IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #9

[Gabby66]

-Begin Rant - :maddening:

Okay websleuths, this discussion is becoming very frustrating. And I think I echo others when saying this. There is SO much speculation about the timeline, the 3:38 thing, videos, who said/confirmed what, etc. It's fruitless.

THE COPS AREN'T GOING TO CONFIRM/DENY ANYTHING IMPORTANT AND HAVE NO INTEREST IN DOING SO! They are investigating a crime and will release false and confusing information to the public if they think it will help.

We can go back and forth and up and down and round and round about timeline timeline timeline, and none of it matters. We, the public, AREN'T GOING TO BE TOLD THE REAL FACTS! LE is up against a massive heavyweight defense attorney who will use everything possible to smash a prosecutor's case. LE will keep all their cards hidden until they have enough to arrest someone, end of story.

- End Rant - :maddening:

Perhaps we could discuss the following?
- Possible motives.
- Possible ways/places to dispose of body.
- Possible strategies defense attorneys could be using.
- Who LS's "friends" are and why they're not talking.
- Possible drug connections.
- How the search is going/what strategies they're using.
- Anything but trying to confirm a timeline that we can not confirm.

I mean this very respectfully, but I don't see how talking about any of the above is any more appropriate, than discussing our opinions of the sighting. LE did NOT say the sighting didn't happen. He merely said it wasn't on video at 3:38 at that location. They didn't say it couldn't have happened out of camera's shot, nor did the say that they don't have that exact thing shown on video at a previous time. Of course what you say it true - Cops are not going to confirm everything. But that also means these other things that we could discuss might also not be confirmed. I've only been posting on this site for one day but I assumed this to most ALL be speculation until something has been confirmed. So far, we only have it confirmed that Lauren was not shown on video at that location at 3:38 with a mystery man.

 

[jjenny]

Maybe it is just my weird family, but I knew a ton of guys in college and my Mom didn't really consider them my friends in a close way. Like, not like how she considered people I brought over to the house or spent the night with or go shopping with every week.

I think when mom talks about "friends" she talks about anyone who could possibly have any information about where LS is.

 

[bx2]

If LE is saying they were looking at video and LS is not there at 3:38 am, then I presume it's a safe bet to assume if the witness was correct, LS should have been on the video at 3:38 am but wasn't.
But there are no video cameras to verify if LS actually left JR's apartment building. So it's not the same thing at all.

It's very safe to assume we are interpreting what they said differently

 

[bunnyesq.]

If LE is saying they were looking at video and LS is not there at 3:38 am, then I presume it's a safe bet to assume if the witness was correct, LS should have been on the video at 3:38 am but wasn't.
But there are no video cameras to verify if LS actually left JR's apartment building. So it's not the same thing at all.

Not a safe bet, IMO. What if the witness saw her (or whoever) but she's just not on the video? Like she's out of the camera shot?

Think about it like this - forget the video was ever mentioned or a possibility. You're left with a witness account of LS, so it kind of is the same thing.

 

[Blythe]

why "DAYS LATER" when just hours would work and be less suspicious maybe? why do you think person was gone for days?

Soo maybe just the time it takes to get to Lake Michigan and back?

 

[AbbeyR]

I also think that Lauren's mom was talking about friends coming forward *voluntarily* with information. Keeping in mind that there were several people claiming to be Lauren and JW's friends posting on FB early on not only alluding to things that went on that night but to the fact that everyone in their circle knew information that was "troubling" (this has since been deleted, but several people here saw it), I think it's likely that this is at least part of the reason that her parents continue to call on friends for any information, no matter how small.

 

[mrsu]

Re "mystery man" video:

"We have reviewed the video, not only the timeline we have been using but also where Lauren does in fact appear in that video with someone who is already known to investigators," said Qualters.

Qualters said everyone in the surveillance video is known to investigators, and that out of 300 hours of video evidence, some were still outstanding.

http://www.wthr.com/story/14956457/...tinue-to-review-video-in-missing-student-case

Just seeing this. What I think he is saying is that they have reviewed the video (meaning all the video in general), and that everywhere that Lauren is seen in the video she is seen with someone that is known to them.

I do not believe they have cameras on 10th & College. If so, can someone remind me?

 

[elmomom]

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

I really tried to walk away from this 3:38 thing but you all got me interested in saying something.

If it really was nothing - completely insignificant, disproven, completely inconsequential to LE, don't you think he would have said

We looked into it, and found it is not significant in this case. Period.

He talks very clearly when he wants to. What he said was "we heard 3:38, nothing backs up that time" (so maybe 3:35?) "We were told there was a person - We confirm that there is no one that is unknown to LE." "We were told X and we know Y." That is what I heard over and over. Not once did he say that this sighting was deemed to be inconsequential or not pertinent to this case, not did he ever out right say that this witness was mistaken about the sighting. Not at that precise moment, maybe not at that location, but he did not not ever say that he dismissed this as out right wrong. There were two details he dismissed clearly - to me - the time and the fact that it was a "mystery" person.

