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

[Ixchel13]

Because the last person to be with a victim so often is so often involved, a lot of attention was placed on the POIs. A simple answer as to what happened to Lauren is that she had had so much in the way of drugs and booze, on top of a heart condition and being a tiny woman, and died while with JR, perhaps with JR, MB and CR. That those men then rid themselves of her body because they did not want the problems that would come with having a person OD on them. It's very possible that those men did give her drugs and alcohol. In such cases, murder charges are even possible, not to mention the notoriety and unversity disciplinary action. High level of publicity, loss of rep, possible jail time, civil sutis. Not a pleasant prospect at all, and so they simply disposed of the body. They got lawyers (their parents got them as soon as the police started asking them questions, and though a lot has been made of that, it is the way any and all people should do when the situation is that serious. I would do the same, and the Spierers would have for their daugher had she been so involved). Thought they stated what Lauren's journey was with them, CR, whose journey to his place is pretty well documented on film with her, claims he remembers notning, MB, CR's roommate, says CR was not in good shape and went to straight to be, and MB then took Lauren to JR's place. JR agrees that Lauren was at his place, and that she insisted on walking home at 4 AM.

The simplicity of that theory breaks down in that we are talking about 3 very selfish college guys who would throw anyone down river, as would their attorneys, and not one scrap of evidence can refute their stories. Or validate them. Also, their parents with enough money to remove them from the situation left them right there. You can believe that they did pay to get private polygraph tests so that they and the lawyers know what they are dealing with, and if it the story was a bad one, they'd have been out of their.

So, if Lauren did indeed start walking home at 4 am, the simplest story would be that someone picked her up enroute. Doesn't have to be a serial killer, sex offender or even a stranger. Could be someone else she knew; college students galore, and being tired, barefoot, she'd have likely gladly accepted a ride. What happened then could be any number of scenarios. It's the simplest thing to have happened.

BBM it would have also have been the simplest thing for them to have called someone to pick up Lauren, and they know who this person is, and are protecting this person: lying and obstructing a murder investigation, conspiracy, etc. Lots of bad charges would come of that kind of thing, especially if the person who picked her up would then in turn report them for all of the things he or she knew about from A to Z. This person would probably then be, IMO, a close friend or associate, like as in a frat bro or someone like that who has vowed never to turn in another bro no matter what, JMO, just sayin'.

 

[imkeylime]

Huh? Aren't we speculating about a motive either way? With 5N, based on what witnesses have seen, there are red flags that could point to sexual assault, or possibly overdose - both potential motives. With JW, we can speculate that he could have been jealous, but that isn't anything more than a guess, since no one that knows them has ever actually said he was jealous or angry about anything that night, or ever.

Abby, I agree about the red flags at 5N, without a doubt. But I also think there's evidence that suggests JW could have an anger problem, based on how he's acted after LS disappeared. However, we don't know if he was one to act this way before she disappeared. Stress brings out certain behaviors, obviously, and we may have seen JW's worse side because of it. OTOH, parents know if their kid has issues, which might have given JW's a reason to feel the need to do damage control (arriving in town so early, lashing out defensively, etc.). That said, having anger issues isn't the same as making someone disappear, either.

 

[imkeylime]

[/I][/B]

BBM it would have also have been the simplest thing for them to have called someone to pick up Lauren, and they know who this person is, and are protecting this person: lying and obstructing a murder investigation, conspiracy, etc. Lots of bad charges would come of that kind of thing, especially if the person who picked her up would then in turn report them for all of the things he or she knew about from A to Z. This person would probably then be, IMO, a close friend or associate, like as in a frat bro or someone like that who has vowed never to turn in another bro no matter what, JMO, just sayin'.

I could see this happening IF the person called also had a vested interest in having LS disappear for some reason ... or was paid a big sum of money to take her away. But to dispose of a young woman's body as a favor or in response to a simple request seems like a reach to me ... even a bigger stretch than JR involving himself if he wasn't the last to see LS alive. FWIW, I'd believe such a person would have a vested interest versus was paid to do the deed, as it seems unlikely that any of the POIs would keep such a person's name and number on speed-dial. OTOH, maybe one or more were playing with a tougher crowd than we realize (which still strikes me as unlikely, but stranger things have happened, I'm sure). If there WAS a vested interest, I'd surmise that it would related back to drugs or sex.

