Elisa Lam - What Happened?

Why did Elisa die?

  • Homicide/crime of opportunity - Murder due to chance encounter with someone on the day she died

    Votes: 162 47.4%
  • Homicide/preplanned - Elisa was lured to her death in a scheme planned before the day she died

    Votes: 46 13.5%
  • Accidental death - related to an altered mental state: drug induced, psychosis, sleep walking, etc.

    Votes: 86 25.1%
  • Suicide - Elisa intended to end her life due to mental issues/other

    Votes: 7 2.0%
  • Occult/supernatural/conspiracy - related to occult, supernatural phenomena or gov./other conspiracy

    Votes: 5 1.5%
  • Unsure/Do not know

    Votes: 36 10.5%

  • Total voters
    342
Status
Not open for further replies.

danzn16

For the missing
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
1,365
I'm really confused by this story. Do you think that this truly was an accident, or do you think that it was a homicide without any evidence to prove it?

It just seems bizarre to me that a women (regardless of her mental state or if she was bipolar) would find her way to the top of a building and *accidentally* climb into a water tank without anyone noticing.

After seeing the video of her in the elevator I really thought she was undergoing mental issues and I did not find it far fetched whatsoever that it was accidentally. When some people are undergoing mental issues no scenario is too outlandish and it is truly surprising what people can get themselves into when not mentally clear. I am glad that it was investigated in case there was any foul play however.
 

Nickfalzone

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
114
Reaction score
3
I'm glad the case is closed. I'm glad that Elisa's family do not have to suffer the indignities of having the details of her lie and death splashed all over the news to whet the appetites of the morbidly curious. I'm glad Elisa did not have to suffer at the hands of a murderer.

I hope this sweet girl can rest in peace now.

Like I said, no evidence to prove it one way or another. There's no evidence of accidental death, just like there is no evidence of foul play. Simply because I state that accidental death is not proven, does not mean that I believe foul play is indeed the cause of death. I am simply stating that ruling the case as 'accidental death' is simply a way of closing the case, in the absence of any definitive answers. You can imagine that her death was accidental all you want, if it makes you feel better, but that does not necessarily make it so. To say that LE is right 100% of the time is incredibly naive.

Additionally, the fact that some believe she was acting out mental illness in the security tape, does not make it so. Many others believed that what they saw on camera was a girl hiding from someone. Many so-called professionals also said that she was on drugs like X. Tox results indicate that those professionals were simply wrong. So we're left with mental illness or foul play, with no definitive answer one way or another. The case is closed, but not definitively solved.
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
Like I said, no evidence to prove it one way or another. There's no evidence of accidental death, just like there is no evidence of foul play.
Snipped for space
But you can't really compare the idea of 'evidence' when it comes to foul play versus accidental death.

Here's why: it is inherently difficult (if not impossible) to find evidence that any death is an accident, and yet these kinds of deaths occur all the time. Accidents just happen out of nowhere and leave no hard evidence; they lack motive, planning, and execution--the kinds of processes that leave behind evidence. So generally the evidence for an accidental death is circumstantial: a) there is no evidence of foul play, and b) there is no evidence of intentional suicide. That leaves you with a strong indication of an accident.

On the other hand, it's very possible to find evidence of foul play. That doesn't mean people can't cover it up, or that the authorities always discover that evidence. But hard evidence is extremely common with foul play. It's almost non-existent with accidents. How do prove that a sudden, random event happened once that event is over and no one witnessed it? How do you get inside the mind of a dead person? You can't. But you can definitely find evidence that someone did something on purpose. So lack of evidence for foul play is inherently more powerful than lack of evidence for an accident... but again, I'm speaking in generalizations. I realize that these are not hard rules. But they are true most of the time. :twocents: :twocents:

And on top of that, remember that we don't know what evidence or knowledge they have. We only know what we know, which is not a complete picture of what they have. Until we know more about the evidence and/or autopsy, we can only assume that they know more than we do. Hopefully we will have more info soon! :) Unfortunately, we will never, ever know with absolute confidence that we're being told the truth, but I guess that's true of almost everything in life.
 

AlphaWolf

Active Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2013
Messages
507
Reaction score
52
But you can't really compare the idea of 'evidence' when it comes to foul play versus accidental death.

Here's why: it is inherently difficult (if not impossible) to find evidence that any death is an accident, and yet these kinds of deaths occur all the time. Accidents just happen out of nowhere and leave no hard evidence; they lack motive, planning, and execution--the kinds of processes that leave behind evidence. So generally the evidence for an accidental death is circumstantial: a) there is no evidence of foul play, and b) there is no evidence of intentional suicide. That leaves you with a strong indication of an accident.

On the other hand, it's very possible to find evidence of foul play. That doesn't mean people can't cover it up, or that the authorities always discover that evidence. But hard evidence is extremely common with foul play. It's almost non-existent with accidents. How do prove that a sudden, random event happened once that event is over and no one witnessed it? How do you get inside the mind of a dead person? You can't. But you can definitely find evidence that someone did something on purpose. So lack of evidence for foul play is inherently more powerful than lack of evidence for an accident... but again, I'm speaking in generalizations. I realize that these are not hard rules. But they are true most of the time. :twocents: :twocents:

And on top of that, remember that we don't know what evidence or knowledge they have. We only know what we know, which is not a complete picture of what they have. Until we know more about the evidence and/or autopsy, we can only assume that they know more than we do. Hopefully we will have more info soon! :) Unfortunately, we will never, ever know for absolute sure that what we're being told is true, but I guess that's true of almost everything in life.

