IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #28

[akh]

Dude, if you have a theory about JW or something for us to consider, post away. I'm not giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, but I'm starting with where the story falls apart. It falls apart as soon as CR gets home (or whatever apartment he ends up at at 5N).

The story doesn't 'fall apart' there. That's just the end of the line to where there are any independent witnesses who wouldn't be considered PsOI or video evidence that we are aware of. That's just where the speculation begins and for some people that's where it ends because they refuse to consider any other possibilities.

 

[AbbeyR]

I don't really consider the stories of the 5N guys all that far afield since we're just hearing 2nd and 3rd hand accounts mixed with some bad reporting. The gist of their stories seems to match. Whether they made up their story or told the exact truth I wouldn't expect 2nd and 3rd hand accounts to be perfect accounts. Filter out some noise and you get the same basic account. If their stories didn't match closely, or if they told someone a wildly different version, somebody would be sitting in jail.

Okay, so we have the stories that CR, MB and JR told friends and neighbors. There are at least 4 or 5 of these, and they contradict each other. But, there's room for 'noise', and the POI aren't accountable for what other people say anyway, so let's take them out of the equation for now...

Unless the lawyer is reading from a prepared statement, particularly a quote from a prepared statement, then it's every bit as much of a 2nd hand account as anything else we'll hear.
...<snipped> that was the attorney just putting his spin on the story to put his client in a better light. <Snipped>

The lawyers have been hired to represent their clients, so these are not the same as the second hand accounts from other people... But okay, let's just consider the statements the lawyers have given to media about their own clients and ignore the 'spin'


What's left? What actually is their story? Here's what I can make of it:

JR: No Comment -- (We only have an account from an interview with HT. Lawyers have explicitly said they will not give a statement about JR's last interaction with Lauren -- In other words, they have not confirmed that HT's story is actually JR's account. It also happens to be the same story that another witness attributed to MB in an article published the week before)

CR: can't remember anything once he was alone with Lauren. Lawyer says he has amnesia and that MB can confirm he put CR to bed. The other parts of Salzmann's account have turned out to be misleading/ untrue and are irrelevant since he claims his client can't remember anything)

MB: Was at home writing papers, did not drink or do drugs, "put CR to bed" and "watched Lauren leave his apartment". ( I am only including the consistent parts of the statements provided by his own Lawyer, not the many other versions of his story that have been reported)

I believe, perhaps naively so, that if the 5N stories didn't line up for the most part, or that they've told a conflicting version of the story to someone that leaves no chance of misunderstanding, then the entire house of cards would fall apart. That doesn't mean they can't be guilty or lying... It just means they've kept their story reasonably straight in my judgment.

If they haven't committed to a story, there's not much to keep straight.

The only one who has a story is MB -- and even if we whittle it down to its most consistent parts, we are left with 3 things, 2 of which have been publicly challenged by the PI's in the Lohud report:

- MB was sober and writing papers all night (PI's say he was drinking)
- MB put CR to bed
- MB watched Lauren leave (He did not say "Lauren left" He said "Lauren wanted to leave and he "watched her leave". The PI's say MB called JR and brought her over to his apartment.)

In the end, it seems like the accounts we consider to be the POI's stories are just the ones we've put together ourselves, ignoring and correcting the contradictions for them, even though they have never stepped up to do this themselves.

 

[AbbeyR]

Very early on there were discussions about Xanax(as LS supposedly was boasting about it at Kilroys). And then quite a bit this past fall about klonopin, with that being attributed to DR. But these things remain unsubstantiated, right? So while certain drugs could produce the effects which LS was subjected to, it seems to me that nothing fits better than Rohypnol being slipped to her at Kilroys. It takes off within 15 minutes. With other substances in her system (including alcohol) the effects would have been intensified. It fits the behavior as good as anything can. Within 15 minutes her phone and shoes would not matter. .

I agree. This is one thing I've changed my mind about over time as we learned more from the PI and I started to question the motives of some of the rumors.

 

[AbbeyR]

You know what's strange? If you look at the statements that lawyers have given for the POI, and the stories that were told by random people to the media, there's a few things that are repeated.

Here's one: In statements attributed to both JR and MB, when they describe LS leaving, they say: She wanted to leave. and then I watched her leave or I watched her walk out the door (toward home).

It's a weird thing to say. Wouldn't you just say "She left at whatever time?" Why the redundancy, and why are two people who claim they weren't even together using the same awkward sentence about 'watching her walk off'?

:waitasec:

 

[akh]

AbbeyR,
I think you just made my point very well.
We really have nothing to definitively indicate they are lying.

We can assume they are lying for purposes of creating a theory of the crime, but there's nothing in the public domain to remotely make the theory anything more than just a theory except knowing they claim to have been with her as the last known people to have seen her.

But where's the allowance that just maybe their story is true? Where is the further probing and alternate theories? Why fixate on the 5N guys by just rearranging things when nothing has shed any new light on their story in months? The last thing I can think of is the PI's account of the night, and that ended up with the same basic narrative we've had as far as the 5N PsOI go since the first month of the investigation.

At some point when theory 'A' gets nowhere shouldn't other possibilities be considered if for nothing else than to eliminate them?

One thing should be very clear and that is why it's best to say nothing at all. Their stories are getting picked apart not because they don't really hold up overall but because they are what is available IMHO. Then it becomes more of a witch hunt than a fact finding mission.

 

[AbbeyR]

AbbeyR,
I think you just made my point very well.
We really have nothing to definitively indicate they are lying.

No, that isn't my point, but nice try

When people tell the truth, the details may change and there may be different versions of the story, but the facts don't change.

The information given by the POI does not add up. There are inconsistencies in their stories, and they have purposely tried to mislead people about certain things, including being together that night. And the kicker is, their lawyers will not commit to anything. Not even that Lauren walked out the door at JR's -- the one thing they want everyone to believe. There's a reason for that, IMO.

ETA: Witch hunt? Oh gawd. The POI are not the victims here. Lauren is.

 

[akh]

You know what's strange? If you look at the statements that lawyers have given for the POI, and the stories that were told by random people to the media, there's a few things that are repeated.

Here's one: In statements attributed to both JR and MB, when they describe LS leaving, they say: She wanted to leave. and then I watched her leave or I watched her walk out the door (toward home).

It's a weird thing to say. Wouldn't you just say "She left at whatever time?" Why the redundancy, and why are two people who claim they weren't even together using the same awkward sentence about 'watching her walk off'?

:waitasec:

Because whoever was quoting MB misunderstood what MB said about his own part in the story and where he was quoting JR would be my guess.

As to your other question, I suppose if you watched her walk out the door, or watched her walk down the street, in an important case like this you might actually add that detail. If he hadn't said he watched her walk out the door or walk down the street, at this point I think we'd be debating on him leaving that detail out so he wouldn't be caught lying if he was asked if he saw her actually walk out of his apartment.

It would be all about why didn't he say he actually saw her walk out of the apartment?

Considering LE and the PI's have had this case for over a year and apparently have little to nothing that they can take action on, I think it's safe to assume we aren't going to find a smoking gun in any of the known or assumed known comments and statements of the PsOI and witnesses without something new in the picture.

 

[AbbeyR]

Because whoever was quoting MB misunderstood what MB said about his own part in the story and where he was quoting JR would be my guess.

As to your other question, I suppose if you watched her walk out the door, or watched her walk down the street, in an important case like this you might actually add that detail. If he hadn't said he watched her walk out the door or walk down the street, at this point I think we'd be debating on him leaving that detail out so he wouldn't be caught lying if he was asked if he saw her actually walk out of his apartment.

It would be all about why didn't he say he actually saw her walk out of the apartment?

Considering LE and the PI's have had this case for over a year and apparently have little to nothing that they can take action on, I think it's safe to assume we aren't going to find a smoking gun in any of the known or assumed known comments and statements of the PsOI and witnesses without something new in the picture.

MB's lawyer said that, not just the CVS guy. His own lawyer isn't going to be mixing up the story.

You have no idea what LE has.

 

[akh]

No, that isn't my point, but nice try

When people tell the truth, the details may change and there may be different versions of the story, but the facts don't change.

The information given by the POI does not add up. There are inconsistencies in their stories, and they have purposely tried to mislead people about certain things, including being together that night. And the kicker is, their lawyers will not commit to anything. Not even that Lauren walked out the door at JR's -- the one thing they want everyone to believe. There's a reason for that, IMO.

