OH OH - Brian Shaffer, 27, Columbus, 1 April 2006 - #2

[neesaki]

Derek used the term "negative" , not angry. Sorry, still didn't find the actual link to the article.

 

[Alleykins]

The reason everyone thinks Clint is hiding something is simply because he refused the polygraph test. He could have put all this to rest if he had just taken it. I understand his reasoning for not doing it, but it definitely doesn't help convince anyone of his innocence.

I agree, but even if he had taken a polygraph and passed it, there would still be those who think he's holding back and accuse him of somehow beating the test. The way I see it, no matter how Clint handled it, it was a no win situation for him. Sometimes, there's just no convincing some people, one way or the other.

 

[dotr]

Is it possible they did hook up after leaving the bar? Just the two of them , not Meredith. And that's when whatever happened, happened. Thus leaving Clint to claim he never saw Brian after the bar. Just an idea.

http://thelantern.com/2009/04/is-brian-shaffer-alive/
rbbm.

Rosenberg also said in his e-mail to Corbett that, “The only burning issue with the authorities remains Clint’s refusal to be polygraphed. That decision was based on my recommendation and advise [sic] to Clint, not because he is, has been misleading or has something to hide, but that he simply has nothing new to tell and was totally up front and honest with them from the beginning. As far as Clint is concerned, this matter is closed.”

In a telephone interview Friday, Meredith Reed, a friend of both Shaffer and Florence who was with them that night, said she took and passed a polygraph about a month after Shaffer disappeared.

She said she assumes the Columbus Police asked her to take the test.

In fact, everyone who was asked to take a polygraph passed it, Miles said.

But not everyone who knew Brian or who had seen him the night he went missing was asked to take a polygraph.

The last time Shaffer was seen on surveillance video outside the Ugly Tuna Saloona he was with two women, Brightan Zatko and Amber Ruic. Ruic said in a phone interview Friday that she was never asked to take a polygraph.

 

[MatthewTyler]

Derek used the term "negative" , not angry. Sorry, still didn't find the actual link to the article.

Are you referring to Derek's comment about Clint speaking negatively about Brian after the disappearance? I remember reading an article where Clint said something about Brian having a history of mouthing off when he drank, and Derek and Randy both thought that was completely uncalled for to say

 

[MatthewTyler]

Is it possible they did hook up after leaving the bar? Just the two of them , not Meredith. And that's when whatever happened, happened. Thus leaving Clint to claim he never saw Brian after the bar. Just an idea.

I assume that Clint's phone records were checked? If the 2 of them did meet up again after the bar, surely Clint would have had to get in contact with him or vice versa, likely via phone call. Clint says that Brian's phone was shut off by 2 am, so if the records indicate no activity after that time then it was unlikely they were in contact after Clint left the bar

 

[Alleykins]

Is it possible they did hook up after leaving the bar? Just the two of them , not Meredith. And that's when whatever happened, happened. Thus leaving Clint to claim he never saw Brian after the bar. Just an idea.

I would be willing to accept that totally if we knew when she and Clint parted ways.

 

[Deleted member 155000]

I agree, but even if he had taken a polygraph and passed it, there would still be those who think he's holding back and accuse him of somehow beating the test. The way I see it, no matter how Clint handled it, it was a no win situation for him. Sometimes, there's just no convincing some people, one way or the other.

I disagree. Just talking for myself, but if one of my friends was truly missing or in danger--I would set aside personal risk to share as much as possible whenever asked. If Clint had taken a polygraph, he would be viewed the same way as everyone else. Because he didn't, bc he spoke negatively abt Brian, and bc his lawyers implied they believed Brian was alive, it drew suspicion to Clint over others.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alleykins]

http://thelantern.com/2009/04/is-brian-shaffer-alive/
rbbm.

Interesting, from the article,

In a telephone interview Friday, Meredith Reed, a friend of both Shaffer and Florence who was with them that night, said she took and passed a polygraph about a month after Shaffer disappeared.
She said she assumes the Columbus Police asked her to take the test.

I find it odd that she would agree to take a test but not know for sure who had ordered/asked her to take the test.

 

[Alleykins]

I disagree. Just talking for myself, but if one of my friends was truly missing or in danger--I would set aside personal risk to share as much as possible whenever asked. If Clint had taken a polygraph, he would be viewed the same way as everyone else. Because he didn't, bc he spoke negatively abt Brian, and bc his lawyers implied they believed Brian was alive, it drew suspicion to Clint over others.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, what you're saying is that you would risk being arrested and possibly convicted for a murder you didn't commit, all for your friend? Truly? Or do you think you can just talk your way out of it because, gosh darn it, you didn't do it? Just curious, have you ever been accused of a crime and interrogated by the police?

 

[dotr]

http://nbc4i.com/2016/04/01/a-decade-later-medical-students-disappearance-remains-a-mystery/
Published: April 1, 2016

Although it’s been a decade, police are still looking for answers. Sgt. John Hurst was originally assigned the case and still works on it today.
He says there’s not a day that goes by that he doesn’t wonder what happened to Shaffer.
“My hope is that someday that we do have the answers that everybody is looking for,” says Sgt. Hurst.
He says they’ve scoured over thousands of hours of surveillance video and interviewed hundreds of people.

He says the news of finding LaBute’s body in the Scioto River earlier this week, coupled with his experience on the Shaffer case has left him sleepless.

