IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #32

[akh]

What story would CR be telling his attorney for his attorney to come up with that suggestion? CR supposedly didn't remember the 15 minutes leading up to the altercation or the actual altercation.

Regardless, even if he was interrupted, it still seems like an odd suggestion if his attorney was interrupting mid-story and suggesting memory loss. The attorney wouldn't know the remaining story that might be useful for his client's case and technically the statements claim CR doesn't remember the 15 minutes prior.... I'm not sure how the attorney would suggest CR might have memory loss for parts of the story CR would have already told him before the attorney realized his client had been punched, if that makes sense!

No idea. I was just discrediting the idea that his attorney would directly tell him to lie and create the amnesia story. At best, if there was an opportunity, he might stop him and interject hypothetically why memory loss from a punch could be advantageous BEFORE CR was to tell the attorney things that would take certain defenses off the table. So while possible, it's not all that likely of a scenario... but even less likely would be an attorney feeding his client a story that contradicts what the client has told him.

Once you put something on the table for the attorney you tie his hands. So it's not entirely unheard of for an attorney to not want to hear too much from his client until he has to.

Meanwhile, the 2nd part of my post mostly explained what I thought was probably happening.

I think we mostly agree on the point that an atty isn't going to force feed his client a coached story that counters what the client has already told the atty. That's just not how it works.

 

[kpeacock]

No idea. I was just discrediting the idea that his attorney would directly tell him to lie and create the amnesia story. At best, if there was an opportunity, he might stop him and interject hypothetically why memory loss from a punch could be advantageous BEFORE CR was to tell the attorney things that would take certain defenses off the table. So while possible, it's not all that likely of a scenario... but even less likely would be an attorney feeding his client a story that contradicts what the client has told him.

Once you put something on the table for the attorney you tie his hands. So it's not entirely unheard of for an attorney to not want to hear too much from his client until he has to.

Meanwhile, the 2nd part of my post mostly explained what I thought was probably happening.

I think we mostly agree on the point that an atty isn't going to force feed his client a coached story that counters what the client has already told the atty. That's just not how it works.

I can see your point, akh. Do you think, then, that Salzmann (CS? Not to confuse him with mother of LS) knew the story as MB might have retold it to CR the next morning, when he sobered up? As in, "I don't remember what happened, but MB told me what I said before I passed out"? Because his interest is his client, does he give statements on behalf of CR's experience only, not acknowledging what the others involved have said? Or do you think it more likely that June 9, six days after Lauren is missing (when he gives first press conference) he still is not aware of who punched CR, as he indicated in the conference? And what do you make of the fact that he was one of the business owners asked to hand over security tape from 10th and College (aren't these the cameras that should have captured LS on her way home, if we are to believe JR's story?) Wouldn't that make him the first one to see that tape?

I also prefer to believe that attorneys always operate under a certain code of ethics. I have a hard time believing, though, that CR was lying to his attorney, unless he was sticking to a pact/story with others. He doesn't seem bright or calculating enough to do that on his own. If he wasn't lying to his attorney, he would have been forthcoming about the secondhand stories he heard about the altercation, at least before six days after the disappearance, IMO. Do you think CR also told his atty that LS helped him get home (further proving CR lied?) What scenario are you partial to?

 

[sammi89]

I'm not sure that is actually an accurate statement.

Touché. I will just quote USA Today's quote of CR and people can interpret how they want.

Rossman also seemed to distance himself from his lawyer Carl Salzmann's statement that he had no memory of his final moments with Spierer.

"I never said that," Rossman said. "You're taking statements that were said by my lawyer. I never said I did or didn't."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...g-indiana-student-parents-harassment/2356267/

My own opinion is that CR is stating either his lawyer misstated what CR told him OR CR is implying his attorney decided to make a statement on CR's memory without knowing whether CR remembered or not OR the attorney did know and decided to make a public statement he knew to be false.

Do you think CR maybe meant something different?

