OH OH - Brian Shaffer, 27, Columbus, 1 April 2006 - #4

[stargazer17]

@Looking4Brian - when will the new podcast be out?

 

[Looking4Brian]

I've always wondered if there were more to that post. Someone posting it on Brian's behalf at his request, or something like that. The official word is that it was "determined to be a hoax". But we've never known whether LE found the person who posted it, or if the identity of the poster was never discovered at all.

As far as I know the identity was never established, just the location. When I asked John Hurst about

@Looking4Brian - when will the new podcast be out?

I’m not 100% sure yet but my guess is 2 weeks. I will be doing some traveling that will have me pretty busy over the next week or so.

 

[Kaie]

As far as I know the identity was never established, just the location. When I asked John Hurst about

Was there more to that sentence? I'm just asking as it trails off there, and I thought you might have accidentally deleted part of it before posting your reply. Did John Hurst say something about it?

If there's any chance that the legacy post could still turn out to be a key piece of information, then I think it's a pity that the Wikipedia entry called Disappearance of Brian Shaffer describes the post as follows:

"However, upon further investigation, the note was found to have been posted from a computer accessible to the public in Franklin County; it was determined to be a hoax."

If the post wasn't determined to be a hoax, but rather was presumed to be a hoax... changing one word would make this a more accurate statement. The reference cited for this statement is an article called In the Name of the Father published in the April 2009 edition of Columbus Monthly. However, that article never did use the word "determined". It's a strong word in this context... it fully suggests that LE got right to the bottom of the legacy post, and know for a fact that it wasn't written by anyone with a connection to Brian.

This gets described with the word "determined" all the time now, and I bet that it all originates with the wording of the Wikipedia entry.

 

[neesaki]

Just thinking.... Brian disappeared April 1, and his dad had said he had been cramming for some upcoming tests, which sounds like it may have been his semester final exams (just guessing), so possibly scheduled for May. Idk, maybe some were earlier than that.

Also since he started med school in 2004 he would have been only two years in, about half way, with graduation in two more years, so 2008. Does that sound right to everyone or am I off ?

I guess my point is he still had two years to go, so if being a doctor wasn't what he really wanted , why would he put himself through another two years.

 

[Smiley IBI]

Just thinking.... Brian disappeared April 1, and his dad had said he had been cramming for some upcoming tests, which sounds like it may have been his semester final exams (just guessing), so possibly scheduled for May. Idk, maybe some were earlier than that.

Also since he started med school in 2004 he would have been only two years in, about half way, with graduation in two more years, so 2008. Does that sound right to everyone or am I off ?

I guess my point is he still had two years to go, so if being a doctor wasn't what he really wanted , why would he put himself through another two years.

Brian was studying for Step 1 of the USMLE, it's part of the licensing process/board exams. Step 2 of the test is taken after the 4th year of medical school. You can read all about it here: Everything You Need to Know about the USMLE Board Exam.

I agree, Neesaki, why would he put himself through that if it was something that he truly didn't want. I think he thought being a doctor would make his mother happy, I know he didn't think it would make him happy.

 

[neesaki]

Brian was studying for Step 1 of the USMLE, it's part of the licensing process/board exams. Step 2 of the test is taken after the 4th year of medical school. You can read all about it here: Everything You Need to Know about the USMLE Board Exam.

I agree, Neesaki, why would he put himself through that if it was something that he truly didn't want. I think he thought being a doctor would make his mother happy, I know he didn't think it would make him happy.

Oh ok, wasn’t aware of those tests. That would be yet another stressor, why put himself through all that if it’s not what he truly wanted for his life.
Thanks, Smiley!

 

[Looking4Brian]

Was there more to that sentence? I'm just asking as it trails off there, and I thought you might have accidentally deleted part of it before posting your reply. Did John Hurst say something about it?

If there's any chance that the legacy post could still turn out to be a key piece of information, then I think it's a pity that the Wikipedia entry called Disappearance of Brian Shaffer describes the post as follows:

"However, upon further investigation, the note was found to have been posted from a computer accessible to the public in Franklin County; it was determined to be a hoax."