He says they still follow up on tips or leads on the Brian Shaffer case today. The last one they had was about 8 months ago.

He still encourages anyone with information to call CrimeStoppers.
Shaffer has never been found. There have been many theories on what happened to him including suicide, foul play or that he just walked away from his life. Sgt. Hurst says all are possible, but none have been proven.

rbbm.

 

[MatthewTyler]

Is there any sort of technology they can use to detect skeletal remains in walls? If so, did they ever try this on the current building where the construction was? It would be nice to even be able to rule just one thing out. Or maybe something that can detect certain metals, because if he's in the construction site he likely still has his phone and keys with him

 

[rachelcanteatcheese]

I'm almost certain that other security camera footage was checked. At about 3:35 in that E! News clip that everybody on this thread has seen, the narrator says that security cameras IN THE AREA were checked (although it's E! News, so I'm hesitant to trust everything they report). However, the detective in the clip I said able to demonstrate the exact path Brian took while exiting a parking garage, which indicates that other security camera footage was checked.

 

[Deleted member 155000]

So, what you're saying is that you would risk being arrested and possibly convicted for a murder you didn't commit, all for your friend? Truly? Or do you think you can just talk your way out of it because, gosh darn it, you didn't do it? Just curious, have you ever been accused of a crime and interrogated by the police?

I would absolutely do a lie detector test. at risk to myself. The risk is overstated. No one can be convicted by a lie detector alone. They're not even admissible in many courts. If I didn't do anything, I would not be concerned about a conviction. I might worry about public opinion shifting, but those losses wouldn't outweigh my friend's life.

I haven't been charged with a crime but I have risked my own life to help someone before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 155000]

Is there any sort of technology they can use to detect skeletal remains in walls? If so, did they ever try this on the current building where the construction was? It would be nice to even be able to rule just one thing out. Or maybe something that can detect certain metals, because if he's in the construction site he likely still has his phone and keys with him

There HAS to be, right? In this day and age? But the police probably feel, based on their findings, that the expense would be unjustified.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MatthewTyler]

I'd love to make a trip to Columbus just to investigate for myself lol. Maybe if I run into some free time

 

[neesaki]

Apologies for the duplicate posts, I don't even know how that happened. :thinking:

 

[Brainy]

I would absolutely do a lie detector test. at risk to myself. The risk is overstated. No one can be convicted by a lie detector alone. They're not even admissible in many courts. If I didn't do anything, I would not be concerned about a conviction. I might worry about public opinion shifting, but those losses wouldn't outweigh my friend's life.

I haven't been charged with a crime but I have risked my own life to help someone before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, and like I have mentioned here before – Clint doesn’t seem like he was Brian’s “best friend”. If he was his friend, he would take that polygraph. He wouldn’t be convicted by a lie detector. There was nothing really that was pointing at him anyway. He didn’t even do the smallest thing he could to help the investigation. Admit it or not, this does make him look guilty even if he had his personal reasons of not taking it. I think his reasons were just about reputation, of what people would think, rumors, etc. If this was the case it only makes me sad that he wouldn’t even do it for his friend.

 

[Alleykins]

I would absolutely do a lie detector test. at risk to myself. The risk is overstated. No one can be convicted by a lie detector alone. They're not even admissible in many courts. If I didn't do anything, I would not be concerned about a conviction. I might worry about public opinion shifting, but those losses wouldn't outweigh my friend's life.
I haven't been charged with a crime but I have risked my own life to help someone before.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BBM- I thought that, too, that if I didn't do anything I wouldn't be concerned about a conviction, but I was never more wrong.

I'd share my story of being falsely accused of a crime and nearly having my life ruined, and being interrogated by the police for something I didn't do, but I know it won't make a hill of beans. Those of you who have never been in the hot seat personally, will never understand how precious the right to remain silent & protecting yourself from self incrimination is. I'm not even going to waste my time trying to convince you. Suffice to say, should you find yourself a victim of circumstance, you'll learn first hand.

 

[dotr]

There may be many reasons for C. to not take the test, maybe none of them are related to Brian's disappearance.
The most important thing, imo. is where to find Brian now, maybe he left the club in some way not picked up by cameras, perhaps in the middle of the night, or the following day- by his own volition or otherwise.
Let's say he was drunk or whatever and quietly passed out in some really weird unnoticed spot, like the awning, or a booze/food barrel of some kind, or at the back of a fridge shelf, under the stage, i dunno- then slips out undetected- to the great unknown.
all speculation, imo.

 

[Deleted member 155000]

BBM- I thought that, too, that if I didn't do anything I wouldn't be concerned about a conviction, but I was never more wrong.

I'd share my story of being falsely accused of a crime and nearly having my life ruined, and being interrogated by the police for something I didn't do, but I know it won't make a hill of beans. Those of you who have never been in the hot seat personally, will never understand how precious the right to remain silent & protecting yourself from self incrimination is. I'm not even going to waste my time trying to convince you. Suffice to say, should you find yourself a victim of circumstance, you'll learn first hand.

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am sorry for how it sounds like the justice system failed you. I have a friend whose life has been derailed in many ways by false allegations so I do know that justice is sometimes miscarried as you have described. However, when we are taking about a person's (especially a close friend's!) life being at risk or taken, I think it's one of those times in life where it's hard and feels scary, but that doesn't excuse us from doing the right thing.

Lie detectors aren't admissible. I believe the statute of limitations has also passed. Clint should absolutely come forward and share what he knows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk