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

[Darcyline]

Haven't been here in a long time. I can't believe it has been this many years. I am still stuck where I have been (and where the investigation seems to be as well) since she went missing. The boys' stories do not match up. Now, do they not match up because they are young people who were all drunk/drugged up? Or do they not match up because they are guilty?
I feel like MB is a lynchpin here, but I also thought that years ago and assumed he would crack, but nope.
Still praying for a resolution somehow through this civil case or otherwise. At the very least, I hope they find her so her parents can give her a proper goodbye

 

[Karmady]

From what I have read, the stay on discovery has not yet been lifted. Some speculate this is a good thing, as perhaps there is movement in the criminal case. One can only hope.

This article is the most recent I have seen-- depositions were to have started last week, but the stay was simply reiterated. Apologies if this was already posted:

http://www.theindianalawyer.com/depositions-delayed-in-spierer-civil-case/PARAMS/article/34298

I read the article. The stay on discovery is not a good thing for the plaintiff's case, imo. The Judge has already said the Spearer's claims are tenuous and now is saying that the defendants who've moved for summary judgment should get to be heard before expensive discovery is taken. So not only has the judge concluded the discovery isn't needed to dispose of the motions, but is telegraphing that it's likely they'll be granted. It's relatively rare to not allow discovery depositions before hearing motions for summary judgment. Especially if the non-moving party has argued that they need discovery to oppose the motions. jmo

eta: link in the unlikely event anyone wants more information about stays when motions to dismiss/msj's are pending


http://wakeforestlawreview.com/when...discovery-when-a-motion-to-dismiss-is-pending

 

[Ros]

I'm rethinking the strategy for the toxicologist. Not that I think he would lie but being that he's hired by the plaintiffs we can certainly know how he'll skew the information he imparts.

So, that said, he's not going to say she was sober or anywhere near it. That is a given. But he's also not going to say without question she couldn't walk. That would be nearly pointless for the civil case, if not damaging. You're going to put an expert witness on the stand that doesn't even support the narrative that your lawsuit is based upon? No... And LE has their own experts for any work towards a criminal case.

BUT.... I can easily see the expert suggesting or implying that it was lucky she could walk at all with her level of intoxication. Perhaps to the point of planting the seed he doesn't believe it but never really says that. Why would he and the plaintiffs do that? To win sympathy... To create an atmosphere where a verdict might not be technically correct but the plaintiffs win because it's felt that it's all a lie that she walked out in the first place.

So the plaintiffs 'win' in that the verdict technically agrees that 5N let her leave their apartment in a condition that led to her demise (when they had a duty of care). But the reality is the verdict will be based on a belief she never left the apartments alive at all and so the verdict will be brought to make sure they get some level of punishment.

The defense would understand that strategy and how it undermines their own defense strategy since it would be an undercurrent they have to address, but can't tackle head on necessarily (depending on what type of exculpatory evidence they may or may not have of course).

Make sense that that is what the strategy could be?

I think the judge has already ruled that the defendants did not have a duty of care. As I, who am not a lawyer, understand it (please correct me if I am wrong), the issue then became whether or not the defendants provided her with alcohol, which led to her injuries or death. The defendants then moved to bifurcate this issue, and asked that there first be a ruling on whether or not her state of intoxication was the proximate cause of her injuries or death. At first the plaintiffs said that no additional discovery was needed (because there is nothing anyone has been able to find out about what happened to LS after 4:30 a.m.), then later said they needed to give a toxicologist time to examine the evidence showing her state of intoxication before her disappearance.

So, in order for the suit to proceed, the toxicologist must be able to convince the court that her intoxication was the proximate cause of her injuries or death. What may be problematic is the fact that there is no proof of her death. However, the witness statements (falling face down with a thud, not breaking her fall her hands, signs of a black eye) indicate that her intoxication may well be the proximate cause of injuries, injuries that may have led to her death. Would they need an expert such as a pathologist or neurosurgeon to testify that a face down fall could result in death hours later, and if so, how many hours later? The black eye quickly forming would indicate that some blood vessels around her eye had broken. She could also have had bleeding in her brain.

I forgot, did the witness indicate that she was conscious after the fall, or could she have had a concussion? If she was unconscious and the fall had injured her neck, her condition could have worsened if someone moved her.

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Head_injuries_first_aid

 

[akh]

You are right... I believe the duty of care part of the lawsuit was tossed. The more likely reason for the toxicology expert, at this point, is just to try and keep the suit alive at all.

 

[Mahouston69]

You are right... I believe the duty of care part of the lawsuit was tossed. The more likely reason for the toxicology expert, at this point, is just to try and keep the suit alive at all.

I believe the toxicology expert will testify that the amount of alcohol/drugs she reportedly was provided combined with her particular medical diagnosis would result in injury or death.

 

[imkeylime]

I believe the toxicology expert will testify that the amount of alcohol/drugs she reportedly was provided combined with her particular medical diagnosis would result in injury or death.

I'm interested in JR's claim that either DR or LS told him they'd ingested klonopin before arriving at his place. I'm assuming that would come up in DR's testimony, if true, and wonder how it might effect the case. For example, if JR knew she'd taken klonopin and then provided her with alcohol, might it not effect the duty of care rule? Even if he learned about it after she'd started drinking, the knowledge gave him possible insight into how she was acting later in the night.

Thinking about it that way, I wonder if CR knew about the klonopin (again, if true) or if it's something else covered by his amnesia. Buying drinks for a petite young woman who you know has taken klonopin is different than buying drinks for a petite young woman who has just been drinking, IMO.

Actually, klonopin (aka clonazepam) itself can be used as a date-rape drug (and can also cause memory loss):

http://www.uhs.wisc.edu/assault/date-rape-drugs.shtml

Also, I'd really like verification about the klonopin. The link that follows also mentions cocaine ... and that investigators and the Spierers had no knowledge to support that. But it doesn't specify no knowledge of klonopin, so I wonder if DR did bring that up. Added thought: Could JR have mentioned cocaine because he knows it would show up in her system forensically if she was ever found?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/02/missing-student-boyfriend-family-fume/2382909/

 

[Kadence]

I'm interested in JR's claim that either DR or LS told him they'd ingested klonopin before arriving at his place. I'm assuming that would come up in DR's testimony, if true, and wonder how it might effect the case. For example, if JR knew she'd taken klonopin and then provided her with alcohol, might it not effect the duty of care rule? Even if he learned about it after she'd started drinking, the knowledge gave him possible insight into how she was acting later in the night.

Thinking about it that way, I wonder if CR knew about the klonopin (again, if true) or if it's something else covered by his amnesia. Buying drinks for a petite young woman who you know has taken klonopin is different than buying drinks for a petite young woman who has just been drinking, IMO.

Actually, klonopin (aka clonazepam) itself can be used as a date-rape drug (and can also cause memory loss):

http://www.uhs.wisc.edu/assault/date-rape-drugs.shtml

Also, I'd really like verification about the klonopin. The link that follows also mentions cocaine ... and that investigators and the Spierers had no knowledge to support that. But it doesn't specify no knowledge of klonopin, so I wonder if DR did bring that up. Added thought: Could JR have mentioned cocaine because he knows it would show up in her system forensically if she was ever found?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/02/missing-student-boyfriend-family-fume/2382909/

Just re-reading that article about the Wolff family and their "issues" with the Spierer family, has my blood boiling, their comments are just so mean and spiteful.

Any thoughts on Nadine Wolff's comment regarding making sure their on took a polygraph?: "We did it because we wanted to be 100 percent sure," she said. "We thought he was innocent, but you could never be 100 percent sure." As a mom, I'm 100% sure that's not what I would have done, or said, if I thought my son was innocent. Why would they not be 100% sure Jesse didn't have anything to do with Lauren's disappearance?

Re-reading her other comments also make me feel uneasy as, imho, they just seem "off", not something that a mother would say. Maybe it's just me...

 

[imkeylime]

Just re-reading that article about the Wolff family and their "issues" with the Spierer family, has my blood boiling, their comments are just so mean and spiteful.

Any thoughts on Nadine Wolff's comment regarding making sure their on took a polygraph?: "We did it because we wanted to be 100 percent sure," she said. "We thought he was innocent, but you could never be 100 percent sure." As a mom, I'm 100% sure that's not what I would have done, or said, if I thought my son was innocent. Why would they not be 100% sure Jesse didn't have anything to do with Lauren's disappearance?

