IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #33

[AbbeyR]

Interesting responses all around regarding an attempt to estimate Lauren's state and therefore decide (as best we can) if she actually left JRs. To look at the question a different way, is it possible LS took something after her and CR left SW that increased her coordination, at least for a short period of time? Do we have someone in the group that has some expertise/scientific background on drug mixing? We have alcohol, klonopin and a possible "upper" what would the possible results be?

<snipped for space>

In my (non-scientific) experience, certain drugs, if taken while drinking, will make a person feel more sober, or at least more alert. But they do not reverse the effects once a person is severely intoxicated.

Based on everyone I've ever seen mixing drugs and alcohol, I do not believe that any drugs Lauren could have taken after she was in an 'incapacitated and nonresponsive state' and after falling several times, including face first on the ground, would have allowed her to suddenly walk away without stumbling. I think it's unlikely that someone who couldn't even walk or put her hands up to brace a fall would be snorting drugs a few minutes later, but if she did take (or was given) something else in that condition, it would only have made her worse off, IMO.

 

[Ixchel13]

Interesting responses all around regarding an attempt to estimate Lauren's state and therefore decide (as best we can) if she actually left JRs. To look at the question a different way, is it possible LS took something after her and CR left SW that increased her coordination, at least for a short period of time? Do we have someone in the group that has some expertise/scientific background on drug mixing? We have alcohol, klonopin and a possible "upper" what would the possible results be?

For example, it is extremely mainstream in this age age group to snort adderall ("an upper") after a night of heavy drinking to party for a few more hours. I've seen people multiple times who should call it a night (eyes drooping/leaning on a friend) that (stupidly) snort adderall and gain a another 1-2 hrs of partying. They still appear clearly intoxicated/on something but are now alert. Their coordination may be sloppy but now appear semi-functional and almost slightly hyper, but in a mellow way (I know that is an oxymoron, but the best I can describe it).

IMO, I am leaning toward a theory that involves the CR/MB/JR actually telling the truth (however I am always open to changing my mind). Would it be possible that LS and CR took an upper of some kind on their way home to CR's or if LS took something alone while MB was taking care of CR? Thus MB/JR not knowing additional drugs were added? Or maybe MB/JR took an upper with her (which could be something they initially/are still lying about). Either way, it appeared to stabilize her and then she left?

Im not excusing JR letting her walk home alone, even if they were sober, the situation would have been handled wrong, IMO. It is just interesting to speculate because if possible, at the same time it offers a more reasonable but even more dangerous scenario of LS leaving JRs. If LS had a mini burst of energy (although her body was probably getting ready to collapse and she/JR didnt realize it) was she going home/was she going to another friend's none of us had heard of (including JR)/run into someone and think she was ok to keep partying/heading somewhere else.....?

I've always thought the "paper due" from MB was an excuse in case someone told that he was running back and forth to JRs snorting Adderall. We all know the excuse the "kids" use for their Adderall scripts, it helps them focus, it helps them study, they can't study or take a test or write a paper w/o it! Parents fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Then, the next excuse they make is that they need to grind it up and snort it to get the best effect. It's even more addictive than cocaine. Call it what they will, it is speed. And it does age a person just like speed does. I've seen the adverse cosmetic effects in just 6 mos of doing it on some of these kids faces.

snipped this from Bluelight, a place where little junkies go to discuss drugs. They were debating adderall vs. coke:

"My opinion... so far this friggen adderall comedown is worse than any coke comedown Ive had! WTF! It's been HOURS and i'm dying!

No.. dont like this at all and this is pure pharmeceuticals! NOT COOL"

 

[Ros]

Interesting responses all around regarding an attempt to estimate Lauren's state and therefore decide (as best we can) if she actually left JRs. To look at the question a different way, is it possible LS took something after her and CR left SW that increased her coordination, at least for a short period of time? Do we have someone in the group that has some expertise/scientific background on drug mixing? We have alcohol, klonopin and a possible "upper" what would the possible results be?

For example, it is extremely mainstream in this age age group to snort adderall ("an upper") after a night of heavy drinking to party for a few more hours. I've seen people multiple times who should call it a night (eyes drooping/leaning on a friend) that (stupidly) snort adderall and gain a another 1-2 hrs of partying. They still appear clearly intoxicated/on something but are now alert. Their coordination may be sloppy but now appear semi-functional and almost slightly hyper, but in a mellow way (I know that is an oxymoron, but the best I can describe it).

IMO, I am leaning toward a theory that involves the CR/MB/JR actually telling the truth (however I am always open to changing my mind). Would it be possible that LS and CR took an upper of some kind on their way home to CR's or if LS took something alone while MB was taking care of CR? Thus MB/JR not knowing additional drugs were added? Or maybe MB/JR took an upper with her (which could be something they initially/are still lying about). Either way, it appeared to stabilize her and then she left?

Im not excusing JR letting her walk home alone, even if they were sober, the situation would have been handled wrong, IMO. It is just interesting to speculate because if possible, at the same time it offers a more reasonable but even more dangerous scenario of LS leaving JRs. If LS had a mini burst of energy (although her body was probably getting ready to collapse and she/JR didnt realize it) was she going home/was she going to another friend's none of us had heard of (including JR)/run into someone and think she was ok to keep partying/heading somewhere else.....?

Taking Adderall with alcohol could mask the toxic effects of alcohol. One might feel relatively OK, but be on the verge of serious, even fatal, alcohol poisoning.
http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/adderall-health-risks-when-combined-alcohol

 

[Ros]

<snipped for space>

In my (non-scientific) experience, certain drugs, if taken while drinking, will make a person feel more sober, or at least more alert. But they do not reverse the effects once a person is severely intoxicated.

Based on everyone I've ever seen mixing drugs and alcohol, I do not believe that any drugs Lauren could have taken after she was in an 'incapacitated and nonresponsive state' and after falling several times, including face first on the ground, would have allowed her to suddenly walk away without stumbling. I think it's unlikely that someone who couldn't even walk or put her hands up to brace a fall would be snorting drugs a few minutes later, but if she did take (or was given) something else in that condition, it would only have made her worse off, IMO.

Alcohol and Adderall could be a bad combination, because the Adderall could mask the toxic effects of alcohol. Many drugs are bad to combine with alcohol, including amphetamines, cocaine, barbiturates, and anti-anxiety agents such as Klonopin.
http://www.scu.edu/wellness/topics/alcohol/mixingalcohol.cfm

 

[Ixchel13]

I'm not sure I follow your question but if you are wondering about the video and attorney/client relationship I don't see how the video would apply. Arguably it might apply if LE wanted it to see if MB was going to the law office, but to see it to see random passerbys on the street, one of which (or more) could be clients of the attorney would be irrelevant I'd think.
Therefore there wouldn't be much to be gained by requiring a warrant, and there could even be a PR issue if he delayed handing over video that might be helpful in finding a missing Bloomington resident.

And if LE as a matter of efficiency and thoroughness (basically crossing t's and dotting i's) got a warrant I don't know that we'd necessarily know about it if it was handled in a matter of fact method with nobody objecting and no battering rams and major police presence. Which goes back to the attorney agreeing to release the video with no hiccups. Considering his connections and lines of communication professional courtesies could've applied both ways.

I just meant that if during the course of building a defense for CR, Salzmann
wanted to implicate MB over and above putting CR to bed, MB's attorney might not want MB to say he knew w/o a doubt that CR was out like a light.
Not being a defendant in the civil trial can and may put MB right back in the hot seat for a murder trial later.

I may be wrong, but if MB is on the witness list for the civil trial, I am sure his attorney is going to vet the situation thoroughly to see which way the wind is going to blow on this.

MB is a witness to what happened after CR and LS returned to CR's apt and after that at JR's, and he seems to be a witness as to what went on the first time Lauren was up there pregaming,
and a witness to what went on when they left JR's pregame party to go over to his and CR's apt. before going to Kilroy's. But he isn't a witness to what happened while CR and Lauren were at Kilroys and the SW altercation.