 

[Blythe]

Mother is perfectly clear that she isn't asking for evidence but for information to find Lauren.

 

[bx2]

Just seeing this. What I think he is saying is that they have reviewed the video (meaning all the video in general), and that everywhere that Lauren is seen in the video she is seen with someone that is known to them.

I do not believe they have cameras on 10th & College. If so, can someone remind me?

This was exactly my interpretation. I don't believe there to be video avaiable at that corner either, but am open to being proven wrong!

 

[Glaucon]

Soo maybe just the time it takes to get to Lake Michigan and back?

This is good thinking. And as someone who lives in a large city on Lake Michigan, I think that lake isn't the best choice for a criminal:
- It's COLD and would preserve a body much better than a smaller and warmer pond or lake.
- It's heavily trafficked in the summer, especially the Southern part. Lots of pleasure boats everywhere.
- LE agencies along L Michigan are accustomed to finding/dealing with bodies. Why risk the Chicago, Gary, Benton Harbor, or Michigan City PD getting involved? (The Chicago PD is MEAN, btw)
- There are tons of places between Bton and Lake Michigan that would be easier.

 

[eqh]

This was exactly my interpretation. I don't believe there to be video avaiable at that corner either, but am open to being proven wrong!

I think you are almost certainly right that there's no video at 10th and college (or at least video that would cover the northeast sidewalk at the intersection).

Remember if a camera were there, it (in theory) would pick up on Lauren immediately after she went out of JR's range.

also, http://www.bloomingtonsecuritycameras.com/map.html

 

[elmomom]

Soo maybe just the time it takes to get to Lake Michigan and back?

there is an article that quotes LE as having directly spoken to JR and I believe the article date was 8June so it seems to me that JR spoke to LE very early on and was not missing for a few days.. I could be wrong though.

 

[Blythe]

This is good thinking. And as someone who lives in a large city on Lake Michigan, I think that lake isn't the best choice for a criminal:
- It's COLD and would preserve a body much better than a smaller and warmer pond or lake.
- It's heavily trafficked in the summer, especially the Southern part. Lots of pleasure boats everywhere.
- LE agencies along L Michigan are accustomed to finding/dealing with bodies. Why risk the Chicago, Gary, Benton Harbor, or Michigan City PD getting involved? (The Chicago PD is MEAN, btw)
- There are tons of places between Bton and Lake Michigan that would be easier.

What would a Long Islander know? Thanks.

 

[illinialum]

Just out of curiosity, how do you know AR is one of her best friends? Is she one of the two who reported LS missing?

There's several articles that mention her. Here's a good example:
http://www.lohud.com/article/201106...college-student?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|News

 

[TonyGatto]

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

I really tried to walk away from this 3:38 thing but you all got me interested in saying something.

If it really was nothing - completely insignificant, disproven, completely inconsequential to LE, don't you think he would have said

We looked into it, and found it is not significant in this case. Period.

He talks very clearly when he wants to. What he said was "we heard 3:38, nothing backs up that time" (so maybe 3:35?) "We were told there was a person - We confirm that there is no one that is unknown to LE." "We were told X and we know Y." That is what I heard over and over. Not once did he say that this sighting was deemed to be inconsequential or not pertinent to this case, not did he ever out right say that this witness was mistaken about the sighting. Not at that precise moment, maybe not at that location, but he did not not ever say that he dismissed this as out right wrong. There were two details he dismissed clearly - to me - the time and the fact that it was a "mystery" person.

You are so right. I was questioning him on my own story and I was confused.

 

[elmomom]

What would a Long Islander know? Thanks.

Anywhere on the route to either Michigan or LI would work. But IIRC, JW's father showed up fairly soon after LS went missing.

I think if LS was disposed of by one of the POIs, it is within 1-2 hours of campus. or less.

 

[Blythe]

Anywhere on the route to either Michigan or LI would work. But IIRC, JW's father showed up fairly soon after LS went missing.

I think if LS was disposed of by one of the POIs, it is within 1-2 hours of campus. or less.

And seems they did not want her located.

 

[Glaucon]

What would a Long Islander know? Thanks.

Good point. I guess they'd know about the ocean, which is also COLD (and salty too! :crazy. My understanding is that most of the POIs are from the NYC general area, and one is from a Detroit suburb (please correct if wrong). I just think Lake Michigan (or Erie for that matter) would be a tough place to dump a body - unless you had quick and easy access to a boat, which seems unlikely in this case.

 

[bunnyesq.]

Anywhere on the route to either Michigan or LI would work. But IIRC, JW's father showed up fairly soon after LS went missing.

I think if LS was disposed of by one of the POIs, it is within 1-2 hours of campus. or less.

Unless JR drove home for the summer. With her body.