Re-reading her other comments also make me feel uneasy as, imho, they just seem "off", not something that a mother would say. Maybe it's just me...

What strikes me about the article is that JW's mother is indignant that JW is still a suspect and indignant that the Bloomington PD gives drinking tickets to kids (like JW), but she's not indignant that LS is very likely deceased. What's "off," IMO, is her tone. It's really biting, given the circumstances, and doesn't fit the context of the situation.

"This poor little girl is not with us today because of her drug abuse," Nadine Wolff said. IMO, calling LS a "poor little girl" in itself is demeaning; she wasn't a "little girl" at age 20, and the "poor" is condescending.

I can imagine LS' disappearance has negatively impacted JW's life, but there's no compassion at all for the Spierers here. His mother doesn't have the compassionate quality one mother usually has for another mother who has suffered a tragedy. That's the part that strikes me as the most odd.

I agree that her statement about the lie detector test is strange. IDK ... maybe JW has a temper? But if she wanted him to take a lie detector test, why is she so offended that the Spierers and LE want him to take one? In addition, DR reportedly took an FBI-administered test, so why couldn't JW have taken that versus one from Bloomfield PD if not trusting BPD was an issue?

That also strikes me as odd ... they hired a retired FBI polygrapher but wouldn't consider a current FBI one ... or maybe that wasn't offered to them? IOW, her argument doesn't seem valid.

 

[Jacobite]

Not only a strange reaction but possible motive.

 

[imkeylime]

... I agree that her statement about the lie detector test is strange. IDK ... maybe JW has a temper? But if she wanted him to take a lie detector test, why is she so offended that the Spierers and LE want him to take one? In addition, DR reportedly took an FBI-administered test, so why couldn't JW have taken that versus one from Bloomfield PD if not trusting BPD was an issue?

That also strikes me as odd ... they hired a retired FBI polygrapher but wouldn't consider a current FBI one ... or maybe that wasn't offered to them? IOW, her argument doesn't seem valid.

Oops, Bloomington PD!

 

[Todaysun]

Not only a strange reaction but possible motive.

Jacobite, I always find your posts intriguing and I look forward to your insights. Can you please expand on this thought?

 

[masootz]

What strikes me about the article is that JW's mother is indignant that JW is still a suspect and indignant that the Bloomington PD gives drinking tickets to kids (like JW), but she's not indignant that LS is very likely deceased. What's "off," IMO, is her tone. It's really biting, given the circumstances, and doesn't fit the context of the situation.

"This poor little girl is not with us today because of her drug abuse," Nadine Wolff said. IMO, calling LS a "poor little girl" in itself is demeaning; she wasn't a "little girl" at age 20, and the "poor" is condescending.

I can imagine LS' disappearance has negatively impacted JW's life, but there's no compassion at all for the Spierers here. His mother doesn't have the compassionate quality one mother usually has for another mother who has suffered a tragedy. That's the part that strikes me as the most odd.

I agree that her statement about the lie detector test is strange. IDK ... maybe JW has a temper? But if she wanted him to take a lie detector test, why is she so offended that the Spierers and LE want him to take one? In addition, DR reportedly took an FBI-administered test, so why couldn't JW have taken that versus one from Bloomfield PD if not trusting BPD was an issue?

That also strikes me as odd ... they hired a retired FBI polygrapher but wouldn't consider a current FBI one ... or maybe that wasn't offered to them? IOW, her argument doesn't seem valid.

their whole side of the story strikes me as parents who don't know anything definitive but who internally question their son's involvement. she's really acting like someone who wants it all to go away, likely because she knows in her heart that there's more to the story and that could mean serious business for her son.

 

[imkeylime]

their whole side of the story strikes me as parents who don't know anything definitive but who internally question their son's involvement. she's really acting like someone who wants it all to go away, likely because she knows in her heart that there's more to the story and that could mean serious business for her son.

You raise a good point that makes sense to me. IMO, JW could very well know more about that night than he's willing or able to share, for whatever reason. That's also infuriating, as helping find LS is worth total disclosure.

