OH OH - Brian Shaffer, 27, Columbus, 1 April 2006 - #3

[embufum]

Question for L4B ... listened to the latest episode today. The retired detective made a comment about Brian not agreeing with his father's lifestyle. Do you have any idea what that means? It was an odd statement that piqued my curiosity.

Really enjoying the podcast!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

If you read between the lines and listen to the whole podcast I believe I know what he was talking about but I rather not even throw out my opinion on that one.

 

[embufum]

Occams razor is a grand philosophy, but, it doesn't always fit. The world is more complicated than most of us would want to admit. And there is often times more involved than simplicity, such as empirical evidence, and then there’s the complex nature of human beings in general.

What is the evidence in this case? Do we even know? AFAIK, What we do know isn’t much, and there’s no evidence that has been revealed to us that Brian was buried somehow in the construction site, is there?

However, If someone here knows something I would really hope you turn it over to LE.

Very well stated! I think that we can in my mind put to rest or at least minimize the buried in concrete theory. I actually think it's a disservice to Brian to end the case inside the Gateway. In doing so we are possibly ignoring other leads as to where he might be, dead or alive.

 

[XPh]

Occams razor is a grand philosophy, but, it doesn't always fit. The world is more complicated than most of us would want to admit. And there is often times more involved than simplicity, such as empirical evidence, and then there’s the complex nature of human beings in general.

What is the evidence in this case? Do we even know? AFAIK, What we do know isn’t much, and there’s no evidence that has been revealed to us that Brian was buried somehow in the construction site, is there?

However, If someone here knows something I would really hope you turn it over to LE.

I agree there isn’t much evidence, which makes this case especially frustrating.

But what we do have is:
-evidence that Brian was outside the bar at 1:55am
-evidence that there were multiple entry points nearby into an active construction area
-eyewitness statements claiming that he was very drunk
-no evidence of Brian leaving through the only obvious public exit
-a lack of any shred of concrete evidence that suggests Brian is still alive today (12 years later)

I can only come up with one theory that ties these all together using only one major assumption, and that’s a construction zone accident that has remained undetected.

Occam’s razor is a philosophical principle. Not a scientific law. But the lack of evidence in this case is exactly what makes this case feel so much like a philosophical debate. We are all grasping at theories with very little concrete evidence to go off of. If you think critically using this well established principle of thought, I just don’t see any way that the construction accident doesn’t become the leading theory.

That doesn’t mean that’s what definitely happened. It just means that it’s the most likely scenario.

LE giving a very non-descript statement of “we looked everywhere” does nothing to put these thoughts to rest IMO—unless they come out and give a detailed account of the exact state of the construction area, what type of work was completed, how long it took to search the area and what sort of construction was done in the meantime. They’ve remained silent on that as far as I know.

 

[embufum]

I agree there isn’t much evidence, which makes this case especially frustrating.

But what we do have is:
-evidence that Brian was outside the bar at 1:55am
-evidence that there were multiple entry points nearby into an active construction area
-eyewitness statements claiming that he was very drunk
-no evidence of Brian leaving through the only obvious public exit
-a lack of any shred of concrete evidence that suggests Brian is still alive today (12 years later)

I can only come up with one theory that ties these all together using only one major assumption, and that’s a construction zone accident that has remained undetected.

Occam’s razor is a philosophical principle. Not a scientific law. But the lack of evidence in this case is exactly what makes this case feel so much like a philosophical debate. We are all grasping at theories with very little concrete evidence to go off of. If you think critically using this well established principle of thought, I just don’t see any way that the construction accident doesn’t become the leading theory.

That doesn’t mean that’s what definitely happened. It just means that it’s the most likely scenario.

LE giving a very non-descript statement of “we looked everywhere” does nothing to put these thoughts to rest IMO—unless they come out and give a detailed account of the exact state of the construction area, what type of work was completed, how long it took to search the area and what sort of construction was done in the meantime. They’ve remained silent on that as far as I know.

Actually Det Hurst's exact words were "we searched the building from top to bottom" but don't let that take anything away from remainder of your very insightful and philosophical post. I especially liked your "concrete evidence" comment.

