IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #29

[akh]

I'd like to say something else in response to your comment and my link (http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/09/10/imovation-solutions-putting-the-fun-in-five-hour-energy/).

It interests me that some PR person put such a spin on this that the local CBS affiliate referred to JR and DB as "the kind of young guys who will probably go far." Only in the comments section was LS brought up. Maybe the article wasn't the place for that, being a business vs. news piece. But it's kind of brazen, IMO.

It sucks to think they are getting this positive mention if they were involved in LS' disappearance... OTOH... what if they are totally innocent of the disappearance? Do their own lives have to stop even if they had nothing to do with the disappearance? Innocent until proven guilty is one thing but nobody has even been charged in this case as of yet. And when it happens it's not outside of the realm of possibilities that it would not be either of this two.

 

[Ixchel13]

It sucks to think they are getting this positive mention if they were involved in LS' disappearance... OTOH... what if they are totally innocent of the disappearance? Do their own lives have to stop even if they had nothing to do with the disappearance? Innocent until proven guilty is one thing but nobody has even been charged in this case as of yet. And when it happens it's not outside of the realm of possibilities that it would not be either of this two.

and yet. even if they didn't do it, IF they supplied her with whatever incapacitated her and then as hosts, allowed her to leave to her demise,
surely some charges therein lie and this is what they could be avoiding, in civil and federal court. I mean, if they are telling somewhat the truth, they
could have called a cab. even for 3 blocks.

 

[VeryVeritas]

and yet. even if they didn't do it, IF they supplied her with whatever incapacitated her and then as hosts, allowed her to leave to her demise,
surely some charges therein lie and this is what they could be avoiding, in civil and federal court. I mean, if they are telling somewhat the truth, they
could have called a cab. even for 3 blocks.

If you are going to spend 1/2 hr of supposedly giving sobriety tests, calling people, watching out balconies.... you could have just walked her home yourself and returned in less time! It's BS. BS because she lived so close by and there is nothing to suggest that anyone was in worse shape than she was. If someone looks like they took a sidewalk to the face, though, you'd maybe want to take them to the hospital instead. This fabrication is to make it SEEM like JR cared and was a stand up guy making it SEEM like he was doing the right thing. But we all know the right thing would have been to just walk her home or take her to the hospital. You couldn't do either of those things if she were already dead or someone else made off with her, and that's the problem.

 

[VeryVeritas]

IMO, it might be prudent to get rid of a vehicle that a POI or POI's guest drove if it contained incriminating evidence in terms of LS' disappearance. (Though we've been told CR's car was searched and JR's was in the shop.) While the existence of a guest could be proven, where that guest stayed and when he came and left could be manipulated, I'd think. ???

Wasn't CR's vehicle the only one searched and sniffed? With at least a dozen other people at JR's just prior to LS's 12:30am arrival, plus that known and unknown connected to POI's how many vehicles would be on such a list that LE didn't search. And yeah by now 1.5+ years later, what are the odds of finding all of those vehicles and then finding admissible evidence?

Other than dropping her in a sewer, wet cement at nearby construction, under some rocks that were soon later covered with landfill, or putting her into a dumpster... it's much more likely that she left in one of those vehicles. Someone that could just as easily have brought her home... but didn't because either she was already dead, died on the way, or they did something terrible instead.

LE and the FBI have tools and techniques to narrow this stuff down.

 

[VeryVeritas]

Thanks RoS, I saw the tweet too. It would be nice to have some confirmation that DB was actually at JR's that night though (as in, during the time that LS was supposedly at JR's and then left), if we are going to consider him a POI.

That IM article was just reporting on the rumor of the Tweet, not confirming anything, unfortunately.

ETA: It looks like Salzmann wasn't really sure about the numbers either... Here's an article published after the one quoted above:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-06-09-missing-indiana-student_n.htm

Keep in mind, we now know that at least MB "left Rossman's apartment" too.