 

[Tssiemer]

I just can't believe there is no connection between her, Paige Johnson, Kaitlyn Markham, Brittnee Drexel and Holly Bobo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[akh]

Touché. I will just quote USA Today's quote of CR and people can interpret how they want.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...g-indiana-student-parents-harassment/2356267/

My own opinion is that CR is stating either his lawyer misstated what CR told him OR CR is implying his attorney decided to make a statement on CR's memory without knowing whether CR remembered or not OR the attorney did know and decided to make a public statement he knew to be false.

Do you think CR maybe meant something different?

I think he probably means he never used the term amnesia with his attorney and so that is his attorney's word. I am speculating that he might see the term 'amnesia' as being less believable than either saying he was passed out drunk or knocked silly from a punch. Especially among his peers.

I didn't read his statement as backing away from memory loss per se'. Just separating from calling it 'amnesia'. Of course you could read it another way but I think it would be a little questionable he'd do a 180 on such an important point. And since it could be taken either way I'm assuming the odds are better he meant it in the way I'm guessing.

 

[Ros]

Touché. I will just quote USA Today's quote of CR and people can interpret how they want.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...g-indiana-student-parents-harassment/2356267/

My own opinion is that CR is stating either his lawyer misstated what CR told him OR CR is implying his attorney decided to make a statement on CR's memory without knowing whether CR remembered or not OR the attorney did know and decided to make a public statement he knew to be false.

Do you think CR maybe meant something different?

Maybe he just meant that he had made no such statement publicly, though he might have said so to his lawyer.

I've also wondered whether CR's memory lapse, if true, could be due to more than alcohol or the blow by ZO. What if he ingested a roofied drink meant for someone else? Doesn't seem likely but not impossible.

Here's another idea. Is it possible for someone to give oneself a drug that causes amnesia when one is about to do something one will not want to remember?

 

[Kadence]

I hate the idea too, but not sure I buy into the theory. It's just the one I've heard repeatedly, but not from "credible" sources, from "townies"/students. If you read this thread on WWTT today, there's discussion about concrete being unlikely (rebar in concrete, etc.) I hope this is true, because other than some fancy technology to detect a body in concrete (is that possible outside of TV land?), I can't see LE here busting up new construction concrete, especially if it's "under" a building.

(ETA: can't link to exact thread re: concrete but here's the page link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/203764669685648/

Thread started by LaTasha L. Mezo yesterday, 2/28/14.)

As for why the Btown police do or don't do things we'd personally do, want or expect, there's the the theory that they were involved (chickjustin), as well as something of a reputation for corruption going way back. Could also be ineffective leadership/skills. IU brings the big money to town, these kids come from the class of families who supply it. Out of state tuition from wealthy East Coast old money. Bloomington/IU have a lot to lose from a soiled reputation. A large scale cocaine drug bust within the student population from these families = bad publicity, and bad for business.

Again, all theories based on speculation, but an indication of how people talk/think here, which may be helpful in criminal profiling.

I have posted about Gina Hall before in Lauren's thread but thought I would post her link again, it is thought that Stephen Epperly buried her in concrete on the Radford, VA campus where a multipurpose arena, the Dedmon Center, was under construction. For the record, he was one of the first, if not the first person (I need to fact check this) convicted of murder with no body being found.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49282"]VA VA - Gina Hall, 18, Radford, 28 June 1980 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

There is technology to assist in finding a body buried in concrete (we're not quite up to the Jetsons yet (hurry please!) but this is real), ground penetrating radar (GPR) has been used, I haven't seen that GPR has ever been used in Lauren's case so I will include the link in case any LE in Lauren's case are reading (I posted this before but maybe they missed it), go to the bottom of the website page:

http://gp-radar.com/

Still, and always, here for Lauren!

 

[Ixchel13]

good thinking, Ros. Maybe someone rufied them both to ruin their date
and then followed them to SW?

 

[sammi89]

I think he probably means he never used the term amnesia with his attorney and so that is his attorney's word. I am speculating that he might see the term 'amnesia' as being less believable than either saying he was passed out drunk or knocked silly from a punch. Especially among his peers.

I didn't read his statement as backing away from memory loss per se'. Just separating from calling it 'amnesia'. Of course you could read it another way but I think it would be a little questionable he'd do a 180 on such an important point. And since it could be taken either way I'm assuming the odds are better he meant it in the way I'm guessing.