 

[XPh]

Very well stated! I think that we can in my mind put to rest or at least minimize the buried in concrete theory. I actually think it's a disservice to Brian to end the case inside the Gateway. In doing so we are possibly ignoring other leads as to where he might be, dead or alive.

<modsnip>

Tell me one reason that theory should be put to rest, other than LE giving a vague statement that they already searched. How many counterexamples do you need to see of cases where searches were ineffective or the body was there the whole time?&#8212;there was just an example of this a few posts ago!!! <modsnip>

There are theories that I think are much more likely than others, but I would never say &#8220;let&#8217;s put that one to rest completely,&#8221; unless there were obvious reason to do so. If anything, I might refer readers back to the actual facts of the case and away from rampant speculation about what Brian or his friends/family were thinking and how that effected the events of that evening&#8212;something that you seem to make the basis of nearly all of your theories.

 

[XPh]

Actually Det Hurst's exact words were "we searched the building from top to bottom" but don't let that take anything away from remainder of your very insightful and philosophical post. I especially liked your "concrete evidence" comment.

The assertion that Hurst saying “we searched top to bottom” makes it a less vague statement is one I think most people would reject.

 

[itsrak]

I agree there isn&#8217;t much evidence, which makes this case especially frustrating.

But what we do have is:
-evidence that Brian was outside the bar at 1:55am
-evidence that there were multiple entry points nearby into an active construction area
-eyewitness statements claiming that he was very drunk
-no evidence of Brian leaving through the only obvious public exit
-a lack of any shred of concrete evidence that suggests Brian is still alive today (12 years later)

I can only come up with one theory that ties these all together using only one major assumption, and that&#8217;s a construction zone accident that has remained undetected.

Occam&#8217;s razor is a philosophical principle. Not a scientific law. But the lack of evidence in this case is exactly what makes this case feel so much like a philosophical debate. We are all grasping at theories with very little concrete evidence to go off of. If you think critically using this well established principle of thought, I just don&#8217;t see any way that the construction accident doesn&#8217;t become the leading theory.

That doesn&#8217;t mean that&#8217;s what definitely happened. It just means that it&#8217;s the most likely scenario.

LE giving a very non-descript statement of &#8220;we looked everywhere&#8221; does nothing to put these thoughts to rest IMO&#8212;unless they come out and give a detailed account of the exact state of the construction area, what type of work was completed, how long it took to search the area and what sort of construction was done in the meantime. They&#8217;ve remained silent on that as far as I know.

Well said, my friend. I admire your rational approach.

 

[embufum]

The only people that know what the construction area looks like are the workers and the police and unfortunately that's probably where it will remain unless someone comes up with pictures. We know from what Det Hurst said they searched the building pretty thoroughly and did multiple searches with two types of dogs according to his most recent interview.

In this most recent interview with Don Corbett although not asked, doesn't even entertain the idea that Brian is still in the building. I honestly thought that he would mention it. He seems to think that Brian got out of there alive and is split on whether he is dead or alive.

Even if there is a 1% chance that Brian made it out of there alive then I think he deserves for people not to give up on him.

On a side note I will be in Columbus this weekend and I may head towards the Gateway Theater so if there is anyone that wants pictures of anything specific let me know.

 

[XPh]

In this most recent interview with Don Corbett although not asked, doesn't even entertain the idea that Brian is still in the building. I honestly thought that he would mention it. He seems to think that Brian got out of there alive and is split on whether he is dead or alive.

Even if there is a 1% chance that Brian made it out of there alive then I think he deserves for people not to give up on him.

I was also surprised Corbett didn’t talk directly about the construction site. He dismisses the fact that foul play occurred “in the bar”—something I think we all pretty much agree with—but makes no comment about the possibility of a construction-related incident.

He also mentions that LE kept him pretty much in the dark, so presumably he wouldn’t have much information about the nature of the site, timing of the search, etc (the key information that all of us who are proponents of the theory really want to know).

I do not think we should “give up” on theories that place Brian getting out of the bar—in fact I’ve suggested some. I just think these are less likely than the construction site. And I certainly don’t think we should stop considering the construction site either.