You are 100% correct...

I think when the public first heard ( mostly misinformation) about the tanks bieng padlocked or the fire escape/roof access door bieng "Locked with an Alarm" ...it casted a possible theory of Foul play.

the more " correct" information that came in ( tanks were not locked....Roof access door was not locked or had any serious alarm )....made an accidental drowning much much more likely.
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
You are 100% correct...

I think when the public first heard ( mostly misinformation) about the tanks bieng padlocked or the fire escape/roof access door bieng "Locked with an Alarm" ...it casted a possible theory of Foul play.

the more " correct" information that came in ( tanks were not locked....Roof access door was not locked or had any serious alarm )....made an accidental drowning much much more likely.
I agree. This is why some solid journalist needs to put all of the corrected, verified evidence and knowledge together, along with logical, unbiased synthesis and analysis of what is known and the various possibilities. This way anyone who wants to separate the known facts from the confusing cloud of fantasy and misinformation can go and educate themselves in one place.

Unfortunately, good, solid information doesn't necessarily make for good headlines, so it might be up to one of us to write such a story (including sources) and put it on a blog site or something. It would be good to take it out of the message board universe, because here it would blend in with endless conversation. A blog-style article, though, would keep it as an autonomous story while maintaining the advantage of a comment section for others to add their thoughts. And of course it could be updated as needed.

It would take a damn good bit of time and revisiting some loooong threads and the links therein, though :)
 

Willow57

New Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
103
Reaction score
2
Well...since L.E. has all of the evidence I will take what they say over someone who doesn't who is just guessing. It seems like some people want everything that happens to be foul play. I haven't heard that her family is not satisfied with the results. Also the bipolar condition that some people on here argued that she didn't have has been vertified by the M.E. The very first time I viewed that video-to me it looked like a woman who was in the midst of some type of mental health condition. Her parents may have requested that L.E. only release what they had to and to keep everything else private. In any case, I pray that she rest in peace.
 

neo

New Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Well half of us on this message board predicted the same thing. She's not much of a psychic :)

well thing is she also did reading of that hotel before Elisa Lam incident. I dont recall the details but there were some interesting parts in it. I did not come across any post where someone said there wont be any evidence of foul play found..maybe you are psychic in your mind :)
 

Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
128
Reaction score
184
Still, we are not dealing with a conclusive cause of death, just a speculative cause of death. Evidence that this was an accidental death would be something like Elisa having a conversation earlier that night with another guest or hotel employee and told them she was going to have fun on the roof late at night and take some cool photos. Or an email or phone call to a friend that indicated a psychosis/paranoia. But those conversations never happened, as far as we know. In fact, there is no evidence that proves accidental death. It is simply a conclusion that LE reached due to lack of evidence. It should be called an "unsolved death", as opposed to a more definitive "accidental" one, since as far as we know, there is no specific evidence to the latter.

I disagree completely. If it wasn't suicide, murder/manslaughter or natural causes then the only option left is accidental. She had posted rooftop pics before so it is not a stretch to believe that she would make her way up there. When a person is in a manic, delusional or psychotic state it is not reasonable to expect a logical chain of events or behavior. Some people with bipolar disorder cycle quickly into a manic episode and won't be thinking about making calls or sending emails. And if she did, the account of her behavior and correspondence would have likely been conveyed to police and may be a factor in why her bipolar disorder was cited as a contributing factor.
 

Peace777

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
981
Reaction score
1,028
Detectives had closed the Natalie Wood accidental drowning case also but it was re-opened in 2011 as more info came out even after 30 yrs. had already gone by, so 1 never knows. Maybe Natalie was pushed off the boat by RW after an argument? :twocents:
 

Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
128
Reaction score
184
I'm really confused by this story. Do you think that this truly was an accident, or do you think that it was a homicide without any evidence to prove it?

It just seems bizarre to me that a women (regardless of her mental state or if she was bipolar) would find her way to the top of a building and *accidentally* climb into a water tank without anyone noticing.

I am guilty of climbing onto roofs and on top of water tanks (never in) when I was in my teens through mid twenties. I always found it to be peaceful-especially at night.

LE never stated that she "accidentally climbed into a water tank"-LOL. We don't know why she climbed in and can't apply our reasoning to her behavior at the time.

If she was last spotted on surveillance video late at night, then we can conclude that her rooftop excursion was soon thereafter. Late at night, one does not encounter many other people in the hallway of hotels let alone at the precise moment that someone sneaks up to the roof. The Cecil is taller than the neighboring buildings so it makes sense she would not be spotted once there. Plus I doubt many people, late at night, are looking at the rooftop of other buildings for any substantial amount of time if at all.
 

Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
128
Reaction score
184
Detectives had closed the Natalie Wood accidental drowning case also but it was re-opened in 2011 as more info came out even after 30 yrs. had already gone by, so 1 never knows. Maybe Natalie was pushed off the boat by RW after an argument? :twocents:

Apples and Oranges. In that case, there were undeniably other people present on the boat.
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
well thing is she also did reading of that hotel before Elisa Lam incident. I dont recall the details but there were some interesting parts in it. I did not come across any post where someone said there wont be any evidence of foul play found..maybe you are psychic in your mind :)
What I was saying is that many on this board were theorizing that foul play was not involved before or at the same time as the psychic made her prediction. And there definitely were plenty of posts in which people predicted that the evidence would suggest that it was an accidental death--ie. that no evidence of foul play would be found. I don't think any of us said it was an absolute fact, because that wouldn't be logical.

But who is 'right' and 'wrong' is irrelevant. The coroner's conclusion could have gone either way. I'm just saying that it isn't a very impressive psychic prediction since the publicly-available info was already leading many people to the same theory.
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
Detectives had closed the Natalie Wood accidental drowning case also but it was re-opened in 2011 as more info came out even after 30 yrs. had already gone by, so 1 never knows. Maybe Natalie was pushed off the boat by RW after an argument? :twocents:
No offense, but that kind of seems like grasping at straws in terms of logic :twocents: Natalie Wood's case is a totally different story with totally different circumstances, save for the fact that both involved drowning. And you can say "one never knows" about any case, technically. There have been many cases that have been wrongly judged, but that doesn't mean all cases should be assumed to be wrongly judged. JMO. I think most of us would agree that there is a possibility that EL didn't die by accident, but to me what is most important is trying to determine the most likely possibility of what happened. JMO.
 

BlueShoe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
434
Reaction score
1,758
I'm sure that LE has more information than we do. If I thought they were basing their findings in this case solely on what we are privy to plus the coroner's and tox reports, I would definitely have preferred a ruling of "undetermined" over "accidental." However, I don't think we will know what other factors were involved unless someone decides to write a book about this case and can gain access to other materials. Meanwhile, I'll accept the LE findings.
 

LittleWing

New Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
146
Reaction score
1
I'm sure that LE has more information than we do. If I thought they were basing their findings in this case solely on what we are privy to plus the coroner's and tox reports, I would definitely have preferred a ruling of "undetermined" over "accidental." However, I don't think we will know what other factors were involved unless someone decides to write a book about this case and can gain access to other materials. Meanwhile, I'll accept the LE findings.

Blueshoe, I agree. They obviously know far more than anything we do and seem very convinced of their assessment of Elisa's death.

Would you happen to know why it is that details of the investigation will not be revealed? I don't know much about the way these things work.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
There are designer drugs that would not necessarily show up on the toxicology report. I could easily picture someone on bath salts climbing up to the roof and into a water tank.

http://laboratory-manager.advanceweb.com/Archives/Article-Archives/Detecting-Designer-Drugs.aspx
Actually, I have read that bath salts (which are actually one of several different compounds sold under various product names) are now traceable in drug tests. Obviously it would only be a matter of time... they just needed to design the tests and implement them, which took a little time.

http://www.kcbd.com/story/20221945/synthetic-drug-testing-compounds-in-bath-salts-now-traceable

And I think it's safe to assume that with all of the testing they did, they must have tested for bath salts. Especially since they have been the subject of our culture's latest drug scare propaganda, just like 'reefer,' LSD, crack, meth, ecstasy have all been through over the years (NOT that bath salts aren't terrible--they are! But there has been a lot of misinformation based on fear, such as the belief that the so-called 'Miami zombie' was on bath salts, which is a falsehood that still persists. The stuff is terrible, but misinformation is always bad, no matter what) :) :twocents:
 

Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
128
Reaction score
184
There are designer drugs that would not necessarily show up on the toxicology report. I could easily picture someone on bath salts climbing up to the roof and into a water tank.

http://laboratory-manager.advanceweb.com/Archives/Article-Archives/Detecting-Designer-Drugs.aspx

I am curious why people are finding it so hard to accept the findings of law enforcement and the medical examiner. From what is known, Elisa does not have a history of experimenting with drugs. Bath salts are pretty obscure and one would need to be on a quest or have existing connections in order to obtain them.

On the flipside, Elisa was diagnosed as being bipolar. Mental health professionals have described her actions in the video footage as being in line with that of manic episode AND it has been ruled that bipolar disorder was a contributing factor in her death.
 

findinganatta

New Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
200
Reaction score
10
I am curious why people are finding it so hard to accept the findings of law enforcement and the medical examiner. From what is known, Elisa does not have a history of experimenting with drugs. Bath salts are pretty obscure and one would need to be on a quest or have existing connections in order to obtain them.

On the flipside, Elisa was diagnosed as being bipolar. Mental health professionals have described her actions in the video footage as being in line with that of manic episode AND it has been ruled that bipolar disorder was a contributing factor in her death.
I think there is just a lot of ignorance about mental illness. A lot of people just don't understand much about the major forms, and how they manifest. I think a lot of it has to do with misinformation by the media.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top