The secrecy about who was at JR's is definitely weird though, so I'm not ruling anything out.

1) I didn't see reference to MB leaving the apartment. I'm wondering about details that explain his actions after 3:30am call to JR.

2) In this article you linked, it says that CR did not seek medical attention yet had Amnesia. Another supporting clue that his Amnesia is bogus and selective.

 

[imkeylime]

It sucks to think they are getting this positive mention if they were involved in LS' disappearance... OTOH... what if they are totally innocent of the disappearance? Do their own lives have to stop even if they had nothing to do with the disappearance? Innocent until proven guilty is one thing but nobody has even been charged in this case as of yet. And when it happens it's not outside of the realm of possibilities that it would not be either of this two.

I agree and disagree. I actually understand the POIs lawyering up. There are enough false arrests in this country that I'd advise them to do that. What I don't get is the refusal to take LE- or FBI-based polygraphs. DB took one, which suggests to me that something happened later in the night that requires special handling. Maybe it has more to do with drug activity than LS' disappearance. IDK. I do know that the Spierers deserve total disclosure in such a grave matter, and I don't feel that most of the POIs have provided that. And as Jared said in the comments section of that article, that's a reflection of character, if nothing else.

 

[Jacobite]

I wouldn't be surprised if a lie detector has already cleared the bad guy in this case. I have little faith in the polygraph. It can't detect a sociopath. And, remember all those guys on death row convicted by that faulty instrument, yet cleared by DNA.

The thing that really makes JR look guilty is his choice of attorney's. And, CR refuses to sit down with Lauren's dad. Looks guilty.

 

[akh]

I agree and disagree. I actually understand the POIs lawyering up. There are enough false arrests in this country that I'd advise them to do that. What I don't get is the refusal to take LE- or FBI-based polygraphs. DB took one, which suggests to me that something happened later in the night that requires special handling. Maybe it has more to do with drug activity than LS' disappearance. IDK. I do know that the Spierers deserve total disclosure in such a grave matter, and I don't feel that most of the POIs have provided that. And as Jared said in the comments section of that article, that's a reflection of character, if nothing else.

I think the lie detectors are red herrings. I don't know why people get hung up on the lie detectors so much. For one thing, they did take lie detector tests, and apparently passed or else we wouldn't even know they took them. If anyone is going to argue that they weren't all administered by LE and thus the results could be manipulated and aren't reliable then how does that suddenly mean a LE LD test would be the holy grail of accuracy? You can't have it both ways.

It's a fallacy they haven't cooperated with LE. They clearly did before finally seeking lawyers. JR even met with the parents and PI's. His lawyer must be awfully sure of innocence, stupid, or have no control of his client to allow such a meeting. You don't do something like that and risk your client implicating himself.

 

[VeryVeritas]

I agree and disagree. I actually understand the POIs lawyering up. There are enough false arrests in this country that I'd advise them to do that. What I don't get is the refusal to take LE- or FBI-based polygraphs. DB took one, which suggests to me that something happened later in the night that requires special handling. Maybe it has more to do with drug activity than LS' disappearance. IDK. I do know that the Spierers deserve total disclosure in such a grave matter, and I don't feel that most of the POIs have provided that. And as Jared said in the comments section of that article, that's a reflection of character, if nothing else.

DB took one? Did you mean DR? If DB took one, please supply links and other details. ty

 

[akh]

If you are going to spend 1/2 hr of supposedly giving sobriety tests, calling people, watching out balconies.... you could have just walked her home yourself and returned in less time! It's BS. BS because she lived so close by and there is nothing to suggest that anyone was in worse shape than she was. If someone looks like they took a sidewalk to the face, though, you'd maybe want to take them to the hospital instead. This fabrication is to make it SEEM like JR cared and was a stand up guy making it SEEM like he was doing the right thing. But we all know the right thing would have been to just walk her home or take her to the hospital. You couldn't do either of those things if she were already dead or someone else made off with her, and that's the problem.

