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

[holly18]

Snipped by me.

I wonder if the academic records (disciplinary actions, grievances, etc.) are connected at all to the request for member info for AEPi:



http://legalpronews.findlaw.com/article/8ae608741683a8360a1f4c2b34dc153b#.U2MvGD1dXD0

In context with the closing of AEPi due to hazing in January 2008: JW started IU in 2007 according to LinkedIn. Not sure when JR started, but it's reported that both were AEPi's in 2008, which means as it was getting shut down. Freshmen? Would that make them part of the initiated/hazed/whatever frats call their first year guys? (http://www.wthr.com/story/7765853/iu-closes-fraternity-for-hazing)

Interesting to me that the first article states they want documents identifying members - are they trying to place other possible guests from the parties that evening? AF?

BBM, that would be my guess.
And from what I know about frats, if JW and JR were freshman when it was shut down, they were probably the ones being hazed, a lot of frats go way over the top with hazing/initiations.... One thing I've thought about (that could be totally wrong) some frats have a habit of dropping pledges in the middle of nowhere and expecting them to find their way back.... Maybe the spierers want to know if this happened, and where they were dropped off? IE were JW, JR or any other POIs familiar with a particular random area outside bloomington

 

[AbbeyR]

For me it has a lot to do with the hiding of her body, and the length of time it continues to be missing. If the hiding were only for drugs, it's almost like why bother? Even so, not like it should be anything extensive or professional.
But hiding it to destroy DNA linked to rape could be construed as 1st degree murder. So much more motivation to destroy it or to keep it a secret.

Yes, I agree.

On top of that, there are a lot of red flags that could potentially point to sexual assault in the hours leading up to Lauren's disappearance. In any situation when someone is seen at a bar giving an intoxicated girl drinks and 'helping her' drink them (as stated in the lawsuit docs) to the point where she is "incapacitated" and "incoherent" and then taking her away from a public place and carrying her home at 4 am in a state where she obviously could not consent to anything, sexual assault is a real possibility that should be considered.

Even more so:
- If that person is an acquaintance who had only known her one week
- If that person was seen to be acting aggressively and inappropriately
- If that person ignored several (and unrelated) people who expressed concern, and told them he 'had things under control', speaking for someone who was too out of it to speak for herself
- If that person didn't seem very concerned with the well being of the girl in the last minutes she was seen (no shoes, falling on her face, etc.) and refused help
- If the last encounter with the person involved violence. (Corey had just been punched in the face, which could have added to the the aggression and anger)

And finally:
- If the girl disappears and is never seen again

Add all of these things together, and it makes me worry that Lauren was potentially in a very bad and vulnerable situation. Considering the stories we have heard from the other guys at 5 N, it also worries me that they seem to be covering for each other and withholding information, and that all of them have expressed a lot of anger towards Lauren and very little empathy, implying that Lauren herself is to blame for whatever happened that night.

Red flags. Everywhere.

 

[AbbeyR]

I don't know how to bring over a quote from a previous thread, but the initials came from public court documents.

Bx2 provided instructions to obtain them:

Court transcripts and documents are available (for a small fee) via the PACER system (http://www.pacer.gov) and https://ecf.insd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/ShowIndex.pl

 

[Ixchel13]

Yes, I agree.

On top of that, there are a lot of red flags that could potentially point to sexual assault in the hours leading up to Lauren's disappearance. In any situation when someone is seen at a bar giving an intoxicated girl drinks and 'helping her' drink them (as stated in the lawsuit docs) to the point where she is "incapacitated" and "incoherent" and then taking her away from a public place and carrying her home at 4 am in a state where she obviously could not consent to anything, sexual assault is a real possibility that should be considered.

Even more so:
- If that person is an acquaintance who had only known her one week
- If that person was seen to be acting aggressively and inappropriately
- If that person ignored several (and unrelated) people who expressed concern, and told them he 'had things under control', speaking for someone who was too out of it to speak for herself
- If that person didn't seem very concerned with the well being of the girl in the last minutes she was seen (no shoes, falling on her face, etc.) and refused help
- If the last encounter with the person involved violence. (Corey had just been punched in the face, which could have added to the the aggression and anger)

And finally:
- If the girl disappears and is never seen again

Add all of these things together, and it makes me worry that Lauren was potentially in a very bad and vulnerable situation. Considering the stories we have heard from the other guys at 5 N, it also worries me that they seem to be covering for each other and withholding information, and that all of them have expressed a lot of anger towards Lauren and very little empathy, implying that Lauren herself is to blame for whatever happened that night.

