IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #30

[AbbeyR]

Some of the points copied from: http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wthr/PDF/spiererlawsuit.pdf

12. Rosenbaum interacted with Spierer at the party and observed that she appeared intoxicated at that time

13. Spierer consumed alcohol supplied by Rosenbaum at the Rosenbaum party

16. Beth observed that Spierer was extremely intoxicated and witnessed Rossman encourage Spierer to join him at Kilroy's Sports bar … in order to consume more alcoholic beverages

19. At least one witnessed observed that as Spierer entered Kilroy's she appeared intoxicated, had trouble standing and relied on Rossman's assistance to walk.

20. At approximately 1:30 am… Rossman purchased, provided, and helped Spierer consume multiple additional beverages over the course of approximately one hour

21. At approximately 2:30 am… Spierer was observed leaving Kilroy's in an intoxicated state without her shoes or cellphone and returned with Rossman's assistance to the fifth floor of Smallwood Plaza, where her apartment was located

22. Shortly thereafter, Spierer was observed by multiple individuals in a distressed, incoherent and non-responsive state near the elevator on the first floor of the Smallwood Plaza with Rossman only

23. Rossman was confronted by these individuals for not assisting Spierer into her apartment.

24. Rossman engaged in a physical confrontation with one of these individuals

25. Rossman did not assist Spierer into her apartment… but was observed shortly thereafter assisting Spierer away from Smallwood..

26. Spierer was so intoxicated, incoherent and unable to properly function that Rossman was observed carrying Spierer slung across his back less than a block from his residence

[They return to 5N]

29. Beth found that Spierer was slurring her speech and was far more intoxicated than she had appeared earlier in the evening

30. Because of Spierer's disoriented and incapacitated condition, Beth was concerned for Spierer's well being and safety and attempted to convince Spierer to sleep on his and Rossman's couch

31. When Spierer asked to return to her apartment, rather than helping her return to her apartment, Beth escorted Spierer to Rosenbaum's residence

32. With Beth still present, Rosenbaum, expressing concern about Spierer's well being and safety, attempted to contact mutual friends to pick up Spierer and take her back to her apartment.

34. Unsuccessful at contacting others, Rosenbaum acknowledge that shortly thereafter he allowed Spierer to leave his residence on her own…

38. Spierer's abandonment in an intoxicated and disoriented state in the early morning hours of June 3, 2011 in an area known for criminal acts contributed to her disappearance, and presumed injuries and death

42. Rossman, Rosenbaum and Beth owed Spierer a duty of care.

43. Rossman and Rosenbaum's actions to supply Spierer with alcohol knowing that she was already extremely intoxicated to the point of incapacitation breached that duty of care

44. Further, Rossman, Rosenbaum and Beth breadched that duty tby failing to exercise reasonable care to ensure Spierer's safe return to her apartment.

45. Rossman, Rosenbaum and Beth's actions and omissions caused Spierer's disappearance that resulted in her injury and death

Even though we knew just about all of this, it made me sad and angry to read. If anyone thought that people were 'exaggerating' Lauren's condition, do you still think so now?

 

[Ixchel13]

Some of the points copied from: http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wthr/PDF/spiererlawsuit.pdf



Even though we knew just about all of this, it made me sad and angry to read. If anyone thought that people were 'exaggerating' Lauren's condition, do you still think so now?

38. Spierer's abandonment in an intoxicated and disoriented state in the early morning hours of June 3, 2011 in an area known for criminal acts contributed to her disappearance, and presumed injuries and death

BBM. Abby, I know I have said people may have exaggerated her state, but I never said she wasn't intoxicated. I pasted #38 because it says what I have always said, she might've been able to walk, and they let her go into an
area known for criminal acts when she was defenseless.

All along, I have said for that they should be punished. Even if they didn't hide her body, CR and JR helped her to get to the state she was in and left her, for whatever reason, to get home by herself. Left her at the mercy of anyone driving by or coming out of the many apartments known for wild drug
and alcohol parties. Left her at the mercy of anyone leaving the 3 sex shops a block north of 5N.