So, MB could weigh heavily on JR and what he provided; or he could put
most of the blame on CR if he wanted to. The problem CR faces is his amnesia
claim. Either attorney, MB's or JR's, could put all kinds of misdeeds on CR's plate if they want, and so could any of the other POIs' attorneys.

So yes, I think it does matter how Salzmann decides to treat MB as a witness, as to how enthusiastic of a CR backer he is going to be.

We talk about ethics in criminal trials, and yet I have heard tell that someone is always lying under oath, happens all the time, not accusing any attorneys in this case, but as long as they don't out and out tell their client to lie, they
can't be held responsible if they do.

And I hope this doesn't spur a debate about how this just doesn't happen, one only has to google perjury or lying under oath to find out it happens all the time, every day, everywhere.

That being said, I have known Salzmann as a customer, and as a prosecutor and he is a good person and honest.

As far as Voyles, well that's another matter. During the Tyson trial, my cousin was friends with someone who got her a copy of the victim's deposition,
which had 3 pages of a report from the physician who examined her. It was very graphic, and after reading that part, and other parts of it from the night he raped her, there would leave no doubt whatsoever that this woman was brutally raped. For one thing, I'm not sure if people know this woman was found by the maid the next morning alone and still tied to a bed. Yet Voyles had the unmitigated gall to attack this victim!
He defended an animal.(sorry to all real animals) So, don't expect anything upright from this jerk.

 

[Btown]

That became the consensus after Btown posted this picture with his observations.

Post 294 in Thread #4

Brace yourself for more irrelevant images of cameras that we have no way of knowing if they function.
(Forgive the sarcasm to a local townie and fellow websleuther)

I'll let others judge, but having been onsite up close, the angle of the camera appears to maybe get the sidewalk in front of the the Attorney's building, but not across the street.

 

[Ixchel13]

Brace yourself for more irrelevant images of cameras that we have no way of knowing if they function.
(Forgive the sarcasm to a local townie and fellow websleuther)

I'll let others judge, but having been onsite up close, the angle of the camera appears to maybe get the sidewalk in front of the the Attorney's building, but not across the street.

thanks BTown! at least we are going with it is a camera. I sat on the steps across the street and it seemed like the camera was pointed at me, this was a few days ago, but as you say it may not actually be picking up images across the street.

 

[bessie]

Oh, thank goodness! I ran myself bats trying to zoom in on that object in GE street view. There's a tree in the way, and no matter how I tried, I couldn't maneuver around it. :facepalm:


Thanks, Btown.

 

[bx2]

Brace yourself for more irrelevant images of cameras that we have no way of knowing if they function.
(Forgive the sarcasm to a local townie and fellow websleuther)

I'll let others judge, but having been onsite up close, the angle of the camera appears to maybe get the sidewalk in front of the the Attorney's building, but not across the street.

Nice job, pretty clear from the back/side views what it is. The location of it seems pretty telling, to me, that it is for capturing the parking lot side of the bldg. If it was intended to capture out front, why wouldn't they just mount it up top pointed west along side the other one pointed at the door.

As noted by Ixchel13, there is a camera on the south side of his bldg that captures the 10th street sidewalk, but I'm pretty sure this wasn't in place on June of 2011.

 

[Ixchel13]

Nice job, pretty clear from the back/side views what it is. The location of it seems pretty telling, to me, that it is for capturing the parking lot side of the bldg. If it was intended to capture out front, why wouldn't they just mount it up top pointed west along side the other one pointed at the door.

As noted by Ixchel13, there is a camera on the south side of his bldg that captures the 10th street sidewalk, but I'm pretty sure this wasn't in place on June of 2011.

well, the camera that looks new on the south side is pointed south east. The north side camera in question at this time would not, for example, pick up that car parked there. the trajectory of this camera seems to start very near the sidewalk and does, indeed, point across the street at those stairs. There is one shot of this above that shows the camera is not pointed downward
enough, and also, even if so, it wouldn't cover but just a tiny strip of parking lot. The side parking lot seems to be only for his or another employee's parking, IOW, the main parking is in the front, there is no side parking lot. He has the front parking lot well covered with the two cameras in front.