Red flags. Everywhere.

Not defending CR. However, in all of your points above, you neglected to state that CR did bring Lauren home. Then, he got punched, etc, and they ended up leaving.

There is no proof whatsoever that Lauren was making a stop off at her apartment. She was apparently making out or close to it with CR in the hallway, ZO saw it and punched CR. And everyone knows this has been linked many times, that CR was being inappropriate with Lauren or something like that. This fake concern for Lauren, when he didn't even end up helping her. Could it be, for some reason, that she didn't want his help?

IMO, speculation, before the altercation, she was headed for her apartment.
with CR. He was not trying to get her away alone, he ventured into a place he was banned from to go up to her floor.

Now he's saying he can't remember any of this. Is it because he did something, or is it because he knows someone else did?

And then there's a chance he can't really remember.

Now, who sees CR and JR as allies in this case? Or will they turn on each other?

 

[AbbeyR]

He didn't bring her home. He brought her to Smallwood, where people told him to bring her to her apartment. He didn't. He also didn't leave her at Smallwood. Instead, according to the reports, he picked her up off the floor after she fell coming out of the elevator, and carried her back to his apartment, instead.

The Spierers' attorney, Jeanine Kerridge, argued Rossman and Rosenbaum had a legal duty for Lauren Spierer's welfare because they had provided drinks to the point where she was visibly intoxicated.

"They were contributing to her peril," Kerridge said.

Rossman had an additional duty to the woman because after leaving the bar, he carried her past her own apartment while going to the apartment he and Beth shared.

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/...er-lawsuit-against-men-last-seen-with-student

<snipped for relevance>

And where was it ever stated that they were 'making out or close to it'? The witnesses said Corey was acting aggressively and inappropriately towards Lauren, and "bothering her".

Students who spotted the pair told the New York Post Lauren was 'clearly very inebriated.'

They also said Rossman had been bothering her and had then got angry when they asked him to stop.

'He was being overly aggressive...being so belligerent,' one told the paper.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-Man-seen-memory-moments.html#ixzz30am4DMGg

 

[sammi89]

Snipped by me.

I wonder if the academic records (disciplinary actions, grievances, etc.) are connected at all to the request for member info for AEPi:



http://legalpronews.findlaw.com/article/8ae608741683a8360a1f4c2b34dc153b#.U2MvGD1dXD0

In context with the closing of AEPi due to hazing in January 2008: JW started IU in 2007 according to LinkedIn. Not sure when JR started, but it's reported that both were AEPi's in 2008, which means as it was getting shut down. Freshmen? Would that make them part of the initiated/hazed/whatever frats call their first year guys? (http://www.wthr.com/story/7765853/iu-closes-fraternity-for-hazing)

Interesting to me that the first article states they want documents identifying members - are they trying to place other possible guests from the parties that evening? AF?

http://westbloomfield.patch.com/groups/business-news/p/david-bleznak-and-jason-rosenbaum-5-questions --> says JR graduated 2012.
JW's linkedin says class of 2011, so I'm guessing JR started in 2008 and JW in 2007.

If JW joined when most do, as a freshman, he likely would have been "hazed" the year before JR. If true, that would also mean that JW possibly "hazed" JR's class, although I don't think there can be any certainty that JW actually participated in any of the hazing unless he was specifically named by the school, LE, or AEPi.

I am curious how well the fraternity kept in touch though. I've heard of it referred to as an "underground fraternity" IIRC? If JW had a 1.5 in AEPi before it got kicked off and JR only had a semester, I'm not sure either of them would have been inclined to maintain relations with other members just because of their status as AEPi members, but if they had, it again makes me wonder why JR's phone didn't have JW's number in it and why he wasn't called.

Did JW and JR know each other well enough to have each other's numbers? If not, then it isn't surprising that JR didn't call him, although I would be surprised if LS didn't know JW's number by memory. Maybe her intoxication barred her from recalling it at the moment or she couldn't speak well enough to say it, although that would tend to support the known descriptions of her.

If they did know each other well enough, why didn't JR call him to come get LS? They supposedly had plans to meet up and if anyone knew LS well, it would have been JW (or HT, but I've pointed out how weird it was she wasn't called). Either JR didn't want to call him for his own reasons (LS was in super bad shape?) or LS didn't want JR calling him (maybe they were going through a rocky patch). If either of those situations are true, then I doubt LS went in search of JW.

JMO.

 

[sammi89]

Yes, I agree.