ETA: Witch hunt? Oh gawd. The POI are not the victims here. Lauren is.

It's a witch hunt when you believe the highlighted part of your quote is even remotely correct. I mean it could be correct, but we have no way of knowing it if it is.

We only have a rough idea of EXACTLY what their story is... and that story has LS arriving at 5N in MB's apartment, leaving for JR's, and then leaving 5N entirely from JR's apartment. That is the end of what we actually 'know' or remotely 'know' about details they've allegedly given.

If any of that was to have fallen apart then I don't think we'd be on here discussing this.

 

[AbbeyR]

It's a witch hunt when you believe the highlighted part of your quote is even remotely correct. I mean it could be correct, but we have no way of knowing it if it is.

Um, there are concrete examples of inconsistencies coming from their own statements, lawyers and witnesses. The only way you can pretend this isn't true is by making up excuses for every single example and imagining that everyone else got it wrong. You are therefore doing exactly what you are accusing everyone else of doing.

I'm not saying they are guilty of anything. Only that their stories don't add up. They just don't.

Anyway, I've spent too much time on here today. If you want people to look at other theories so badly, then offer one up!

 

[akh]

MB's lawyer said that, not just the CVS guy. His own lawyer isn't going to be mixing up the story.

I don't know about the accuracy of your quote regarding MB's lawyer and it doesn't matter anyway. Unless he was reading, quoting from a prepared statement then the chances of him misspeaking, let alone misquoted, is just as likely as from anyone else.

You have no idea what LE has.

I know they haven't taken any action and the case is still unsolved. If you think they have actionable evidence and are sitting on it then I'd be curious to know why that would be.

Now, we could be playing semantics here and have differing definitions of 'actionable' but I'd think if someone's story fell apart in some major way besides a word sitting wrong or someone potentially misunderstanding something then I think there'd be some action. I think that would be the break LE would be looking for.... something... anything... just not to fit.

 

[AbbeyR]

I know they haven't taken any action and the case is still unsolved. If you think they have actionable evidence and are sitting on it then I'd be curious to know why that would be.

They don't have a body. That doesn't mean they don't have any other evidence.

This seems like a long time to us, but in a lot of cases there is a long stretch between a crime and an arrest.

AKH, can you clarify why you keep implying that a lawyer has to be "reading , quoting from a prepared statement" for it to be considered legitimate? The statements I'm referring to are direct quotes given to the media, on record, by Chapman. Why would we assume that he is likely to be making a mistake unless he later corrected the quote or retracted a statement?

 

[akh]

Um, there are concrete examples of inconsistencies coming from their own statements, lawyers and witnesses. The only way you can pretend this isn't true is by making up excuses for every single example and imagining that everyone else got it wrong.

No... You're hanging on the type of noise that will always be found and expecting it to be a perfectly straight line.... Yet ignoring that overall, it's consistent with the main narrative.

Meanwhile, you're doing from the POV where you or me can't possibly have a crystal ball to get the clarity needed to take it much farther than that.

You are therefore doing exactly what you are accusing everyone else of doing.

No... I'm not. I'm just being open minded to other possibilities and saying people need to quit picking apart the noise thinking they've found the smoking gun.

There's still nothing definitive to say they are lying. Nothing either of us have typed has changed that.

I'm not saying they are guilty of anything. Only that their stories don't add up. They just don't.

Their stories add up as much as anything else we think we know. At least if by 'don't add up' you mean they fall apart. If you mean in your gut you just don't believe them, then I can't question that. You're free to not believe them if something just doesn't feel right to you.

Anyway, I've spent too much time on here today. If you want people to look at other theories so badly, then offer one up!

Well, after so long and no action then random abduction has crept up my list after being a very distant possibility initially. This could be a crime of opportunity and wouldn't have to be a total stranger or someone not from the area. She even could've randomly ended up at the door of the wrong place at the right time (or door of a vehicle).

