IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #22

[PlainJaneDoe]

From today's Indiana Daily Student LS father “Be more diligent about safety. Be with someone you can trust, not just an acquaintance,”http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=82426

And yet it is so hard to know the difference. :twocents:

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

In an earlier thread, there was brief discussion of the possibility that LS and perhaps even CR were experiencing a new substance that night. I profferred the dissociative anesthetic ketamine (v popular on the jam band scene) as a potential culprit that could explain CR's memory loss/crashing into bed (a "k-hole" perhaps) as well as LS's observed inability to walk or function without someone helping her along.

Well, ketamine produces anterograde amnesia. The memories are never formed, so they cannot return, hazily or otherwise.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Until LS is located people are going to explore all avenues and multiple scenarios. You may as well get used to it and use it to explore your own theory.

Reporting a sighting of two people involved with the case does not necessarily implicate them or draw attention away from JR.
You can focus on your theory while remembering that others will and have the right to do the same.

As to Charlene's comments "pushing" towards JR and that being "our best lead", I can tell you that the earliest searches focused on the boyfriend.
At the time that was the "best lead". I never bought it but I helped search anyway and worked on my own theory along the way.
Point being, as the case evolves, theories and opinions can change. Not everyone is going to follow those leads.
Some are steadfast in their position that JW is the perp and others have their theories.
So if something I'm exploring doesn't fit with what you believe, please don't take offense or waste your time trying to convince me one way or another.

To answer your question about HT and AB. Imo the connection here is relevant for several reasons.
I don't believe that the timeline reported by JR is correct.
I suspect that:
- ZO and AB were at SW per HT's request.
- ZO assaulted CR based on something that HT told him
- HT "helped" JR with the timeline to cover the fact that LS actually left 5 North at 3:30am
- AB was spotted "assisting" LS by an eye witness at 3:38am
- LS was removed from the area by AB or AB and ZO.
- JR is covering for HT and AB and trying to conceal his drug activity.
- JW was not involved.
- Crazy as it sounds...I think HT had very intimate feelings for LS and that is what started the ball rolling so-to-speak.

So pointing out AB and HT together is not implicating them, but, by the way, you're implicating them? Ok.

I don't have a "theory," but rather a filtering approach to evidence. I have not counted anything out, and am not trying to censor anyone, but I am paying attention to what I believe are the best sources in this case - LE, the family and friends, and local and other mainstream media - while other people seem to be paying more attention to anonymous forum commenters and a blogger from out of town.

My approach to the evidence begins with the undisputed fact that JR was the last to see her, which if true means he knows what happened to her as long as she was not later abducted (an idea that while not impossible does not seem to be the focus of the investigation or our discussion here) or otherwise disappeared out of camera range (a scenario I find difficult to imagine).

Re: the 3:30 theory - need I remind you that a) police have arguably rejected the mystery witness report, and b) AB does not in any event fit the description? Two separate police records have him at 5'11, 120 pounds. The report said the mystery witness was 5'9 and 160. It also said he has pointed, thin, rounded sideburns. AB's sideburns do not match that description, I don't believe - see the video. If there were some sort of ZO/AB/HT/JR conspiracy, please explain, if the facts are as you suggest, a) why HT would friend ZO in early June, and b) why she would never friend AB? And if LS was removed from the area, why did HT tell the media to search outside Btown? Why on earth JR would cover for the others (unless, as you suggest, she was brought back to his place, at which point he is responsible), amidst potential serious criminal responsibility? You don't set yourself up for a murder/manslaughter charge because you did a little coke, something LE can make go away very easily if you cooperate. Please explain why he has hired the top criminal defense attorney in Indiana, and has not spoken publicly about the case once (it's not even clear he has ever spoken directly to LE), while we have no evidence that any of ZO, AB or HT has secured representation - all of them (along with BB) have tweeted or spoken to media about the case free of any care, something you don't do if you have a lawyer.