To clarify, are you interpreting it as CR responding "I never said I did or didn't [have amnesia]" but you think he still has no memory of that time period? That CR's only issue with the statement was his attorney's word choice (amnesia)?

I'm not sure I agree with your last point though - if you assume that it could be taken either way, why would your interpretation be any better than the other?

To me, based on what the author of the article wrote prior to quoting to CR, it sounds like he was commenting on whether he had "no" memory of his final moments with LS, and his response was that he has never stated whether he did or not (have any recollection); that the statements saying he had no memory were from his attorney, not CR himself.

 

[Ixchel13]

To clarify, are you interpreting it as CR responding "I never said I did or didn't [have amnesia]" but you think he still has no memory of that time period? That CR's only issue with the statement was his attorney's word choice (amnesia)?

I'm not sure I agree with your last point though - if you assume that it could be taken either way, why would your interpretation be any better than the other?

To me, based on what the author of the article wrote prior to quoting to CR, it sounds like he was commenting on whether he had "no" memory of his final moments with LS, and his response was that he has never stated whether he did or not (have any recollection); that the statements saying he had no memory were from his attorney, not CR himself.

yes, his statement is ambiguous and meant to be so....

 

[Ros]

I have posted about Gina Hall before in Lauren's thread but thought I would post her link again, it is thought that Stephen Epperly buried her in concrete on the Radford, VA campus where a multipurpose arena, the Dedmon Center, was under construction. For the record, he was one of the first, if not the first person (I need to fact check this) convicted of murder with no body being found.

VA VA - Gina Hall, 18, Radford, 28 June 1980 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

There is technology to assist in finding a body buried in concrete (we're not quite up to the Jetsons yet (hurry please!) but this is real), ground penetrating radar (GPR) has been used, I haven't seen that GPR has ever been used in Lauren's case so I will include the link in case any LE in Lauren's case are reading (I posted this before but maybe they missed it), go to the bottom of the website page:

http://gp-radar.com/

Still, and always, here for Lauren!

There have been numerous murder convictions without bodies, but in a few cases the victim later showed up alive.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body

 

[sammi89]

I have posted about Gina Hall before in Lauren's thread but thought I would post her link again, it is thought that Stephen Epperly buried her in concrete on the Radford, VA campus where a multipurpose arena, the Dedmon Center, was under construction. For the record, he was one of the first, if not the first person (I need to fact check this) convicted of murder with no body being found.

VA VA - Gina Hall, 18, Radford, 28 June 1980 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

There is technology to assist in finding a body buried in concrete (we're not quite up to the Jetsons yet (hurry please!) but this is real), ground penetrating radar (GPR) has been used, I haven't seen that GPR has ever been used in Lauren's case so I will include the link in case any LE in Lauren's case are reading (I posted this before but maybe they missed it), go to the bottom of the website page:

http://gp-radar.com/

Still, and always, here for Lauren!

Thanks for posting about the GPR. I hadn't heard of it before. Hopefully LE has considered using it by now, especially if there is any substance to construction rumors!

 

[akh]

To clarify, are you interpreting it as CR responding "I never said I did or didn't [have amnesia]" but you think he still has no memory of that time period? That CR's only issue with the statement was his attorney's word choice (amnesia)?

I'm not sure I agree with your last point though - if you assume that it could be taken either way, why would your interpretation be any better than the other?

To me, based on what the author of the article wrote prior to quoting to CR, it sounds like he was commenting on whether he had "no" memory of his final moments with LS, and his response was that he has never stated whether he did or not (have any recollection); that the statements saying he had no memory were from his attorney, not CR himself.

The problem is we don't see the actual question. So we're dealing with interpretations right off the bat. We don't know what the reporter asked nor can we tell how CR might've taken it. The reporter has framed the context after the fact.

And regardless, CR's answer is non-committal because he's not really actually saying he in fact does now recall what happened.

I already explained my thought process on why I believe he was bristling more at the term amnesia than anything else is because it doesn't make sense to do an entire 180 on a major cog of his defense (at least as it relates to the court of public opinion) in a random exchange with a reporter. And even if he's not bristling at the term amnesia, the fact is his answer didn't really commit to changing his story if you take it at face value.

