IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #27

[Igor]

Or maybe that means the teeth are in really bad condition...

 

[cluciano63]

I am very confused by what is going on here. They claim the skull had intact teeth. There is no need to remove a tooth for dental comparison. All they would need is to take an x-ray of the skull's teeth and compare those to known x-rays for Lauren's. And it shouldn't take long at all. I presume Lauren had been to a dentist and taken an x-ray? So what in the world are they doing?

"At the scene of the crime, odontologists collect the skull or remaining teeth, which are taken back to the forensic laboratory for the postmortem dental investigation. X-rays are taken and if the jaw is completely intact and the dental records used to compare are recent, the job of proving a match is a relatively simple one. Dentists mark on a chart the position of missing teeth, crowns, bridges, fillings, caps, root canals and various other treatments during a patient's routine check-up. The task of identifying a victim is made more difficult when the dentist records and x-rays are out of date or when the skull is severely damaged and has parts missing."
http://library.thinkquest.org/04oct/00206/pti_dental_matching.htm

I have no idea. Lauren's mother said LE has had Lauren's dental records and DNA for ages now, on her latest post. I am really confused about what they are doing as well.

 

[katydid23]

If this is her skull, then it changes my theory completely.

I was leaning towards the theory that she OD'd or had heart trouble while she and friends were getting high late that night. And the group decided to dispose of her to avoid getting busted themselves. But I don't think they dismembered her.

 

[Igor]

this sounds really morose, but is it possible for a head to detach from the body if its submerged in a river for a year?

 

[jjenny]

Or maybe that means the teeth are in really bad condition...

That report said the skull had teeth. Teeth are very sturdy and presumably shouldn't be in bad condition.

 

[jjenny]

I have no idea. Lauren's mother said LE has had Lauren's dental records and DNA for ages now, on her latest post. I am really confused about what they are doing as well.

Well if they have her dental records then nothing makes sense to me whatsoever. Why don't they just say it isn't her or it is her? Dental record comparison shouldn't take long at all. And teeth aren't removed for dental record comparison. You don't compare one tooth removed from the skull to the dental records (unless that skull only had one tooth-but report said it had teeth). You compare x-rays of the skull's teeth to known x-rays of the victim. So whatever they are trying to sell, I am not buying it.

 

[jjenny]

this sounds really morose, but is it possible for a head to detach from the body if its submerged in a river for a year?

Well when those legs kept washing up in Canada (wearing running shoes) they claim the legs were removed naturally in the water from drowning victims and such.

 

[Igor]

Well if they have her dental records then nothing makes sense to me whatsoever. Why don't they just say it isn't her or it is her? Dental record comparison shouldn't take long at all. And teeth aren't removed for dental record comparison. You don't compare one tooth removed from the skull to the dental records (unless that skull only had one tooth-but report said it had teeth). You compare x-rays of the skull's teeth to known x-rays of the victim. So whatever they are trying to sell, I am not buying it.

Maybe the cops are holding the media back while they build a case, i hope?

 

[jjenny]

Maybe the cops are holding the media back while they build a case, i hope?

That's what I am thinking. Either that skull didn't have teeth (or had one tooth) or they are trying to sell the public a bunch of baloney for whatever reason.

 

[Igor]

hey, if it's what they need to do in order to make an arrest, then its fine by me.

though this is pure conjecture, i'd think teeth could take some damage and wear if they were submerged for over a year in water that was frozen for a few months. maybe it was a partial match and before confirming anything they want to be 100% sure?

 

[Lfpayne1985]

Someone is hypothesizing that her body was dumped into the White River near the point that the river flows under 82nd/86th St. in Indianapolis, which is close to Lake Clearwater, which is an area where POI ZO has lived.

The 82nd/86th St. (82nd St runs NW over the river and then becomes 86th St.) bridge is heavily traveled and not a place where one would dump a body without being seen. IMHO, in that area there is no good place along the river to park and carry something to the river without being seen, except maybe the possible in the cemetery for the church on Union Chapel Road.

I disagree with this as I lived at Lake Clearwater apartments for the past two years (just recently moved out of state) . Our apartment was right on the back end of the lake and most nights was eerily quiet. Yes during the day the bridge that runs along 82nd and 86th by the fashion mall is heavily travelled. But at night is very quiet and easily accessible with little possibility of being noticed. Also with the closing of the UNOs on the corner last year it would make it even easier . I often drove by the area late at night on my way home from the gym and would see a random car or two parked just off the lake and never really thought twice.

