke
Back
Top