IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #28

[akh]

What troubles me about the white truck is the explanation that it did not really go around the block. Apparently there were two cameras viewing the same area with timestamps about 10 minutes apart. If the truck really went around the block twice, then it should have appeared on both cameras twice. If it went around the block once, it should have appeared on each one one time. I am surprised that they did not figure this out right away.

The other thing that surprises me is that the white truck seems to have been the ONLY vehicle in the area that night that LE has had any interest in. I would think they would want to talk with the driver of EVERY vehicle in the area that night.

I'd agree with this as well. I can only assume there wasn't much traffic and possibly they were able to read plate numbers so they were able to confirm those other vehicles (if there were any) and maybe talk to the owners. Remember, at one point it was said the truck didn't completely stop at a stop sign/light which made them unable to read the plates.

The only thing I can think of on the truck appearing to LE to circle the block is maybe the camera footage was viewed by different investigators and they compared notes later and saw the different time stamps and thought "AHA... And 10 mins later there's that same truck!!!"... Soooo... they were distracted and caught up more by the timestamp than realizing that it only appeared once on either camera.

 

[bx2]

Bloomington is one of the sites that Google has updated with its new 45 degree aerial imagery. You can now get an updated (as of about a month ago) view from Maps at a certain zoom level. Attached a few of the screen shots below.

 

[imkeylime]

Once you acknowledge the 3:38AM witness timeframe could be off then it's no longer possible to know how much or how little and which way it's off (at least not from what the public has been told). It's been explained already how it could take some time to get out of a bar if you are the manager. Enough that 3:38AM wouldn't necessarily be enough time to depart. And it's also just an assumption this sighting happened immediately after leaving the bar AFAIK.

And a lot of bars use (or did anyway) 'bar time'... They set their clocks forward some in order to not take it to the wire on serving after 3AM or not having the place cleared by 3:30AM. So maybe that becomes a factor too in an inaccurate time (although I don't see how 10-15mins makes the 3:38AM time fit any better in and of itself.

It's not really been said what time the witness' bar actually closed that night AFAIK.

But at least in the case of the white truck LE claims to have found the owner and their story checks out as well as noted a discrepancy that meant the truck wasn't actually circling the block. With this mystery witness and mystery man sighting LE could not have been any more vague on what they thought of the report, the credibility, or the accuracy of the time, etc..

I've never heard what time the witness' bar actually closed. When I waited tables at an Irish pub during my college days, we were all pretty eager to leave at the end of the night ... getting the glasses washed as fast as possible, etc. But it could be that she had little help, etc.

I just think that this is something that should be verifiable ... and either LE verified it or they're keeping it under wraps for some reason. JMO.

 

[akh]

I've never heard what time the witness' bar actually closed. When I waited tables at an Irish pub during my college days, we were all pretty eager to leave at the end of the night ... getting the glasses washed as fast as possible, etc. But it could be that she had little help, etc.

I just think that this is something that should be verifiable ... and either LE verified it or they're keeping it under wraps for some reason. JMO.

I'd think a bar security cam, a cash register time stamp, a computer sign off, something would tell LE when she left the bar. But AFAIK we've all just been assuming she finished and immediately left the bar and saw what she reported. Maybe that's not exactly the case? Maybe she left the bar, went somewhere, was stopped by someone, came back.... I don't know.... and then saw what she reported?

For whatever reason LE doesn't appear to take the reported time (or even the sighting itself possibly) seriously from what it seems so maybe we've made some wrong assumptions about this witness' actions in the first place?

Maybe someone with a better memory than me can remember if there was anything definitively stating this alleged sighting was immediately after she'd left the bar (and not just sometime after she'd left the bar)? Otherwise, we've been working off an assumption that could've led to some flawed scenarios or unnecessarily limited scenarios.

 

[Jacobite]

I'd bet the corner clock really said 2:46 ---2:48 AM when the mystery woman saw Lauren with the Mystery Man.
The corner clock usually said 3:38 when she would get off work.