Is MB innocent of all wrong doing or just lazy? He notes that others were
getting Lauren too drunk, but decides to keep out of it? He knows she needs to get home, but won't help her because he felt it was others' responsibility,
yet he put one of the ones responsible to bed, he's the other resident of the house, so de facto, to me, he becomes the host.

yes Abbey, it makes me angry to read how self-absorbed and utterly lazy these guys are; whether they are murderers we will find out. Either way, they need to go down, have it on their records, and then we need to get
a bill passed called Lauren's Law that will hold people responsible for this behavior.

This law should not only apply to private parties, but to bars like Kilroy's. Someone noted that she was drunk when she walked through the door!
Yet they were only cited for serving a minor or some such small charge. If they had sent her and CR packing, she would be alive today.
IOW, don't just get depositions from the 5N POIs, but also from those employees at Kilroys (make them find the ones who've quit) and force them to tell the truth about who is saying what about Lauren.

 

[Jacobite]

Abbey, She was not unconscious. She managed to hold on to her key though the falls on 10th Street. She dropped her stuff after rising from a sitting position. on the other side of the block. The detective describes how she drops her stuff while getting up.
So, I agree with Ixchel about the exaggerated statements. And, I also agree with the statements made in the lawsuit.
Of course, I have been wrong myself plenty of times as well. We must be flexible in our theories as we get more details.

 

[Dixie811]

I have a question about the civil suit, as I am certainly no lawyer!

Can other witnesses be deposed as well such as other students who were partying at JR's that night? Or any house guests, bar-goers, etc? Does this mean we may finally get some details from the mouths of others who were present during parts of that evening?

TIA for an answer from someone more knowledgeable than I!

 

[doubtingthomas]

32. With Beth still present, Rosenbaum, expressing concern about Spierer's well being and safety, attempted to contact mutual friends to pick up Spierer and take her back to her apartment.

Providing this statement is true there two things that caught my attention. We know that two phone calls were made around 4:15. If these were the only calls made then I read this statement that MB was still at JR's at 4:15. If this is true then MB should be able to verify the statement by JR that LS mistook his ipod for a phone and that LS made the calls.

In earlier post, I don't remember where, it stated that MB called JR prior to taking LS over there. Does anyone remember if it stated what time the call was made? Does anyone remember if a time was stated when MB took LS over to JR's?

 

[bx2]

I have a question about the civil suit, as I am certainly no lawyer!

Can other witnesses be deposed as well such as other students who were partying at JR's that night? Or any house guests, bar-goers, etc? Does this mean we may finally get some details from the mouths of others who were present during parts of that evening?

TIA for an answer from someone more knowledgeable than I!

Here is an okay primer for Federal Civil cases: http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/HowCourtsWork/CivilCases.aspx

As noted here earlier, another important distinction is that any/all defendants or witnesses can assert their 5th amendment privilege during discovery, with the downside to doing so being that decision can be taken into account by the judge or jury when determining liability unlike during a criminal trial.

 

[Ixchel13]

Now we may finally get a few answers.

Headlines - Herald Times Online June 26th 2013

Missing IU student Lauren Spierer's parents sue three men; claim actions led to her death

Whether or not she could have been able to go there, when you click on BTown's link and go to the Herald Times stories, it then invites you at the end to click on timeline pictures. Towards the end, there's a photo of 11th St. Called "Last Seen" . In this photo, especially if you blow it up, you can see how easy it would be for her to go to House Bar. In the photo, as you cross the intersection of 11th and College, look across the street to the left and you'll see a 3 story brown building, then a low limestone wall and a one story building. In between the brown building and the limestone wall, there's an entrance to an alley. Turn left into that alley, go a few hundred feet and you dead end into the patio gate to HB.
Don't know why I even bring this place up except that it would be the only bar still open, people partied there after hours because the place doesn't have to have a liquor license! The alley leading up to it would be a very good place to get snatched from at that hour.
I showed it to a couple of PIs (not Laurens, not Tony G) and they were doing some sleuthing around there right around the time Kilroy's closed down
for "remodelling" right after Lauren disappeared. Then, House Bar closed down and had some kind of sign saying a new place was opening, but then a few months later, opened up as House Bar, same people again. MOO, and def
not accusing anyone at House Bar being involved.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Okay I haven't followed this case closely, but I was reading an article about the lawsuit, and it said that the three guys it was filed against...they are former students. Does that mean they graduated or transferred or dropped out?