You're making assumptions. For one thing, how much did JR even care about her? She wasn't his girlfriend. At best she was a 'buddy'. She might've even been an annoyance at that point in the night. Didn't the PI's make the statement that MB brought her to JR's making her 'his problem...'?

Meanwhile, is there anything to show that these people had any fear in their surroundings? I don't think it's a stretch to say they naively felt nearly as secure walking around that area as most of us do in our own backyard.

If she was in any shape to walk out of the apartment, how badly did she want to leave? He couldn't keep her in his apartment against her will. Granted he could've walked with her but who's to say if there was any fear it was more towards police and a PI for himself than anything.

Boyfriend and girlfriends are one thing but when the girls are just friends and in the 'friend zone' I see guys of that age treating them no differently than they treat their male buddies. That's why I don't find it hard to believe he'd let her walk out the door if she could do it at all. He wouldn't fear for her safety (based on what I said above about their comfort in their surroundings) and I think he'd see a PI arrest/ticket as her own problem. Maybe he offers to let her stay out of concern for that but if she wants to leave anyway him saying "Ok... see ya later" just doesn't strike me as outside of the norm.

Him claiming to watch her walk off and the pseudo sobriety test would seem to be indications that she wasn't perfectly sober and he knew it. You see this as indicating he's lying without question because he's claiming her to have passed his sobriety test and be sober... Meanwhile, I see it as him admitting he had some concerns about her state of sobriety and an admission she clearly wasn't in a perfect state of sobriety. He wouldn't be examining her to see if she could drive a bus full of children to church, he would be examining her to see if she could walk, or stagger, a couple of blocks back to her apartment. So letting her leave, to me, would only indicate she didn't want to stay in his apartment and appeared capable of making it a couple of blocks. I doubt the vulnerability to fending off attackers would've been a thought that even crossed his mind. Maybe that makes him a bad person. Maybe that makes him naive. It doesn't necessarily make him a murderer though.

We don't know the full extent of what he told LE about these moments but what we do think we know can be spun either way. I don't see how they are clearly indications of lying.

IOW... we have no proof of lying. All we have is some alleged statements that we can spin one way or the other.

 

[imkeylime]

DB took one? Did you mean DR? If DB took one, please supply links and other details. ty

Oops, oh no, I meant DR. Since I can't edit the above post now, let this suffice ... I meant DR. (I just can't type today!)

 

[Ros]

Kilroy's is now promoting a "Culture of Care." Wish they had started doing so long ago.

http://studentaffairs.iub.edu/paren...y-2013/kilroys-steps-up-with-culture-of-care/

 

[akh]

I wouldn't be surprised if a lie detector has already cleared the bad guy in this case. I have little faith in the polygraph. It can't detect a sociopath. And, remember all those guys on death row convicted by that faulty instrument, yet cleared by DNA.

The thing that really makes JR look guilty is his choice of attorney's. And, CR refuses to sit down with Lauren's dad. Looks guilty.

I don't know that I'd look at it that way. What makes JR look guilty is the talk and rumors about her condition an hour earlier and whether she would've been capable of walking at 4:30AM. I'd be curious to know from LE or anyone who saw her last on video if she was totally unable to function at that point or if she didn't appear as bad as the reported version of the eye witness is making it sound. Let alone the embellished versions of it. I'm not sure what his choice of attorney has to do with anything.

OTOH I think you're right about CR. CR not meeting with the father makes him look guilty in the public's eye (the court of public opinion if you will) but I have to believe the attorney would advise him not to meet with anyone. So he's probably following legal advice. You don't hire an attorney and then ignore his advice or else he will quickly drop you. So from an investigative point of view it really is of little value or consequence. I doubt LE thinks this makes him look guilty.

 

[imkeylime]

Kilroy's is now promoting a "Culture of Care." Wish they had started doing so long ago.

http://studentaffairs.iub.edu/paren...y-2013/kilroys-steps-up-with-culture-of-care/

This sounds like a promising program. I wish all schools would offer something like this in addition to alcohol awareness (which many do offer) ...

