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

[Ixchel13]

Thank you Ixchel, what a great memory. I suppose it is possible that LE has knowledge of each vehicles' plates travelling in that time span, those that is that are on camera, but it is so incredibly frustrating that no leads are made public...
..... Could she have literally slipped thru the cracks?? And I do mean streets and sidewalk construction. Concrete holes were checked....right?? ...before filled in.
Just soo much construction peri early June.

during the early searches, there were no reports stating anything such as an extensive search of construction sites. In fact, they purposely didn't reveal exact areas that had been searched but did say that everything had been searched. IIRC, they asked searchers not to talk about exact areas they searched. So it was, we're
searching everywhere but we can't mark off exact areas as having been searched, publicly. They asked people not to search on their own; and they also asked everyone to search their own properties, or if they found anything anywhere, to report it immediately to LE. They didn't want the perps to know what areas had been searched.
It is very possible that she ended up in a construction gap, but IMO, she didn't accidentally fall into one.
I could see someone thinking that it would look like she simply fell into it. At the time, right next to Kilroy's they had the lot torn up. Also at the time, right by JR and CR's apts, across the street, was completely torn up and
now there's a huge row of townhouses there. In one of BTown's or was it BX2's, photos of cameras, you can see the construction barricades in the background. Right when people were searching for Lauren, they started tearing up the whole back lot behind 5N and also behind and beside the houses just east of 5N that shared that back parking lot. Also, they tore up the walkways behind and between the same houses next to 5N. I remember seeing that and thinking, weird. Then, they tore up the alley that led to House Bar and remodeled it.
I know it's probably just progress, but everything along Lauren's paths, even Kilroy's, has been completely remodeled except for that one alley I call alley #2 between 10th and C and 10th and V. Alley #1 is the one that leads from SW to 10th and C, it has been remodeled as well. The lot next to SW was torn up too. I reported all this on WS as it happened. Right at the beginning of the search for Lauren, both Kilroy's and House Bar closed down and reopened in Aug. and Sept respectively. Kilroy's was especially suspicious because they had just finished an extensive remodeling and had created the "beach" area, and the place was packed. Once when I was searching the area I was just floored by
all of the excavations along Lauren's path and even wondered if LE was behind them.

 

[akh]

Just curious. Why would running a stop sign make them unable to see a license plate?
Also, JMO but I believe they have lots more info and evidence.

Because (possibly), since the cameras aren't (apparently) traffic cams designed to catch license plates (and so not perfectly focused directly on plates), then the movement of the vehicle would blur the plates too much to make them legible. Whereas, a vehicle stopping would give the viewer several frames to focus in on the plate numbers and read it or enhance it. Especially true when we're talking about some fairly low res cameras to begin with. When you see crime shows that show a forensics lab turn a blurred plate photo into a perfectly clear and legible plate, that is totally television and not realistic. If the image is smeared on the frame then no amount of enhancement is going to change that. At best you'll have a sharper edged smear.

 

[elmorejames]

Because (possibly), since the cameras aren't (apparently) traffic cams designed to catch license plates (and so not perfectly focused directly on plates), then the movement of the vehicle would blur the plates too much to make them legible. Whereas, a vehicle stopping would give the viewer several frames to focus in on the plate numbers and read it or enhance it. Especially true when we're talking about some fairly low res cameras to begin with. When you see crime shows that show a forensics lab turn a blurred plate photo into a perfectly clear and legible plate, that is totally television and not realistic. If the image is smeared on the frame then no amount of enhancement is going to change that. At best you'll have a sharper edged smear.

my thoughts exactly

 

[elmorejames]

chilling recap. I think we're really onto something here. hopefully LE is reading this because 3 years they have to have something and this is the only lead they've mentioned even though they were quick to dismiss it. some tampering seems to be apparent

 

[CoolJ]

Because (possibly), since the cameras aren't (apparently) traffic cams designed to catch license plates (and so not perfectly focused directly on plates), then the movement of the vehicle would blur the plates too much to make them legible. Whereas, a vehicle stopping would give the viewer several frames to focus in on the plate numbers and read it or enhance it. Especially true when we're talking about some fairly low res cameras to begin with. When you see crime shows that show a forensics lab turn a blurred plate photo into a perfectly clear and legible plate, that is totally television and not realistic. If the image is smeared on the frame then no amount of enhancement is going to change that. At best you'll have a sharper edged smear.