And what exactly are the theories in this case? That Lauren suffered from alcohol poisoning, and the guys freaked out and dumped her body? Something like that?

 

[SeaEclipse]

Okay I haven't followed this case closely, but I was reading an article about the lawsuit, and it said that the three guys it was filed against...they are former students. Does that mean they graduated or transferred or dropped out?

And what exactly are the theories in this case? That Lauren suffered from alcohol poisoning, and the guys freaked out and dumped her body? Something like that?

If the facts are as the parents present them, I don't see how MB will be civilly on the hook for this. There's no way, under the circumstances, that he had a legal duty of care beyond walking her to the home of a closer friend. I think he actually might be able to get the complaint against him dismissed at the summary judgment stage (which requires that the complaint fail to state a proper claim, assuming all of the facts therein are true).

 

[akh]

If the facts are as the parents present them, I don't see how MB will be civilly on the hook for this. There's no way, under the circumstances, that he had a legal duty of care beyond walking her to the home of a closer friend. I think he actually might be able to get the complaint against him dismissed at the summary judgment stage (which requires that the complaint fail to state a proper claim, assuming all of the facts therein are true).

I agree... and by also not naming Kilroy's in the suit they open questions about how you can go after 3 college guys for serving too much alcohol, and not recognizing the limits, but not go after professional bartenders. The last drinks would've been served at Kilroy's if I read things correctly.

 

[Ixchel13]

I agree... and by also not naming Kilroy's in the suit they open questions about how you can go after 3 college guys for serving too much alcohol, and not recognizing the limits, but not go after professional bartenders. The last drinks would've been served at Kilroy's if I read things correctly.

yes that's right akh

 

[akh]

Some of the points copied from: http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wthr/PDF/spiererlawsuit.pdf



Even though we knew just about all of this, it made me sad and angry to read. If anyone thought that people were 'exaggerating' Lauren's condition, do you still think so now?

Exaggerating, embellishing, re-thinking....I don't know. I've not seen the videos and I've not seen the witnesses under questioning or spoken with them myself. As Ixchel13 said it's never been about doubting that LS was intoxicated. The question is whether it was to the point that she couldn't walk out of JR's apartment.

Everything in the lawsuit is what the Spierer's are alleging. It's not a list of facts per se'. In due time we'll see if any of this is challenged and how well it is challenged.

Also, keep in mind that in an odd twist, in making the case they are making they are not challenging the story that LS walked out of JR's apartment.

What are we to make of the alleged guests? Were they not there? Were they in bed asleep and oblivious to the happenings? How do they escape being named in the suit?

And if there was drug use why isn't it mentioned in the lawsuit?

Obviously IMHO the parents are trying to drive a wedge between the 3 hoping someone can't afford the price of a losing judgment. "I don't recall" might be a dodge but it's a valid legal answer because nobody can get inside someone's head to challenge an 'I don't recall' answer. As already said, pleading the 5th is also valid. Both things could lead to a judgment though so it's possible the parents could win the battle (lawsuit) but still lose the war (no answers).

Further along those lines, win a case where you say that JR allowed her to walk into the night alone and intoxicated where she met her demise and you've just severely harmed any potential LE case that LE could make against JR or 5N if they believe that story is not true and that she never left 5N alive (or possibly never even arrived there alive).

Now factor in MB's chances in winning a summary judgment and you lose one of the wedges that you needed for this to be a fishing trip and not just to win a monetary judgment.

Finally, I'm curious about the atty for the plaintiff. Is he working for a contingency or straight fee? If the 5N bunch would argue for a settlement, and offer to make a generous settlement, I'd think an atty working for a contingency would no longer be interested in the fishing expedition motives of the case at that point.

And what if their story is true and the only details they can add to the case as presented is details the parents already have but don't want to believe? What if they present a valid case that she wasn't the victim of a random crime leaving 5N but instead she went elsewhere after 5N, or the victim of a stalking? What if they can show harassment by the Spierer's PI's and attorneys? Any of that could turn the jury. Particularly if the jury loses sympathy for the family and starts to see this case as a fishing trip and/or even another level of harassment.

I don't see this civil suit path as the slam dunk some of you are seeing. I think it is loaded with potential pitfalls. I see it more as a hail Mary. Possibly one they knew was coming due to the statute of limitations.