On top of that, there are a lot of red flags that could potentially point to sexual assault in the hours leading up to Lauren's disappearance. In any situation when someone is seen at a bar giving an intoxicated girl drinks and 'helping her' drink them (as stated in the lawsuit docs) to the point where she is "incapacitated" and "incoherent" and then taking her away from a public place and carrying her home at 4 am in a state where she obviously could not consent to anything, sexual assault is a real possibility that should be considered.

Even more so:
- If that person is an acquaintance who had only known her one week
- If that person was seen to be acting aggressively and inappropriately
- If that person ignored several (and unrelated) people who expressed concern, and told them he 'had things under control', speaking for someone who was too out of it to speak for herself
- If that person didn't seem very concerned with the well being of the girl in the last minutes she was seen (no shoes, falling on her face, etc.) and refused help
- If the last encounter with the person involved violence. (Corey had just been punched in the face, which could have added to the the aggression and anger)

And finally:
- If the girl disappears and is never seen again

Add all of these things together, and it makes me worry that Lauren was potentially in a very bad and vulnerable situation. Considering the stories we have heard from the other guys at 5 N, it also worries me that they seem to be covering for each other and withholding information, and that all of them have expressed a lot of anger towards Lauren and very little empathy, implying that Lauren herself is to blame for whatever happened that night.

Red flags. Everywhere.

Also the bruised face.

I've assumed it is because she fell, but it could also be that CR got her home and acted aggressively, either directly causing the injury (hitting her, shoved, etc.) or indirectly (fell during the process).

 

[ontheclock]

Just curious what facts or aspects of this case caused you to feel that way?

For me it has a lot to do with the hiding of her body, and the length of time it continues to be missing. If the hiding were only for drugs, it's almost like why bother? Even so, not like it should be anything extensive or professional.
But hiding it to destroy DNA linked to rape could be construed as 1st degree murder. So much more motivation to destroy it or to keep it a secret.

I agree. Posters above have stated really good reasons to believe SA is a possibility (likely, IMO).

From the moment I read of Lauren's disappearance, I had a terrible feeling that someone took advantage of her vulnerable condition. I still can't shake that feeling. My suspicions only got stronger as the story emerged.

I partied hard in Bloomington many years ago (I'm old enough to be Lauren's mom). I put myself in harm's way so many times, and I feel lucky that nothing bad ever happened to me. I can't attest to what the scene is like there now, nor am I comparing Lauren to myself. I don't really think it matters.

My gut tells me someone did something bad to Lauren because she was not in control of her faculties. Complete victim. I can't rule out OD, but I lean strongly toward SA. I'm open to other players as the perp (but not too much).

 

[ktgirl]

http://westbloomfield.patch.com/groups/business-news/p/david-bleznak-and-jason-rosenbaum-5-questions --> says JR graduated 2012.
JW's linkedin says class of 2011, so I'm guessing JR started in 2008 and JW in 2007.

If JW joined when most do, as a freshman, he likely would have been "hazed" the year before JR. If true, that would also mean that JW possibly "hazed" JR's class, although I don't think there can be any certainty that JW actually participated in any of the hazing unless he was specifically named by the school, LE, or AEPi.

I am curious how well the fraternity kept in touch though. I've heard of it referred to as an "underground fraternity" IIRC? If JW had a 1.5 in AEPi before it got kicked off and JR only had a semester, I'm not sure either of them would have been inclined to maintain relations with other members just because of their status as AEPi members, but if they had, it again makes me wonder why JR's phone didn't have JW's number in it and why he wasn't called.

Did JW and JR know each other well enough to have each other's numbers? If not, then it isn't surprising that JR didn't call him, although I would be surprised if LS didn't know JW's number by memory. Maybe her intoxication barred her from recalling it at the moment or she couldn't speak well enough to say it, although that would tend to support the known descriptions of her.

If they did know each other well enough, why didn't JR call him to come get LS? They supposedly had plans to meet up and if anyone knew LS well, it would have been JW (or HT, but I've pointed out how weird it was she wasn't called). Either JR didn't want to call him for his own reasons (LS was in super bad shape?) or LS didn't want JR calling him (maybe they were going through a rocky patch). If either of those situations are true, then I doubt LS went in search of JW.

JMO.

I'm just wondering what you meant by AEPi being an underground frat. Were they at one time suspended from or kicked off campus for something?