So, if someone wants to read between the lines and assume the reporter used the proper context after the fact and CR and he/her were on exactly the same page and so believe that he's changing his story, they would be free to do that. But does it really make much sense that would be the case that he would be changing his position 180 deg? And if that is the case then where is the followup with the media or even the Spierers addressing this change? This seems to me it would be a major change in the case if that was indeed the fact.

So my opinion is A: He's not really changing the gist story. B: He might be bristling at the characterization of the atty's version of the story but that doesn't mean he's making a 180deg turn and now willing to say he recalls the events after all.

 

[sammi89]

The problem is we don't see the actual question. So we're dealing with interpretations right off the bat. We don't know what the reporter asked nor can we tell how CR might've taken it. The reporter has framed the context after the fact.

And regardless, CR's answer is non-committal because he's not really actually saying he in fact does now recall what happened.

I already explained my thought process on why I believe he was bristling more at the term amnesia than anything else is because it doesn't make sense to do an entire 180 on a major cog of his defense (at least as it relates to the court of public opinion) in a random exchange with a reporter. And even if he's not bristling at the term amnesia, the fact is his answer didn't really commit to changing his story if you take it at face value.

So, if someone wants to read between the lines and assume the reporter used the proper context after the fact and CR and he/her were on exactly the same page and so believe that he's changing his story, they would be free to do that. But does it really make much sense that would be the case that he would be changing his position 180 deg? And if that is the case then where is the followup with the media or even the Spierers addressing this change? This seems to me it would be a major change in the case if that was indeed the fact.

So my opinion is A: He's not really changing the gist story. B: He might be bristling at the characterization of the atty's version of the story but that doesn't mean he's making a 180deg turn and now willing to say he recalls the events after all.

I don't think my understanding would necessarily mean that he is changing the gist of the story entirely - if he is stating that he has never said that he does or does not recall the events, it is a noncommittal statement giving himself leeway down the road to say he remembers all, part, or nothing.

I think that there actually has been follow-up: changes in stories have been noted, the PIs and Spierers have already stated things don't line up (I believe RS called the amnesia/entire memory loss "laughable"), and there is a pending lawsuit initiated by the Spierers in large part to get the 5N stories straight. The media almost always mentions the amnesia claim and clearly USA Today printed the statement we are discussing. I have a feeling if he makes any more statements concerning his memory loss, they will print that also. In fact, the article was printed right before the Spierers filed the lawsuit.

I do agree that it in large part depends on what was being said to him, but the amnesia claim has been around so long that it seems strange that he would be bristling at the term now.

 

[Kadence]

Have posted this here before but feel like I should post again (also just posted it on Colin's page) - IMHO it bears repeating:

If, by chance, someone is reading that may have knowledge about where Lauren is, or what happened to her, please speak up, there is a way to do this that is completely anonymous, no tracing (IP address, etc.), no taping, if you call:

Just please go to this link, no one will know:

http://wetip.com/submit-anonymous-tip-2/

 

[imkeylime]

Maybe he just meant that he had made no such statement publicly, though he might have said so to his lawyer.

I've also wondered whether CR's memory lapse, if true, could be due to more than alcohol or the blow by ZO. What if he ingested a roofied drink meant for someone else? Doesn't seem likely but not impossible.

Here's another idea. Is it possible for someone to give oneself a drug that causes amnesia when one is about to do something one will not want to remember?

I've been wondering about ketamine. I'm hearing of kids here who take it voluntarily for kicks, although it's also used as a date-rape drug. It's actually an animal tranquilizer. Side effects include loss of body control (falling?) as well as loss of memory (leaving phone and shoes?). It apparently can be ingested in a variety of ways.

Here's a link:

http://elitedaily.com/news/world/drugs-college-campuses/

PS: I'm not implying LS took this voluntarily, of course, just that it might have been accessible to someone that night ...

 

[Kadence]

I've been wondering about ketamine. I'm hearing of kids here who take it voluntarily for kicks, although it's also used as a date-rape drug. It's actually an animal tranquilizer. Side effects include loss of body control (falling?) as well as loss of memory (leaving phone and shoes?). It apparently can be ingested in a variety of ways.

