Page 2 of 54 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 799
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    22,128
    DNA samples from POIs is not going to answer that question because LE doesn't have a body.
    Just my opinion


  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jjenny For This Useful Post:


  3. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by jjenny View Post
    DNA samples from POIs is not going to answer that question because LE doesn't have a body.
    Yes, of course, this is true at the present.

    But it seems that LE would take DNA samples in anticipation of eventually finding a body so they could then utilize those samples, along with interview answers to impeach a possible perp. No?

    Are there other reasons they would take DNA samples?


  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Garden Variety For This Useful Post:


  5. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by TobyWong* View Post
    http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=81967

    "June 8 — day 6
    11:30 a.m. — Police confirm that they obtained security video from Smallwood during the search. The BPD wanted the footage as evidence, but Smallwood administrators asked them to obtain an official search warrant first. Lt. Parker says they were denied access into the rooms they needed to enter even after getting the warrant, so they had to force their way in."

    This article is older but I had not heard that LE had to break in to security room even after a requested search warrent was produced. This was on day 6. I hope LE can determine if anything had been erased. Everything must be on those security video's, the coming and goings and the fight.
    MSM reported that Smallwood was not trying to impede the investigation but that the manager on dudy did not have the key to the room in question. Smallwood said that the person with the key was in route when the police forced their way in the room.


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to guitarmeister For This Useful Post:


  7. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by pcsmith View Post
    I just really wish that LE would release the info on which POI passed the lie detector test... i think this case lies on the info that Lauren was last seen at 4:30 a.m. and if that can be proved or disproved would be a big deal...

    i also think that LE feels that CR and MB are "accurate" in the infor they have given. Both have given DNA and both have presumably answered questions and cooperated with police


    I dont think LE would release such info. LE has not even released the name of the person she was seen with in the alley where she lost her keys after she left Smallwood, but I think in the report there was mention of some "activity". Right? That must be the last recorded and documented presence of LS and must hold the key to the whole case. If LE has a suspect (s) they would not want to jeopardize the case by releasing unnecessary information. They would only do so if they have enough evidence against someone.


  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to British For This Useful Post:


  9. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NYC transplant to rural PA
    Posts
    2,637
    About the watch, or bracelet - I am pretty sure I remember that during the early searches, people were being specifically asked to cover the ground inch by inch looking for jewelry- which leads me to believe that they haven't recovered the object from her wrist.

    About the Lie detector result - we were told that one POI had passed. I have a strong feeling it is JR- but we have never been told who that person was. Now that is strange, because all these kids are "lawyered up" and usually the lawyer for the one who passed would be getting that info about his client out there in the public. It could be that that POI or his family is being extremely reticent to be mentioned at all in the press, but I don't think so. I think it is possible that LE does not want the rest of the POI's to know who it is so they have requested that the POI and his lawyer refrain from making their IDs public.

    The reason I believe that it may be JR who passed is that if it were, then the primary suspect would have a good idea that he is indeed the primary suspect. I don't think it would matter if any of the others passed, and then we would have been told who it was.

    I believe there really are only a few possibilities here - JR or JW, alone, or together, or either one with another unnamed associated POI. Either that, or a stranger.

    Honestly, I have such a hard time believing that any of these kids did anything violent. And to think that unsophisticated kids like this could get their ***** together enough to dispose of a body, to not be seen on NUMEROUS surveillance cameras, and for that body to be so well hidden that no one has discovered it.... it all sounds so difficult to imagine.

    But I do believe that at the very least, JW knows something or was involved, if it wasn't a stranger abduction. I think, given that JR and JW are buddies, we would have seen fireworks between them if JW believed that JR had something to do with this and was not involved himself. (like the stroy about his confrontation with CR)

    As far as a stranger goes, my thinking is that LS could have collapsed and passed out, and it would have been easy pickings to scoop her up off the street. And not even look guilty doing so.

    And that 3:38 Bar Manager eyewitness testimony makes me very uncomfortable since it doesn't fit the nice little time line package we have been given.


  10. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to elmomom For This Useful Post:


  11. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    22,128
    The only place to report that supposed bar manager testimony was a blog. LE hasn't confirmed anything, and no main stream media reported it. And since LE hasn't shown us any sketches of the man who was supposedly seen with LS, it doesn't appear LE is taking it seriously even if such testimony actually exists.
    Just my opinion


  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jjenny For This Useful Post:


  13. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NYC transplant to rural PA
    Posts
    2,637
    I agree about the source. But yesterday LE was asked specifically about this witness by a Fox reporter, and LE did not deny its existence, but just did a lot of "hand waving" saying essentially, that they have a lot of info coming in and they are not going to release all of it. So I truly believe it is a real story, but what LE makes of it I am left in the dark. It just makes me very uncomfortable knowing that it's there, if that makes sense to you.


