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

[Ixchel13]

Peyton Riekhof, age 18, and her car, missing in the area of Fishers, IN.

http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/indiana/fishers-police-search-for-missing-teen1374246103775

hopefully she will show up soon.

My mom lives in Fishers. It's surrounded by gravel pits and rural industry, although in itself an upscale town, especially Geist.

The state of Indiana, and I guess all the other states, should insert a class in their school curriculum about personal safety. Is it more important to learn how to make a coffee cake (home Ec) fix a flat tire, or to know basic rules of personal safety?

One rule would be, always make sure you have enough gas so you don't have to stop late at night, when the gas station isn't open. Lately, I've been so spooked that when I realized I didn't have enough gas for a 50 mi. drive, I
had to stop at 5 a.m., still dark, and it scared me. What is the world coming to when you're afraid to stop for gas? But still, it's an easy place to be accosted when you're alone and the place is closed.

 

[AbbeyR]

. The OP later added the information that the dog trail was from Smallwood to JW's, and probably her usual route there.

Thanks Ros, I missed this. This makes sense (I think? I wish I knew more about search dogs!)

 

[Ixchel13]

POI is just a fancier term for suspect on one hand, and a more encompassing term for persons that LE believe could have direct information (or even indirect information in some cases). Since it's a bigger net, so to speak, then it's not meant to have the darker connotations that "suspect" would have. And because of that, LE can use the term more freely and argue they aren't labeling anyone as 'suspects' (which people and the press came to take as meaning 'all but charged with the crime' or 'soon to be charged').

ok, I get it now. Then I guess they have at least 10 suspects
and if any have been cleared, it hasn't been released in MSM or anywhere else.

I'm not on the 5N POIs' "side". But, not only could it be random/random acquaintance, but also we don't really know what other 'friends' LE is looking
at. So, we can say the 5N are the people WE are focusing on, and they were in fact supposedly the last to see her but isn't there reasonable doubt?
If they went on trial right now, and I was on the jury, I could not vote guilty, not w. them just being the last to see her.
But, if someone would PLEASE come forward with more information, I can't see why anyone would not tell LE what they know. I'm not sure if someone who was there, although did nothing to harm Lauren, but they were too scared to come forward, would get in trouble now. But if I were they, I would come forward now vs. later, because once it comes to trial, and it will, they will become accessories after the fact, right?
So come forward already!

 

[AbbeyR]

This is just my opinion, but I really don't think the "10 POI" number is relevant. That was during the first few days of the investigation, and as Ros posted recently, within a few days they said that number was changing day to day. The key POI were confirmed within a week or so of Lauren going missing by LE and by their own lawyers, and these names haven't changed.

The term POI may encompass both people who may have info and people that police really do consider 'suspects', but LE made it pretty clear who they were interested in. They have also made it clear in at least two cases when people should not be considered suspects (white truck and crazy gun dude). IMO, there is no reason to believe that there are any other important Persons of Interest whose identities have been kept secret by LE, the Spierers and the POI.

 

[Ixchel13]

This is just my opinion, but I really don't think the "10 POI" number is relevant. That was during the first few days of the investigation, and as Ros posted recently, within a few days they said that number was changing day to day. The key POI were confirmed within a week or so of Lauren going missing by LE and by their own lawyers, and these names haven't changed.

The term POI may encompass both people who may have info and people that police really do consider 'suspects', but LE made it pretty clear who they were interested in. They have also made it clear in at least two cases when people should not be considered suspects (white truck and crazy gun dude). IMO, there is no reason to believe that there are any other important Persons of Interest whose identities have been kept secret by LE, the Spierers and the POI.

glad you brought up crazy gun dude. The picture of Kilroys I posted on the previous page was exactly as high up as the crazy gun dude was, it was eerie when I saw that pic because my first thought, seriously, was it looked like it was taken right where this guy was located when he had the front door of Kilroy's in the site of a sniper type rifle.

And he's raving about being up there, just looking through his scope, just using the scope of the rifle as binoculars to watch Kilroy's. And he was mixing in the Lauren Spierer case, tying in for some reason, saying he knows what happened.

And of course he's running loose, not in any trouble! That's just ridiculous, here is a guy, caught in the act of siting the door of a club and has all this
ammo and at least 1 more gun.

Was he an undercover cop or is that bad to say?

 

[akh]

The term POI may encompass both people who may have info and people that police really do consider 'suspects', but LE made it pretty clear who they were interested in.

They have? The parents have made it clear who they are focused on and the media certainly have followed that path. Possibly the PI's have narrowed things down somewhat (though not as much publicly as the parents).