And please also explain why LE has discussed in depth the facts of the night that we believe to involve JR, CR, MB, and DR, and has never said a single word about facts that theoretically might involve AB (the only person putting him in the SW confrontation is you; the only person putting ZO in SW are anonymous forum commenters whose agenda and identity are unknown). Please further explain why LE has searched 5 North and JW's home more than once, while we have no evidence of their ever having searched or even questioned ZO or AB. Why there is no camera evidence of LS after 2:51 AM despite the fact that cameras cover every entrance to both apts at 10th and college (I believe; someone correct me if I'm wrong), and many of the pathways around them (other than, perhaps, the sidewalk on the East side of 10th and College Apts)? Please explain why the family has pointed at JR, and never said a word about ZO or AB or, perhaps, HT.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

For what it's worth I saw the following at http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2011/06/lauren-spierer-disappearance-puzzles.html

7. Surveillance cameras, if motion activated, tend to detect larger objects. Depending on their settings, Lauren would not necessarily be considered a "larger object."

We don't know that any of the cameras at issue are either motion-activated or set in that fashion, but I think a surveillance camera designed to capture the comings and goings of people, would therefore capture people. Perhaps there are identification issues, but I believe the comings and goings of anyone who lives in either of the 10th and College buildings, and/or LS if she visited either, would have been recorded. I could certainly be wrong, but the fact that we don't know of any LE interest in such records would tend to indicate to me that they are not important to the investigation.

 

[Carmen101]

But he DID say it. Maybe it was mistake and a slip, but he did say it ...

I agree that he said it, and I think it was a slip and a mistake, but he has not revealed who provided the video for him.

 

[bx2]

My approach to the evidence begins with the undisputed fact that JR was the last to see her, which if true means he knows what happened to her as long as she was not later abducted (an idea that while not impossible does not seem to be the focus of the investigation or our discussion here) or otherwise disappeared out of camera range (a scenario I find difficult to imagine).

Can you clarify this? You first state JR being the last to see her is an undisputed fact, but then stipulate 'if true'. He's being labelled as the last to have seen her from his own timeline, and because there have been no further first hand reports or video evidence to dispute that.

Re: the 3:30 theory - need I remind you that a) police have arguably rejected the mystery witness report, and b) AB does not in any event fit the description? Two separate police records have him at 5'11, 120 pounds. The report said the mystery witness was 5'9 and 160. It also said he has pointed, thin, rounded sideburns. AB's sideburns do not match that description, I don't believe - see the video.

There's been tons of go-round on the 3:30 report, going to try something else to aid my point.

What would have to happen in order for LE to definitively say that the witness account is incorrect? a)witness recants b)video evidence of LS elsewhere at that time c)video evidence of the site where the witness reported the sighting

Anything else? Seriously, I'm asking how can it be ruled out. Not sure that we'd ever hear about A or B, but they sure missed an easy opportunity at the press conference to mention either when asked about this. For C, I can't say it enough, that there is no video camera showing the corner. The confusion and stammering at which LE answered the question on this at the briefing is simply baffling to me.

I have no earthly idea if that witness account is credible or not, but there is just no way that I see to reject it.

And please also explain why LE has discussed in depth the facts of the night that we believe to involve JR, CR, MB, and DR, and has never said a single word about facts that theoretically might involve AB (the only person putting him in the SW confrontation is you; the only person putting ZO in SW are anonymous forum commenters whose agenda and identity are unknown). Please further explain why LE has searched 5 North and JW's home more than once, while we have no evidence of their ever having searched or even questioned ZO or AB. Why there is no camera evidence of LS after 2:51 AM despite the fact that cameras cover every entrance to both apts at 10th and college (I believe; someone correct me if I'm wrong), and many of the pathways around them (other than, perhaps, the sidewalk on the East side of 10th and College Apts)?.

This is pretty great. To be honest, the apparent disinterest of LE toward the SW confrontation has made it plummet on my own list of things to keep any eye on. If you're on video committing an assault, I think its safe to say that LE has enough leverage to at least get you to talk to them.

 

[Gabby66]

There is absolutely no way it would be possible to get medical proof of CR's memory loss or lack thereof. Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if he actually did have a black out, although I don't necessarily believe it was due to a punch to the head.

I respectfully disagree. A lie detector test, given in the right way, could help determine whether he remembered or not. There are a few known facts in this case - they know what happened in the alley, what he was wearing, etc. There are also some rumors - perhaps what types of drugs he used. LE could ask some simple questions like "Do you remember such and such." If he answers "No" and it shows that he's he's lying repeatedly, I'd think that's a pretty clearn indication that he does in fact remember.