I suppose this could be true. But IMO in that image in which white truck is coming toward camera(not to mention all of the other angles and views they must have had of the truck driving around those streets, 200 hours of tape to go through, isn't that what Qualters said?), I believe they would have been able to make out the license plate, which is why they showed us an image without it. They could have found that white truck without all the hoopla. They wanted to see if putting out an image with what appears to be Lauren in the back would scare somebody into talking. Didn't work. IMO

 

[akh]

I suppose this could be true. But IMO in that image in which white truck is coming toward camera(not to mention all of the other angles and views they must have had of the truck driving around those streets, 200 hours of tape to go through, isn't that what Qualters said?), I believe they would have been able to make out the license plate, which is why they showed us an image without it. They could have found that white truck without all the hoopla. They wanted to see if putting out an image with what appears to be Lauren in the back would scare somebody into talking. Didn't work. IMO

Here's what I found in a (very) quick search:

"It could either be significant to us in that that person may have some direct responsibility for the event or that individual has information that could lead us in a direction," Qualters said.

He said the truck, which ran a stop sign, didn't slow down enough for investigators to be able to make out writing seen on one of its back doors and rear panels.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/15/lauren-spierer-case-polic_n_877533.html

 

[akh]

...and a little more...
I think it's pretty obvious from what they are saying that the plates would have been impossible to make out from the video. Although I still seem to remember that actually being said directly in a quote.

A private security camera captured images of the white truck circling the block near where and when Spierer was last reported seen by a friend the morning of June 3.

“The significance of that is obviously ... we’re talking a very close proximity to the area where Lauren was last seen,” Bloomington police Capt. Joe Qualters said as he released two pictures of a truck during a press briefing. “And we basically have this vehicle in that same area, twice.”

The truck was described by police as either a full-sized Chevy Silverado or a mid-sized Chevy Colorado. Its year is believed to be in the mid-2000s. It is white, with four doors, a short bed with a bed liner and equipment in the back. The truck has “distinctive” wheels and writing or a logo on the side doors or on the rear quarter panel.

“At this point, we are treating it as hopefully someone who can provide information to us,” he said. The truck is not considered a suspect vehicle at this time, as police are still in the information-gathering stage, he said. The person driving the truck may have information that can help point police in the right direction.

The truck is captured on video heading west on 10th Street, approaching Morton Street, at 4:14 a.m. June 3, according to the time on the video surveillance camera equipment. The truck then heads north on Morton Street.

It is seen a second time heading west on 10th Street, approaching Morton, at 4:24 a.m.

The times provided by the security camera equipment cannot be verified by police, Qualters stressed, as clocks may be set incorrectly or be affected by power outages.

A friend told police he last saw Spierer as she started to walk home from an apartment at 11th and College to her Smallwood Plaza apartment about 4:30 that morning.

Had the truck stopped at a stop sign, police would have gotten higher quality photographs, Qualters said. The truck is constantly in motion in the video, he said.

Police had obtained this video of the truck “fairly soon” after Spierer’s disappearance, he said.

Qualters said police are “absolutely” looking into the possibility that this truck may be involved in Spierer’s disappearance. “Why? Because it circles the block,” Qualters said.

“We have not ruled out any possibility,” he said, and called the video and photographs of the truck “another piece of the puzzle that we need to put together.”

Qualters acknowledged that construction work is being done in the area. He said police have made contact with construction workers in the area and plan to do so again with the photographs in hand.

http://ww.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2011/06/15/news.154691.sto

 

[jynkal]

The lawsuit against CR and JR was dismissed today.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/10/01/federal-judge-dismisses-lauren-spierer-lawsuit/16526073/

 

[CoolJ]

...and a little more...
I think it's pretty obvious from what they are saying that the plates would have been impossible to make out from the video. Although I still seem to remember that actually being said directly in a quote.



http://ww.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2011/06/15/news.154691.sto

Thanks akh, yes I was aware of all these comments by Qualters. The problem is, if you are replying to my previous comments, that for my thoughts to be true, LE is giving us the "run around" (aka - lying as an in investigative tactic).

Do you really think that they wouldn't have known the time stamps were off and rushed to the judgement that the truck circled the area? They are not that stupid... They make it look that way at times, but believe me, they are not.

 

[OldSteve]

The lawsuit against CR and JR was dismissed today.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/10/01/federal-judge-dismisses-lauren-spierer-lawsuit/16526073/

I wonder if the lawsuit was a good idea...
When cases go cold like this, sometimes someone who has heard something, or is indirectly involved will come forward for a variety of reasons. Might such a person(s) be made fearful if the atmosphere if that of lawsuits rather than immunity? ..

