IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #24

[bx2]

We are definitely missing something from this story.If we go by what we know from HT and JW roommate they had plans to get together after the game that night but neither one of them tried to call the other or at least until after she lost her phone which would have been after 2:30 in the morning.That does not seam to make any sense to me.If I am remembering correctly the roommate said he did get or make any calls and HT said JW could no longer get in touch with her because she had left her phone at Kilroys.

I just think it's impossible to separate JW's story from HT inserting her own spin in to what she is saying. If JW told her, for example, that when he had talked to LS earlier that day they had spoke of doing something after the game... that could turn into HT saying "they had plans", even though no plans were ever actually made because LS never called. Not saying this was the case, but I find it very easy to believe that people's plans are completely reliant on one party bringing them back up again, and if they don't, the other party is fine with not pursuing anything more that night.

 

[bx2]

Polygraph notwithstanding, why is his word any more credible than the bar manager's?

It's not just the bar manager's purported sighting that they don't include. They don't include any other sighting not corroborated by video. No MB, no arrival at JR's. It's only the last reported sighting that they choose to include.

 

[bessie]

Listen to JQ explain the police timeline here.

He does take care to note the differences between points notated by video and that the rest is based solely on witness testimony.

I do also notice that he is clarifying that original 3:15-3:30 video sighting to what we now know was 2:48 and 2:51 and has caused a lot of the confusion with some of the earlier MSM aritcles. The audio is from 6/16. Parker's apparent discounting of the 3:38 witness was on 6/10. Was LE still operating under the incorrect assumption that LS was walking through the alley at 3:15-3:30 when they were listening to the 3:38 witness?

Thanks for the link, bx2. I've listened to it many times, but it's been awhile. Qualters addressed the 3:38 a.m. "mystery man" witness on 06/22, six days after the release of the updated timeline:

What I’m here to tell you is that we have reviewed the video, not only the timeline that we have been using, ... and where Lauren does in fact appear ... she does appear in that video with someone that is already known to investigators. We have also reviewed it during the time period where it has been reported, essentially an hour later (at 3:38 a.m.), and we do not find any evidence that supports that information,” Qualters said

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2011/06/22/news.qp-4391232.sto

 

[bessie]

Which witness = JR. I wasn't deeming him more credible, only more relevant - his is the last claim in time to see her and therefore the last point on the timeline. And I add, in that regard, that LE was careful to note that JR's account was not corroborated.

As to credibility, though, I do think the poly counts for something, and I think the fact that the mystery witness has not been credited may suggest that she did not take or pass a polygraph (or that there were other indicia that she was not credible, such that no poly was necessary, though I'm unsure what these would be). (Of course, I still retain a little belief in the possibility that JR was publicly credited, but privately discredited, with the reverse true of the mystery witness)

Thanks for the clarification. As for JR's cred, I lean toward your last statement. The polygraph had no bearing on the official timeline since it did not occur until much later. And although the time last seen was included based on JR's account, just a day before the timeline was released on June 16, LE announced the truck sighting, indicating the timeline was not etched in stone. So I guess I have to disagree with Walker on that point because if LE had evidence to support JR's statement, they would not have been so interested in the white truck. As for the mystery witness, I didn't interpret Qualters' statement to mean LE completely dismissed the story.

 

[cluciano63]

I think LE is using JR as the last known "sighting" because he admits to having seen her. So LE can't think of a reason (as I can't) why he would want to put himself with her at all unless he actually was. Therefore, they take the fact that he was with her as true. But cannot confirm if she walked away as he indicates. JMO

 

[bessie]

The facebook co-admin group appears to be several years old with the only remaining post looking particularly ironic. I don't think it was anything planned by them in relation to this case.

There was a facebook change to where you can target things on your page to specific groups, public, friends, etc within a day or so of his "like" appearing to those of us that previously couldn't see anything. Again, I don't see anything nefarious behind it, merely that he knows some of the people behind it (it's some kind of new media start-up).

I agree. The business itself has been in development at least since early 2011. Isn't JR a marketing major? He might be involved in publicity for the new business.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

Thanks for the clarification. As for JR's cred, I lean toward your last statement. The polygraph had no bearing on the official timeline since it did not occur until much later.

