IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #29

[AbbeyR]

Kind of getting OT, but it's pretty slow around here and we've talked about everything else, so I hope you guys don't mind.

I've been reading about Jim Voyles, JR's attorney over my coffee this morning -- It's pretty interesting to learn what kinds of strategies and approaches he's taken with other clients and cases. In one case, one of his clients was acquitted on a murder charge, partly because he said his car was being repaired so he couldn't have been at the crime scene. No one could remember him bringing in the car, but he produced a cash receipt. (Hmmm, a coincidence, I'm sure -- but just pointing that out )

And I found this article on a different case, which gives some good insight into some of Voyles' strategies and approaches and shows how rumors in the media can be used to the advantage of a defense team.

http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/Story.aspx?ID=1447543

Jim Voyles has a rule. “I never advise my clients to speak to police,” he says. “The opposite. Now, after I interview the client and I know something about the case, if I think it’s an advantage to sit down with the police to clear up some kind of a problem, I might suggest we do it.”

The article describes how Voyles plays the part of the "country lawyer", holding open doors for jury members and bringing magazines to the judge and prosecutors when he found out they shared an interest in cars

But Voyles’s folksy style belied a shrewd understanding of the evidence and how to spin it to a jury. It might have been just a coincidence that Tunks was at the scene of the murder, close to the time when the murder might have occurred. But that’s some coincidence. So Voyles challenged the prosecution’s assumptions about where Tunks was and when the victim was killed.

The article goes on to explain how he did this, by challenging the timeline and trying to debunk the cell phone data that put his client at the scene of the crime (basically just by saying cell phone data is flawed).

The article also talks about how rumors in the media played a key role. After an anonymous source was quoted in an article saying the victim had mob connections, the media ran with it and it became a key premise of the defense case:

Finally, Detective Delaney’s references to “organized crime” and “hitmen” in the report describing the crime scene, and witness testimony that Marcucci liked to brag about having underworld connections, gave the proceedings a mob-trial flair, much to the dismay of Grootenboer, the lead prosecutor in the case. “Our case was completely dogged by this inaccurate misconception of Mr. Marcucci being a mob figure,” she says. “A newspaper article said ‘a high-ranking law enforcement source’ said this was a mob guy. Who the heck was it? It always troubled me because, based on one article, this became a ‘mob’ case. And I thought our detectives did an excellent job of debunking that.” Accurate or not, the mere suggestion of Mafia involvement helped Voyles and Jennings highlight the possibility that someone far more sinister than a small-town Hoosier like Tunks had committed the crime.

(This makes me think about how quickly drug rumors started by friends of the POI on PT were reported by the media and became unquestioned 'facts' in Lauren's case, leading to the accidental overdose/ coverup scenario as being the leading theory (to do with the POI) and the victim blaming that went along with that -- It's a good warning about how easily rumors can shape perceptions, with very little evidence)

On #Winning

Known for staying mum in the media, Voyles let Jennings handle the task of giving statements to the press throughout most of the trial—until that day of the verdict, when he told The Record that he was “thrilled with the victory” and “happy to take my client home to Indiana.” He says he earned “well over six figures” for his work on Tunks’s behalf, but when he stands in his office looking at that picture, the money doesn’t seem to matter. He has trouble describing the satisfaction he gets from winning such a dramatic acquittal. “You savor those feelings, because they are sometimes far between,” he says. “The birth of a child would be a little more important.” But just a little.

 

[imkeylime]

Kind of getting OT, but it's pretty slow around here and we've talked about everything else, so I hope you guys don't mind.

I've been reading about Jim Voyles, JR's attorney over my coffee this morning -- It's pretty interesting to learn what kinds of strategies and approaches he's taken with other clients and cases. In one case, one of his clients was acquitted on a murder charge, partly because he said his car was being repaired so he couldn't have been at the crime scene. No one could remember him bringing in the car, but he produced a cash receipt. (Hmmm, a coincidence, I'm sure -- but just pointing that out )

And I found this article on a different case, which gives some good insight into some of Voyles' strategies and approaches and shows how rumors in the media can be used to the advantage of a defense team.

http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/Story.aspx?ID=1447543




The article describes how Voyles plays the part of the "country lawyer", holding open doors for jury members and bringing magazines to the judge and prosecutors when he found out they shared an interest in cars



The article goes on to explain how he did this, by challenging the timeline and trying to debunk the cell phone data that put his client at the scene of the crime (basically just by saying cell phone data is flawed).

