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

[pg66]

Did Brian attend Ohio University before he attended OSU?

All the pics of Brian I have seen in which he had long hair and facial hair were several years prior to his disappearance. In his last couple of years of studies, as far as I know, he had short hair. At least that is what the pics indicate.

 

[embufum]

It’s interesting that when Brian first went missing all the news articles said he was wearing a striped shirt.

 

[Kaie]

Did Brian attend Ohio University before he attended OSU?

I don't know if it's just because I'm tired, but that is vaguely ringing a bell with me. Maybe Brian was only briefly enrolled at Ohio University, and someone mentioned it in an interview or an article once.

 

[pg66]

It’s interesting that when Brian first went missing all the news articles said he was wearing a striped shirt.

Correct. It would also be interesting to know where they got this misinformation.

 

[Looking4Brian]

A copy & paste of a youtube comment :

Aerophlix Media 1 year ago
These guys are in contact with Derek now we marched with him Sunday as well www.comebackpodcast.com
They also have new information that the media was completely wrong on! currently searching for security video that police wont release where the security team says shows him by a wendys after the last time seen check out their podcast!

I did not listen to this podcast but, apparently, the police either have suppressed video footage showing Brian by a Wendys after the last time he was officially seen or that they say the police has this footage. Any truth to this? Is there such footage in existence? If not, if it is a lie, then why does this lie exist? And who created this lie? For what reason? If the footage exists, why suppress it? To hide something? If so, for what reason?

In any case, this is what helped me form my theory. But I've been told that the "seen by the Wendy's" is speculation. So Hurst speculated? So why is it said that this footage exists? Either it does or it doesn't. You can't speculate on the existence of footage. Either it exists or it doesn't. And what was the basis for this speculation? An anonymous tip?

As one of the hosts of Comeback, I can tell you this is 100% false. The owner of Aerophlix media reached out to me 2 years ago wanting to video The Brian Shaffer March For The Missing with his drone. I agreed and was super excited to see the footage. He brought very professional equipment and recorded everything. He wanted to partner with me and Nick for a YouTube Channel. Basically he wanted to insert himself into Brian’s disappearance and my personal life. We just held the 2nd March for the Missing and I still have not received the footage he took at the 1st March for the Missing.

 

[Looking4Brian]

Did Brian attend Ohio University before he attended OSU?

He attended Ohio University Lancaster Branch for 1 year.

 

[embufum]

I got this from a comment someone made on youtube. Just now, in the last hour or so, I actually took the time to listen to the podcast where John Hurst is interviewed. He does say that cadaver dogs picked up nothing in the bar or building or construction site but that he was tracked outside the bar up to a Wendy's. However, Hurst said that although it appeared to be Brian's scent, he was not 100% sure that it was. Until it is confirmed as near to certainty as possible that the scent was not Brian's, I'm accepting that it was.

As for the suppressed footage, again, I got that from a youtube comment. I'm assuming the commenter actually heard that somewhere in a podcast. I have not listened to all the podcasts so I can't confirm if what this commenter said is true or not. I merely put this out there to see if anyone here had heard of this and/or knew something about it.

In a podcast, Brian's brother Derek has a gut feeling that Clint knows more than he let on. Derek also thinks that something bad happened to Brian and that he is no longer alive. Derek absolutely does not believe that Brian walked away from his life. If Brian's own brother thinks Brian did not walk away, then that's the best we have to go on for now. And who are we to question Derek?

Wendy's is no longer there but N Pearl was located right behind Wendy's at the time. As I had said in a previous post I think it possible Brian went through N Pearl to get home. N Pearl is more of an alley than a street. I don't think that Brian was caught on camera by Wendy's.

Something else that I find very interesting. When Brian was spotted by the homeless man, one of Brian's friends lived right across the street from the Dairy mart. I'm not sure we can totally discount this sighting. If this man was Brian then it's very possible that he was staying with this guy. Just seems like too much of a coincidence to me.

 

[pg66]

Interesting theory :

"Brian was speaking to the 2 ladies outside the bar about cocaine and maybe meeting up afterwards. In an effort to find more coke he went back into the bar to speak to some acquaintances or staff that could hook him up. At this point the bar is closing and people are being ushered out. He goes out the service entrance in either an exchange of drugs or an attempted exchange of drugs with a staff member or band player. At this point it's probably 2:10am. He has now exited the bar from the service entrance and since the bar is closed he can't come back in from that door. He decides to walk through an alley or side road to get back to where he wants to go (his house or after party). There is a good chance he has coke on his person or whoever he asked about the coke told someone he has cash. He gets jumped in a dark alley and robbed by 2-3 men. In the robbery he is killed. They lift him into a dumpster and escape the scene possibly with his cell phone which they turn off. Since the search really does not kick off until late Monday and most trash is picked up Monday starting as early as 4am his body is disposed of in the landfill.