 

[Ixchel13]

I could see this happening IF the person called also had a vested interest in having LS disappear for some reason ... or was paid a big sum of money to take her away. But to dispose of a young woman's body as a favor or in response to a simple request seems like a reach to me ... even a bigger stretch than JR involving himself if he wasn't the last to see LS alive. FWIW, I'd believe such a person would have a vested interest versus was paid to do the deed, as it seems unlikely that any of the POIs would keep such a person's name and number on speed-dial. OTOH, maybe one or more were playing with a tougher crowd than we realize (which still strikes me as unlikely, but stranger things have happened, I'm sure). If there WAS a vested interest, I'd surmise that it would related back to drugs or sex.

yes, I agree, the person I meant was bf.

 

[imkeylime]

yes, I agree, the person I meant was bf.

Sorry, now I get it! Not sure what I think here, although I do believe that JW knows more than he's saying, which is odd if he truly cared about LS. I suppose it could mean that while he can't do anything for LS now, he won't do anything against anyone else. But why, if that's the case?

 

[TB Rhine]

[The PI's] aren't trying to scapegoat anyone. They are only after the truth.

And money.

Applying the Rule of the Useful Lie, what does [Rossman's] amnesia cover?

I always thought the "amnesia defense" was less about concealing something specific -- as in, "I was over here, doing this, rather than over there, committing a murder" -- and more about trying to avoid making up a detailed story, each and every detail of which is a lie in itself that the perp could eventually get caught in.

 

[Vidocq]

A Lauren Spierer Facebook group just brought up this opaque-light-blue-gem ring, mentioned in 2012 as likely being worn by her at the time of her disappearance. I'd never heard of it before, so I figure it's worth a mention (or re-mention, if it's been mentioned on this thread before).

http://www.wdrb.com/story/19401451/spierer-family-hopes-ring-prompts-new-tips

 

[AbbeyR]

I always thought the "amnesia defense" was less about concealing something specific -- as in, "I was over here, doing this, rather than over there, committing a murder" -- and more about trying to avoid making up a detailed story, each and every detail of which is a lie in itself that the perp could eventually get caught in.

Yes, well said. I've always thought this may be the reason that the POI at 5 N have never committed to one story of what happened the night Lauren went missing. It's not that people can't poke holes in their story, as someone stated above - there is no story.

 

[akh]

Yes, well said. I've always thought this may be the reason that the POI at 5 N have never committed to one story of what happened the night Lauren went missing. It's not that people can't poke holes in their story, as someone stated above - there is no story.

You keep saying that, and it's convincing, right up until someone stops to consider that none of us really know what their official story actually is that they've told to police, private investigators, and the family from the beginning.

 

[TB Rhine]

But aren't the details of that story -- or what we know of those details -- what we've been debating all this time? She's seen wandering around town, clearly intoxicated, including on video cameras. The cameras and eyewitnesses also place her with CR (who claims to have been blackout drunk and doesn't remember most of it). At least one eyewitness saw a physical confrontation between CR and another guy, which is at least proof of some sort of violence on CR's part while in Lauren's company, assuming said witness doesn't have their own reasons to lie. CR's roommate or neighbor claims to have tried to convince Lauren to stay the night, and to have turned down her subsequent invitation to go out partying with her. One or the other claims to have seen her walking into the alley where some of her belongings were later found, corroborating at least that part of their story (that she was in the location where they claimed to have seen her, and was most likely drunk, assuming she didn't lose her belongings in the midst of an assault).

 

[CoolJ]

Let's not forget here that CR has distanced himself from the statement that he doesn't remember anything.

 

[candi123]

Let's not forget that she was also seen falling down hitting her head rather hard on concrete and didn't receive any medical attention. This occurred more than once as a matter of fact. The falling down and bumping her head could explain some of the intoxicated behavior that was mentioned above.

 

[Ixchel13]

But aren't the details of that story -- or what we know of those details -- what we've been debating all this time? She's seen wandering around town, clearly intoxicated, including on video cameras. The cameras and eyewitnesses also place her with CR (who claims to have been blackout drunk and doesn't remember most of it). At least one eyewitness saw a physical confrontation between CR and another guy, which is at least proof of some sort of violence on CR's part while in Lauren's company, assuming said witness doesn't have their own reasons to lie. CR's roommate or neighbor claims to have tried to convince Lauren to stay the night, and to have turned down her subsequent invitation to go out partying with her. One or the other claims to have seen her walking into the alley where some of her belongings were later found, corroborating at least that part of their story (that she was in the location where they claimed to have seen her, and was most likely drunk, assuming she didn't lose her belongings in the midst of an assault).

You have your facts wrong. ZO punched CR and knocked him down, claiming that CR said something he didn't like, not the other way around.

Lauren was not wandering around town, she was in a 2-2and1/2 block radius from her apt at all times.