And I'd be surprised to learn LE was onboard with it. In fact, I'd think it would be the opposite unless LE has decided even with a body nobody would be charged based on the state of the current investigation and dead leads.

From a legal point of view it will be interesting to follow the case but I'm doubtful it actually leads to the solving of the case. If anything we will finally get some more evidence out in the public arena as well as clean up some of the noise of rumors, fact from fiction, and bad reporting.

 

[bx2]

I agree... and by also not naming Kilroy's in the suit they open questions about how you can go after 3 college guys for serving too much alcohol, and not recognizing the limits, but not go after professional bartenders. The last drinks would've been served at Kilroy's if I read things correctly.

I'm making a leap on intent here, but I think this suit's purpose is to provide some legal leverage in getting these boys to talk. If the parents felt Kilroy's was not being forthcoming in what they've provided I think they would have been named.

 

[akh]

I'm making a leap on intent here, but I think this suit's purpose is to provide some legal leverage in getting these boys to talk. If the parents felt Kilroy's was not being forthcoming in what they've provided I think they would have been named.

Right. Because the suit isn't about winning per se'... it's about fishing (in truth). BUT the suit has to have a legal basis in reality. It can't be about fishing even if that is what it really is at its root. And when you look at the type of suit they've chosen and the arguments they've made then Kilroy's belongs in that suit too because they AFAIK served her last.

They leave the lawyers an avenue to say "Kilroy's served her last and they didn't think she was too intoxicated and they are professionals. But somehow you expect college students to make a better determination than someone whose job depends on these type of situations?"

At least if Kilroy's was a defendant you could tear them apart. I suppose they could still do it, but then they'd leave the jury wondering why Kilroy's wasn't a defendant and it will be a potential scale tipper to tell the jury this is a fishing trip and they are just pawns. They might understand... or they might start losing sympathy for the family. It's a gamble.

 

[bx2]

Right. Because the suit isn't about winning per se'... it's about fishing (in truth). BUT the suit has to have a legal basis in reality. It can't be about fishing even if that is what it really is at its root. And when you look at the type of suit they've chosen and the arguments they've made then Kilroy's belongs in that suit too because they AFAIK served her last.

They leave the lawyers an avenue to say "Kilroy's served her last and they didn't think she was too intoxicated and they are professionals. But somehow you expect college students to make a better determination than someone whose job depends on these type of situations?"

At least if Kilroy's was a defendant you could tear them apart. I suppose they could still do it, but then they'd leave the jury wondering why Kilroy's wasn't a defendant and it will be a potential scale tipper to tell the jury this is a fishing trip and they are just pawns. They might understand... or they might start losing sympathy for the family. It's a gamble.

Kilroy's may also have done their job and asked that she leave; I think their actions would be part of the discovery process. Either side can request a jury or both sides can waive it, so not sure who that may benefit. In reality, I wonder if this case might be settled with just a meeting between the Spierers and each of the defendants, to try and get the answers that they want.

 

[bx2]

Hadn't seen this article linked yet.

http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/...update-lawsuit-targets-last-people-to-see-her

They actually call out the MB discrepancy in what his lawyer told them vs. what is alleged in the lawsuit. CR also now saying his harassment claims reported by Lohud were falsified by the author.

 

[Dixie811]

I think the Spierer's are quite aware that this civil suit is a "hail mary". I am sure they have agonized over the decision to file such a suit and received very detailed legal advice about the possible paths this suit may take.

I believe they think nothing will change if things continue as is (without the discovery of Lauren's body, which has yet to happen of course). This is their last move to try to shake these boys and see what falls out.

 

[curioser]

From #20 in the lawsuit:

“Rossman purchased, provided, and helped Spierer consume multiple additional alcoholic beverages.”

That is probably how they are getting around naming Kilroy's. They are claiming CR bought and provided the drinks to LS at Kilroy's.

 

[doubtingthomas]

If we are to believe the lawsuits claim of what happened that morning then I think MB would be the most critical person to be questioned. He is the only one who knows the actions of both CR and JR from the time he returned home at 3:30 till he left JR's after escorting LS over there.

 

[AbbeyR]

I think it's dismissive to say this lawsuit is about 'fishing'. It's about holding people responsible for their actions, and it does have a legal basis. That's why the POI been crafting their defense since day one, IMO.