I hope that this is her in fact, I have followed the case since day one and this family deserves closure and I hope that day occurs soon for them

 

[cluciano63]

What if the dental records did not seem to match up with the DNA result of the hair? So they aren't sure if they have two people? So they need to check the DNA inside the tooth? I don't know, I am grasping now, but I don't think they withhold identity to make perps squirm, certainly not from her parents.

 

[jjenny]

hey, if it's what they need to do in order to make an arrest, then its fine by me.

though this is pure conjecture, i'd think teeth could take some damage and wear if they were submerged for over a year in water that was frozen for a few months. maybe it was a partial match and before confirming anything they want to be 100% sure?

Well I guess we will have to wait. From the photos, she had really nice teeth.
Maybe she didn't have any fillings? But I presume they could still have the comparison from dental x-rays-and there is no need to remove the tooth for that.

 

[jjenny]

What if the dental records did not seem to match up with the DNA result of the hair? So they aren't sure if they have two people? So they need to check the DNA inside the tooth? I don't know, I am grasping now, but I don't think they withhold identity to make perps squirm, certainly not from her parents.

But finding hair doesn't mean that someone is dead. Anyhow, removing the tooth for dental comparison doesn't make sense (as this is not how dental comparison is done). In fact I presume one would want the teeth to be in the skull to take the x-rays for an accurate comparison.

 

[Seagull]

My take is that she probably misspoke and meant that the tooth would be removed for the DNA portion of the investigation vs. the dental records comparison.

 

[British]

"Deputy coroner Alfarena Ballew told the paper last week that a tooth would be cross-referenced with Spierer’s dental records. Willis said the office has since decided that subsequent DNA testing of the tooth is necessary to prove a connection."

Is this saying that after they compared the dental records, the senior deputy coroner decided they needed further proof? I think the use of 'subsequent' implies that.
If that's the case, one would think they wouldn't need more evidence if it clearly was not a match, right?

I think this says what I suspected all along. It seems to imply that the initial comparison is positive, but to make a definitive identification, they need confirmation by DNA. The DNA is 100% accurate. The comparison of dental records maybe only 80-90% lets say (I have no idea, thats just a wild guess). I think at the end it will end up being Lauren. I am wondering if they have already provided any preliminary info to her parents and that may be why CS wrote the new letter.

In any case, I hope that if the skull is Lauren's, it will lead to the arrest of the criminal (s) who killed her.

 

[elmomom]

If she has no dental work - no filings, no crowns etc, then I would think DNA confirmation is more critical. I would imagine that teeth can shift somewhat when the soft tissue of the jaw is absent. I'm just guessing, but I am starting to think that this may be a match in the works.

 

[jjenny]

It is my understanding that dental records are considered an accurate form of an identification. The teeth are also very stable and should have survived submersion in water without being destroyed.

"Dental records have been used for over 200 years in this country for the identification of deceased. The teeth are uniquely qualified for identification in many ways, but especially since they are virtually impossible to destroy. They survive fire, decomposition and submersion in water or earth for many years. This survivability and the fact that most persons have dental records is the key to the success of dental records for the identification of deceased. Even now, with many persons having no dental restorations, the teeth and their surrounding structures provide a myriad of distinctive characteristics useful in identification."

http://pennsylvaniamissing.com/homepage/forensicinformation.html

 

[British]

It is my understanding that dental records are considered an accurate form of an identification. The teeth are also very stable and should have survived submersion in water without being destroyed.

"Dental records have been used for over 200 years in this country for the identification of deceased. The teeth are uniquely qualified for identification in many ways, but especially since they are virtually impossible to destroy. They survive fire, decomposition and submersion in water or earth for many years. This survivability and the fact that most persons have dental records is the key to the success of dental records for the identification of deceased. Even now, with many persons having no dental restorations, the teeth and their surrounding structures provide a myriad of distinctive characteristics useful in identification."

http://pennsylvaniamissing.com/homepage/forensicinformation.html

That's all true. But in the era of DNA, confirming what the dental records may show using DNA would leave absolutely zero possibility for error. That's exactly why I think it must be LS. If the dental records were no match, there would be no reason to go for DNA. JMO.

 

[jjenny]

That's all true. But in the era of DNA, confirming what the dental records may show using DNA would leave absolutely zero possibility for error. That's exactly why I think it must be LS. If the dental records were no match, there would be no reason to go for DNA. JMO.

Even if its not a match to LS its still somebody's head found in the river.
So they would still have to figure out who that is.