 

[XPh]

Does anyone have information on the professor’s house that he was babysitting (does he mean housesitting?) which was processed as a potential crime scene?

It sounds like they didn’t find anything noteworthy. But in the years I’ve followed this case, I haven’t really heard of this until now.

 

[Ozoner]

Occams razor is a grand philosophy, but, it doesn't always fit. The world is more complicated than most of us would want to admit. And there is often times more involved than simplicity, such as empirical evidence, and then there’s the complex nature of human beings in general.

What is the evidence in this case? Do we even know? AFAIK, What we do know isn’t much, and there’s no evidence that has been revealed to us that Brian was buried somehow in the construction site, is there?

However, If someone here knows something I would really hope you turn it over to LE.

BBM

Actually, there is evidence that Brian was buried or immured at the construction site. The reports of a hideous stench at the Gateway complex constitute evidence. How much weight you choose to give that evidence is up to you. I consider it compelling.

 

[embufum]

BBM

Actually, there is evidence that Brian was buried or immured at the construction site. The reports of a hideous stench at the Gateway complex constitute evidence. How much weight you choose to give that evidence is up to you. I consider it compelling.

How does a bad smell in the lobby of the Gateway constituent evidence that Brian is buryed in concrete in the floor below?

 

[itsrak]

Just finished the most recent Comeback podcast with the Don Corbett interview. Some thoughts:

-First and foremost, great job L4B as always; so thankful we have this podcast!

-I appreciated Mr. Corbett&#8217;s willingness to talk openly and share his opinions.

-I was surprised that so many of the points that he emphasized were based on speculation only. I guess it&#8217;s hard when you&#8217;re kept in the dark by LE. But I just sort of expected he would have more factual information he could share or things to set the record straight on (there were a few things like this, e.g. refuting that Clint waited at Brian&#8217;s apartment the next day).

-The more factual things that he did share didn&#8217;t seemed to be emphasized as strongly, but they sure felt important to me.

-Why do I not know more about the professor&#8217;s house that was searched as a potential crime scene? That seems HUGE to me? Did I totally miss something on this? Apologies if this has been discussed and I am late to the party, but I&#8217;d appreciate it if someone has more info to offer about this.

Thanks for summarizing your thoughts. I just listened to the podcast, too. Thanks to those who made it happen.

FWIW, the points that were of most interest to me:

1) Some time after Randy died, the gal he'd been dating had a convo with Corbett and told him that a while after Brian disappeared the father of one of Brian's friends had been cleaning out the basement of his home and found a box of stuff that belonged to Brian that included some writing that the GF told Corbett about, and the gist of it was she and/or Corbett felt that the writings were 'bizarre' and basically very dark.
2) There'd been at least some history of suicide in Brian's family - mom's or dad's side or both
3) Brian had incurred a lot of student loan debt and some credit card debt, may have been feeling financial strain
4) Brian hadn't been doing particularly well grade-wise in med school, may have also been source of strain

Having learned these things, the possibility of suicide seems perhaps slightly more probable. But still a lower probability IMO. I would still contend that most likely outcome was that Brian died in the building in an accident, most likely in the 'completely dug up' construction area, and his remains are still there.

 

[embufum]

I was also surprised Corbett didn’t talk directly about the construction site. He dismisses the fact that foul play occurred “in the bar”—something I think we all pretty much agree with—but makes no comment about the possibility of a construction-related incident.

He also mentions that LE kept him pretty much in the dark, so presumably he wouldn’t have much information about the nature of the site, timing of the search, etc (the key information that all of us who are proponents of the theory really want to know).

I do not think we should “give up” on theories that place Brian getting out of the bar—in fact I’ve suggested some. I just think these are less likely than the construction site. And I certainly don’t think we should stop considering the construction site either.

I agree. For the record Don does NOT dismiss the construction site as a place Brian could still be. He pretty much keeps an open mind on most theories. He is pretty much of the opinion that anything within reason is possible, but he didn't seem to put emphasis on any one thing. I did speak to him briefly today.