His friend Florence also was involved in cocaine which is why he didn't want to take the lie detector test or speak to detectives further. That sort of admission could ruin his career. He fears that being entangled in drugs plus a missing person case could have serious implications. Any attorney would advise to not speak to police under polygraph. "

I got this from reddit. The comments posted for this theory claimed the theory was full of holes. There is no evidence that Brian ever used drugs. At least that's what his brother said. But then again, if he did use drugs, he would not want that fact to be known. I do not subscribe to this theory but it does have a certain amount of plausibility. Any thoughts?

 

[neesaki]

Interesting theory :

"Brian was speaking to the 2 ladies outside the bar about cocaine and maybe meeting up afterwards. In an effort to find more coke he went back into the bar to speak to some acquaintances or staff that could hook him up. At this point the bar is closing and people are being ushered out. He goes out the service entrance in either an exchange of drugs or an attempted exchange of drugs with a staff member or band player. At this point it's probably 2:10am. He has now exited the bar from the service entrance and since the bar is closed he can't come back in from that door. He decides to walk through an alley or side road to get back to where he wants to go (his house or after party). There is a good chance he has coke on his person or whoever he asked about the coke told someone he has cash. He gets jumped in a dark alley and robbed by 2-3 men. In the robbery he is killed. They lift him into a dumpster and escape the scene possibly with his cell phone which they turn off. Since the search really does not kick off until late Monday and most trash is picked up Monday starting as early as 4am his body is disposed of in the landfill.

His friend Florence also was involved in cocaine which is why he didn't want to take the lie detector test or speak to detectives further. That sort of admission could ruin his career. He fears that being entangled in drugs plus a missing person case could have serious implications. Any attorney would advise to not speak to police under polygraph. "

I got this from reddit. The comments posted for this theory claimed the theory was full of holes. There is no evidence that Brian ever used drugs. At least that's what his brother said. But then again, if he did use drugs, he would not want that fact to be known. I do not subscribe to this theory but it does have a certain amount of plausibility. Any thoughts?

Very true, many college students use uppers to help them stay up to study, and / or for recreational use. Most likely this kind of information is something Brian wouldn't share with his family.
Btw, this is one of several theories I've entertained as well.

 

[pg66]

Very true, many college students use uppers to help them stay up to study, and / or for recreational use. Most likely this kind of information is something Brian wouldn't share with his family.
Btw, this is one of several theories I've entertained as well.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that this theory is the most plausible. I personally knew some friends back in the day who used uppers and such to stay up and study. This is apparently more common that we think. One thing I am absolutely convinced of is that Clint knows something. He may not have been directly involved but I am sure he knows something. His initial co-operation with the police means nothing. Lying to the police is a very common occurrence. But, when pressured, he clammed up and got a lawyer. I am convinced he knows something. He may have helped to set up the meeting with Brian and his eventual killer(s). I believe the original intention was not to kill him but just to rough him up. But he died from the injuries. His body was then disposed of. Maybe not in a dumpster but it was disposed of. Avoiding detection by a security camera is unlikely but not impossible, especially if it is a pan and scan camera--there were some of those in that area. And security camera footage can be edited. It would show, of course, but it can be done. That would imply that someone at the Ugly Tuna or someone associated with it, the building owners, whoever, were involved in some way and got rid of the incriminating footage. I can't prove this, of course, but it is a possibility. Jealousy has ben mentioned as playing a part in all this. Clint may well have been jealous of Brian which could explain his negative attitude towards Brian in the wake of the disappearance. Brian was quite attractive and Clint just average looking. Jealous of Brian's luck with the ladies? People hate for awfully trivial reasons sometimes. And it would not be the first time that someone who is involved in a disappearance and murder clams up, lawyers up, and moves away to another state. It has also been said that Clint asked for immunity. This is apparently not true. Or is it? But if he did ask for immunity, it would be extremely telling. Clint holds the key to solving this mystery. I am convinced of that. But, in any case, petty jealousy (and God knows what else) and fear of reprisal is keeping him quiet.

 

[itsrak]

Interesting theory :

"Brian was speaking to the 2 ladies outside the bar about cocaine and maybe meeting up afterwards. In an effort to find more coke he went back into the bar to speak to some acquaintances or staff that could hook him up. At this point the bar is closing and people are being ushered out. He goes out the service entrance in either an exchange of drugs or an attempted exchange of drugs with a staff member or band player. At this point it's probably 2:10am. He has now exited the bar from the service entrance and since the bar is closed he can't come back in from that door. He decides to walk through an alley or side road to get back to where he wants to go (his house or after party). There is a good chance he has coke on his person or whoever he asked about the coke told someone he has cash. He gets jumped in a dark alley and robbed by 2-3 men. In the robbery he is killed. They lift him into a dumpster and escape the scene possibly with his cell phone which they turn off. Since the search really does not kick off until late Monday and most trash is picked up Monday starting as early as 4am his body is disposed of in the landfill.