<modsnip>

I think she added a detail (the time) that was not true. This is something that is really easy to do as many of us recalled her getting the time from the corner clock when she never said that.
Most of her information was confirmed with video at 10th and College Apartments. The only thing that is left to her interpretation is this. How loud was that thud? Was Lauren injured by the fall?

 

[Jupiter812]

Whoa there posters, lol. Here is her direct quote from Gatto's blog, and no, I don't think we've all been assuming.

&#8220;I had just come off work so I was totally sober."

Pick that apart if you want to distinguish "just" from "immediately," etc. but it is close enough for me.

FWIW while I appreciate all the info about a bar manager's duties and work hours, etc. not every place operates like clockwork, especially in a college town during summer hours. Employees swap hours, owners tell employees to go home early to save labor costs, etc. there are many variables.

 

[akh]

Whoa there posters, lol. Here is her direct quote from Gatto's blog, and no, I don't think we've all been assuming.

&#8220;I had just come off work so I was totally sober."

Pick that apart if you want to distinguish "just" from "immediately," etc. but it is close enough for me.

FWIW while I appreciate all the info about a bar manager's duties and work hours, etc. not every place operates like clockwork, especially in a college town during summer hours. Employees swap hours, owners tell employees to go home early to save labor costs, etc. there are many variables.

But we're still back to the main issue... LE, and apparently the PI's either, don't seem to be giving credibility to the time reported (or maybe the entire episode) for some reason.

Which takes us back to my point that if the time has been discredited (and the witness has not) then it's either merely a matter of the time being wrong one way and fitting into the known timeline (which isn't this what the PI's seem to be saying?) or else the time is off the other way and the witness adds another piece to the puzzle that needs to fit in somewhere else (possibly hurting the PsOI story or possibly strengthening it). (Or else LE and the PI's are wrong to be discrediting the 3:38AM time in the first place).

<modsnip>

 

[bx2]

But we're still back to the main issue... LE, and apparently the PI's either, don't seem to be giving credibility to the time reported (or maybe the entire episode) for some reason.

Which takes us back to my point that if the time has been discredited (and the witness has not) then it's either merely a matter of the time being wrong one way and fitting into the known timeline (which isn't this what the PI's seem to be saying?) or else the time is off the other way and the witness adds another piece to the puzzle that needs to fit in somewhere else (possibly hurting the PsOI story or possibly strengthening it). (Or else LE and the PI's are wrong to be discrediting the 3:38AM time in the first place).

I need to go back and check this out, but I don't think the PI's are referring to the bar manager witness at all. They reference a woman who was visiting her boyfriend, but I don't think this is the same person as Gatto's witness.



<modnsip>

 

[Jupiter812]

Re: The aerial map.

It's quite unsettling to see the huge apartment construction site in the very place where Lauren was last seen on tape. I experienced this in person a couple of months ago when I visited but it's just another damn reminder of something, I'm not quite sure what. As if her disappearance were not enough; now it's as though she wasn't there at all.

 

[mikkismom]

Lauren on HLN right now.


HTH

 

[Jupiter812]

Lauren on HLN right now.


HTH

I caught some of it, thank you! Did the story lead off with Lauren then go into the recent rape attempt?

 

[IUGrad84]

I just think that this is something that should be verifiable ... and either LE verified it or they're keeping it under wraps for some reason. JMO.

FWIW, my brother serves as an Indiana County cop/SWAT (not in Marion). I have asked him several times over the past year to speculate on what he thinks happened to Lauren that night and on the progress or lack of - in this case. He feels strongly that one or more known POIs are responsible for her disappearance. He has never shared information or details on active investigations, but he has told me again and again that in certain cases LE will not release info, verify witness statements, confirm time of assaults ... He also is very loyal to 'brotherhood', but did not defend the BPD on the handling of this investigation.

 

[Jupiter812]

FWIW, my brother serves as an Indiana County cop/SWAT (not in Marion). I have asked him several times over the past year to speculate on what he thinks happened to Lauren that night and on the progress or lack of - in this case. He feels strongly that one or more known POIs are responsible for her disappearance. He has never shared information or details on active investigations, but he has told me again and again that in certain cases LE will not release info, verify witness statements, confirm time of assaults ... He also is very loyal to 'brotherhood', but did not defend the BPD on the handling of this investigation.