I just ask because AEPi was one of the frats where I did my undergrad and hardly "underground," however, the school I went to had/has a large Jewish student population....but Hillel's (the Jewish student organization) natonal website says IU Bloomington is the 8th most popular public college for Jewish students to choose (http://www.hillel.org/about/news-vi...views/2013/08/21/2013-top-schools-jews-choose) and that 11% of the students there are Jewish according to http://reformjudaismmag.org/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=1380.

So my guess is AEPi would be a pretty prominent frat on the campus. At my school, the Jewish frats and sororities even had some non-Jewish members. In fact, the sorority known for some of the prettiest girls who partied the most at my school was AEPhi, a Jewish sorority...yet many of the members on my campus were not Jewish, but had the right look and partied at the right places, so they pledged AEPhi (not saying that is the case on every campus).

A look at IU's AEPi's chapter's website makes it look like they're by no means underground; they
look to be a flourishing fraternity with a nice frat house and a viable presence on campus:http://www.iuaepi.org/External/Home.aspx?C=57

I am not attacking your post or anything, I'm just wondering why the notion that the frat was "underground" is out there and what if anything it has to do with Lauren's case. As a sorority member myself, I do think it's significant these guys were frat brothers. They weren't just a group of friends. They were bonded by more than that....other shared experiences within the fraternity/frat life and by whatever happened to Lauren. They already shared secrets...what happened to Lauren is one more.

Were any of them kicked out or quit AEPi after Lauren disappeared?

 

[Mahouston69]

You put it better than I have been able to..from past posts the frat was on probation for..whatever but I believe that changed in the fall of 2011. Also, the significance of being frat brothers. Unless you have that experience it's hard to describe that relationship and bond. Which is why I believe JR and JW were and are more involved than they want it to appear. For obvious reason.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[ktgirl]

Found the story:
They were closed for hazing in 2008; reopened in spring 2011, which would have been the semester before Lauren went missing.
http://www.wthr.com/story/7765853/iu-closes-fraternity-for-hazing

Here's an article about when the frat came back to campus:
http://idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=77623&search=greek&section=search
&#8220;It&#8217;s AEPi policy that once a chapter closes, those members cannot re-enter,&#8221; Bock said. &#8220;We&#8217;re starting from scratch, with a new group and a fresh look, to build a strong personality and reputation on campus.&#8221;

So were these guys Lauren was hanging out with members of the old AEPi chapter than had been kicked off or some of the news guys (since old members couldn't re-enter).

When I was in a sorority, there were certain frats we were advised by sisters to stay away from - some were known for sexual assaults at parties, some were known for incidents on campus like crazy hazing, etc as well as frats that had been kicked off campus or that had previously been kicked off campus then brought back (it wasn't considered great to associate with them until they'd been back on campus for a few years). Girls just let us know those frats didn't have the best reputation and we may not be safe at their parties, etc.
AEPi at my school was not one of the frats we were advised to stay away from but had they been sanctioned like the chapter at IU, I'm thinking they would have been.

 

[sammi89]

Also, the significance of being frat brothers. Unless you have that experience it's hard to describe that relationship and bond. Which is why I believe JR and JW were and are more involved than they want it to appear. For obvious reason.

Respectfully snipped by me.

I was in a sorority during my undergrad and I see your point, but also, I think sometimes the Greek bond is a little overplayed. There were several sisters I didn't care for within my own sorority and I'm sure some that felt the same way toward me. Some girls I hope will continue to be my lifelong friends and others I probably won't ever speak to again simply because we didn't know each other that well. JR and JW didn't necessarily have to be friendly just because they belonged to the same fraternity, especially because the fraternity was kicked off campus relatively early during both of their undergraduate careers.

I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "underground fraternity" either, to be honest though. It's just that I've seen it referred to repeatedly, which is why I was wondering whether either of them would have been inclined to keep up with other members just because of their status as former AEPi members. JW may have been a member for up to 1.5 years so maybe that would have been enough for him and IIRC he shared his house with other fraternity members? JR only had a semester in before they were kicked off campus in Jan 2008, so his time there was much, much shorter. Depending on how well AEPi kept up with each other during that period, I would be surprised that JR did not at least know several mutual friends that he could have called to get ahold of JW, if neither he nor LS had JW's number.


ktgirl, kpeacock mentioned that they were both members during 2008, so none of them should have been new members in 2011.


Also, I am 100% with you guys that Greek life is a great experience and you do share many, many memories and experiences with other members, but I have to disagree that those in the same fraternity or sorority would put aside everything else to keep a secret of that magnitude. If any members do have knowledge of what happened, that is totally separate from Greek life and does not reflect anything I was ever taught from Greek life, at least.

