IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 - #17

[Thelonious]

I dont know how plausible it would be to:

1: Transport her body a few blocks
2: enter a busy apartment complex filled with college students, some who are likely to be awake
3: take her to her room
4: place her in her bed

That would take HT being directly involved in the cover-up and that girl would have talked. I do not think that their were more than 1 or 2 people involved in this. Every added person involved increases the chances of someone talking or stories not lining up. There is no way that their original plan was to put her in her bed. If she did OD, the people with her panicked and hid her. If they took her 30-40 minutes outside the city they didnt even need to hide her well. They just need to hide her in a place no one has looked. That could be anywhere.

Sure, it would have taken all of those things, and obviously they did not end up doing them. The point is that if that was what the call to DR was really about (and JR's explanation of the call makes no sense at all), that was what they were thinking. There are a bunch of implications of that if you follow them: e.g., for starters, they weren't aware of all the cameras around Smallwood that would have seen them, they aren't exactly Tony Soprano when it comes to evidence disposal, and the conspiracy pretty much extends to all the POIs in this case, if not further. If DR & HT were together that night, it gets even more interesting.

 

[elmomom]

1. Transporting a body: This could be the 3:38 sighting. At the least it illustrates imo it's totally plausible. A limp woman's body over the man's shoulder, she hits her head, he talks to her as if to make it appear she's just drunk. The witness doesn't do anything about it because it's not that unusual.
<snip>

totally on board with you on this one, I think this is a very real possibility. But, ok, what's the call at 4:15 then?

 

[Jupiter812]

I spent two hours digging through links already, so forgive me for not wanting to go find this one for you. But, somewhere... somewhere I did read that DR had no attorney at first. He did get one, but it was to handle his failure to appear bench warrant that he had to answer for sometime in June (the 12th maybe?) So, the lawyer he retained is really for that case, but has commented briefly on this one on DRs behalf.

at least this is what I remember.

You're good Elmomom!

 

[elmomom]

A very interesting tidbit I came across while I was listening to lots of the early pressers.

Lt Parker is asked if all 10 POIs are people known by LS - and he says "not necessarily".

So, could this be the 3:38 person (at whatever time he was seen)

 

[sv614]

I was trying to make a point. I knew after I clicked "submit" that it would be only a matter of moments before someone called me on that. lolol I'm not going to have that discussion. But hiring Voyles is so unseemly if he's innocent. No, that's not a crime. Hope I've covered my bases.

I agree. I think he's the kind of attorney you need to see you through a trial by jury, not just to clear you in an investigation.

 

[Jupiter812]

totally on board with you on this one, I think this is a very real possibility. But, ok, what's the call at 4:15 then?

Because the carrier realizes he's been seen at 3:38. The call is to try to deny that potential witness testimony and make it appear that she was still alive later at 4:15, then of course at 4:30 as well.

 

[Jupiter812]

Because the carrier realizes he's been seen at 3:38. The call is to try to deny that potential witness testimony and make it appear that she was still alive later at 4:15, then of course at 4:30 as well.

Also, the choice of DR as recipient of 4:15 phone call could be to provide alibi for him too. Two birds with one stone: LS is alive and DR is innocent.

 

[katydid23]

Someone talked about the FBI profiler who said it's not suspicious if someone who's used to relying on experts hires an attorney (I'll edit with link if I can find it), so maybe this is just revealing about my own background, but if I thought I might be a suspect in a murder -- if the police used "Person of Interest" in conjunction with the name "Ski Girl" -- after all I've read about false convictions, I'd hire the absolute best attorney money could buy if I had the means. If I were a man and the last person to see a missing woman in the middle of the night, I would not even pass "go" before contacting attorneys, so I really just don't think the hiring of lawyers is that revealing for some of the players (e.g., JR, JW). For others, I do think it's odd.

That said, I lean heavily toward the idea that she was abducted by someone she knows.

ITA. We have a 23 yr old son. If he was the last reported witness to see girl before she disappeared I would hire him an attorney, pronto. We would cooperate with LE, absolutely. But I would hire an attorney to try and prevent him from being the scapegoat.

My Dad was a defense attorney. He said it was important after hiring an attorney to go immediately and contact LE. with your attorney, and tell then you are still cooperating and 'it is not an admission of guilt, just a sign of maturity.'

 

[:+:MrTT:+:]

Until Lauren is located.
I believe the wheels of justice.
Are going to be turning very very slow.
​

 

[bessie]

bessie- Is there a reason why the map to start this thread again included Kilroy's(the bottom portion of the map)?

I changed the map to B'town's most recent version. Even though we know she was alive after she left Kilroy's, it's still a point of reference to understand all of the night's events.

 

[The Smurf]

Sure, it would have taken all of those things, and obviously they did not end up doing them. The point is that if that was what the call to DR was really about (and JR's explanation of the call makes no sense at all), that was what they were thinking. There are a bunch of implications of that if you follow them: e.g., for starters, they weren't aware of all the cameras around Smallwood that would have seen them, they aren't exactly Tony Soprano when it comes to evidence disposal, and the conspiracy pretty much extends to all the POIs in this case, if not further. If DR & HT were together that night, it gets even more interesting.

The call never got through to DR. It doesnt take much effort to get phone records and see how long that call lasted. The whole Tony Soprano thing actually makes my point. If they are not good with disposing of the body their only choice is to make everything disappear. If they were seen on camera with Lauren's body we would be much closer to having some resolution.