JW should be POI 1B because he's the boyfriend and would have a strong jealousy motive. It's also possible he could've known/found out where she was, so stalking cannot be ruled out. The top theories have 5N as a crime scene. If I was to know what LE found or didn't find at 5N then JW could potentially move to the POI 1A slot. It's hard to imagine 5N being evidence free if it's really a crime scene that involves the 5N guys. If JW has a strong alibi then clearly I'd take him off the list, at least as to being directly involved.

The altercation at SW still leaves the possibility someone either followed immediately or a short time later. It certainly leaves a door open to there being a connection to her disappearance and this altercation (which could be how JW enters the picture). Possibly jilted suitor and or someone wanting to play hero role if not a connection to JW. They would have a good idea where she was headed and following/spying/stalking would fit in the timeline. At one time I'd put this in the 3rd slot of possibilities... but the crime of opportunity scenario has moved up so they would be close.

I still consider it 5N Guys PsOI 1A and JW POI 1B. Everything else is a notch below that.

But I consider them all innocent until proven guilty.

 

[akh]

They don't have a body. That doesn't mean they don't have any other evidence.

This seems like a long time to us, but in a lot of cases there is a long stretch between a crime and an arrest.

This is true but for the top theories involving the guys at 5N to be true you have a designated crime scene to examine and you have the individuals you think involved to zero in on.

With many crimes LE is lucky to have just one of those things. Sometimes they have neither (just a vehicle or body found where they had been dumped/left).

That is one thing that makes this unusual.

 

[AbbeyR]

No... You're hanging on the type of noise that will always be found and expecting it to be a perfectly straight line.... Yet ignoring that overall, it's consistent with the main narrative.

Whose main narrative? What does that mean?

 

[akh]

Whose main narrative? What does that mean?

We only have a rough idea of EXACTLY what their story is... and that story has LS arriving at 5N in MB's apartment, leaving for JR's, and then leaving 5N entirely from JR's apartment. That is the end of what we actually 'know' or remotely 'know' about details they've allegedly given.

\

Based on the official timeline, the most consistent of media reports, and finally the PI's then the above is the main part of their story. At least as far as what we can assume to be accurate and that would matter to their guilt or innocence.

Yes, there are details inside there like CR to bed, the phone call to DR, the supposed 2nd phone call, but if the above part of the story is really true then these things wouldn't change anything.

 

[akh]

Good discussing this with you AbbeyR and I see you asked another question I missed before. I need to run now but I'll answer later.

 

[Ixchel13]

Put the named POIs, JW, BB, AB, DB, HT and the girls, into the 75% mix and any of them could be lying .

The other 25 per cent:random/not so random abduction.

Abduction is not a popular theory for several reasons: 5N guys already here and lawyered up fast. They were cooperating at first until parents got involved. Guilty as hell or completely innocent, these wealthy people are gonna put the clamp down on their kids.

Less painful for parents. the parents favor the easiest and least painful theory
for their daughter and who can blame them?

Timing has to be just so. But we saw in Mickey's case the timing involved minutes/seconds. Every off hand thing she and Brettly did led to her random intersection with BSL.

No video of her turning the corner. In several articles, LE states that Lauren was last seen heading south on College, not alledgedly last seen. Again, in Mickey's case, LE did not share the entire picture of the initial encounter with BSL, but instead doctored a photo they released, erasing Mickey from the picture! They almost seemed to believe JR's statement about seeing her leave.

Maybe Salzmann, CRs atty, has let them in on something they are not releasing but have confirmed. Right or Wrong, Salzmann is going to carry a little more weight
with LE. It could be that CR is exaggerating his amnesia because the trek to 5N is blurry
and he then passed out. What he could be keeping from Salzmann is why they wanted to stop at 10th and College so badly. Who saw Lauren during this trek? Same person could have
seen her leaving JRs. CR could actually not remember this crucial info.

Salzmann has done a great deal of good for BTown as far as getting rid of drug gangs
in the past and is generally well liked. Once I got a ticket that I didn't think was fair, called him and he personally looked into it and talked to the officer. He then personally got back to me with the verdict: not going to get away with the ticket, officer adamant. I don't see this guy backing a lying kid. He doesn't need the money and it would hurt his reputation which is pretty much spotless. His office is on the corner of 10th and Walnut. he is super-familiar with the area and I'm sure he probably would not discount a random/not-so-random abduction in that area.