The article also talks about how rumors in the media played a key role. After an anonymous source was quoted in an article saying the victim had mob connections, the media ran with it and it became a key premise of the defense case:



(This makes me think about how quickly drug rumors started by friends of the POI on PT were reported by the media and became unquestioned 'facts' in Lauren's case, leading to the accidental overdose/ coverup scenario as being the leading theory (to do with the POI) and the victim blaming that went along with that -- It's a good warning about how easily rumors can shape perceptions, with very little evidence)

On #Winning

I can definitely see parallels between this case/drugs and the case mentioned/mob connections in terms of media coverage. IMO, the picture being painted (LS "foaming at the mouth" and talking about coke at Sports, LS stopping with CR to possibly score something at 10th & College, LS telling MB she wanted to party, etc.) suggests a John Belushi scenario where she was totally gone but wanting more.

However, even if that was the case (which hasn't been proven, IMO), it doesn't answer the question of what happened to LS' body. It could be a deflection from a scenario in which she was given a date-rape drug, taken advantage of, and died or was murdered/disposed of. Based on media coverage, there's room for speculation that she did too much Klonopin and coke and, given her medical history, ODed or had heart failure. I could buy that scenario, to a degree, but it doesn't fit with wandering off into the night (as JR more or less claims she did)—or provide direction toward a body.

OTOH, I'd think that disposing of the body of a deceased friend who ODed when voluntarily doing drugs and drinking would carry less penalty than disposing of the body of a deceased friend who'd been involuntarily drugged and taken advantage of sexually before dying. So if nothing else, such media coverage could skew perception if LS was found with drugs in her system (unless there was clear evidence of sexual assault). And if she's never found ...

The info you provided on the car being repaired is just crazy. I hate to think that it's that easy to "buy" a defense (with a receipt), but it sounds like it is. Also, I think it's a safe bet that JR has legal expertise in his own family (I know the name myself as a one-time resident of Oakland County).

 

[Ixchel13]

just want to point out--in Mickey's case, they had her on video being confronted by BSL, but erased her from the video they released and just showed the truck; because they wanted to catch the guy, the focus was just on the criminal. I won't go in to the amount of discussion and first rate photo shopping that went on here and one person even found the image that had been erased.
We were never told if the family saw the actual photo right away, and during the investigation, they didn't mention the actual photo.

 

[VeryVeritas]

Kind of getting OT, but it's pretty slow around here and we've talked about everything else, so I hope you guys don't mind.

I've been reading about Jim Voyles, JR's attorney over my coffee this morning -- It's pretty interesting to learn what kinds of strategies and approaches he's taken with other clients and cases. In one case, one of his clients was acquitted on a murder charge, partly because he said his car was being repaired so he couldn't have been at the crime scene. No one could remember him bringing in the car, but he produced a cash receipt. (Hmmm, a coincidence, I'm sure -- but just pointing that out )

And I found this article on a different case, which gives some good insight into some of Voyles' strategies and approaches and shows how rumors in the media can be used to the advantage of a defense team.

http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/Story.aspx?ID=1447543




The article describes how Voyles plays the part of the "country lawyer", holding open doors for jury members and bringing magazines to the judge and prosecutors when he found out they shared an interest in cars



The article goes on to explain how he did this, by challenging the timeline and trying to debunk the cell phone data that put his client at the scene of the crime (basically just by saying cell phone data is flawed).

The article also talks about how rumors in the media played a key role. After an anonymous source was quoted in an article saying the victim had mob connections, the media ran with it and it became a key premise of the defense case:



(This makes me think about how quickly drug rumors started by friends of the POI on PT were reported by the media and became unquestioned 'facts' in Lauren's case, leading to the accidental overdose/ coverup scenario as being the leading theory (to do with the POI) and the victim blaming that went along with that -- It's a good warning about how easily rumors can shape perceptions, with very little evidence)

On #Winning

Almost entirely agree. The exception is that I think the drug discussions needed to be explored to try to understand the POI's, the circumstances and all possibilities - you know the defense would do that.

The fact that Lauren is missing, is to me the most obvious problem. That fact makes it clear there was some kind of wrongdoing / foul play. Just what sort of wrongdoing is the question?? There has not been one person to come forward to suggest that Lauren was a Charlie Sheen type of manic coke fiend or a Belushi-esqe out of control party animal as a behavior pattern. It seems to me that her partying was likely no different or even less than that of her "friends" which all have managed to remain alive and whereabouts known.