 

[JerseyGirl]

From the Find Lauren FB page:

Two years, eleven months….too long. Someone knows what happened, where Lauren is and who is responsible for her disappearance. If you have any information, the smallest piece could change our lives. Please contact us. Below is a photo of the ring Lauren was wearing the night she disappeared. Lauren was last seen wearing black stretch pants and a white top. Maybe you have seen it if so, please contact us.

https://www.facebook.com/Lauren.Spi...5047564191647/839460989416965/?type=1&theater

 

[AbbeyR]

Slightly OT, but I saw that IU-Bloomington made this list (55 colleges investigated over sexual violence complaints):

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/01/us/colleges-sex-complaint-investigations/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.cnn.com/2014/images/05/01/sex_assault.pdf

I wonder if this means there could be unreported rapes and sexual assaults or just mishandled rapes and sexual assaults. ???

A long time ago, I listened to this feature on NPR called "Myths That Make It Hard To Stop Campus Rape" - Just found the link in an old post. It's worth a listen. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124272157

It talks about the high rates of rape on college campuses, and the kind of campus culture of 'partying' where cases of 'date or acquaintance' rape happen frequently and go unpunished

...Still, Lisak says these men don't think of themselves as rapists. Usually they know the other student. And they don't use guns or knives.

"The basic weapon is alcohol," the psychologist says. "If you can get a victim intoxicated to the point where she's coming in and out of consciousness, or she's unconscious — and that is a very, very common scenario — then why would you need a weapon? Why would you need a knife or a gun?"

Along with underreporting, a lot of schools handle sexual assault as a matter of conduct code (if handled at all), and the offender ends up with minimal, if any punishment.

There is a three part series about this- Part 2 about "Margaux" is about IU.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124111931

It's about her experience dealing with a sexual assault with the college justice system.

On a college campus, this isn't a formal legal process like a court of law. Instead it fell to two campus administrators to sort out the truth, simply by asking the accused and the accuser for their sides of the story....

The story then details the ineffective response of IU, and how she left school because she didn't want to be on campus with her attacker. Her family ended up filing a request for the U.S. Department of Education to investigate IU for violating Title IX, based on the way it handled the sexual assault.

Anyway, gives a bit of insight into how sexual assault may be handled on campus, at IU and elsewhere.

 

[Ixchel13]

He didn't bring her home. He brought her to Smallwood, where people told him to bring her to her apartment. He didn't. He also didn't leave her at Smallwood. Instead, according to the reports, he picked her up off the floor after she fell coming out of the elevator, and carried her back to his apartment, instead.



And where was it ever stated that they were 'making out or close to it'? The witnesses said Corey was acting aggressively and inappropriately towards Lauren, and "bothering her".

what else could he have been doing? slapping and pushing her? No, I think any attempt to glorify ZO as a hero is totally misguided. IMO, he saw CR being "inappropriate", which is really a prudish term considering the antics of these people , IOW, I think he saw another guy getting fresh with JW's girl.


I think it's interesting, that whenever the altercation is brought up, certain people just refuse to acknowledge that CR had brought Lauren home, to her apt., and then pandemonium broke out and they left. No one can deny that he initially brought her home. He was not trying, at first, to get her away
from her friends. He was, perhaps foolishly, idiotically, venturing into a place where he was banned and where he had to know he was going to get his clock cleaned if the AEPI's caught him there.
He probably was trying, and succeeding, in getting Lauren drunk. This is where duty of care comes into play for him. I think they were trying to get to the safety of her apt and didn't make it. Or did they? LE isn't saying. I often wonder if she was turned away at her own door because she was with CR.
This is where I give CR the benefit of the doubt, and only where. To say that Lauren was only stopping off at her apt at almost 3 a.m., when she knew she had told her bf that she was asleep, and to say she was stopping off for more drugs, etc, is actually defaming her. I wholeheartedly believe that she was going home to stay at that point.
Lauren was an adult. If she wanted to date someone else, or bring someone else home to her apt., an apt where she held a lease, that was her business. She didn't have to be hounded by a pack of thugs from her bf's gang. If these guys at the altercation were concerned about Lauren, they could have called security, informed therm of the situation, and Lauren would have been admonished to go to her apt or risk a PI. Or, if they thought she was intoxicated beyond limit, they could have called an ambulance or even taken her to the hospital. That's what a "hero" would do, not beat up the person she was with and let her stagger out the door with him.
What ZO told the police was a bare faced lie, backed up by other liars.
See LE has the video of the altercation. IMO, this is what the Spierers want
the ID of the AEPIs for. If it was Jesse's pack that was beating up CR,
then you just have to know he knew. And they probably want to ID all of the people with ZO for that reason. Maybe to see if any of the guys with ZO are among his roomies that alibied him as being "asleep" during all of this.