Here's a link:

http://elitedaily.com/news/world/drugs-college-campuses/

PS: I'm not implying LS took this voluntarily, of course, just that it might have been accessible to someone that night ...

I have heard of Special K before so I dd a little research to see if it was mentioned having any connection to IU - well, it didn't take long:

"Ketamine, also called K, Vitamin K, Special K, Jet, among other street names, is a derivative of PCP and is commonly understood to be a "club drug" or "designer drug." It appears as either a white/off-white powder or a liquid, and can be snorted, injected, or orally ingested, though injection (intramuscular) is the most popular means of use. Ketamine is produced commercially for use as a veterinary anesthetic in the United States and is often acquired for use by theft from veterinary clinics. It is also smuggled from other sources, such as legitimate pharmacies in Mexico. Ketamine has hallucinogenic properties: in low doses, it produces a dream-like state. At higher doses, it can cause memory loss, learning impairment, loss of motor control, paralysis, high blood pressure, and respiratory distress. Very high doses (~ 1 gram) can be fatal. Long-term use increases the risk of heart attack and stroke. ..."

http://www.drugs.indiana.edu/drug-info/drug-pictures/26-ketamine

Maybe it wasn't Klonopin but Ketamine?

And from the Indiana State University website:

"The incidence of ketamine abuse is increasing, and accounts of ketamine abuse appear in reports of parties attended by teenagers and young adults."

http://www.indstate.edu/svp/alcoholanddrugs.htm

Both websites are very informative about roofies, MDMAs, GHBs, and ketamine, I learned a lot from them and imkeylime's link (thanks!) - it's scary out there for today's youth!

 

[imkeylime]

I have heard of Special K before so I dd a little research to see if it was mentioned having any connection to IU - well, it didn't take long:

"Ketamine, also called K, Vitamin K, Special K, Jet, among other street names, is a derivative of PCP and is commonly understood to be a "club drug" or "designer drug." It appears as either a white/off-white powder or a liquid, and can be snorted, injected, or orally ingested, though injection (intramuscular) is the most popular means of use. Ketamine is produced commercially for use as a veterinary anesthetic in the United States and is often acquired for use by theft from veterinary clinics. It is also smuggled from other sources, such as legitimate pharmacies in Mexico. Ketamine has hallucinogenic properties: in low doses, it produces a dream-like state. At higher doses, it can cause memory loss, learning impairment, loss of motor control, paralysis, high blood pressure, and respiratory distress. Very high doses (~ 1 gram) can be fatal. Long-term use increases the risk of heart attack and stroke. ..."

http://www.drugs.indiana.edu/drug-info/drug-pictures/26-ketamine

Maybe it wasn't Klonopin but Ketamine?

And from the Indiana State University website:

"The incidence of ketamine abuse is increasing, and accounts of ketamine abuse appear in reports of parties attended by teenagers and young adults."

http://www.indstate.edu/svp/alcoholanddrugs.htm

Both websites are very informative about roofies, MDMAs, GHBs, and ketamine, I learned a lot from them and imkeylime's link (thanks!) - it's scary out there for today's youth!

Snipped by me. The side effects interested me in terms of LS, although other substances are similar I'm sure. JR was the one who mentioned klonopin, I believe. But other people could have had access to different stuff.

It surprised me to learn that ketamine is used as much as a party drug as a date rape drug ... and that it can be added to "smokable" materials. So it's not just drinks that could be laced, apparently.

It's definitely scary. I know I've said it before, but these drugs are in both the high school and college communities. I say yes to every dance, yoga, and exercise class my kids want to take in an effort to keep them busy and health-oriented ...

 

[Mergatroid]

Arrest made in Holly Bobo case yesterday. Just fyi.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/05/holly-bobo-case-arrest-made-in-2011-murder-kidnapping-case/

 

[AbbeyR]

Arrest made in Holly Bobo case yesterday. Just fyi.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/05/holly-bobo-case-arrest-made-in-2011-murder-kidnapping-case/

I'm sad to hear this outcome, but relieved that someone has been arrested and that her family will finally have answers. Holly went missing just a few months before Lauren and I haven't heard anything about her case in years. It goes to show - you never know what's going on behind the scenes.