It was acknowledged/reported much later, but I don't think we know when it took place. I believe there's a good chance it occurred prior to the updated timeline release, which was the same time polys were obtained from CR and MB.

 

[AnalyticalExaminer]

As for the mystery witness, I didn't interpret Qualters' statement to mean LE completely dismissed the story.

I'm not sure I did before, but I think I might now, based on this quote: "We have also reviewed it during the time period where it has been reported, essentially an hour later (at 3:38 a.m.), and we do not find any evidence that supports that information.”

That suggests to me at least a possibility that they believe LS would have been captured on camera if the report were correct. I believe the report was that she was on the steps at the NW corner of 10th and College. She would of course have been captured on camera if she had traveled there via either the alley or the arcade. That leaves the sidewalk on College. While it appears that there is no camera coverage of the sidewalk (though I've never been entirely convinced that the arcade cameras don't capture any sidewalk activity), I've always believed that the camera on 10th a little bit West of College might capture that NW corner, or at least the sidewalk in front of the steps. Was this discussed earlier? I may have forgotten, but if so, apparently I wasn't convinced...

 

[kemo]

Qualter's statement was classic double-talk. If there was a camera that would captured anyone walking down College, his statement means "the mystery witness is wrong, the camera would have caught the action if it had happened". If there were no camera that would capture anyone walking down College, his statement is clearly deceptive. It implies there was a camera but not actually saying there was. If there was no camera his statement, while technically true, seems designed to lead the listener to the false assumption that there was a camera and it VERIFIES that mystery witness is wrong.

If there were a camera that would have captured anyone walking down College, it would have picked up LS at 3:30, 4:30 or any other time and the issue would be settled. We would know if JR was telling the truth.

Since we don't have verification that LS went down College AT ANY TIME, it is a strong assumption that there was no camera and, for some reason, Qualter wanted to discourage speculation about the mystery witness.

 

[bx2]

Thanks for the link, bx2. I've listened to it many times, but it's been awhile. Qualters addressed the 3:38 a.m. "mystery man" witness on 06/22, six days after the release of the updated timeline:

Geez, I knew this didn't sound right when I typed it, thanks for clarifying.

 

[thesaint]

One thing I've been pondering since JR returned to IU-Bloomington-5 North to resume being neighbors with CR and MB is...why?

Possible scenarios:

1. JR may have provided party favors for LS and been negligent in not walking her home, but he's not guilty of her actual disappearance. (tho I think there's an argument that he'd not want to return to the scrutiny of B-town even under this scenario, not the least of which is potential civil liability). (i give this about a 10% probability)

2. JR's the only person who knows what happened with LS and is thus hubristically confident that he and he alone controls his fate. (maybe a 30% probability)

3. CR and MB (and perhaps others, but esp JR's 5 North neighbors CR and MB) as well as JR know/were involved in LS's disappearance and JR's back to keep those potential loose ends in line. He's living next door to them. A recent news report noted that JR was on his way over to their place with a beer when they approached his townhome. (maybe a 60% probability now).


4. ??? Any other iterations?

The reason I rank them as I do is b/c JR has from the get-go been getting top-shelf legal advice. And any defense lawyer worth his P# is going to tell a client in JR's situation that there are 2 rules:

1. You (JR) tell me everything. No surprises. I get surprised by something you didn't tell me, I drop you as a client.

2. You do exactly what I say, when I say, how I say and you might get out of this.

1. JR's relatively "innocent". Tough call here, but the lawyer would likely suggest that not being in B-town would be the preferred course of action---unless JR felt like going all out and granting LE and others extensive interviews and participating in the search for LS.
Otherwise, the situation's a tinderbox and JR could be a flashpoint for angry friends, etc of LS. This is more about JR's personal safety than say legal implications, tho civil liability lurks in the background.

2. JR's the only person culpable/who knows what happened. This was my preferred theory previously. But once you factor in JR's return to the "scene of the crime", so to speak, it becomes difficult to support. If only for this reason:

If a perp walks into a defense lawyer's office and seeks counsel for involvement in this sort of situation, AND they make it clear they (JR) are the only person who knows what happened, that defense lawyer, after he gets done dancing around his desk, separates the ONLY person who can impeach his client from the milieu of the scene of the crime as much as possible. Esp with the ready-made excuse for not returning to B-town that #1 provides.