Back to random/not-so-random abduction. Trying to describe that corner, well you have College, a one-way street bringing in everyone into town going south and a block east you have Walnut St., a one-way street taking everyone out of town going north.
For 2 blocks north on College going from her last known intersection, you have your sex shops and sex toy/video stores and lingerie modelling place. Two blocks south from that intersection, you have SW.
Any weirdo would know that these young kids are running around there at all hours.
After the bars close, they are literally in large packs heading to SW, 10th and College, and 5N and various building right in the 4 block radius. Every single night, someone gets separated from the pack and walks home alone.
If you knew what I knew, and really anyone who has spent any time at all around that neighborhood late at night, you would see the obvious case for random/not-so-random abduction. 10th and College is a HUGE drug den. More of a chance of an older, more jaded crowd/local drug dealers mixing with the younger college/college drop-out drug dealer crowd. 10th and College is where several wealthy kids have dropped out of college
to start businesses/deal drugs on larger scale. Some of these kids have been busted inside 10th and College.
If I had to generalize, she would be more likely to have been taken by someone living/visiting 10th and College than someone living/visiting SW or 5N; excluding the out of town guests. This would be not-so-random.

Random would be someone visiting these sex shops, and riding around trying to pick up someone, meaning a hooker, just like BSL. The idea that someone like that wouldn't be in that area at that time is ludicrous.

About drunken altercations in that area between lovers, very common for them to get into fights, sometimes physical, upon arrinving back at 10th and College. The security guards there, much to my surprise on several occasions, just talk the kids down even after violence and let them go off together. I saw this one guy yelling and screaming at his girlfriend, threaten her, she was screaming too, then the guys throws a pizza at the picture window, and has her by the shoulders shaking her. I was yelling at them to break it up. The guard comes to break it up, and then lets the guy walk off with her.
This was after 3 a.m. IMO, the guard should have made them separate at the very least.

Also, what I have been saying all along is, these friends and acquaintances of Lauren's may have contributed to placing her in harm's way at just the wrong moment. JWs role might even be that he knew she was in trouble but didn't help her as well. Or that he told someone he was going to House Bar and she was trying to find him there. To get
there she would have to pass a men's oxy rehab house.

Many, many possibilities for abduction. To not take that seriously is a gigantic mistake.

 

[doubtingthomas]

Does anyone know if there were cameras at 10th and College apartments when LS went missing? If so, would these cameras capture video of anyone entering and leaving 10th and College apartments? And if so, would it capture video of anyone walking on College?

 

[AbbeyR]

No video of her turning the corner. In several articles, LE states that Lauren was last seen heading south on College, not alledgedly last seen. Again, in Mickey's case, LE did not share the entire picture of the initial encounter with BSL, but instead doctored a photo they released, erasing Mickey from the picture! They almost seemed to believe JR's statement about seeing her leave.

LE has definitely stated that they don't have evidence that she ever made it to that corner. But I agree, a lot of their statements have been confusing...Some of those early press conferences practically required an FBI decoder to understand what they were saying! IMO

Salzmann has done a great deal of good for BTown as far as getting rid of drug gangs in the past and is generally well liked. Once I got a ticket that I didn't think was fair, called him and he personally looked into it and talked to the officer. He then personally got back to me with the verdict: not going to get away with the ticket, officer adamant. I don't see this guy backing a lying kid. He doesn't need the money and it would hurt his reputation which is pretty much spotless. His office is on the corner of 10th and Walnut. he is super-familiar with the area and I'm sure he probably would not discount a random/not-so-random abduction in that area.

I guarantee you, defense attorneys do not take on their clients based on whether they believe them or not. A good defense attorney brackets that question entirely, because it's not their job. They are considering 'legal innocence and guilt' -- 'Can my client be proven guilty in a court of law?', not 'are they actually guilty?'.

Also, its worth remembering that defense attorneys don't consider the choices to be 'guilty' or 'innocent'. They are concerned for getting the best possible outcome for their client, whatever that is. So they might concerned with getting rid of or downgrading certain charges, setting things up to get a plea deal, etc. If you consider what potential charges could come up in a case, or what might happen if that case ever goes to court, some of the 'spin' and comments to the media can make more sense.