The north side camera seems to be covering the street and since it is on the main street coming into town, useful for many reasons, including helping LE if need be. And even keeping a watch on vandals coming out of 10th and C wanting to do damage to his building. We have a famous lawyer, Kenn Nunn, whom Salzmann knows really well, who caught these repeat vandals using his cameras. They had been breaking out his lights and caused, according to Nunn, over 25,000 worth of damage. He put in the cameras and caught them. Salzmann has put away a lot of criminals. And I think he has a "bird's eye"on 10th and College, JMO.

in the 4th image above, you can see the steps across the street clearly, and you can see the trajectory of the camera points across the street right at them. If you sit on the stairs, you are looking right into this camera. If anyone local has time, maybe they can sit on the steps and weigh in. Or, if anyone is super good at geometry and knows how to draw on the screen, maybe someone could draw the trajectory for us. And, I don't feel it's irrelevant that someone involved in the case has a camera pointed at what could be the stairs in question!

 

[Ixchel13]

agree with everything you say, but pretty sure ZC currently lives in Philly.

She left the country right after Lauren disappeared. it was on her fb. Am I allowed to say that?

a better way to say it is that she "vacationed abroad" not implying she fled the country.

 

[Ixchel13]

Interesting responses all around regarding an attempt to estimate Lauren's state and therefore decide (as best we can) if she actually left JRs. To look at the question a different way, is it possible LS took something after her and CR left SW that increased her coordination, at least for a short period of time? Do we have someone in the group that has some expertise/scientific background on drug mixing? We have alcohol, klonopin and a possible "upper" what would the possible results be?

For example, it is extremely mainstream in this age age group to snort adderall ("an upper") after a night of heavy drinking to party for a few more hours. I've seen people multiple times who should call it a night (eyes drooping/leaning on a friend) that (stupidly) snort adderall and gain a another 1-2 hrs of partying. They still appear clearly intoxicated/on something but are now alert. Their coordination may be sloppy but now appear semi-functional and almost slightly hyper, but in a mellow way (I know that is an oxymoron, but the best I can describe it).

IMO, I am leaning toward a theory that involves the CR/MB/JR actually telling the truth (however I am always open to changing my mind). Would it be possible that LS and CR took an upper of some kind on their way home to CR's or if LS took something alone while MB was taking care of CR? Thus MB/JR not knowing additional drugs were added? Or maybe MB/JR took an upper with her (which could be something they initially/are still lying about). Either way, it appeared to stabilize her and then she left?

Im not excusing JR letting her walk home alone, even if they were sober, the situation would have been handled wrong, IMO. It is just interesting to speculate because if possible, at the same time it offers a more reasonable but even more dangerous scenario of LS leaving JRs. If LS had a mini burst of energy (although her body was probably getting ready to collapse and she/JR didnt realize it) was she going home/was she going to another friend's none of us had heard of (including JR)/run into someone and think she was ok to keep partying/heading somewhere else.....?

just had a bad thought. What if while MB was putting CR to bed, Lauren did a little of his adderall and that's why she wasn't there when he came down, and that's why he keeps changing his story? And that's why the "do you want to party?" whole thing came up in his story. and that's why he's talking about the paper due? JMO, scenario. In case somehow people find out about this speculated adderall, he can say it was there so he could focus on the paper
and she must have helped herself to it when he was upstairs and he didn't offer it to her. And in her incapacitated state Lauren took too much? It may have been enough for her to get an initial alcohol blocker type of thing that possibly could have her walking back down the street and being back on those middle steps. MB may be the middleman because he also could have provided. Lauren something, maybe even suggested it, when she was in no condition to make such a decision. He has her asking, "do you want to party?" when it seems more likely he asked it.

 

[imkeylime]

just had a bad thought. What if while MB was putting CR to bed, Lauren did a little of his adderall and that's why she wasn't there when he came down, and that's why he keeps changing his story? And that's why the "do you want to party?" whole thing came up in his story. and that's why he's talking about the paper due? JMO, scenario. In case somehow people find out about this speculated adderall, he can say it was there so he could focus on the paper
and she must have helped herself to it when he was upstairs and he didn't offer it to her. And in her incapacitated state Lauren took too much? It may have been enough for her to get an initial alcohol blocker type of thing that possibly could have her walking back down the street and being back on those middle steps. MB may be the middleman because he also could have provided. Lauren something, maybe even suggested it, when she was in no condition to make such a decision. He has her asking, "do you want to party?" when it seems more likely he asked it.