 

[Stella]

I'm wondering if somewhere between the last working security camera (in the alley?) where she was seen and the one in front of her apartment where she was NOT seen, LS may have crawled under a house to sleep it off or inside a little used building room (like Wade Steffey) and died? Has every possible place been searched between those 2 locations? I just don't feel like any of her drinking buddies had anything to do with her death. How would they even dispose of a body, especially as drunk as they were? I don't know if any of them had a large incinerator or furnace in their buildings where they might have disposed of her body or if any of them even had cars to take her out and bury her and the idea that one of them had a shovel handy to bury her is ludicrous. I can't find any working links that show photos of what might have been the area she would've walked towards her home. I just think every inch of her supposed route should be gone over.

 

[Ros]

I'm wondering if somewhere between the last working security camera (in the alley?) where she was seen and the one in front of her apartment where she was NOT seen, LS may have crawled under a house to sleep it off or inside a little used building room (like Wade Steffey) and died? Has every possible place been searched between those 2 locations? I just don't feel like any of her drinking buddies had anything to do with her death. How would they even dispose of a body, especially as drunk as they were? I don't know if any of them had a large incinerator or furnace in their buildings where they might have disposed of her body or if any of them even had cars to take her out and bury her and the idea that one of them had a shovel handy to bury her is ludicrous. I can't find any working links that show photos of what might have been the area she would've walked towards her home. I just think every inch of her supposed route should be gone over.

When I first heard that she was missing, my hope was that she had simply gone to a friend's place to sleep it off and forgot to check in with anyone. My next thought was the Wade Steffey scenario, but except for a few houses, most of the buildings in the area are large commercial buildings. I walked around the area about three years ago this month, and did not see anyplace that would be a likely place for her to be. Besides, the dogs should have found her (although they did not find Wade Steffey...). Next I thought that someone might have abducted her (like Jill Behrman), and that her body would be found in the woods by hunters or in a farm field at harvest time. However, fall has come and gone three times.
CR's car was searched. JR's car was allegedly in the shop. JR had friends from Michigan, who presumably had cars. LE is supposed to have known their names early on, and, one would expect, that their cars were searched too. The building trash was sent to a dumpster, not an incinerator. A few months after she disappeared, the landfill was searched; but she was not found.
BTown has posted a number of photos of the area. Look through the early threads to find them.
The area where she disappeared was covered by numerous volunteer and professional searchers, including Texas Equusearch, and by dogs.

IMHO, we cannot rule out any possible scenario at this point, including random abduction, stalking and abduction by unknown person, body hidden by guys at 5N, and involvement of JW.

 

[Ven]

I have always suspected JW and wondered why the Spierer family continued to insist on the other three being involved. JW was the one with motive. Cases are often not solved because the investigators insist on looking in the wrong direction. JMO

 

[Ven]

Does anyone know what was the status of LS and JWs relationship as of June 2nd 2011? All of the reports I've seen said they were in a "3 year relationship" but she was clearly going out with another guy that night, and not in a platonic way. Had they broken up? Were they in an open relationship? Or cheated on each other? I know these aren't the greatest details to be getting into, but after this long it's time to put prudishness aside and get to the bottom of things and bring Lauren home to her family.

From day 1 I've always come back to the fact that she was with CR that night of her own volition.
These two were more than friends.
JW's friend ZO punched CR when he spotted CR with LS that night.
What kind of long-term boyfriend let's his girlfriend go out and get completely wasted and drugged up without him being there?
Was that a regular occurrence in their relationship?
Or were they on the outs and LS was using CR against JW?

Did this piss JW off? And would he have confronted LS later that night?

etc. etc.

I've always been amazed how JW has escaped scrutiny in this case by the media and PIs and Spierer family, despite the fact that he's not willing to take a LD or be interviewed by Bloomington PD, and he's potentially the only one who had motive to do anything that night above and beyond an accident.

 

[imkeylime]

Does anyone know what was the status of LS and JWs relationship as of June 2nd 2011? All of the reports I've seen said they were in a "3 year relationship" but she was clearly going out with another guy that night, and not in a platonic way. Had they broken up? Were they in an open relationship? Or cheated on each other? I know these aren't the greatest details to be getting into, but after this long it's time to put prudishness aside and get to the bottom of things and bring Lauren home to her family.