But has LE really narrowed it down at all? I guess arguably they have from the people they've searched. But then that is only because we are aware of those searches. Who is to say we are aware of some searches and records they have ran that the media simply know nothing about?

They have also made it clear in at least two cases when people should not be considered suspects (white truck and crazy gun dude). IMO, there is no reason to believe that there are any other important Persons of Interest whose identities have been kept secret by LE, the Spierers and the POI.

I'm not even sure how much LE has really identified any of whom they consider PsOI or what brought that info to light. Certain names were obviously released as part of the narrative they put out in the initial search. But how many of those names did LE release first versus the press getting them from friends and family and then inserting them into the narrative from that angle when talking to the police? IOW, how many names would we have if the sole source for the names would be the police and the press didn't have any names from their own investigation?

 

[AbbeyR]

Also:

If they went on trial right now, and I was on the jury, I could not vote guilty, not w. them just being the last to see her.

I don't get the impression that any of the posters here believe without a shadow of a doubt that they know what happened to Lauren. And I would hope that no one could vote 'guilty' based on the info we have!

The POI are often the focus here, because they are suspected of withholding information and possibly having something to do with Lauren's disappearance. This isn't just because they were the last to be seen with Lauren. To me, at least, it's also because:

* They are named persons of interest in this case

* Their stories don't add up

*They have omitted key information, obscured and misled people about what happened the night Lauren went missing (and/or they have never bothered to set the record straight)

* they have never 'officially' committed to a single public version of events of what happened in the hours before Lauren went missing

* They have put themselves in the spotlight through their actions and comments through lawyers, friends and media, (which I personally find weird and hostile)

And finally,

*There is just no evidence leading anywhere else.

Every time there is, we've talked about it at length here (even if it is just a mention of a sex offender in the news, a random comment on Youtube, or someone's dream!) But so far, nothing has lead anywhere else, and the questions I have always go back to the POI at 5 N. I'd like to see them, at the very least, take some accountability by committing to one story or publicly setting the record straight.

All JMO

 

[AbbeyR]

They have? The parents have made it clear who they are focused on and the media certainly have followed that path. Possibly the PI's have narrowed things down somewhat (though not as much publicly as the parents).

But has LE really narrowed it down at all? I guess arguably they have from the people they've searched. But then that is only because we are aware of those searches. Who is to say we are aware of some searches and records they have ran that the media simply know nothing about?



I'm not even sure how much LE has really identified any of whom they consider PsOI or what brought that info to light. Certain names were obviously released as part of the narrative they put out in the initial search. But how many of those names did LE release first versus the press getting them from friends and family and then inserting them into the narrative from that angle when talking to the police? IOW, how many names would we have if the sole source for the names would be the police and the press didn't have any names from their own investigation?

How do you think the media found out exactly what time LE would be searching those apartments with dogs to get there for the photo op?

But yes, I agree. LE has only indirectly confirmed who the key POI are. In some cases, the POI themselves jumped in to preempt the story -- Rossman's lawyer was the one who came forward with the story about Lauren "helping" Corey home, when LE was only identifying him as 'a male companion' -- IIRC?

But again, the question for me isn't: Is it possible there are some mysterious POI that we don't know about. It's why would I have any reason to believe there are?

 

[Ixchel13]

Here is a quote from the article in the Herald Times about him, snipped by me


"Some have questioned why the man was detained if he was not creating a problem and was legally allowed to carry the guns.

But others, including the editorial staff at the newspaper, praised police for their handling of the situation.

"Would it have been better for police to leave him alone as he looked down on the front door of a popular bar with a rangefinder and guns? After other recent high-profile mass shootings? You’ve got to be kidding," the paper said in an editorial. "Perhaps this guy had no ill intent, but his actions were suspicious enough for police to get involved. They may have saved some lives."

Watch RTV6 and refresh this page for updates.

www.wthr.com/story/.../man-wants-guns-back-that-bloomington-police-sei...

 

[AbbeyR]

And of course he's running loose, not in any trouble! That's just ridiculous, here is a guy, caught in the act of siting the door of a club and has all this ammo and at least 1 more gun.

Was he an undercover cop or is that bad to say?

Sounds more like a crazy-gun-dude to me. But I agree, it's ridiculous that this person is running loose. Scary!

 

[Ixchel13]

Sounds more like a crazy-gun-dude to me. But I agree, it's ridiculous that this person is running loose. Scary!

I'm no gun expert, but when they searched this guy's home they found
over 50 firearms, in the picture a lot of them looked like the same type of rifle
or are those shotguns? Why so many the same?

