IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #9
- Thread starter bessie
- Start date
- Status
Right, but he never said she wasn't on the video.
cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,312
I believe he said she was never on video at the time the witness mentioned and that they looked "extensively" at video...
He did not say that there was no video supporting the 3:38 sighting. In fact, he said that she WAS on that corner, with people already known to them. He just said that it didn't happen at 3:38. If the witness saw what she says she did, at an hour earlier (and he alluded to this as being an hour earlier), it is proof of how drunk Lauren was during that time. If it was around 2:30, 10th and College doesn't appear to be a direct route from the bar to Smallwood though. Does this mean they were on their way back to CR's but then turned around to head to Smallwood?
cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,312
What I took from it was that they are not changing their stance that 2:51 is the last time they KNOW where Lauren was and who she was with...nothing else has been verified with video, of which he said they have a great deal...
elmomom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2011
- Messages
- 3,491
- Reaction score
- 8,117
Back to square 1 on the 3:38. If he wanted to be clearer, he would have been. This is some sort of tactical maneuvering, and I am not going to speculate what is or is not true, and what is or is not the motive behind floating this out there and leaving it, in my mind, intentionally murky.
Jupiter812
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- -15
Some "friends".
SeaEclipse
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Messages
- 406
- Reaction score
- 252
Completely agree. Any 3:38 sighting-related speculation or mystery man-related speculation should be dead.
He was super confusing, but what I took from that is LS is NOT on the video at 3:38. BUT:
Someone already known to them is on the video, never clear about what time this person is on the video, or if LS is on the video with this person.
He also said that it doesn't necessarily mean that witness didn't see LS/mystery guy or someone else/mystery guy (though I should say "known guy") just that it's not on the video at the time she says.
It is becoming very clear to me that they are really leaning hard on the known POIs. If this was a close circle of friends, they are now protecting each other, because I believe LS is unfortunately not alive to be protected by that circle. The raw emotion that is so evident in Charlene's demeanor really is pointed at POIs......
Regarding the calls to police by friends.....It's possible that most of the good friends have nothing to report. They know nothing. We've heard that JW called to make the report and didn't two girls go with him? The ones who have things that maybe could be shared seem to all have lawyers. I can almost guarantee that they have been told to NOT call.
illinialum
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2011
- Messages
- 207
- Reaction score
- 4
One friend has contacted police? That breaks my heart and explains why the parents might seem so leery of her friends.
You would think that even if her friends had NOTHING to do with the disappearance, they would be contacting LE to see if they could be of help. Her friends know LS's behaviors, tendencies, habits. They may be able to answer questions about LS that no one else can - even LS's parents. I'm sure LS's behavior in school is different from home.
For a girl who seems to have so many friends, this is so sad.
You would think that even if her friends had NOTHING to do with the disappearance, they would be contacting LE to see if they could be of help. Her friends know LS's behaviors, tendencies, habits. They may be able to answer questions about LS that no one else can - even LS's parents. I'm sure LS's behavior in school is different from home.
For a girl who seems to have so many friends, this is so sad.
I think it is a mistake to believe this to be dead. It is clear that they do not have video of a 3:38 encounter described by the witness, and this is why they cannot put it in to the last sighting.
I attempted watching this presser live but was unfortunately left without sound. It was still heartbreaking to watch Charlene's plee this way.
Question for those that heard: I see a lot of talk of the "murkiness" and vagueness portrayed by CQ. Well, didn't the press attempt to ask questions to clear up the 3:38 witness? If so, did CQ continue to dodge this?
Thanks
Question for those that heard: I see a lot of talk of the "murkiness" and vagueness portrayed by CQ. Well, didn't the press attempt to ask questions to clear up the 3:38 witness? If so, did CQ continue to dodge this?
Thanks
No, he was clear they don't have any video to support the 3:38 supposed sighting.
Also, people get scared. I'm not saying that is OK, but it's real. We don't know what happened. We've speculated that she ODd and the boys became scared, but what if it were more violent than that? What if there is a serious drug ring involved? Kids get scared over small things - what if it's something larger? It is sad and not OK that her "friends" aren't sharing things with the police, but there may be a reason aside from assuming that they're guilty of something.
SeaEclipse
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Messages
- 406
- Reaction score
- 252
Umm... I think he said a lot more than "it's not visible on video, so we can't confirm". I think it's clear that whatever supposedly happened at 3:38 *should* have been on video, but was not (or at least, LS was not part of whatever was on video). He did not just say the 3:38 sighting was unconfirmed, he more or less said it was false/irrelevant.
- Status