From day 1 I've always come back to the fact that she was with CR that night of her own volition.
These two were more than friends.
JW's friend ZO punched CR when he spotted CR with LS that night.
What kind of long-term boyfriend let's his girlfriend go out and get completely wasted and drugged up without him being there?
Was that a regular occurrence in their relationship?
Or were they on the outs and LS was using CR against JW?

Did this piss JW off? And would he have confronted LS later that night?

etc. etc.

I've always been amazed how JW has escaped scrutiny in this case by the media and PIs and Spierer family, despite the fact that he's not willing to take a LD or be interviewed by Bloomington PD, and he's potentially the only one who had motive to do anything that night above and beyond an accident.

While I agree that JW shouldn't escape scrutiny, I don't think there's evidence that LS saw CR in a non-platonic way or that JW would be bothered by her partying with him. She was obviously hanging out and partying with DR as well, and I would guess that she did the same with other guys at times. I have two kids slightly younger than LS, and that is today's norm, IMO. Young people often hang out with others of the opposite sex, regardless of relationship statuses.

Unless there was previous mistrust or jealousy in the relationship, it's not a red flag, IMO. It would be worthwhile to examine if there was possible mistrust/jealousy. For example, maybe CR had a reputation? But if that was the case, I'd think JW would go after him and not LS, unless they'd already discussed him (CR). It's possible they were already on shaky ground, but it then seems odd that she'd have stayed in Bloomington to drive home with JW. ???

Playing devil's advocate, it does seem like LS didn't keep in contact with JW that night, but that could be because she was combining klonopin and alcohol. Also, it's possible that she wanted to go out and party while he didn't. Maybe she was an extrovert and he, an introvert? That said, what LS wanted and what CR wanted could have been very different things.

 

[sammi89]

Ixchel, is there a link showing that the business that hired JW/JW's company to act as a spokesman for was in the same building as JR's company?

I used mapquest and they are NOT in the same building and do not even show the same building in their street view. Additionally, one is on WEST Brown Street and the other is on EAST Brown Street and it appears there is entire block between the two. They are NOT the same building so can you please stop stating that as a fact? It is FALSE as far as I can tell. I can probably verify next month when I am home visiting (MI native).

 

[sammi89]

While I agree that JW shouldn't escape scrutiny, I don't think there's evidence that LS saw CR in a non-platonic way or that JW would be bothered by her partying with him. She was obviously hanging out and partying with DR as well, and I would guess that she did the same with other guys at times. I have two kids slightly younger than LS, and that is today's norm, IMO. Young people often hang out with others of the opposite sex, regardless of relationship statuses.

Unless there was previous mistrust or jealousy in the relationship, it's not a red flag, IMO. It would be worthwhile to examine if there was possible mistrust/jealousy. For example, maybe CR had a reputation? But if that was the case, I'd think JW would go after him and not LS, unless they'd already discussed him (CR). It's possible they were already on shaky ground, but it then seems odd that she'd have stayed in Bloomington to drive home with JW. ???

Playing devil's advocate, it does seem like LS didn't keep in contact with JW that night, but that could be because she was combining klonopin and alcohol. Also, it's possible that she wanted to go out and party while he didn't. Maybe she was an extrovert and he, an introvert? That said, what LS wanted and what CR wanted could have been very different things.

I agree with your earlier comments on his mom. It lacked the compassion I would think she would have as a mother herself, not to mention LS was someone her son cared about for many years.

I agree that at minimum, JW probably has the most knowledge about her usual habits, especially party habits, and IMO, it has always appeared that he was aware of the reputations of the other POIs that either genuinely triggered concern or he took advantage of to focus attentions elsewhere. I think all of the main POIs are POIs because they would have had motive though, whether it's because of jealousy/anger (JW), romantic/sexual (CR, maybe other 5N), or injury due to something at 5N. If JW is the jealous type, I have a feeling those kind of behaviors will repeat themselves in future relationships and will hopefully be communicated to LE at some point. If any of the 5N players were truly acting aggressively sexually toward LS, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a history of coming on too strong and/or will present itself in future interactions too.

IMO, the Spierers have honed in on the 5N POI because they can be placed with her and the consistent descriptions of LS that night. If they were aware of JW out and about, I really think they would be much more vocal about him being possibly involved. I'm not sure we would necessarily know if LE is really focused on these guys or not because they have been relatively quiet about their investigation for awhile.