 

[Gabby66]

To answer your question about HT and AB. Imo the connection here is relevant for several reasons.
I don't believe that the timeline reported by JR is correct.
I suspect that:
- ZO and AB were at SW per HT's request.
- ZO assaulted CR based on something that HT told him
- HT "helped" JR with the timeline to cover the fact that LS actually left 5 North at 3:30am
- AB was spotted "assisting" LS by an eye witness at 3:38am
- LS was removed from the area by AB or AB and ZO.
- JR is covering for HT and AB and trying to conceal his drug activity.
- JW was not involved.
- Crazy as it sounds...I think HT had very intimate feelings for LS and that is what started the ball rolling so-to-speak.

(Snipped by me). I can buy this. I'm trying to follow and curious - if LS left 5 North at 3:30, how would this explain the phone call which supposedly came from JR's phone? Also, I'm a unclear why JR would cover for HT/AB. Would it be out of fear b/c perhaps AB is his supplier? I guess I can see a boy MAYBE doing that in the beginning, thinking that she's be found. However, by now, if he really had nothing to do with a death, why wouldn't he come forward and say, "OK, I lied and LS really left earlier." I'm not sure why he'd continue to implicate himself once it got to be so serious, by admitting to basically being the last one to see her....unless your suspicion is correct that LS was taken back to JR's - but why?

When you say HT had "very intimate feelings for LS" do you mean as in a Lesbian way? What makes you think this? Surely, that's not something that someone would just guess up. I imagine you've heard something around campus to give you cause to think that?? Additionally, when you say these feelings are what got the "ball rolling", what do you mean by that? If she had intimate feelings for LS, in what way did that lead to the fight? Thanks!

 

[plaidmom]

Please explain why the family has pointed at JR, and never said a word about ZO or AB or, perhaps, HT.

snipped for length...

The Spierers have never, that I can recall, named any names. What you may see as an accusation against one person others may see as an accusation at another, or perhaps at many.

Also, AB inserted himself into this mess on his own, with his stupid immature "tweet". Out there for the world to see. I'm pretty sure if he could take those 5 seconds back, he would. And he's not the only one...

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

snipped for length...

The Spierers have never, that I can recall, named any names. What you may see as an accusation against one person others may see as an accusation at another, or perhaps at many.

They did name a name - JR's - in the WIBC story I linked on page 25 of this thread.

Also, AB inserted himself into this mess on his own, with his stupid immature "tweet". Out there for the world to see. I'm pretty sure if he could take those 5 seconds back, he would. And he's not the only one...

That is not inserting yourself into the case; it's commenting on it. Displaying poor taste is not a crime.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

(Snipped by me). I can buy this. I'm trying to follow and curious - if LS left 5 North at 3:30, how would this explain the phone call which supposedly came from JR's phone?

I meant to ask this as well.

Also, I'm a unclear why JR would cover for HT/AB. Would it be out of fear b/c perhaps AB is his supplier?

AB is taller, but a lot skinnier, than JR. If JR is afraid of someone "above" AB, I have yet to see what basis we have for inserting AB into that chain.

 

[Darcyline]

If poor taste was a crime about half the people that surrounded Lauren in those last few days would be arrested by now. I am still surprised by how many tacky things people have said or done. I don't think it makes them guilty of her disappearance, but damn.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Can you clarify this? You first state JR being the last to see her is an undisputed fact, but then stipulate 'if true'. He's being labelled as the last to have seen her from his own timeline, and because there have been no further first hand reports or video evidence to dispute that.

It can theoretically be both undisputed and untrue, which I think has to be Tr.'s assertion here. I'm trying to figure out why on earth that would be the case, and basically fail to come up with a good reason that relates to Tr.'s theory.

What would have to happen in order for LE to definitively say that the witness account is incorrect? a)witness recants b)video evidence of LS elsewhere at that time c)video evidence of the site where the witness reported the sighting

Anything else? Seriously, I'm asking how can it be ruled out. Not sure that we'd ever hear about A or B, but they sure missed an easy opportunity at the press conference to mention either when asked about this. For C, I can't say it enough, that there is no video camera showing the corner. The confusion and stammering at which LE answered the question on this at the briefing is simply baffling to me.