My list of cause of death probabilities has reshaped to this:
1) Drug induced Planned "date" rape - 60%
2) Drug deception (including opportunistic "date" rape - 30%
(the motive here would be undetermined but not necessarily specifically for the purpose of rape. Meaning that someone sought to take advantage of the situation in some way, but didn't necessarily plan it out in advance or know where it might go.)
3) Accidental drug interaction - 5%
The possibility still exists that LS ingested more than one substance voluntairly and/or involuntarily at different times such that others were not aware. Since at some point this would have involved illegal drugs, or illegal use of prescription drugs, those supplying or providing the environment would have motive for cover up.
4) Everything else - 5% including less than .0001% chance of stranger abduction.
The strongest possibility I see here is that she didn't die directly from the drugs, but rather injuries. Either the injuries that we know about from the falls, or worse ones sustained in later falls, mishaps(like CR dropping her) or less likely but possible violence(being gagged, hit, strangled, etc...

Her QT alone could not have killed her, because we know she was under the influence of one or more substances. But I'll agree it may have been a contributing factor.. that does become irrelevant because she is missing. She would not be missing if there was not something illegal going on. As many have suggested, even if she OD'd on voluntarily ingested drugs that is rarely a cause to ditch the body. But it does happen.


So in line with those categories here is who I think would be mostly likely responsible based on the facts and 1.5 years of hashing on WS's:
1) CR alone 50%, CR+MB 10%, CR+JR 10%, CR+MB+JR 20%, Note: by JR I also mean JR's guests inclusive. All other possibilities and combinations 10%
2) Same as #1 but would involve DR to some degree.
3) In this scenario it would be most likely something like; LS had a beer at SW, some type of drug while at JR's, possibly a second drug at CR's before heading to Kilroys, and possibly a second or 3rd drug at Kilroy's with more alcohol. This again would point to the primary POI's being independently culpable but not necessarily being aware of what else she had ingested while with others. So then all who gave her drugs (or served alcohol) would be equally responsible.
4) similar to #3, if accidental, those not seeking medical treatment for LS are equally responsible.

The way I see it, the most likely reason to ditch her body was to cover up rape and/or drugs which would make rape possible. And so for motive that points more at CR than anyone else.

Questions:
Why did LS go to Kilroy's with CR, I mean why HIM?
Why not stay at JR's? (I'm thinking - boring...)
Why not go back to SW? (I'm thinking - boring...)
Why did the 2 of them go together and not with others?
If LS and CR stopped at CR/MB's first before going to Kilroy's then Why did they stop there?
Why go to Kilroy's at all if they were already partying?
(My gut feel on this is that LS was restless and bored with the environment at SW and JR's and wanted to be around "fun" people not necessarily more dope)

So, in my view the simplest explanation is that: LS was just looking to have fun that night and hang out but was tired of the usual scene at SW. At the same time CR saw this as an opportunity to get closer to LS and helped her get FU'd. But in that process and very likely by being slipped a roofie on top of the rest, it became too much for her. She started falling down, hitting her head, and the lights went out. CR brought her to CR/MB's, thus involving MB. MB called JR, thus involving him. With LS having also been at JR's earlier with drugs present, the 3 then all had a reason to cover up for mutual benefit.

Certainly would be worse for CR if LS were still alive when he brought her back to 5N and did attempt rape. It would seem the only proof of that would be with the body. (Yet JR may not have known that part of the real story) At least one of them knows what happened to her body, possibly the 3 of them.

Now if you were JR, and had taken on the task of cover up for CR (because he seemed innocent at the time) and you felt culpable because you were serving up drugs that night... and even hid her body... but now start to realize CR may have slipped her something and may have attempted rape, what would you do?

 

[imkeylime]

Almost entirely agree. The exception is that I think the drug discussions needed to be explored to try to understand the POI's, the circumstances and all possibilities - you know the defense would do that.

The fact that Lauren is missing, is to me the most obvious problem. That fact makes it clear there was some kind of wrongdoing / foul play. Just what sort of wrongdoing is the question?? There has not been one person to come forward to suggest that Lauren was a Charlie Sheen type of manic coke fiend or a Belushi-esqe out of control party animal as a behavior pattern. It seems to me that her partying was likely no different or even less than that of her "friends" which all have managed to remain alive and whereabouts known.

My list of cause of death probabilities has reshaped to this:
1) Drug induced Planned "date" rape - 60%
2) Drug deception (including opportunistic "date" rape - 30%
(the motive here would be undetermined but not necessarily specifically for the purpose of rape. Meaning that someone sought to take advantage of the situation in some way, but didn't necessarily plan it out in advance or know where it might go.)
3) Accidental drug interaction - 5%
The possibility still exists that LS ingested more than one substance voluntairly and/or involuntarily at different times such that others were not aware. Since at some point this would have involved illegal drugs, or illegal use of prescription drugs, those supplying or providing the environment would have motive for cover up.
4) Everything else - 5% including less than .0001% chance of stranger abduction.
The strongest possibility I see here is that she didn't die directly from the drugs, but rather injuries. Either the injuries that we know about from the falls, or worse ones sustained in later falls, mishaps(like CR dropping her) or less likely but possible violence(being gagged, hit, strangled, etc...