IDK, he's up on the top of the parking garage across the street from Kilroy's
aiming a gun directly at Kilroy's. OK he's probably not a cop. But he doesn't seem that crazy. He was admittedly staking out Kilroy's. Because many of the rifles were identical, it sounds like more people involved. He had a shotgun within easy access. If he saw the person go in, then he could wait til they came out and get them with the shotgun, which would give him a better chance of hitting the target, especially if the target was in a crowd.
IMO, with a rifle you would have to be exactly on the mark, but with the right shell you could be almost exactly on the mark and still hit your target.

IIRC, the police asked him first about Lauren, but then he had a lot to say,
and apparently this caused police to search his house.

Not being sarcastic, but does a gun carrying permit also allow one to stalk with said gun? Not to mention that the parking garage is above another bar/ restaurant, Scotty's. A lot of chance of bullets bouncing around killing lots of
people as both places have outside seating in the front.

it's amazing what people can get away with. You could get in more trouble shoplifting a 30$ pair of shoes from Wal Mart.

 

[Ixchel13]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_c-935Sal4&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube[/ame]

here's the pic I was referring to. This looks like it's taken on top of the parking garage. The UTube video is private, but is dedicated to Lauren Spierer. Why would a video dedicated to Lauren start out looking at Kilroy's from above like that? Wonder who made this video?

Also very creepy because someone could sit up there and see someone leaving from Kilroy's and walking back to SW or 10th and College, and then radio/text someone parked along the street to snatch someone as a team. Maybe that's what we're supposed to get from this?

OMG just enlarged the photo, and it shows people waiting to get in, and the last in line is a small blond . It couldn't be Lauren. But in the photo, there are people at the door. Is the bouncer hugging the girl?

Sorry to keep editing, but let's see...Jupiter812 posted the video on thread #27, post #27. Jupiter, do you know where this video came from?

ok the video comes from Jacobite, who does seem to have ties with the LE/attorneys somehow, or at least says they meet with them sometimes. The video seems to be linked with a song by an Australian singer playing and the words were written by Catherine Rothchilde, friend of Lauren and scion of the aforementioned Rothchilde banking family. Can't get it to play, also the picture just doesn't match. Catherine
was in a big war of words with GR, and it's interesting to go back to the beginning and see how this started. In the words to the song, Catherine doesn't necessarily blame the 5N POIs. I just want to know who in the world was on top of the parking garage and why they think this view is important.

 

[Ixchel13]

http://privateinvesigations.blogspot.com/2011/07/lauren-spierers-boyfriend-says-hes.html

here's a link posted from the same blog just 50 days after Lauren vanished. that almost makes it seem like JW is just as likely a suspect as JR. It's from a Jewish blogger, Joe Levin.

Like the detective in the Kristin Smart case, maybe we should go back to square one. During this time, people were battling it out on FB, PT and Tony Gatto as to whom seemed the guiltiest and also some awful people were heaping blame on Lauren!

Someone, maybe it was anonymous, went up to that parking garage and linked that photo with the song, "Lauren Dear Lauren" right after she went missing 2 years ago. Two people are noticeable at the door of Kilroy's and one is very big (bouncer?) and one is very small and being hugged by the big person, almost looks like she's being scooped up.

In 2013 or late 2012, a man is arrested atop the same garage with guns and rangefinder aimed at Kilroy's door, virtually the same spot as the original photo at the beginning of the video, and he tells LE he knows who
hurt Lauren.

what is it about this photo? Does it seem to mean anything?

sorry about all the posts--I have 4 days off and need to get busy!

 

[Ros]

This time it is a 34 year old married man. So far no reason to expect foul play.


https://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=93437

 

[akh]

*They have omitted key information, obscured and misled people about what happened the night Lauren went missing (and/or they have never bothered to set the record straight)

Sure, this would be nice to know (setting the record straight) but I cannot imagine a scenario where any of their lawyers would have said "Yes, you go set the record straight" or called the other lawyers and proposed a press conference. Their lawyers would probably prefer they never say a word to a reporter or even speak of this case ever again to anyone. If they aren't going to take the advice of their lawyers then why bother hiring them in the first place?

In other words... I'd expect a long wait to hear them 'set the record straight' no matter what rumors, conflicting media statements, hearsay, or noise appears.

I don't necessarily see it happening with a civil suit and could only really see it happening with any probability (if at all) with a criminal trial. A caveat would be if someone else was ever charged then they'd probably talk for days in that case to clear their names once they felt secure nothing they would say would be used against them.