Can't see a defense lawyer letting a guilty but solely knowledgeable about the situation JR return to Bloomington/IU/5 North like this. Way too much risk. Send him to a new school. Take a year off (upset over LS's disappearance etc). Spend a year overseas.
But do not go back into the party environment that caused the situation in the first place.

Which leaves #3 as the most probable reason for JR's return.

 

[StrayKat]

#4. He is not involved.

What about the truck? They must have believed his timeline and story to suggest she would have been walking home at the time that truck was seen in the vicinity.

MOO, moo, MOOOO

 

[Skigirl]

Really? He would most certainly lie when being caught lying could result in five years in prison and/or a quarter-million-dollar fine for making false statements to the federal government (FBI)? The only reason someone would do that, in my opinion, is if they were guilty themselves.

I am of the opinion that everything, or almost everything, that has been told to LE is true. The real issue, I think, is what has not been told to LE, and who has not talked to them.

We don't know what the roommate told police. As far as I know, we only know what an anonymous poster claiming to be JW's roommate said. If that's not correct, I'd appreciate a link to a credible source. TIA.

 

[Pedrosmom]

this has been on my mind a few days but I have been hesitant to post because I am not good at finding news articles, but didn't LE say there was a car they were interested in as well as the truck and then they released the trucks image and forgot about the car. I could have sworn they said something about a car as well.. anyone remember?

Yes, in addition to the white truck, they were asking for help in identifying several cars.

 

[Skigirl]

One thing I've been pondering since JR returned to IU-Bloomington-5 North to resume being neighbors with CR and MB is...why?

Might JR want to remain in control of the apartment if it's the crime scene? If he broke his lease, the landlord could do anything s/he wanted, including allowing the police back in without a warrant to comb through the place in search of trace evidence. The longer he occupies the apartment, the greater the chance the evidence is to be destroyed. It would be quite odd for him to keep the lease but transfer to another school and that would raise suspicion, I would think.

The other thing about not returning to IU is that he'd be looking at at least a semester, but most likely a year, at home or elsewhere. He couldn't start at a good school on that little notice because he'd have missed all the admissions deadlines. Deadlines are generally in the fall and winter for the following fall. Perhaps not being in school at all would also look suspicious?

 

[Pedrosmom]

Or to see it on camera. There is video evidence. CR's lawyer says CR is the guy on the tape - http://www.lohud.com/article/201106...ion-has-no-memory-their-last-moments-together. No one has contradicted him, whether LE or anyone else. Ergo CR is the guy on the tape. Can we put this to bed now?

No I'm not convinced LE is referring to CR. There are several videos that they refer to as CR and LS walking through the alley but this one they don't come out and say CR. I also find it strange that later on evidence from CR's own attorney has CR walking in front of his office, alone. Where was Lauren?

LE is focusing on this 2:51 tape but good, so good we can't see it. Can you not see the possibility that someone else met them at the end of the alley/beginning of the gravel lot? Why would CR be on another tape around that time without Lauren? Maybe because he was afraid for his life and took off?

From your analytical perspective, LE NEVER identified CR as being the "other person" in the 2:51 tape, yet they've ID'd him elsewhere in the alley.

 

[Pedrosmom]

Might JR want to remain in control of the apartment if it's the crime scene? If he broke his lease, the landlord could do anything s/he wanted, including allowing the police back in without a warrant to comb through the place in search of trace evidence. The longer he occupies the apartment, the greater the chance the evidence is to be destroyed. It would be quite odd for him to keep the lease but transfer to another school and that would raise suspicion, I would think.

The other thing about not returning to IU is that he'd be looking at at least a semester, but most likely a year, at home or elsewhere. He couldn't start at a good school on that little notice because he'd have missed all the admissions deadlines. Deadlines are generally in the fall and winter for the following fall. Perhaps not being in school at all would also look suspicious?

A search warrant for those 5 north apts would not be difficult to get if they weren't searched already. The scent of a dead body being there will always be there no matter how much cleaning they do. If Lauren died in either one of those apts and was there for more than 10 minutes, her scent would be detected by a cadaver dog, even today. Same with the cars.

 

[Pedrosmom]

One thing I've been pondering since JR returned to IU-Bloomington-5 North to resume being neighbors with CR and MB is...why?