Re: newmember's previous post and your response: I've thought before that LS may have taken or been given something to "sober her up," i.e., adderall, coke, or even energy drinks like Red Bull (which used to be popular where I live). But I'm inclined to think that any of the above could have aggravated her heart condition rather than have the desired effect. Alcohol and klonopin together could be dangerous for someone with long QT, IMO, without adding in something that can make the heart go faster. IMO, it's more likely that she would have had a health crisis from this than walk away.

IOW, if she took/was given something with a stimulating effect, she might a different physical reaction (cardiac-wise) than someone without long QT. Also, CR, MB, and JR apparently didn't know she even had long QT, so they might have not thought about any possible consequences. JMO.

 

[bx2]

Or, if anyone is super good at geometry and knows how to draw on the screen, maybe someone could draw the trajectory for us. And, I don't feel it's irrelevant that someone involved in the case has a camera pointed at what could be the stairs in question!

snipped.

bear with me here...

Drawing of a square using the camera angle to triangulate. Triangle measures approximately 197 x 64 x 207 pixels. Inverse sine of 64/207 is ~18 degree camera angle.

Now lets determine how far that gets you assuming a 90 degree angle from the ground up. Complementary angle to the ground for the camera is 72 degrees. To find the distance from the camera along the bottom side of the triangle that is formed, you take the tangent of 72 degrees (3.08) and multiply by the height from the ground. So if the camera is 8 feet high, it can view about 24.5 feet away.

Using Google maps scale that would appear to reach just short of the sidewalk

*obviously not an exact science based on picture angles and the slope of the ground

 

[Ixchel13]

snipped.

bear with me here...

Drawing of a square using the camera angle to triangulate. Triangle measures approximately 197 x 64 x 207 pixels. Inverse sine of 64/207 is ~18 degree camera angle.

Now lets determine how far that gets you assuming a 90 degree angle from the ground up. Complementary angle to the ground for the camera is 72 degrees. To find the distance from the camera along the bottom side of the triangle that is formed, you take the tangent of 72 degrees (3.08) and multiply by the height from the ground. So if the camera is 8 feet high, it can view about 24.5 feet away.

Using Google maps scale that would appear to reach just short of the sidewalk

*obviously not an exact science based on picture angles and the slope of the ground but should be close.

thanks, that's interesting. I was talking more about depth of field, which used to be adjustable in hand held cameras, but nowadays they self-adjust. If this camera can be adjusted, it can be set so that it will slightly blur things close up, but will focus on objects further away, such as across the street. iow,
the camera may only see clearly to 24.5 feet normally, but does the trajectory continue on or does it hit the ground? I don't think so. It could possibly have a depth of field meter that can be manually adjusted inside the building to focus across the street, I think.
because...when you're sitting on the steps, you can look right into the lens. If it stopped short of Salzmann's sidewalk,
it seems like you could look at the camera from the steps, but you wouldn't see the lens, you would see the canister pointing slightly downwards by your calculations, I think.

 

[bx2]

Yep, either way, we have to hope it was shared-

"Early in the Spierer investigation, Salzmann, before being hired by Rossman, shared surveillance footage from his own office near Smallwood and 5 North with police."

http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/story.aspx?ID=1712477

 

[AbbeyR]

It's a little hard to tell the angles from that photo, since the photo itself is taken from an angle and the perspective is a little distorted. Still, I'm impressed with the real life application of math skills! Thanks Bx2

It also makes sense to me that the camera is there to record the parking lot of the law offices. But, I also wondered about the range. My guess would be that most security cameras don't have a very good range, especially at night, but it's pretty hard to judge without knowing anything about the camera itself and conditions. (Edit: I just googled this and it looks like some of those little cameras do have quite a far range, with night vision, so who knows!)