 

[imkeylime]

A long time ago, I listened to this feature on NPR called "Myths That Make It Hard To Stop Campus Rape" - Just found the link in an old post. It's worth a listen. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124272157

It talks about the high rates of rape on college campuses, and the kind of campus culture of 'partying' where cases of 'date or acquaintance' rape happen frequently and go unpunished

Along with underreporting, a lot of schools handle sexual assault as a matter of conduct code (if handled at all), and the offender ends up with minimal, if any punishment.

There is a three part series about this- Part 2 about "Margaux" is about IU.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124111931

It's about her experience dealing with a sexual assault with the college justice system.

The story then details the ineffective response of IU, and how she left school because she didn't want to be on campus with her attacker. Her family ended up filing a request for the U.S. Department of Education to investigate IU for violating Title IX, based on the way it handled the sexual assault.

Anyway, gives a bit of insight into how sexual assault may be handled on campus, at IU and elsewhere.

It's so terrible that "Margaux" felt forced to leave. That is so sad. Some schools "entitle" kids at the high school level as well, which has to encourage such offenders' behavior. My daughter had a friend who ex-boyfriend would smack her behind when he'd see her in the hallway. She reported him to the principal ... his punishment was minimal; people think because he was a "connected" senior approaching graduation. She, OTOH, was so humiliated and upset that she transferred to a private school.

Entitlement is a dangerous thing.

 

[AbbeyR]

I also have questions about the altercation at Smallwood, and I wish it had been handled differently too.

But, I see no obvious reason to doubt the story that has been reported. There are witnesses (in the plural) who have reported Corey's behavior and their concern about what was going with Lauren, and there is video of the altercation. The PI's have given a pretty clear account of what happened, down to the words that were exchanged.

Plus, just a few minutes later, after leaving Smallwood, another unrelated witness (the bar manager) stopped, expressing the same kind of concern for Lauren. Did she call an ambulance or the police? No. Presumably because CR told her things were under control.

Another tragic missed opportunity to help, but there's nothing at all to suggest that this makes her -- or ZO and friends -- a liar.

 

[Ixchel13]

I also have questions about the altercation at Smallwood, and I wish it had been handled differently too.

But, I see no obvious reason to doubt the story that has been reported. There are witnesses (in the plural) who have reported Corey's behavior and their concern about what was going with Lauren, and there is video of the altercation. The PI's have given a pretty clear account of what happened, down to the words that were exchanged.

Plus, just a few minutes later, after leaving Smallwood, another unrelated witness (the bar manager) stopped, expressing the same kind of concern for Lauren. Did she call an ambulance or the police? No. Presumably because CR told her things were under control.

Another tragic missed opportunity to help, but there's nothing at all to suggest that this makes her -- or ZO and friends -- a liar.

yes there is. ZO was facing a probable aggravated assault charge, and trespassing--as we determined
a long time ago, the victim does not need to press charges. He, and his friends who were his "witnesses" definitely, beyond a doubt, had motive to lie about the altercation.

Also, the bar manager has been discredited as seeing her a few minutes later. You can't have it both ways. The bar manager insists that it was 3:38, because she saw the big clock. Qualters has said she could have seen Lauren at a different time than the video evidence shows for that particular siting.
Please don't go over the quote again as if I am missing the point. Qualters definitely said that the bar manager could have seen her at a different time. He didn't say, "we have video evidence showing Lauren at the steps of 10th
and C and so the bartender couldn't have seen Lauren", he said very clearly that she didn't see Lauren during the time she and CR were trying to get in ZC's apt, but that she could have seen Lauren at another time, i.e. that would be the 3:38 siting, IMO

.

The mystery of all this is trying to figure out these discrepancies when we don't have the whole story, or even half of it.

CR is a jerk who was trying to get Lauren drunk, no doubt about that.
But saying he wasn't taking Lauren to her room is a huge stretch. He was on the fifth floor, her floor, not in the downstairs lobby, so he didn't just drop her off at the door. She may have been rebuffing him, that is true, and he might have been trying to talk his way into her apt. But after he was beaten up, she went with him. Even in her state, if she didn't want to go, she could have just sat, or fell, on the ground. People would have scooped her up and taken her to her room.