His friend Florence also was involved in cocaine which is why he didn't want to take the lie detector test or speak to detectives further. That sort of admission could ruin his career. He fears that being entangled in drugs plus a missing person case could have serious implications. Any attorney would advise to not speak to police under polygraph. "

I got this from reddit. The comments posted for this theory claimed the theory was full of holes. There is no evidence that Brian ever used drugs. At least that's what his brother said. But then again, if he did use drugs, he would not want that fact to be known. I do not subscribe to this theory but it does have a certain amount of plausibility. Any thoughts?

People weren't being ushered out. The bar wasn't closing. Closing time was 2:30am.

 

[itsrak]

The more I think about it, the more I believe that this theory is the most plausible. I personally knew some friends back in the day who used uppers and such to stay up and study. This is apparently more common that we think. One thing I am absolutely convinced of is that Clint knows something. He may not have been directly involved but I am sure he knows something. His initial co-operation with the police means nothing. Lying to the police is a very common occurrence. But, when pressured, he clammed up and got a lawyer. I am convinced he knows something. He may have helped to set up the meeting with Brian and his eventual killer(s). I believe the original intention was not to kill him but just to rough him up. But he died from the injuries. His body was then disposed of. Maybe not in a dumpster but it was disposed of. Avoiding detection by a security camera is unlikely but not impossible, especially if it is a pan and scan camera--there were some of those in that area. And security camera footage can be edited. It would show, of course, but it can be done. That would imply that someone at the Ugly Tuna or someone associated with it, the building owners, whoever, were involved in some way and got rid of the incriminating footage. I can't prove this, of course, but it is a possibility. Jealousy has ben mentioned as playing a part in all this. Clint may well have been jealous of Brian which could explain his negative attitude towards Brian in the wake of the disappearance. Brian was quite attractive and Clint just average looking. Jealous of Brian's luck with the ladies? People hate for awfully trivial reasons sometimes. And it would not be the first time that someone who is involved in a disappearance and murder clams up, lawyers up, and moves away to another state. It has also been said that Clint asked for immunity. This is apparently not true. Or is it? But if he did ask for immunity, it would be extremely telling. Clint holds the key to solving this mystery. I am convinced of that. But, in any case, petty jealousy (and God knows what else) and fear of reprisal is keeping him quiet.

Hurst himself shot down the immunity rumor. As to Clint, it made perfect sense for him to put a lawyer between himself and LE and the media. He'd have been better off doing so sooner, IMO. If you ever find yourself in a situation such as this - someone you were with disappears - and media and LE come calling, don't utter a word and direct them to your lawyer.

Having studied the heck out of this case, I find it improbable that anyone killed Brian. I think he most likely died in an accident in the building, his remains there to this day. That said, I would love to know why Alexis' father, Tom Waggoner, back in the day stated (this is verbatim, from a 2009 article in the school newspaper The Lantern) that "The gist of my perspective on Clint Florence is that I think that basically all roads to making any progress on the case on Brian Shaffer lead through Clint Florence". What did he know - or think he knew - that compelled him to make that damning statement? He has never said. As far as I am concerned, that is THE BIG UNSPOKEN.

 

[pg66]

Hurst himself shot down the immunity rumor. As to Clint, it made perfect sense for him to put a lawyer between himself and LE and the media. He'd have been better off doing so sooner, IMO. If you ever find yourself in a situation such as this - someone you were with disappears - and media and LE come calling, don't utter a word and direct them to your lawyer.

Having studied the heck out of this case, I find it improbable that anyone killed Brian. I think he most likely died in an accident in the building, his remains there to this day. That said, I would love to know why Alexis' father, Tom Waggoner, back in the day stated (this is verbatim, from a 2009 article in the school newspaper The Lantern) that "The gist of my perspective on Clint Florence is that I think that basically all roads to making any progress on the case on Brian Shaffer lead through Clint Florence". What did he know - or think he knew - that compelled him to make that damning statement? He has never said. As far as I am concerned, that is THE BIG UNSPOKEN.

Describe this "accident in the building". Who was responsible? For what reason? Where did they hide his body? Sorry for the questions but I don't feel like reading nearly 100 pages of messages to see if this has been answered. And again, we can agree to disagree.

 

[itsrak]

Describe this "accident in the building". Who was responsible? For what reason? Where did they hide his body? Sorry for the questions but I don't feel like reading nearly 100 pages of messages to see if this has been answered. And again, we can agree to disagree.