Eyewitnesses claim she could barely walk or talk, was badly injured, so MB's claim that she asked hime to party, or for that matter, that he asked her to stay, rings hollow.

Also, if CR was in fact awake and possibly caused Lauren later harm, why the claim by MB and JR that she left JR's apt and CR was passed out?? can't have it both ways....someone's lying.

No one is really blaming them because Lauren was drinking, per se, it's what came after that is the concern. By all accounts, and the PIs confirm, basically all of these people were drunk and/or high.

What is up for debate is, and it is many posters opinions on this board, is what did they do to Lauren when she was in this state? In almost all of your posts, you like to bring up that Lauren was "drunk". This really isn't up for debate, and really isn't a factor in causing anyone to do anything to her except it made her vulnerable.

A crime is a crime is a crime is a crime, no matter what, a victim is still a victim, and a criminal is still a criminal. We are discussing POIs that have been named by LE and MSM no matter what may have incited them or for what reason they may have disposed of her body--whether because she OD'd, or because she was assaulted.


MB was most definitely CR's roommate, and in my world, birds of a feather flock together, kwim? IMO, MB was no studious little angel caught up in other people's drama as you would have him be.

And, lastly, the items could have been placed where they were found, later. Finding them where they were proved nothing.

 

[AbbeyR]

You keep saying that, and it's convincing, right up until someone stops to consider that none of us really know what their official story actually is that they've told to police, private investigators, and the family from the beginning.

That's the point. There is no 'official' story! One person has 'amnesia' and the other two have multiple and contradictory stories told through statements from friends, lawyers, and witnesses. Plus, it seems as though the last three people to see Lauren have gone out of their way to distance themselves from each other.

We don't know what, if anything, they told LE, partly because the POI have fought every attempt of the Spierers to access this information. We do know that the private investigators who interviewed them have said their stories are full of contradictions and they were withholding information, the Spierers' have said the same thing. I'd love to know what they told LE in any statements they gave originally - but this isn't the only story that matters. It would be interesting in light of the other statements that they gave to friends and neighbors, and to see the extent to which these stories changed when new evidence came to light.

 

[akh]

That's the point. There is no 'official' story! One person has 'amnesia' and the other two have multiple and contradictory stories told through statements from friends, lawyers, and witnesses. Plus, it seems as though the last three people to see Lauren have gone out of their way to distance themselves from each other.

We don't know what, if anything, they told LE, partly because the POI have fought every attempt of the Spierers to access this information. We do know that the private investigators who interviewed them have said their stories are full of contradictions and they were withholding information, the Spierers' have said the same thing. I'd love to know what they told LE in any statements they gave originally - but this isn't the only story that matters. It would be interesting in light of the other statements that they gave to friends and neighbors, and to see the extent to which these stories changed when new evidence came to light.

No, there is an official story. It's simply not been shared with us. They met with LE. We know JR even met with the parents. Did they tell multiple stories to the police and the parents? We don't know... We don't have that information. It's not been shared. All we really have for an official account is what the police gave in the released timeline. We can only assume that is 100% accurate as to what they were told. Elsewise we have 2nd and 3rd hand accounts in the media, and because those aren't perfectly 100% in synch you're declaring it's all but case closed. It's not like the media reports are wildly contradictory. A small twist of words here or there and they could just as easily be quite consistent. More importantly, without knowing what story went down on those initial interview reports with police and others, we don't know whether there's really that much that would be considered incriminatingly inconsistent or not.

Even the PI's, when walking the reporter thru the case, didn't ultimately draw a line around the 5N PsOI. Their comments about contradictory information applied to a wider net than 5N alone. And they didn't explain in what areas info was even contradictory.

As far as the 5N PsOI fighting the Spierers on the information they told the police.... That's not their battle. That would be between LE and the Spierers. If LE isn't sharing it, it's certainly not the fault of anyone at 5N. It doesn't work that way.

The family has said they are withholding information. But we don't know if that is because there were parts of the story where they wouldn't discuss those areas or because the family thinks them guilty and they didn't admit to the guilt so therefore the family says they are withholding information. If someone doesn't tell you what you want to hear, or what you suspect to be the truth, then you're going to think they are withholding information and/or lying. Doesn't mean that you aren't just wrong though. I suppose the family could release those transcripts for the public to judge for themselves but for whatever reason they have not released that information.

I have a hard time imagining how anyone can have any confidence about any theories in this case at all when we know so very little of the official accounts and instead are relying on 2nd and 3rd hand accounts, questionable early reporting, rumors, and taking things potentially out of context from the PI's statements or others.

HT more or less framed what we think we know as the official story from the 5N PsOI... and JW as well for that matter. That's not exactly an iron clad source all things considered.