She went with him for a reason. There are those who say she couldn't have made that decision. But, she not only made that decision, but as the PIs have stated, "They made their way up the alley and knocked on ZC's door" So, was
CR trying to reach Zoe or was Lauren? At that point, Lauren was making a decision to contact Zoe. She was not comatose.

So what reason would make Lauren leave the relative safety of her apt building, at 3 a.m.? I don't really believe she intended to sleep with CR
at that point, and I think he probably knew that by then. Was he angry about that? Maybe. But then he takes her over to ZC's. Why? They were drunk. They were high. To me, looking for more drugs would not be an option.

Why must we assume that at that point CR was trying to make Lauren Zoe's "problem"? He could have just left her at SW if that were the case. Just as easy to assume that Lauren had a "problem" with Zoe or someone at Zoe's.

No one ever asks if Lauren tried to call JW during all of this. He says he was sleeping. What if Lauren tried to reach him on CR's phone, and he didn't answer? Just because Lauren didn't have her phone doesn't mean CR didn't have his, and it would be naive to think he didn't have his phone.

I hope we're beginning to realize why phone records are the key. Who called whom and when. Maybe Lauren thought JW was at 10th and C at Zoe's,
which would give her motive to leave CR's while MB was upstairs and go back down there.

All this riding on whether or not Lauren could function. A very neat package indeed, if we say she couldn't do anything, wasn't capable of walking, talking, or using a phone. Then, it only leaves one way she left, dead. When really, that option is the only piece of "evidence" LE gives us, when they are only
using 4 out of 10 POIs, out of the 10 POIs that we made up from MSM.

The simplest answer is almost always not the answer, not the other way around, as much as we want it to be the simplest.


.

 

[VeryVeritas]

Yes, I agree.

On top of that, there are a lot of red flags that could potentially point to sexual assault in the hours leading up to Lauren's disappearance. In any situation when someone is seen at a bar giving an intoxicated girl drinks and 'helping her' drink them (as stated in the lawsuit docs) to the point where she is "incapacitated" and "incoherent" and then taking her away from a public place and carrying her home at 4 am in a state where she obviously could not consent to anything, sexual assault is a real possibility that should be considered.

Even more so:
- If that person is an acquaintance who had only known her one week
- If that person was seen to be acting aggressively and inappropriately
- If that person ignored several (and unrelated) people who expressed concern, and told them he 'had things under control', speaking for someone who was too out of it to speak for herself
- If that person didn't seem very concerned with the well being of the girl in the last minutes she was seen (no shoes, falling on her face, etc.) and refused help
- If the last encounter with the person involved violence. (Corey had just been punched in the face, which could have added to the the aggression and anger)

And finally:
- If the girl disappears and is never seen again

Add all of these things together, and it makes me worry that Lauren was potentially in a very bad and vulnerable situation. Considering the stories we have heard from the other guys at 5 N, it also worries me that they seem to be covering for each other and withholding information, and that all of them have expressed a lot of anger towards Lauren and very little empathy, implying that Lauren herself is to blame for whatever happened that night.

Red flags. Everywhere.

Right, yet most of the facts you cite (which have been well established) point to CR as a SA perp. Yet there was this very curious transfer of her to MB to JR's and then ??

We have strong reason to see that CR was setting up for that sort of play, but then did someone else follow through instead, or were there perhaps even 2 separate assaults? I spent a lot of time focused on fitting a possible time of death into known facts, actions, and how POI's might have responded. To me it makes a big difference if we could pin behavior down to indicate that she had expired in the gravel lot, at CR/MB's apt, or at JR's or even somewhere in between each of those. Between MB's pre-trial publicly reported statements via his Lawyer and the press, the PI's statements, and now the civil trial statements, it would seem to place LS at CR/MB's for no more than 20 to 30 minutes. With JR's added statements it places her at JR's for more like 45 to 60 minutes. What if instead we think about how a minimally conscious LS might have behaved?
For example: If CR carried her up to his apt, and then attempted SA there (while she is "putting him to bed" to paraphrase a statement attributed to MB). LS may have tried to leave.. creating some commotion and not being able to walk may have caused some drama (the sort that might make your place look like it had been burglarized) MB contacts JR, otherwise if someone(anyone) were to contact LE this would not look good at all (like it would be seen for what it was). Then over at JR's the idea is maybe to calm her down(not get her home!), then someone attempts SA (in one of those many bedrooms) and things go badly. How does something like this fit the known facts and behaviors?