I have no earthly idea if that witness account is credible or not, but there is just no way that I see to reject it.

I thought LE was pretty clear that a) the witness had not recanted, and b) there was no video evidence of LS anywhere after 2:51. I believe that leaves us with two possibilities: 1) the witness is probably not credible, but LE is not saying so in so many words (and given the absence of video coverage, they can't say for sure), or 2) the witness is credible, but can't be verified by video evidence and LE wishes not to discuss the report for investigative reasons. I think LE's statements suggest 1 more than 2, but could go either way.

 

[bx2]

They did name a name - JR's - in the WIBC story I linked on page 25 of this thread.

Not understanding the lack of a quote there. Why wouldn't CS be quoted as mentioning his name if she did so? That paragraph reeked of journalistic interpretation to me.

 

[Darcyline]

If CS didn't say that at all then I think that is one of the most obnoxious journalistic moves I have seen lately. Falsifying a quote from a grieving mother that unfairly points to someone else-very underhanded.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Not understanding the lack of a quote there. Why wouldn't CS be quoted as mentioning his name if she did so? That paragraph reeked of journalistic interpretation to me.

Lack of a quote seems easy to understand - reporter asks if there are any POI's she questions. She says she questions last person to see LS. Good reporter then specifies JR, if so she says yes. Certainly possible it's interpretation, but she's being reported as pointing at JR, which has also been the reading of many people here of their earlier statements.

 

[plaidmom]

They did name a name - JR's - in the WIBC story I linked on page 25 of this thread.



That is not inserting yourself into the case; it's commenting on it. Displaying poor taste is not a crime.

Thanks for the link:

Lauren's mother says she questions the story of Jay Rosenbaum, who says he saw Lauren walking away from his apartment building at 4:30 the morning Lauren disappeared. Lauren's father Robert also says he's upset with all of the people who were the last to see his daughter.

"The folks who were with her the night that she disappeared left town shortly after her disappearance and we've not had any meaningful contact with them since they left," he says.

BBM

Interesting to note the mom singles out JR (as do you), but dad still questions all who saw her that night. It's kind of like us here on WS, we agree to disagree, right?

(Like CS I personally question JR's story too, btw, but I don't think that makes him guilty of any thing other than lying).

Also, if AB had not posted that tweet, most (many? all?) of us out here in web-land would never have heard of him. He didn't implicate himself in a crime, but he sure as heck did throw himself into the mix! Intentional or not.

HT kind of did the same thing. If she hadn't put herself in front of the camera, she'd probably still be just brief a "footnote" as Lauren's roommate.
No one would know what she looks like and no one would be "googling" her.

Think about it: the incident described by Tr. would have been a total "non event". Tr. wouldn't even have any clue who this couple in the tent at the fair might be.

If there's one thing I am learning from this case it's the power of the internet and social media. Both the good and the bad.

 

[bx2]

Lack of a quote seems easy to understand - reporter asks if there are any POI's she questions. She says she questions last person to see LS. Good reporter then specifies JR, if so she says yes. Certainly possible it's interpretation, but she's being reported as pointing at JR, which has also been the reading of many people here of their earlier statements.

WIBC is just piggybacking the Fox coverage.

I'd interpret JR as being one of the people she is referring to, but it sounds like she continues to go with "the people that saw her last" or some other such reference rather than a name.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Interesting to note the mom singles out JR (as do you), but dad still questions all who saw her that night.

Actually, he says he's upset with them; he didn't say he questions the story of anyone other than JR. He may just be being more politic than CS. I've assumed throughout that they are slowly building towards a civil suit, and this is another step in that process.

 

[plaidmom]

Lack of a quote seems easy to understand - reporter asks if there are any POI's she questions. She says she questions last person to see LS. Good reporter then specifies JR, if so she says yes. Certainly possible it's interpretation, but she's being reported as pointing at JR, which has also been the reading of many people here of their earlier statements.

But we don't know, 100%, who that person is. None of us. Not the Spierers, not even LE apparently.

It's kind of like a twist the old joke "why do I always find my glasses in the last place I look for them?".