 

[Ixchel13]

This sounds like a promising program. I wish all schools would offer something like this in addition to alcohol awareness (which many do offer) ...

If Kilroy's is doing this, it's because they have been busted so many times
that one more knifing, murder or rufied woman will cost them their license.
I am a firm believer that evil people don't change. They morph. Only time will tell with these jerks. Sorry but this culture of care must include getting rid of the girls who walk around with trays of shots handing them out indiscriminately no matter how many an individual may have already had, and selling drinks with more than 1-1/2 shots of booze in them. Sex offenders should be banned from all bars, using their ID indicators to put them on a no serve list.
Also, the numbers of patrons allowed in ALWAYS exceeds their legal limits, yes it is very unsafe, but also makes it difficult to manage their crowd, which they should be doing. People who sexually harrass other patrons should be banned.
I had a 3 way liquor license for 24 years in this state. Never had one single complaint about over serving anyone, because I didn't. Every now and then I kicked someone out for harrassing
someone. Maybe if I'd abused my license I would be rich like the gross, greedy, disgusting woman who owns Kilroy's.

 

[Ixchel13]

The presentation at Kilroy’s was one of the first programs that we have done that is in collaboration with a local establishment in Bloomington. We recognize that peers and staff members at local establishments are more than likely the ones who will be on the front lines after a night of socializing and that they also need skills for assisting IU students and guests when they are in need. We appreciate our partnership with Kilroy’s and are looking forward to continually collaborating on ways to make the campus community safer for our students and guests.

snipped by me, BBM, first of all admitting there is a problem at all was a gigantuous move by Kilroy's. Usually, they just pay a huge fine on a regular basis and then get back to the business of serving minors and getting fliberdiggibity kids shitfaced while handing out free macaroni and cheese and cheap sunglasses.
I'm a business- as- usual local, but Lauren was my watershed. I've watched things escalate until that June 3 when I realized, wow, I don't even recognize this deadly
social scene anymore.
Bartenders and waitresses, what are you thinking? If you suspect a person has rufies, and you know you almost always know after a while, you need to report this to mgt. and have them thrown out or lose your liquor license, your livliehoods. People think they can work in food service, or in a bar, just because they need money. No, it takes skills, and the State of Indiana wants you to be able to differentiate a sobriety and age level, discernment and also be able to ensure the safety of the people in your section. I.E., if you see a known junkie trying to rufie someone, you should be taking care of your client, not the gang banger boyfriend of your's sitting in the corner enjoying free drinks and selling dope. Believe me I've been up and down with this kind of behavior as a manager. Not of Kilroy's, I may add. Culture of Care better have huge teeth with it, sounds like Kilroy's is trying to sluff off their responsibility to friends of people "in need",
aka drunk off their arses, been served too much.

 

[SeeingForThe1stTime]

The problem is, this would also happen if the person wasn't there, or was not involved and was not named as a POI, right? And that to me seems more likely than LE, the Spierers, the media and the other POI conspiring to keep the spotlight off a key suspect.

I could be wrong though. I don't follow crime cases like some people here do. Can anyone give me an example of a case with this kind of situation? I.e. where there were named POI, but the suspect ended up being someone who belonged to the same group but was never mentioned as a POI (or at all) until the arrest?

If we actually had confirmation that the out of town person was at JR's that night, I would have a lot more questions.

I know this isn't exactly what you're asking but I think it's similar enough to point out that in the Samantha Koenig case LE did publicly clear a vehicle seen on security cameras at the scene of her kidnapping. Ironically, a white pick up truck. Early on LE had asked for public assistance in locating the truck and it's owner and subsequently announced they had located the truck and cleared it however after Israel Keyes was arrested LE announced that they had linked him to the truck and that it was his and was the transport vehicle. Like I said I know that isn't an answer to the exact question you asked but it does point to the fact that LE does sometimes go beyond just the withholding of specific information but will sometimes release inaccurate information if they feel it's necessary in some way to the investigation.