 

[Vidocq]

there was BTown's viewing of a video of a vehicle on Walnut between 8th and 9th (read, Kilroys) at the time Lauren was supposedly in the area walking. a car running by the curb, with a girl near it, and a skateboarder across the street. always thought they interviewed the skateboarder, IMO he was the one who posted on fb and iirc, here, about seeing a car and a woman by the curb at around 4:30 with a blonde woman in the car.
people on fb treated him like he was crazy. yet he seems to have seen something very similar to something that was reported to have been seen on camera. so, if we treat him as a pseudo eye witness, then it seems like
anyone who reports seeing something contrary to the media driven report is refuted. Notice I didn't say the LE report, because they aren't really telling us anything. Qualters didn't disqualify what the witness said at all, he just relegated her testimony to a different timetable. But in the media, she is considered bogus.

What's this other video? Is there a link?

 

[akh]

Thanks akh, yes I was aware of all these comments by Qualters. The problem is, if you are replying to my previous comments, that for my thoughts to be true, LE is giving us the "run around" (aka - lying as an in investigative tactic).

Do you really think that they wouldn't have known the time stamps were off and rushed to the judgement that the truck circled the area? They are not that stupid... They make it look that way at times, but believe me, they are not.

I believe them that the truck couldn't be identified through the security camera video. I'm more than a little confused why they were so interested in the truck. They even say in the one article that time stamps can be wrong on the cameras. But that didn't stop them from claiming the truck circled the block/area. Yet, any other cars (if there were any) should also then appear to circle the block (which then should've been as giveaway that the there was a timestamp issue, not multiple vehicles circling). We can extrapolate that there was no other traffic in that time period but I'm doubting that really explains the interest in the white truck and the comments about it circling because you'd think LE would be looking at a much wider window of time that should've eventually included periods of heavier traffic. We could extrapolate that the other cars all stopped and that gave LE a clean view of their license plates or other identifying marks and were able to contact those people. But that still leaves the problem of why the belief the truck circled.

I suppose the simplest answer/speculation is that police focused on such a narrow window of time that there weren't any other vehicles there to notice the timestamp conflict making it appear any vehicle was circling. Possibly, running thru a stop sign/light heightened their interest and focused them in as well.

In fact, when taken in context it makes me wonder if they got tunnelvision on that white truck and actually neglected, at least for a while, looking at a larger window of time on the videos?

I'm thinking aloud more than making a point here. If the interest in the truck was deeper and based upon more than has been said then why did they say it circled if it didn't? They could've just said they were interested in the truck due to the time it appeared on the video(s). So I am assuming they really believed it circled. Was there something else it did that made them interested enough to release photos?

I'm kind of back to thinking it appeared on the video at the perfect time, failed to stop, and then appeared to circle due to a time stamp discrepancy that LE would've figured out except they got tunnelvision on the truck and that small window of time. IOW, they thought the truck driver was the culprit at that point and a proverbial rush to judgment kept them from figuring out the time stamp discrepancy and initially looking at a wider time frame on video. At least not with a laser sharp focus on looking at the wider period of time on video.

 

[imkeylime]

Thank you Ixchel, what a great memory. I suppose it is possible that LE has knowledge of each vehicles' plates travelling in that time span, those that is that are on camera, but it is so incredibly frustrating that no leads are made public...
..... Could she have literally slipped thru the cracks?? And I do mean streets and sidewalk construction. Concrete holes were checked....right?? ...before filled in.
Just soo much construction peri early June.

As I've said before, and others have as well, the amount of construction going on is a huge concern for me. I have a hard time reconciling LS leaving JR's based on her alleged condition in the alley, but ... if she did leave somehow, and went the wrong way (toward a construction zone), could she have fallen into something and somehow been overlooked? Or could a manhole cover been off somewhere and she slipped thru? You'd like to think that someone would have manned up to that (no pun intended), but who knows? I almost had that happen on my son's campus one day.

A more likely scenario is that someone buried her in such a place and got lucky when construction continued before she was found. I don't recall if there was a moratorium on construction after disappearance or anything like that ...

 

[akh]

A more likely scenario is that someone buried her in such a place and got lucky when construction continued before she was found. I don't recall if there was a moratorium on construction after disappearance or anything like that ...

Correct me if I'm wrong but it was a Friday morning that she disappeared. And Friday afternoon that she was reported missing. So there could not have been any suspension of construction during the most crucial hours of her disappearance.