Though it's not totally clear, this quote implies that Salzmann did have working cameras, and that if Lauren had walked home that way, she would have passed one, so perhaps some of them do reach at least to the sidewalk/ street...

There is no camera that would have captured her leaving their apartment building. If she turned onto College, she would have had to walk 100 yards until she passed a working surveillance camera. Coincidentally, the camera, which did not capture an image of her walking home, is attached to the law offices of Carl Salzmann, who was retained by Rossman a couple days after Spierer&#8217;s disappearance.

http://archive.lohud.com/article/20...ered-away-after-night-heavy-drinking-drug-use (p5)

 

[Ixchel13]

yes, his cameras may not have seen her walking down the street because she probably didn't at 4:30. Even if she did, she could've rounded the corner, walked a few feet and turned right into the alley that leads to Morton St. She could walk, (or be taken) all the way down that alley to Morton st, staying to the right side of the alley, and not be seen on camera.

Also, unless they move with motion, Salzmann's north camera would only catch a fleeting second of someone moving across whatever width the lens is capable of capturing on the sidewalk.

I'm more interested in the steps. The camera is fixed on them. if they got up on the arcade first, then walked down the steps, the camera wouldn't see them until they sat down. Then, the PIs say they then
"ducked" into a building, to do that, they would go back up the steps, not down to the sidewalk. So who was on the sidewalk is not what I'm looking for here. It's, what steps were they on? And, was the video they're talking about a composite?
It is possible that they went up the steps by the clock, walked north on the arcade, sat on the middle steps trying to call ZC from CR's phone, then
went back up the steps and ducked into the vestibule inside the inner courtyard and tried to buzz her.
I think it's intriguing that Bo Dietl says JW was not where he said he was.
Did Lauren think he was at 10th and C? Not being where he said he was doesn't necessarily mean he was stalking Lauren as people have suggested.
And, as the PIs and LE have pointed out, no one's stories match up. This isn't solely directed at the 5N POIs, not at all. I'm thinking there was another party going on at 10th and C., one in which Lauren wasn't invited to but during the altercation, she somehow found out that JW was there. just a theory. What if Lauren somehow got someone to finally come out of the party, and then while having a heated discussion with them on the steps,she fell back and hit her head?

I mean the whole video narrative just seems cobbled together, and some of it doesn't make sense logistically. If you were the perp{s} and read and listened to the cobbled version, you would know it was wrong, you would lawyer up immediately and refuse to take polygraphs.

It's just that the PIs have her very much alive in their video narrative after emerging from alley; witness who is supposed to be in the same scenario has her non-responsive after smacking her head and being picked up, and doesn't mention an alley. Her account sounds more like they walked up the street.

 

[AbbeyR]

I mean the whole video narrative just seems cobbled together, and some of it doesn't make sense logistically. If you were the perp{s} and read and listened to the cobbled version, you would know it was wrong, you would lawyer up immediately and refuse to take polygraphs.

They lawyered up and refused to take polygraphs long before that video narrative came out!

(Edit, sorry, read that as POI)

IMO, the one part that might be causing confusion is the part that Bx2 pointed out ages ago, where they repeat the same sound bite about heading up the alley. Otherwise, I'm not sure how we could determine what might be wrong about the account.

 

[Ixchel13]

They lawyered up and refused to take polygraphs long before that video narrative came out!

(Edit, sorry, read that as POI)

IMO, the one part that might be causing confusion is the part that Bx2 pointed out ages ago, where they repeat the same sound bite about heading up the alley. Otherwise, I'm not sure how we could determine what might be wrong about the account.

we have no way of knowing when or if other people besides the 5N POIs and JW lawyered up. If you really read my post, I'm not just talking about the 4 main figures. one of the things we can determine isn't right is that you cannot "duck into a building" from the alley. So that's a "mistake".This is a fact that cannot be disputed and is in the narrative as happening. and whether they are repeating a sound bite is up for opinion. They certainly didn't correct themselves. Even if they do repeat a sound bite, it's a mistake in the video narrative. What other "mistakes" are there? that haven't been corrected?