Sorry, don't feel like retyping it all. But as an accident, no one directly responsible. No criminal unless criminal negligence in failing to adequately secure construction area. Just a dumb freak accident.

 

[embufum]

People weren't being ushered out. The bar wasn't closing. Closing time was 2:30am.

Sorry, don't feel like retyping it all. But as an accident, no one directly responsible. No criminal unless criminal negligence in failing to adequately secure construction area. Just a dumb freak accident.

What proof do you have that Brian went down into the construction area?

"Having studied the heck out of this case, I find it improbable that anyone killed Brian."

What did you find that makes it improbable that Brian was not killed?

 

[pg66]

Sorry, don't feel like retyping it all. But as an accident, no one directly responsible. No criminal unless criminal negligence in failing to adequately secure construction area. Just a dumb freak accident.

That's strange, considering that police have said, on camera interview, that dogs picked up nothing to support the accident theory. Hurst said that a scent was picked up leaving the construction area but that this was inconclusive. You mentioned that dogs are unreliable. They are perhaps not 100% reliable but they are the closest thing to reliable that we've got. Like I wrote previously, until something better than a dog's highly developed sense of smell comes along, I'll go with the dogs. In any case, I feel that the accident theory is the least plausible. But that's just my opinion.

But do tell what makes you so convinced that it was an accident. Do you know something the rest of us do not? Were you there? Did you see it happen?

As far as Brian being drunk and stumbling in the construction area, well, look at the 1:55 footage again. For a guy who was said to be really drunk, he sure stood up straight, did not walk crooked, and showed no signs of severe alcohol intoxication. That guy held his liquor really well!

 

[itsrak]

That's strange, considering that police have said, on camera interview, that dogs picked up nothing to support the accident theory. Hurst said that a scent was picked up leaving the construction area but that this was inconclusive. You mentioned that dogs are unreliable. They are perhaps not 100% reliable but they are the closest thing to reliable that we've got. Like I wrote previously, until something better than a dog's highly developed sense of smell comes along, I'll go with the dogs. In any case, I feel that the accident theory is the least plausible. But that's just my opinion.

But do tell what makes you so convinced that it was an accident. Do you know something the rest of us do not? Were you there? Did you see it happen?

As far as Brian being drunk and stumbling in the construction area, well, look at the 1:55 footage again. For a guy who was said to be really drunk, he sure stood up straight, did not walk crooked, and showed no signs of severe alcohol intoxication. That guy held his liquor really well!

Again, don't feel like retyping again and again. I just think it likely that investigators - and dogs - missed Brian's body. All things considered, accidental death in the building, remains still there, seems like most plausible scenario given all the facts. One person of hundreds in the building that evening went permanently missing. One person of hundreds caught on vid entering the building that evening did not appear on vid leaving. Are these two oddities linked by causality? I think most likely so.

 

[itsrak]

What proof do you have that Brian went down into the construction area? No more proof than Hurst.

"Having studied the heck out of this case, I find it improbable that anyone killed Brian."

What did you find that makes it improbable that Brian was not killed? No need to conjure a killer and a murder when an accident in the construction area seems more probable. Accident simpler.

 

[pg66]

Investigators must consider every possibility, however remote. Until a theory is proven beyond shadow of doubt as 100% false, it is still in the realm of the possible. One must always keep an open mind. This I got from a neighbor who was in law enforcement for 30 years. Every possibility must be considered and cannot be discounted until it is 100% proven to be false. Any LE officer worth his salt knows this. Just because a theory is "simpler" does not increase it's likelihood. I apologize if I have seemed a little insistent at times but me leaning more towards a murder theory is my own personal opinion and nothing more. However, statistically speaking, the murder theory does turn out to be the answer more often than not. Perhaps this is why some of us, including myself, have "conjured up a killer".

 

[itsrak]

Investigators must consider every possibility, however remote. Until a theory is proven beyond shadow of doubt as 100% false, it is still in the realm of the possible. One must always keep an open mind. This I got from a neighbor who was in law enforcement for 30 years. Every possibility must be considered and cannot be discounted until it is 100% proven to be false. Any LE officer worth his salt knows this. Just because a theory is "simpler" does not increase it's likelihood. I apologize if I have seemed a little insistent at times but me leaning more towards a murder theory is my own personal opinion and nothing more. However, statistically speaking, the murder theory does turn out to be the answer more often than not. Perhaps this is why some of us, including myself, have "conjured up a killer".

Yeah, gotta keep an open mind. I use 'likely', not 'certain' (there is a podcaster who tried to push the notion that there is NO way Brian may have died in an accident in the completely dug up construction area just feet from where he was last seen...), cuz I cannot be certain. You could of course be right that Brian may have been killed in a gay hook-up gone bad. Who knows?