In LS's case what we do have is LE stating that there are PsOI who have not been named and their vague statements like "others were present". Two things I think we can safely assume are that 1) LE does have information that has not been released and 2) at least some of that information has most likely been shared with CS and RS. What we can't assume is how pertinent and/or specific that information is or if that information is the driving force behind the Spierer's apparent suspicions of CR.

 

[VeryVeritas]

and yet. even if they didn't do it, IF they supplied her with whatever incapacitated her and then as hosts, allowed her to leave to her demise,
surely some charges therein lie and this is what they could be avoiding, in civil and federal court. I mean, if they are telling somewhat the truth, they
could have called a cab. even for 3 blocks.

Amazing the attitudes of some people... their lives shouldn't be inconvenienced because there is a Constitution (which has big holes burned in it and only seems to come out when nasty people want to hide behind it).

We as a society have a responsibility to not let this rest. I don't know the Speirer's, I never met LS, I don't even live in Indiana. But here I am. Those people last to see her and who partied with her that night, damn well do have a responsibility to find her, to help with the investigation, and should not be resting until this is resolved. This is what civilized people do. Not because the Constitution says so, it certainly doesn't because it's a document limiting government power. So hiding behind it when your friend vanishes, might be your right, but it makes you into an asshat if not appearing as a criminal. The reason why there are so many missing is because so many people don't give a crap about anyone but themselves. This isn't the wild wild west. Sure if 2 cars hit on the road next to you and people are injured needing help, you don't need to stop... no obligation whatsoever... you can just let them DIE! it's none of your business at all and if LE thinks you somehow were part of the cause of the accident... well then let them prove it, while you go have a beer and eat some chips.
Borderline narcissistic-psycho thinking... but sure, It's everyone's right as Americans to be a selfish arrogant scum, unless you have proof of something more. Perfect example of why this country is the way that it is...

 

[VeryVeritas]

I'd like to say something else in response to your comment and my link (http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/09/10/imovation-solutions-putting-the-fun-in-five-hour-energy/).

It interests me that some PR person put such a spin on this that the local CBS affiliate referred to JR and DB as "the kind of young guys who will probably go far." Only in the comments section was LS brought up. Maybe the article wasn't the place for that, being a business vs. news piece. But it's kind of brazen, IMO.

No question, if you want to rise to the top of the primate hierarchy, you have to know how to not get bogged down by silly things like Rules or Emotions. But knowing how to make people vanish, can't get through that glass ceiling without skills like that.

 

[VeryVeritas]

If Kilroy's is doing this, it's because they have been busted so many times
that one more knifing, murder or rufied woman will cost them their license.
I am a firm believer that evil people don't change. They morph. Only time will tell with these jerks. Sorry but this culture of care must include getting rid of the girls who walk around with trays of shots handing them out indiscriminately no matter how many an individual may have already had, and selling drinks with more than 1-1/2 shots of booze in them. Sex offenders should be banned from all bars, using their ID indicators to put them on a no serve list.
Also, the numbers of patrons allowed in ALWAYS exceeds their legal limits, yes it is very unsafe, but also makes it difficult to manage their crowd, which they should be doing. People who sexually harrass other patrons should be banned.
I had a 3 way liquor license for 24 years in this state. Never had one single complaint about over serving anyone, because I didn't. Every now and then I kicked someone out for harrassing
someone. Maybe if I'd abused my license I would be rich like the gross, greedy, disgusting woman who owns Kilroy's.

I second that motion! Barring sex offenders from Bars! It's great!
They would then have to be more clever and join church groups to seek out their prey.

Also appreciate your perspective as someone who understands human nature as you would surely have experienced as owner of a liquor establishment.
So, your statements about other liquor sellers in the area comes with some credibility.