  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to elmomom For This Useful Post:


  15. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    22,128
    Quote Originally Posted by elmomom View Post
    I agree about the source. But yesterday LE was asked specifically about this witness by a Fox reporter, and LE did not deny its existence, but just did a lot of "hand waving" saying essentially, that they have a lot of info coming in and they are not going to release all of it. So I truly believe it is a real story, but what LE makes of it I am left in the dark. It just makes me very uncomfortable knowing that it's there, if that makes sense to you.
    In high profile crimes, there are frequently witnesses who report all kind of things. At this point, I would be surprised if LE also doesn't have reports from people who claim to have seen Lauren alive after she went missing.
    Just my opinion


  16. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    335
    Have any of the attorneys, other than CR's, made any statement?

    The silence is deafening. There just seems to be such a lack of straightforwardness and in general an apathy coming from the campus, student body and her companions. Some of the PsOI have dared to express antipathy while claiming their lives were being ruined! Honestly, is this how society is meant to operate?

    In NYC, we say "If you see something, say something" I, for one, dare someone, including the high powered lawyers, to start talking! We are all speculating here without benefit of evidence and access to PsOI. Surely this case is hardly a mystery to those with this missing information!

    Speak up and be a hero. Her body is decomposing....and yours will one day too!


  17. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Blythe For This Useful Post:


  18. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    22,128
    Defense lawyer job is to defend/protect their client, not to get to the truth.
    Just my opinion


  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jjenny For This Useful Post:


  20. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    335
    Be a hero first, Get your defense attorney second.


  21. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Blythe For This Useful Post:


  22. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by eqh View Post
    Considering that the OD/hide the body scenario is still on the table...

    I’d like to see an investigative reporter examine the use of cocaine and other hard drugs amongst students at IU. I think that could be a big, interesting story and could potentially shed light on this case. The local Bloomington paper wouldn’t do this... I think they have a vested interest in presenting anything having to do with the University or IU students in a positive light.

    Obviously, we don’t know if any of these kids did coke or if drugs are involved with Lauren’s disappearance but the rumor and circumstantial evidence is strong. And unlike a lot of students, these folks had the money and probably the opportunity to get cocaine if they wanted to.

    And think about this: Given the speculation, if I was a lawyer for one of the P.O.I. (particularly JR or CR) I’d eagerly announce that my client was not taking any sort of hard drugs the night of Lauren’s disappearance – if he could pass a drug test (so I’m guessing they can’t).

    There haven’t been a lot of stories about “what is (was) Lauren like,” I know one came around a few days ago, but have you seen anyone close to this circle say something like “Lauren wouldn’t do coke or narcotics” or “these people weren’t into drugs?”
    Cocaine usage at colleges has been widely researched.

    http://www.upiu.com/health/2008/12/1...5961229978516/

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...drug-use_N.htm

    http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs0/660/cocaine.htm

    http://www.theindychannel.com/news/11350543/detail.html


    BTW drug usage is NOT a problem of ONLY those with a high Social Economic background in fact until recently the evidence supported the opposite.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2924306/

    Bottom line is why focus on only ONE possible theory? Why not keep an open mind and say what if..

    they were using drugs and it played a role

    OR

    What if they were NOT using drugs


    OR

    What if they were using drugs but it did NOT play a role?


  23. The Following User Says Thank You to shockedandappalled For This Useful Post:


  24. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    11
    If they were doing drugs how could they NOT have a role?


  25. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dmband445 For This Useful Post:


  26. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    5,636
    Yes, if drugs are being used, then they will ALWAYS have a role in what is going on. I don't care how many times they have been used or what types of drugs are used, they have an effect....and I have rarely seen a case where its a positive one.


  27. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to shefner For This Useful Post:


  28. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by jjenny View Post
    Defense lawyer job is to defend/protect their client, not to get to the truth.
    It is not the Defense lawyers job to "get to the truth" that is LE's job.

    If a defense lawyer was to participate in the investigation and did something to incriminate their client then they would have a malpractice suit on their hand.

    Everyone here in America deserves zealous representation whether they are guilty or not.

    It is not up to the defense lawyers to be judge and jury to determine if their client is guilty and thus should be convicted even before a trial.

    What if the lawyer was wrong and read into a "fact"? What if they decided their client was guilty but were mistaken?

    What chance would the client have if their own lawyer was presenting them as guilty?

    I know of a case where a guy confessed to his attorney that he killed someone but the attorney was not allowed to break attorney/client privileged until the person died. The person died and then another crime was solved.

    It does not seem fair but in the big picture it is the only way our legal system can work.


  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to shockedandappalled For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 54 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 707
    Last Post: 06-19-2011, 08:51 PM
  2. Replies: 506
    Last Post: 06-16-2011, 03:13 AM
  3. Replies: 609
    Last Post: 06-14-2011, 09:43 AM
  4. Replies: 535
    Last Post: 06-12-2011, 07:58 PM
  5. Replies: 697
    Last Post: 06-10-2011, 05:54 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •