IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #25

[Jupiter812]

And at the end of the day, we don't even know if the encounter was with LS or simply even a figment of someone's imagination.

And has been noted, there is a serious problem with the story as relayed because of the street being a one way street making the turn-around part questionable. But as been noted, that could possibly be explained and could be a matter of the story changing as it changed hands.

This does not sound like the type of incident that is someone's figment of imagination. This sounds like a plausible scene that could very well be LS.

The fact that College is a one-way street is not a "serious problem". People maneuver one-way streets in this town in a myriad of ways, and the later it gets, the more creative they become.

 

[Jupiter812]

How did Lauren go from stumbling and incoherent--as early as 2:30 and possibly as late as 3:38--to capable enough to make a 4:15 telephone call and walk home barefoot at 4:30 without tottering? Two hours of not ingesting more alcohol or drugs does not seem long enough.

The only way she could have been capable to do these things later (that I've read) is to do more coke. Is this possible?

 

[SUNchips]

Haas anyone seen this yet?


Bender said the ring was small, and had a cross and blue stone.

I know we don't think it is her now anyways, with the description of her jewelry, but I just wanted to point out that LS is Jewish and would not be wearing a cross ring. Assuming it is not an X or something. Are there any missing small brunettes in IN that this could be?

 

[AbbeyR]

How did Lauren go from stumbling and incoherent--as early as 2:30 and possibly as late as 3:38--to capable enough to make a 4:15 telephone call and walk home barefoot at 4:30 without tottering? Two hours of not ingesting more alcohol or drugs does not seem long enough.

The only way she could have been capable to do these things later (that I've read) is to do more coke. Is this possible?

In my experience, coke will wake you up and make you feel a bit more sober if you've had a few drinks, but it's not going to cure you of being totally messed up. If you've hit the point where you can't even walk, a few lines of coke is not going to reverse the effects of the drugs/ alcohol you've taken earlier. Especially in that time frame. (My opinion)

 

[AbbeyR]

The witness account is presumably around 3:30. His story is around 4:30. I can't imagine they didn't poly him on the timing.

I don't understand how we can make assumptions about elements of JR's story being true based on a poly, when he only took a private poly. We have no idea what was asked or what the results were.

 

[imkeylime]

How did Lauren go from stumbling and incoherent--as early as 2:30 and possibly as late as 3:38--to capable enough to make a 4:15 telephone call and walk home barefoot at 4:30 without tottering? Two hours of not ingesting more alcohol or drugs does not seem long enough.

The only way she could have been capable to do these things later (that I've read) is to do more coke. Is this possible?

I'd lean toward coke, too, but what about Adderall, which AB referred to? I just read this at www.adderallandalcohol.com/:

"Combining adderall and alcohol together may have deadly consequences. Many people are using this mixture as a party drug cocktail that allows them to extend their partying by hours. Adderall and alcohol is often coined as a 'safe' replacement to cocaine and alcohol."

I bet Adderall is readily available since it's used to treat ADHD. Just a thought, though coke seems just as likely. These combinations are scary ...

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

I don't understand how we can make assumptions about elements of JR's story being true based on a poly, when he only took a private poly. We have no idea what was asked or what the results were.

"We have no idea what was asked" - as I said in the quoted passage, I can't imagine that the 4:30 time was not asked. If not, it would be a glaring omission when the poly was handed over to LE. We also have to assume that the results were good, because the poly would not have been handed over if they were not.

Now, this does not tell us everything JR said on the poly, nor does it mean he told the truth. But I think the latter is a decent bet.

 

[AbbeyR]

"We have no idea what was asked" - as I said in the quoted passage, I can't imagine that the 4:30 time was not asked. If not, it would be a glaring omission when the poly was handed over to LE. We also have to assume that the results were good, because the poly would not have been handed over if they were not.

Now, this does not tell us everything JR said on the poly, nor does it mean he told the truth. But I think the latter is a decent bet.

It seems just as logical to me to assume that there are glaring omissions. After all, he is still a POI. Plus, I'm assuming there's a reason that the Spierers are skeptical of his story and 'cooperation' with LE.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

It seems just as logical to me to assume that there are glaring omissions. After all, he is still a POI. Plus, I'm assuming there's a reason that the Spierers are skeptical of his story and 'cooperation' with LE.

Assuming he's telling the truth doesn't mean he has told the whole truth or might not have a good idea what happened. We have no idea who is or is not a POI. I would assume the family is skeptical for many of the same reasons we are, and I don't think we can assume they know all or most of what LE does.

 

[AbbeyR]

I agree, AE. I'm just saying, there is absolutely nothing to suggest to me that he is telling the truth, or has been poly'd about the time Lauren left his apartment.

 

[Darcyline]

I agree, AE. I'm just saying, there is absolutely nothing to suggest to me that he is telling the truth, or has been poly'd about the time Lauren left his apartment.

Agreed.
I still tend to think that the general timeline is correct until we get inside the apartments though. I am just not sure she walked away live and well at 430.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

I agree, AE. I'm just saying, there is absolutely nothing to suggest to me that he is telling the truth, or has been poly'd about the time Lauren left his apartment.

1. He has taken a (private) poly
2. The poly was provided to LE
3. He told LE that he saw LS turn the corner alone at 4:30AM

If 3 was not included in 1-2, it would be a glaring omission, and I think we would see a different public posture from LE and perhaps others

 

[AbbeyR]

If 3 was not included in 1-2, it would be a glaring omission, and I think we would see a different public posture from LE and perhaps others

Like what? LE has not given any indication about anyone or anything. The Spierers have publicly questioned JR's story.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Like what? LE has not given any indication about anyone or anything. The Spierers have publicly questioned JR's story.

And CR's. As has been said before, a good lawyer like JR's is going to get the full story from him. He also isn't going to have JR poly'd on something that isn't true.

 

[AbbeyR]

You didn't answer the question, but in any case... Defense lawyers can use a poly to determine the story, they don't necessarily only poly on things they know to be the truth, though they can then arrange a private poly with certain questions or release certain contents. There is just not a single format for a polygraph. And that was my whole point -- I can't say it any other way: We don't know what was questioned, and we don't know the answers since it was a *private* polygraph. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no reason to believe that the 'unofficial' story we heard must be the truth, simply because he took a polygraph. We can agree to disagree

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

You didn't answer the question, but in any case... Defense lawyers can use a poly to determine the story, they don't necessarily only poly on things they know to be the truth, though they can then arrange a private poly with certain questions or release certain contents. There is just not a single format for a polygraph. And that was my whole point -- I can't say it any other way: We don't know what was questioned, and we don't know the answers since it was a *private* polygraph. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no reason to believe that the 'unofficial' story we heard must be the truth, simply because he took a polygraph. We can agree to disagree

I never said it *must* be the truth. Yes, it was a private polygraph, but it was one *provided to LE*. Sure, there could have been other tests or other questions. My point is that I don't know how JR tells his story on a poly *without* specifying the 4:30 time (which, again, LE itself has said he told them). Did he not also specify the 4:15 time? Did he just tell the story without any times at all? Come on.

 

[phantomthought]

We have no idea what "results" were even supplied to LE.Whether someone is being deceptive or not on a question is all according to how the examiner interprets the results.If all that was supplied was the examiners conclusions and not the raw data including all the polygraph charts that were produced IMO it does not matter what questions were asked.That is why LE will only accept tests that they administer the results are just to easy to manipulate.I have yet to meet a defense lawyer that could not get some "expert" to say exactly what he wanted him to say.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

We have no idea what "results" were even supplied to LE.Whether someone is being deceptive or not on a question is all according to how the examiner interprets the results.If all that was supplied was the examiners conclusions and not the raw data including all the polygraph charts that were produced IMO it does not matter what questions were asked.That is why LE will only accept tests that they administer the results are just to easy to manipulate.I have yet to meet a defense lawyer that could not get some "expert" to say exactly what he wanted him to say.

This is the Voyles statement: "He has provided full statements to the police and passed a polygraph that has also been provided to the authorities."

 

[AbbeyR]

My point is that I don't know how JR tells his story on a poly *without* specifying the 4:30 time (which, again, LE itself has said he told them). Did he not also specify the 4:15 time? Did he just tell the story without any times at all? Come on.

A polygraph provided by a defense lawyer isn't going to be a confirmation of their entire story, it is the response to specific questions. If any of these answers are being provided to LE, sure, we can assume they are favorable to JR. But we can't assume the content. For all we know, the 'passed polygraph' could simply show that JR does not know LS's location. Or it could be an attempt to diminish his client's responsibility or prevent/ negotiate certain charges in the future. For example, if test results show that JR did not suppy LS with drugs, did not assault her, etc.

The whole advantage to a private poly is that the lawyer is in control of any and all information about the exam, right? It doesn't really matter what questions we / LE think are the important ones.

 

[imkeylime]

A polygraph provided by a defense lawyer isn't going to be a confirmation of their entire story, it is the response to specific questions. If any of these answers are being provided to LE, sure, we can assume they are favorable to JR. But we can't assume the content. For all we know, the 'passed polygraph' could simply show that JR does not know LS's location. Or it could be an attempt to diminish his client's responsibility or prevent/ negotiate certain charges in the future. For example, if test results show that JR did not suppy LS with drugs, did not assault her, etc.

The whole advantage to a private poly is that the lawyer is in control of any and all information about the exam, right? It doesn't really matter what questions we / LE think are the important ones.

The whole issue of private polygraphs confuses me, truthfully. Let's say that the answers aren't favorable to JR ... would the polygrapher be able to administer a second polygraph and not submit the first one? Is he/she allowed to keep such info private?

All I know is that I've followed a case where the polygrapher conducted a polygraph that he felt a suspect "failed" yet LE "passed" (which resulted in controversy). Perhaps it was the "best" polygraph available? I don't quite get it ...