If the post wasn't determined to be a hoax, but rather was presumed to be a hoax... changing one word would make this a more accurate statement. The reference cited for this statement is an article called In the Name of the Father published in the April 2009 edition of Columbus Monthly. However, that article never did use the word "determined". It's a strong word in this context... it fully suggests that LE got right to the bottom of the legacy post, and know for a fact that it wasn't written by anyone with a connection to Brian.

This gets described with the word "determined" all the time now, and I bet that it all originates with the wording of the Wikipedia entry.

I’m not sure what happened to the rest of my post.

When I talked to John Hurst about the identity of the person who made the legacy post he said, “ there weren’t any cameras in the library and when they checked businesses around the library the cameras they had were either faux, not working, or they had no cameras at all.” John believes the legacy post is a hoax, however I’m not so sure. It has always struck me as odd.

 

[bykerladi]

It just seems to me that disappearing in today's day and age with all this technology would be hard. With internet, facebook, etc., your "missing" picture is out there everywhere.

 

[Kaie]

I’m not sure what happened to the rest of my post.

When I talked to John Hurst about the identity of the person who made the legacy post he said, “ there weren’t any cameras in the library and when they checked businesses around the library the cameras they had were either faux, not working, or they had no cameras at all.” John believes the legacy post is a hoax, however I’m not so sure. It has always struck me as odd.

Yeah... the whole thing is a bit odd really. Firstly, there's the fact that it doesn't sound a lot like something a cruel hoaxer would post. But it's also hard to imagine a library being that lax about who is using their public computers. Even putting the lack of cameras aside... I've never been in a library where you can use a public computer without confirming your identity with someone first. I've worked in three different public libraries, and utilised internet services in countless others. Their booking systems will vary slightly from place to place, but everywhere I have been you have to either:

1. Login using your library membership (which you will have already shown ample ID to obtain)
2. Request guest access as a non-member at the service desk, photo ID required.

In some libraries their records will be electronic... in others they may write your name on a bookings sheet, along with the time you started using the computer til the time you finished. And that's not all about big brother watching you, all libraries keep stats and they need this info for that too.

It had already been like this for years before the legacy post happened... the days of running the risk of letting just anyone at a public computer were long behind us then.

 

[germanbini]

Hi, I'm new to this discussion because I just watched a YT video mentioning this case. I've been interested in the SFK(s) for a while and feel that Brian may have been a victim - the Olentangy River is quite close and would have been a good body disposal site.

I did come across this picture of Brian with his father, and I'm really curious about the hand sign he seems to be making. To me, the expression on his face seems like he's doing something on purpose, but I can't figure it out. File:Brian Shaffer with his father Randy.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

2. Request guest access as a non-member at the service desk, photo ID required.

I've been traveling extensively throughout the USA over the past few years, and I'm not sure how things were at that library at that time, but most libraries I've been to simply have pieces of paper with access codes written on them for anyone to take and use, no ID has been necessary. Also, if there was someone with a laptop, and there was wifi in that library at that time, they wouldn't have needed ID either.

PS BTW I know my profile says new member, but I've been visiting Websleuths off and on since before 2011.

 

[BethAnn777]

Hi, I'm new to this discussion because I just watched a YT video mentioning this case. I've been interested in the SFK(s) for a while and feel that Brian may have been a victim - the Olentangy River is quite close and would have been a good body disposal site.

I did come across this picture of Brian with his father, and I'm really curious about the hand sign he seems to be making. To me, the expression on his face seems like he's doing something on purpose, but I can't figure it out. File:Brian Shaffer with his father Randy.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

Snipped by me.

I love you in sign language perhaps? Maybe only upside down because his arm is hanging at his side.

Or, according to Wikipedia, this sign is what spider man uses to activate his web.

He is doing the same hand sign in this pic with his mom as well. I bet it means love.

 

[BethAnn777]

Here’s the pic.

 

[Kaie]

I've been traveling extensively throughout the USA over the past few years, and I'm not sure how things were at that library at that time, but most libraries I've been to simply have pieces of paper with access codes written on them for anyone to take and use, no ID has been necessary. Also, if there was someone with a laptop, and there was wifi in that library at that time, they wouldn't have needed ID either.

That would never happen in my country. So it's just open slather on using public computers to do illegal stuff in America?

 

[BethAnn777]

That would never happen in my country. So it's just open slather on using public computers to do illegal stuff in America?

You don’t have free WiFi that can be used for free by anyone in many public places?

 

[Kaie]

You don’t have free WiFi that can be used for free by anyone in many public places?

Well of course we have free Wifi in various places... most of which you supply an email address and agree to terms and conditions, or a "fair use policy" when you connect. But I wasn't talking about that. We already know that the legacy post was not from someone's personal a laptop. And WiFi risks are a completely separate issue to the fact that public libraries can not afford for their computers to be used for *advertiser censored*, scams, hoaxes, illegal deals (including drugs), uploading viruses, terrorism, etc... And believe me, if computers are available to all with no identity checking whatsoever... the libraries will repeatedly get burned by this until they implement a better system.

I'm looking through several Ohio libraries' computer usage policies in another window right now... and every one I've seen has exactly the kind of policy I'm referring to. Just as an example I will attach a screenshot from the Finlay-Hancock County Public Library.

 

[BethAnn777]

Well of course we have free Wifi in various places... most of which you supply an email address and agree to terms and conditions, or a "fair use policy" when you connect. But I wasn't talking about that. We already know that the legacy post was not from someone's personal a laptop. And WiFi risks are a completely separate issue to the fact that public libraries can not afford for their computers to be used for *advertiser censored*, scams, hoaxes, illegal deals (including drugs), uploading viruses, terrorism, etc... And believe me, if computers are available to all with no identity checking whatsoever... the libraries will repeatedly get burned by this until they implement a better system.

I'm looking through several Ohio libraries' computer usage policies in another window right now... and every one I've seen has exactly the kind of policy I'm referring to. Just as an example I will attach a screenshot from the Finlay-Hancock County Public Library.

Lol! Ok, well you said you were in another country. I wouldn’t know what you have there or don’t have.

I live in a capital city in the Midwest and anyone can access the WiFi at the library. Anyone call also use the libraries’s computers without signing in or anything. Just sayin’.

 

[Kaie]

Lol! Ok, well you said you were in another country. I wouldn’t know what you have there or don’t have.

I live in a capital city in the Midwest and anyone can access the WiFi at the library. Anyone call also use the libraries’s computers without signing in or anything. Just sayin’.

Well, regardless of how much liability one public library in the midwest is willing to risk (which I am extremely skeptical about by the way)... @Looking4Brian it may be worth looking what the internet and computer use policy was at the library in question, if the name of that library has been disclosed to you.

 

[Looking4Brian]

Well, regardless of how much liability one public library in the midwest is willing to risk (which I am extremely skeptical about by the way)... @Looking4Brian it may be worth looking what the internet and computer use policy was at the library in question, if the name of that library has been disclosed to you.

From what I understand only a sign in sheet or library card was needed at the time to use the library computers.

 

[Old Mozez]

So Brian being on the FBI's VICAP, (Violent Criminal Apprehension program).

Apparently the criteria to be on that list is:

• sexual assault cases
• solved and unsolved homicides, especially those involving a kidnapping or if they are apparently motiveless, sexual or random or suspected to be part of a series
• missing persons, where foul play is suspected
• unidentified persons, where foul play is suspected

So his listing there was at least revised 09/07/2018, not sure when he originally made it on the list in the first place.

BRIAN RANDALL SHAFFER - COLUMBUS, OHIO | Federal Bureau of Investigation

Any thoughts?

 

[neesaki]

So Brian being on the FBI's VICAP, (Violent Criminal Apprehension program).

Apparently the criteria to be on that list is:

• sexual assault cases
• solved and unsolved homicides, especially those involving a kidnapping or if they are apparently motiveless, sexual or random or suspected to be part of a series
• missing persons, where foul play is suspected
• unidentified persons, where foul play is suspected

So his listing there was at least revised 09/07/2018, not sure when he originally made it on the list in the first place.

BRIAN RANDALL SHAFFER - COLUMBUS, OHIO | Federal Bureau of Investigation

Any thoughts?

He's been on there VICAP for a while as I remember bringing this up back when. Thanks for reminding me though, I'd forgotten about it.
I don't know what exactly to think or how significant it is.