 

[Ros]

Yes those comments towards Lauren were just bizarre. Also mixed within those comments was an attack on BPD. Wonder what that was all about? Hmmm.. This is interesting. Thanks for that post. Giving me some good food for thought.

And the Facebook post from a few days before she disappeared, with the quote from "Major Payne" about an urge to kill. Maybe coincidental, but maybe not.

 

[Ros]

would like to throw 2 questions out for everyone:

Why do you think the Bloomington Police Dept hasn't formally cleared
the 10 or so POIs in Lauren's case?

and

Why do you think they haven't named all of the POI's?

BPD has never even given an exact number of POIs. It was "about 10" and then later a number that changes from day to day.

As far as I know, BPD has never actually named any POIs, they only said that all persons who had been with Lauren that night were persons of interest. The naming was done by the MSM and the PIs and social media (blogs, message boards, etc.). BPD would only call a POI "a male companion" or "a friend" etc.

I think that they have not formally cleared anyone because they have not found enough evidence to either clear or charge. And I think that they are not naming the POIs because most of them are innocent and therefore should not have their reputations tarnished by their association with this case. For all we know, all of them could be innocent. BPD may also want to avoid causing a jury to prejudge a case.

 

[Ixchel13]

BPD has never even given an exact number of POIs. It was "about 10" and then later a number that changes from day to day.

As far as I know, BPD has never actually named any POIs, they only said that all persons who had been with Lauren that night were persons of interest. The naming was done by the MSM and the PIs and social media (blogs, message boards, etc.). BPD would only call a POI "a male companion" or "a friend" etc.

I think that they have not formally cleared anyone because they have not found enough evidence to either clear or charge. And I think that they are not naming the POIs because most of them are innocent and therefore should not have their reputations tarnished by their association with this case. For all we know, all of them could be innocent. BPD may also want to avoid causing a jury to prejudge a case.

not sure I totally agree, to me since they have said so little, what they do say should be noted with interest. So easy to say, as they were asked so many times about the POIs, is, that, "most have been vetted and cleared." if they don't have evidence to clear them, or a reason to clear them, they are still in the mix, IMO

 

[Ixchel13]

for instance, JW is a POI even though the 5N POIs haven't brought him up as far as we know. In fact, it was JW and his dad who brought them into focus publicly by accusing CR.The PIs claim he's a POI because JW wasn't where he said he was, which was home, watching the game w. roommates, and then asleep. This may mean roommates gave him an alibi, but how many of them did? He had several roommates. We don't know how many alibied him. If 2 or 3 did, and the alibi wasn't true, we have a small group lying about a disappearance. If 1 or 2 roommates said he wasn't there, then we have witnesses saying a POI is lying and others are impeding an investigation by lying. If he wasn't where he said he was, could he have been at 10th and College when Lauren was trying to get in there (buzzing ZC) after the altercation at SW? This could be why CR has "amnesia". If JW was there, and CR was there w. Lauren helping her try to get in, this means that he wasn't at that point actively trying to hook up w. her and kinda changes the dynamics of the situation, and everything JW did after that.
What follows is pure speculation, but allowing CR to bow out of the timeline with passing out and amnesia, and placing others in the position of seeing Lauren last could be his trade off for "forgetting" everything he saw. JMO of course

 

[candi123]

for instance, JW is a POI even though the 5N POIs haven't brought him up as far as we know. In fact, it was JW and his dad who brought them into focus publicly by accusing CR.The PIs claim he's a POI because JW wasn't where he said he was, which was home, watching the game w. roommates, and then asleep. This may mean roommates gave him an alibi, but how many of them did? He had several roommates. We don't know how many alibied him. If 2 or 3 did, and the alibi wasn't true, we have a small group lying about a disappearance. If 1 or 2 roommates said he wasn't there, then we have witnesses saying a POI is lying and others are impeding an investigation by lying. If he wasn't where he said he was, could he have been at 10th and College when Lauren was trying to get in there (buzzing ZC) after the altercation at SW? This could be why CR has "amnesia". If JW was there, and CR was there w. Lauren helping her try to get in, this means that he wasn't at that point actively trying to hook up w. her and kinda changes the dynamics of the situation, and everything JW did after that.
What follows is pure speculation, but allowing CR to bow out of the timeline with passing out and amnesia, and placing others in the position of seeing Lauren last could be his trade off for "forgetting" everything he saw. JMO of course

If and I say IF your speculation were true why would MB allow himself to be named one of the last to see Lauren? Why insert himself into the mix by saying he tucked CR into bed and then walked Lauren to JR's? But, then again MB's story is every changing. No?