This is good to hear. I appreciate it. Thanks for stopping in to post.

Just to take it even one step further, I asked peeps here very early in the case if LE would lie about info and was told yes they would if they thought it helped the case.

Of course we all know what this means it relation to certain aspects of this case that we revisit again and again. No end.

Just for the record Bloomington is in Monroe county, Indianapolis is in Marion.

 

[imkeylime]

FWIW, my brother serves as an Indiana County cop/SWAT (not in Marion). I have asked him several times over the past year to speculate on what he thinks happened to Lauren that night and on the progress or lack of - in this case. He feels strongly that one or more known POIs are responsible for her disappearance. He has never shared information or details on active investigations, but he has told me again and again that in certain cases LE will not release info, verify witness statements, confirm time of assaults ... He also is very loyal to 'brotherhood', but did not defend the BPD on the handling of this investigation.

Thank you! That's helpful info to keep in mind ... and it does make sense, IMO. I briefly followed the Sierra Lamar case in CA and found it interesting how strategically LE released info and asked for public assistance before naming a suspect. I'm sure it's quite a science.

 

[Jupiter812]

Below is from Gatto's blog and seems to answer why they did not release a sketch. (Surely I read this way back when but apparently I didn't store it on the hard drive of my brain, only cached temporarily.)

"The TonyGatto.com report, New Witness Tells Of Lauren Spierer Mystery Encounter With Unknown Man, was addressed at a police news briefing today, where it was revealed that the &#8220;unknown man&#8221; identified in the story is someone known to police. They did not say whether the man is known to Lauren. "

http://tonygatto.com/2011/06/22/pol...-discount-mystery-man-in-lauren-spierer-case/

 

[Ros]

Lauren on HLN right now.


HTH

What is HLN? Headline News? And HTH?

 

[Jupiter812]

Thank you! That's helpful info to keep in mind ... and it does make sense, IMO. I briefly followed the Sierra Lamar case in CA and found it interesting how strategically LE released info and asked for public assistance before naming a suspect. I'm sure it's quite a science.

Let's hope Bloomington LE approaches it as a science, which btw, is a good word to describe it. I was just sitting here thinking about how it still (!) bothers me how they would not say who Lauren was with at certain moments on tape. Of course the easy answer is CR but by throwing a question mark in the story they invite public discourse, rumor, speculation about who it might be, hoping all the while they hit on something.

 

[IUGrad84]

Just for the record Bloomington is in Monroe county, Indianapolis is in Marion.

Thanks, my memory is failing. I've been on the East Coast for several decades, but still visit family in the Chicago area and Carmel a few times a year. Funny that I remember my old ford mustang license # started with a 45 and b-town plates started with a 53!

 

[IUGrad84]

Let's hope Bloomington LE approaches it as a science, which btw, is a good word to describe it. I was just sitting here thinking about how it still (!) bothers me how they would not say who Lauren was with at certain moments on tape. Of course the easy answer is CR but by throwing a question mark in the story they invite public discourse, rumor, speculation about who it might be, hoping all the while they hit on something.

I would agree that LE likely withheld the CR detail because they wanted to 'shake out' other possible witness accounts from that night. If they had identified CR 'on video' early on, then others may have had no reason to come forward.

 

[SeeingForThe1stTime]

Below is from Gatto's blog and seems to answer why they did not release a sketch. (Surely I read this way back when but apparently I didn't store it on the hard drive of my brain, only cached temporarily.)

"The TonyGatto.com report, New Witness Tells Of Lauren Spierer Mystery Encounter With Unknown Man, was addressed at a police news briefing today, where it was revealed that the &#8220;unknown man&#8221; identified in the story is someone known to police. They did not say whether the man is known to Lauren. "

Just thought I'd confuse things even more

http://tonygatto.com/2011/06/22/pol...-discount-mystery-man-in-lauren-spierer-case/

Does this sound like Qualters is saying there IS video of this mystery guy or am I reading this wrong. All this is so confusing, seemingly on purpose, that I'm starting to think this detail I thought was unimportant may be very important after all.