Possible scenarios:

1. JR may have provided party favors for LS and been negligent in not walking her home, but he's not guilty of her actual disappearance. (tho I think there's an argument that he'd not want to return to the scrutiny of B-town even under this scenario, not the least of which is potential civil liability). (i give this about a 10% probability)

2. JR's the only person who knows what happened with LS and is thus hubristically confident that he and he alone controls his fate. (maybe a 30% probability)

3. CR and MB (and perhaps others, but esp JR's 5 North neighbors CR and MB) as well as JR know/were involved in LS's disappearance and JR's back to keep those potential loose ends in line. He's living next door to them. A recent news report noted that JR was on his way over to their place with a beer when they approached his townhome. (maybe a 60% probability now).


4. ??? Any other iterations?

The reason I rank them as I do is b/c JR has from the get-go been getting top-shelf legal advice. And any defense lawyer worth his P# is going to tell a client in JR's situation that there are 2 rules:

1. You (JR) tell me everything. No surprises. I get surprised by something you didn't tell me, I drop you as a client.

2. You do exactly what I say, when I say, how I say and you might get out of this.

1. JR's relatively "innocent". Tough call here, but the lawyer would likely suggest that not being in B-town would be the preferred course of action---unless JR felt like going all out and granting LE and others extensive interviews and participating in the search for LS.
Otherwise, the situation's a tinderbox and JR could be a flashpoint for angry friends, etc of LS. This is more about JR's personal safety than say legal implications, tho civil liability lurks in the background.

2. JR's the only person culpable/who knows what happened. This was my preferred theory previously. But once you factor in JR's return to the "scene of the crime", so to speak, it becomes difficult to support. If only for this reason:

If a perp walks into a defense lawyer's office and seeks counsel for involvement in this sort of situation, AND they make it clear they (JR) are the only person who knows what happened, that defense lawyer, after he gets done dancing around his desk, separates the ONLY person who can impeach his client from the milieu of the scene of the crime as much as possible. Esp with the ready-made excuse for not returning to B-town that #1 provides.

Can't see a defense lawyer letting a guilty but solely knowledgeable about the situation JR return to Bloomington/IU/5 North like this. Way too much risk. Send him to a new school. Take a year off (upset over LS's disappearance etc). Spend a year overseas.
But do not go back into the party environment that caused the situation in the first place.

Which leaves #3 as the most probable reason for JR's return.

I don't believe that JR is the only person who knows what happened and I'm not sure he would even know where she is, unless he was a passenger in the vehicle that took her away. IMO, he looked the other way, let DB do as he will, while in his mind JR knows its bad when she's gone the next day. But I can't believe that DB would take the risk of gettong out of town alone, likely a little messed up, with a body in the trunk. My guess is that he took a sober person with, or forced a sober person with (perhaps even against their will) in the event he was pulled over and there was any suspicion of being under the influence. Could it have been JR? I suppose anything is possible but if JR was messed up, then we have the blind leading the blind. Could DB have done it alone, sure but I doubt it. He wasn't going to take 100% responsibility for this going down, unless he was 100% responsible. I can only think of one sober person that night. We all know who that is.

 

[Tugela]

A search warrant for those 5 north apts would not be difficult to get if they weren't searched already. The scent of a dead body being there will always be there no matter how much cleaning they do. If Lauren died in either one of those apts and was there for more than 10 minutes, her scent would be detected by a cadaver dog, even today. Same with the cars.

You don't start decomposing 10 minutes after death. You may not be functioning but most of the cells in your body are probably still alive.

 

[cspring]

Really? He would most certainly lie when being caught lying could result in five years in prison and/or a quarter-million-dollar fine for making false statements to the federal government (FBI)? The only reason someone would do that, in my opinion, is if they were guilty themselves.

I am of the opinion that everything, or almost everything, that has been told to LE is true. The real issue, I think, is what has not been told to LE, and who has not talked to them.

Yea cuz everyone is just so forthcoming with the truth in this story........oh wait-no there not!
I stick with the statement i already made. U dont know how good of friends these ppl r(maybe u do-idk) but if we can imagine the other boys lying for each other i can certainly imagine a roommate lying for jw. I think im pretty fair in my judgement of everyone thx

i also dont know who all has talked to law enforcement or not.