 

[itsrak]

I agree. For the record Don does NOT dismiss the construction site as a place Brian could still be. He pretty much keeps an open mind on most theories. He is pretty much of the opinion that anything within reason is possible, but he didn't seem to put emphasis on any one thing. I did speak to him briefly today.

If you get a chance to chat with him again, would like to know what he knows about the construction area and the search of the building... thx! Wonder if Don is on WS.

 

[embufum]

I agree there isn’t much evidence, which makes this case especially frustrating.

But what we do have is:
-evidence that Brian was outside the bar at 1:55am
-evidence that there were multiple entry points nearby into an active construction area
-eyewitness statements claiming that he was very drunk
-no evidence of Brian leaving through the only obvious public exit
-a lack of any shred of concrete evidence that suggests Brian is still alive today (12 years later)

I can only come up with one theory that ties these all together using only one major assumption, and that’s a construction zone accident that has remained undetected.

Occam’s razor is a philosophical principle. Not a scientific law. But the lack of evidence in this case is exactly what makes this case feel so much like a philosophical debate. We are all grasping at theories with very little concrete evidence to go off of. If you think critically using this well established principle of thought, I just don’t see any way that the construction accident doesn’t become the leading theory.

That doesn’t mean that’s what definitely happened. It just means that it’s the most likely scenario.

LE giving a very non-descript statement of “we looked everywhere” does nothing to put these thoughts to rest IMO—unless they come out and give a detailed account of the exact state of the construction area, what type of work was completed, how long it took to search the area and what sort of construction was done in the meantime. They’ve remained silent on that as far as I know.

What eye witnesses are you referring to that claim Brian was very drunk? Both of the girls he was speaking to in early interviews I have seen have them stating he did not appear drunk to them. This is a quote from the an article in the Ohio Center for Missing Persons.

[FONT=&quot]"Although Clint claimed that they had numerous shots that night, Brian does not appear to be overly intoxicated in the videos. The girls last scene talking with Brian shortly before [/FONT][FONT=&quot]2 AM[/FONT][FONT=&quot] said that he did not appear drunk to them". [/FONT]

 

[Looking4Brian]

If you get a chance to chat with him again, would like to know what he knows about the construction area and the search of the building... thx! Wonder if Don is on WS.

I will ask him more but he did state to us that he doesn&#8217;t not believe it happened at the bar or anywhere in close proximity to the bar. He also stated at one point he isn&#8217;t buried in the concrete like a bad mafia movie.

 

[XPh]

What eye witnesses are you referring to that claim Brian was very drunk? Both of the girls he was speaking to in early interviews I have seen have them stating he did not appear drunk to them. This is a quote from the an article in the Ohio Center for Missing Persons.

[FONT=&quot]"Although Clint claimed that they had numerous shots that night, Brian does not appear to be overly intoxicated in the videos. The girls last scene talking with Brian shortly before [/FONT][FONT=&quot]2 AM[/FONT][FONT=&quot] said that he did not appear drunk to them". [/FONT]

I believe Looking4Brian said in an earlier post that one of the girls more recently said the entire group was very drunk. L4B, feel free to correct me if I have that wrong. Upcoming podcast episode with the girls to clarify perhaps?

 

[embufum]

I will ask him more but he did state to us that he doesn&#8217;t not believe it happened at the bar or anywhere in close proximity to the bar. He also stated at one point he isn&#8217;t buried in the concrete like a bad mafia movie.

That would be great. I think clarification is needed from saying that Brian could still be in the building somewhere as opposed to Brian is buried in concrete which I personally can't see. While Don did give an example or two of him still being in the building concrete wasn't one of them. I am guessing the you got the same impression that I did, Don is open minding enough to consider most reasonable theories.

 

[Looking4Brian]

Question for L4B ... listened to the latest episode today. The retired detective made a comment about Brian not agreeing with his father's lifestyle. Do you have any idea what that means? It was an odd statement that piqued my curiosity.

Really enjoying the podcast!



Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Glad you are enjoying! What you heard Don say is all we know as well. I think he was just letting us know they were a normal family with normal family stresses.