 

[The Smurf]

1. Transporting a body: This could be the 3:38 sighting. At the least it illustrates imo it's totally plausible. A limp woman's body over the man's shoulder, she hits her head, he talks to her as if to make it appear she's just drunk. The witness doesn't do anything about it because it's not that unusual.

2. I question whether SW at the hour is hustling and bustling. The security is questionable as we well know because CR got by and a fight ensued on 5th floor. A lot of the kids if awake are probably toasted. The carrier would take their chances for sure. But there's also a back garage entrance that I know nothing about.

I agree about the how the number of people involved being key to the success of this though.

I am only going to respond about number two as I agree with number 1. Whether or not Smallwood would be hustling and bustling is beside the point. In an apartment full of college students there is a high liklihood of someone being up and I dont think it would ever come into their mind to attempt bringing her back there. I think the gravel lot is the place where Lauren dissapeared from. I am not sure of whether I think it is where they drove off with her body or where she was abducted, but I think it is the spot where she was moved from the general area.

 

[The Smurf]

I am not entirely convinced JW should be at the bottom of the list just because he was the one to check her apartment. Let's say he did something to her and wanted to hide his guilt - that would mean he would need to play the part of the concerned boyfriend, doing things like checking her apartment, continuing to send her texts saying "where are you", contacting her roommate, etc.

A lot of people have pointed out how quick he was to assume she was "missing", and that definitely makes me a little bit suspicious. I personally can't put him at the bottom of the list yet.

this is a tough one because his behavior should be the same, whether he is guilty or innocent. It is too hard to read into any of it.

 

[AbbeyR]

1. Transporting a body: This could be the 3:38 sighting. At the least it illustrates imo it's totally plausible. A limp woman's body over the man's shoulder, she hits her head, he talks to her as if to make it appear she's just drunk. The witness doesn't do anything about it because it's not that unusual.

(snipped)

But the witness didn't describe Lauren as being unconscious, did she? Didn't she describe her as being "barely able to speak" and walk? She was close enough to hear the man asking Lauren if he could take her home.

 

[Gabby66]

I felt this way also, but then LE came right out and said that the landfill and dumpsters were searched, so I dropped that. So, now I'm thinking more hidden underground or basement/storm shelters/old bomb shelters, who knows.

Oh man, I have to disagree with this. If I were innocent of a crime, yet I was the last person to reportedly see a missing victim alive, I'd get the BEST darn attorney that my money could buy. It sounds like these kids all come from money so I don't think this is an indicator of guilt. I'm not saying he's innocent, but just the fact that he has Voyles alone, doesn't make him guilty in my book. It makes him SMART.

 

[bessie]

I think this was posted on the last thread, but thought the encouraging words were worth a re-post.

“We will continue to be with the family every step of the way,” said Rabbi Sue Silberberg, director of IU’s Helene G. Simon Hillel Center. “We are determined and will not stop until we find Lauren.”

http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=82109

 

[Pedrosmom]

My gut is still on JW. Why would JR offer info of her leaving when he didn't have to. JW was a possessive boyfriend. He had no idea where she was all night but knew she was with some "other guys." He didn't go to bed and not give a flip. His actions are strange. Picking up the cell phone from the bar, driving his roommate to class, calling her parents reporting her missing. I'd like to see his "pings" after he apparently went to sleep after the game up until he called her parents to report her missing. The police know who is on the camera with Lauren. We don't. JW knows she took CR home. He knows where CR lived. JR may have been doing some naughty things that night, as were the other POI's - and maybe the reason they lawyered up but IMO, JW was a little more than pi**ed off that his girlfriend was partying with a bunch of guys with out her cell phone and he lost his cool. I also think she's close by. He didn't have much time. But if he had her cell phone and his cell phone, the pings could tell a story. JW has a bullseye on his back, of course, IMO.

 

[Gabby66]

Agree. And it's especially odd for someone whose only obvious connection to the case is being with LS much earlier in the night (pre-Kilroys) and then not answering a 4:15 a.m. call from JR.

Yes, unless he was a supplier of drugs of some sort to her earlier in the night, which could open him up to a civil suit. The other thing that I thought of is that since he got a call, it may make him appear to have been contacted to help with body disposal. We've had posters here comment that he may have gotten a call as a "signal" to say that she was taken care of (or something to that effect). I would presume that if people here are making those assumptions, it's possible that LE has as well. Therefore, I don't think it points to him being guilty necessarily. I guess in many people's situation, they wouldn't get an attorney if found to be in his shoes. If they came from money, like he presumably does, then maybe it would be different - not sure.

 

[Berk13]

this is a tough one because his behavior should be the same, whether he is guilty or innocent. It is too hard to read into any of it.

I agree - it could be innocent behavior OR guilty behavior. We have no way of knowing based on the limited info we've been given. The reason I said I can't put him on the bottom of the list of POIs is precisely because his behavior could go either way.

Pedrosmom, you said this:

JW was a possessive boyfriend.

Did you make that statement as a theory, or do you have some proof/evidence to back it up? I hadn't heard that he was possessive before so I'm curious.

 

[Missing Budweiser]

I changed the map to B'town's most recent version. Even though we know she was alive after she left Kilroy's, it's still a point of reference to understand all of the night's events.

Definitely a good idea. The map without Kilroy's didn't tell the whole story and may have been confusing to newcomers who do not know where it is located in reference to SW.