 

[AbbeyR]

Hi everyone, it's been a while! I haven't caught up here, but it seems this is the only news over the couple of months that I've been away? If I've missed anything, let me know.

The lawsuit against CR and JR was dismissed today.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/10/01/federal-judge-dismisses-lauren-spierer-lawsuit/16526073/

Still thinking of Lauren and the Spierers, and still have faith that if not this way, there will be another path to get answers and find Lauren.

 

[AbbeyR]

What's this other video? Is there a link?

Btown was describing what was captured on security video. This is what he wrote and a link to his post. I don't believe he ever mentioned a car running by the curb with a girl near it.

Specifics are verboden, (not due to anything seen, just Company Policy).

A person might indicate something along the lines of; It would not be a surprise if a late-teen male skateboarder, a female pedestrian, (not Lauren), and a smallish 2 door car had been observed on N. Walnut St. between 9th and 10th Street during a specific period of time on a specific date.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...mington-03-June-2011-29&p=8895833#post8895833 (post #70)

 

[AbbeyR]

Another deduction occurs to me, regarding the bar-manager witness: she must not be on camera. Consider the interview Qualters gave, concerning the bar-manager witness (If you scroll down on the page, it's the interview labeled June 22nd, the third from last press conference):

http://www.idsnews.com/article/2011...efings-on-the-case-of-lauren-spierer?id=81917

Qualters seems to say, that the reason they don't believe the bar-manager witness on time is because of an absence of video supporting her story. What he does not say is, we have video of the witness coming and going, and it shows that she was in the area, but an hour off. I find this meaningful. If the bar-manager witness, for example, was "visiting a boy" who lived at Tenth & College (perfectly likely since she would have walked right past the south-east steps to see Lauren, had she been walking from the garage elevator to her car parked, say, on College Ave. out front), then that would prove that the camera coverage from whichever floor bar witness was coming from, all the way down the elevator, and out, was totally inoperable.

This raises the further possibility that the "employee" that the white truck was picking up lived at Tenth & College. (If the employee in fact lived at Tenth & College, then I'm thinking that the truck was headed north or west, since it continued west on 10th, instead of going east.) If the bar-manager witness saw Lauren and Mystery Man at 3:38, then that would give Mystery Man about 37 minutes to take Lauren upstairs, realize she's dead, and summon the white truck to come get her, at around 4:15. It's interesting, though it might be a coincidence, that 4:15 is also the time that JR's phone makes two calls.

But in that press conference, Qualters both says that there is not video at 3:38 of the scene the bar manager described (Lauren with the man) and that there is video of them close to an hour earlier, doesn't he? (Along with saying that there is no mystery man) It's true that the statements from LE are not always totally clear, but one of the things they seem to have been very clear about is that the white truck was not involved. It always seemed to me that they were looking for them as potential witnesses, not suspects anyway, having been in the area. I have always wondered if they might have other vehicles or people recorded that they had identified (POI or others) at the same time.

 

[imkeylime]

I just saw this article about a drone being used in the Hannah Graham search effort and couldn't help but think of LS and how this could have perhaps been useful. With the exception of the construction site theory, I suppose. But I agree with Abbey ... someday the answers will be found.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/01/us/virginia-hannah-graham/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

[Ixchel13]

But in that press conference, Qualters both says that there is not video at 3:38 of the scene the bar manager described (Lauren with the man) and that there is video of them close to an hour earlier, doesn't he? (Along with saying that there is no mystery man) It's true that the statements from LE are not always totally clear, but one of the things they seem to have been very clear about is that the white truck was not involved. It always seemed to me that they were looking for them as potential witnesses, not suspects anyway, having been in the area. I have always wondered if they might have other vehicles or people recorded that they had identified (POI or others) at the same time.

iirc, the only video Qualters talks about is Lauren in the alley, and emerging from it; and Lauren going out the door after the altercation...and of course Lauren walking down the hall when she first left to go out. No one ever says they saw video of Lauren on the steps--it was the PIs paraphrasing what the eye witness said she saw. I for one think it's odd they paraphrase what she said she saw, and seem to believe she saw it, but say it's not on video and the wrong time. We are discussing the white truck. the mystery man, and the eye witness because we want to and really, isn't that what this forum is for? IOW, Some people may see something as very clear, and others see a huge, gray area. instead.

 

[CoolJ]

For the legal wizards out there, now that the law suit has been dismissed, are the 5N boys free from civil litigation with respect to LS's death? Regardless of what evidence or information is obtained going forward..?