 

[VeryVeritas]

yes there is. ZO was facing a probable aggravated assault charge, and trespassing--as we determined
a long time ago, the victim does not need to press charges. He, and his friends who were his "witnesses" definitely, beyond a doubt, had motive to lie about the altercation.

Also, the bar manager has been discredited as seeing her a few minutes later. You can't have it both ways. The bar manager insists that it was 3:38, because she saw the big clock. Qualters has said she could have seen Lauren at a different time than the video evidence shows for that particular siting.
Please don't go over the quote again as if I am missing the point. Qualters definitely said that the bar manager could have seen her at a different time. He didn't say, "we have video evidence showing Lauren at the steps of 10th
and C and so the bartender couldn't have seen Lauren", he said very clearly that she didn't see Lauren during the time she and CR were trying to get in ZC's apt, but that she could have seen Lauren at another time, i.e. that would be the 3:38 siting, IMO

.

The mystery of all this is trying to figure out these discrepancies when we don't have the whole story, or even half of it.

CR is a jerk who was trying to get Lauren drunk, no doubt about that.
But saying he wasn't taking Lauren to her room is a huge stretch. He was on the fifth floor, her floor, not in the downstairs lobby, so he didn't just drop her off at the door. She may have been rebuffing him, that is true, and he might have been trying to talk his way into her apt. But after he was beaten up, she went with him. Even in her state, if she didn't want to go, she could have just sat, or fell, on the ground. People would have scooped her up and taken her to her room.

She went with him for a reason. There are those who say she couldn't have made that decision. But, she not only made that decision, but as the PIs have stated, "They made their way up the alley and knocked on ZC's door" So, was
CR trying to reach Zoe or was Lauren? At that point, Lauren was making a decision to contact Zoe. She was not comatose.

So what reason would make Lauren leave the relative safety of her apt building, at 3 a.m.? I don't really believe she intended to sleep with CR
at that point, and I think he probably knew that by then. Was he angry about that? Maybe. But then he takes her over to ZC's. Why? They were drunk. They were high. To me, looking for more drugs would not be an option.

Why must we assume that at that point CR was trying to make Lauren Zoe's "problem"? He could have just left her at SW if that were the case. Just as easy to assume that Lauren had a "problem" with Zoe or someone at Zoe's.

No one ever asks if Lauren tried to call JW during all of this. He says he was sleeping. What if Lauren tried to reach him on CR's phone, and he didn't answer? Just because Lauren didn't have her phone doesn't mean CR didn't have his, and it would be naive to think he didn't have his phone.

I hope we're beginning to realize why phone records are the key. Who called whom and when. Maybe Lauren thought JW was at 10th and C at Zoe's,
which would give her motive to leave CR's while MB was upstairs and go back down there.

All this riding on whether or not Lauren could function. A very neat package indeed, if we say she couldn't do anything, wasn't capable of walking, talking, or using a phone. Then, it only leaves one way she left, dead. When really, that option is the only piece of "evidence" LE gives us, when they are only
using 4 out of 10 POIs, out of the 10 POIs that we made up from MSM.

The simplest answer is almost always not the answer, not the other way around, as much as we want it to be the simplest.


.

I catch your drift, but there are a lot more facts which support the idea that CR may have wanted to SA LS. You almost imply that such interest could be consensual, but you know that in her state that would not have been possible (legally). So, the scales are tipped against CR being a good guy.

There has always been problems with the altercation at SW. I agree with some of the things you have noted: ZO may have reason to lie, ZO and friends DID NOT HELP LS (WHY DID THEY NOT TAKE HER TO HER APT??), etc... But then... Why isn't ZO being prosecuted for his attack on CR?
There is more to this than meets the eye, just not sure if it's relevant to LS's disappearance or CR's ultimate intentions.

You have said more than once that CR brought LS to her apt. That isn't accurate is it? He was with her from Kilroy's to SW, (WHO ACTUALLY USED HER KEYCARD TO GET INTO SW??) but did they ever make it to her actual Apartment? I have never seen anything that said they got to her Apartment. The events were described that LS was slipping down in the Elevator unable to stand even leaning against the elevator wall and CR is getting clocked by ZO. Then no one is helping LS to her Apartment instead CR "helps" her leave (while CR's lawyer gave an account that LS was "helping" CR to his place)

The part about knocking on ZC's door... how does that fit into some notion that LS was somehow being consensual with CR?

I do not and have never had any reason to believe that CR has amnesia.
But I am curious... who you think CR would be protecting by faking it, other than himself?