* they have never 'officially' committed to a single public version of events of what happened in the hours before Lauren went missing

I'd say that is speculation unless you have inside info. We don't know what they told LE or even what was told to the family. Part of the problem (with making a criminal case against them) might be they have committed to a single version of events and nothing has been found to discredit that story enough to do anything but wait and hope for new evidence that could change that or move the case in another direction.

 

[Ros]

This time it is a 34 year old married man. So far no reason to expect foul play.


https://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=93437

This man has contacted his brother and seems to be no longer considered missing.

https://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=93442

 

[AbbeyR]

I'd say that is speculation unless you have inside info. We don't know what they told LE or even what was told to the family.

That's why I said "single public version of events" -- I meant that they have never publicly said anything about what happened, when it would have been so easy just to make a single statement at the beginning and clear up a lot of questions.

I don't expect them to at this point, but I still find it weird when I think about the time around when Lauren went missing. It just seems like in most missing persons cases, the timeline of events leading up to the person going missing is the first thing people want to know, and it's usually clearly established. Here we are two years later, and most of our conversations have revolved around trying to figure out basic things like the timeline of where Lauren was in the couple of hours before she was missing: how she got from point A to point B, who was there, who was called. There is no reason for these things to be concealed if the POI's story was true, in my opinion.

I remember when Mickey Shunick went missing, the poor friend who was last with her was asked by reporters over and over again what happened that night: What time they left the bar, when they went to pick up food, why they took his car when she had a bike, how much time they spent at his house, why he let her leave at 2 am etc. And he answered every single time, going over every detail of the night, answering any questions that anyone asked. He pleaded for her safe return, he was a key part of organizing and telling people about the search, etc. And he was under suspicion as well at the beginning.

When I think of the POI as POI, I get that their lawyers would tell them not to speak to the media, etc. But when I think of them as friends who were out with Lauren the night she disappeared, I am still surprised by their actions. It was worse than not volunteering any information -- the information they did make public through their lawyers, etc. was totally misleading, IMO. They initially made it seem like there was a chance she went off in search of a party or something, and omitted all information about the real condition she was in. Another thing I was thinking about recently: The only theory we ever heard from the POI/ their lawyers, was from CR's lawyer who made a few comments that tried to steer suspicion toward JW and ZO. If any of the POI believed she was 'kidnapped' off the street, I guess I would expect different reactions.

 

[Kadence]

Snipped by me, still don't know how to do this but...

AbbeyR:

"I remember when Mickey Shunick went missing, the poor friend who was last with her was asked by reporters over and over again what happened that night: What time they left the bar, when they went to pick up food, why they took his car when she had a bike, how much time they spent at his house, why he let her leave at 2 am etc. And he answered every single time, going over every detail of the night, answering any questions that anyone asked. He pleaded for her safe return, he was a key part of organizing and telling people about the search, etc. And he was under suspicion as well at the beginning."

I followed Mickey's case very closely, I learned about her from following Lauren's case here on WS. The above is very true and certainly not what any of Lauren's friends, IMO, long-time, or recent, that evening, did for her, not then, and not now. To me, if you're not guilty/not involved, you would probably act like Brettly Wilson, Mickey's friend. He was not only questioned over and over again by reporters but by police as well. He answered every question asked of him and even appealed for her return on TV.

Guilty or not, the 5N crew, and those with Lauren that evening, sure don't seem to be even in the realm of friends. If you're not guilty, if it were me, I'd be screaming it from the rooftops, no attorney could shut me up, and above all, I'd be looking for my friend until I found her! I REALLY want to believe they're not involved, and maybe I can't because they didn't react as I would, but can they be THAT different from me, another human being?

 

[mfunky]

how do you think the media found out exactly what time le would be searching those apartments with dogs to get there for the photo op?

But yes, i agree. Le has only indirectly confirmed who the key poi are. In some cases, the poi themselves jumped in to preempt the story -- rossman's lawyer was the one who came forward with the story about lauren "helping" corey home, when le was only identifying him as 'a male companion' -- iirc?

But again, the question for me isn't: Is it possible there are some mysterious poi that we don't know about. It's why would i have any reason to believe there are?

this.

 

[Ros]

Peyton Riekhof, age 18, and her car, missing in the area of Fishers, IN.

http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/indiana/fishers-police-search-for-missing-teen1374246103775

No happy ending in this case. Her car was found in a lake. The person inside was deceased. Official ID to be released today, but Silver Alert was cancelled. So sad when a young person's life ends so soon.