Her QT alone could not have killed her, because we know she was under the influence of one or more substances. But I'll agree it may have been a contributing factor.. that does become irrelevant because she is missing. She would not be missing if there was not something illegal going on. As many have suggested, even if she OD'd on voluntarily ingested drugs that is rarely a cause to ditch the body. But it does happen....

Snipped by me. I agree a POI could have slipped LS something with nefarious intentions, i.e., hooking up or worse. I also agree she could have sustained a head injury when falling, but I wonder if she would have succumbed to a cerebral bleed or severe concussion that quickly. And I wonder if a severe neck injury could result in near immediate death?

It could also be someone gave her something to "wake up" and that something triggered a long QT attack. I'm not sure how long Adderall takes to kick in, but a friend of ZO's tweeted about it. This drug is readily available in schools in my region (northern east coast). A guy in my daughter's high school ended up in ER with heart palpitations after taking "A" and partying.

While it seems extreme that someone would dispose of her body if she ODed, you raise a good point that one person may have felt solely responsible when perhaps more than one actually actually provided substances that together were fatal. That one POI may have freaked out. I also find JW's behavior after the fact a little strange. I'm not suggesting he did something to LS and made her disappear, but I do wonder if he doesn't know more than he's letting on, which is strange (as the PIs and even the Spierers now note).

 

[Ixchel13]

Not to open Pandora's Box but I don't think CR or any of the POIs rufied Lauren.
And I don't think any of her local friends or new acquaintances tried to rape her or had a plan to do this. If there was anything of this nature it would either be the out of town guest(s) or satellite roommates/friends of roommates of ZO and AB. Or big chance unsavory persons did this at Kilroy's with bad intentions to both of them.
That's not how these kids operate. None of these guys had any trouble getting laid if
they wanted to, what with the money, the ya-yo, the 3 story town homes and swanky
cars. More than that, Lauren's boyfriend was a big shot in their group, and hitting on his
girlfriend would be big trouble socially. Lauren was just as popular and I can imagine
hitting on Jesse would not go over well either.
Every story changes each time it is told. If all their stories lined up exactly, that to
me would be even more odd then all of them being slightly different. What are the odds of all of these witnesses and retellers of scenarios being drunk or high or both? Not necessarily when they are recounting their story to LE or reporters, but when they actually heard it from someone second hand /saw something/heard it from a POI?
It would seem to me, IMO, MOO, that somehow JR got his hands on a really good batch of something from outta town and everyone was running around getting it and maybe fighting over it.
I think Lauren was running around trying to find her phone to get ahold of Jesse.
She might've thought he was at 10th and College or that her phone was there. Sure, CR
could have suggested that they go out. But, at least according to the POIs stories, Lauren wanted to go home, and she wanted her phone. Did she borrow MBs phone to call JW? The idea that LE tells us about 2 calls only does not mean there aren't other calls that they will not reveal. Besides those 2 calls, she made a last call from SW
before leaving, JW made several texts?calls? to her phone at Kilroys, and that's all we know. Besides POIs, would like to see HT's, BW's, ZO's, AB's, DR's and JW's phone calls after 12:15 that night.

 

[AbbeyR]

I think in a case where a woman is last seen totally incapacitated and being dragged off alone by a man, sexual assault is an obvious factor to consider.

You might want to think that the only people who rape and drug girls are 'unsavory persons' who lurk around bars or dark alleys preying on strangers. Or that the kind of guys who drive nice cars, go to university, or went to your summer camp are not the 'type' to rape someone. But none of the above corresponds to the realities of sexual assault. Look up the statistics, especially about rape on college campuses – you might be surprised:

- Up to 25% of female students are victims of sexual assault during their college years
- In 90 % of those cases women know the assailants
- Most take place in familiar social settings (at home, parties, dorms etc.)
- in 43% of reported cases, more than one assailant is involved...

Given the facts, and the circumstances that we know about that night, I think sexual assault is a legitimate scenario to consider. That's all.

FTR, here's the legal definition and Indiana statute dealing with date rape: http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/date-rape/.

One thing I noticed is that in Indiana, the use of a 'date rape drug' (which is not limited to 'roofies' ) bumps up the severity of the charge from a Class B to a Class A felony. (Includes drugging someone or knowing the victim was drugged)

 

[Snapfade]

I think in a case where a woman is last seen totally incapacitated and being dragged off alone by a man, sexual assault is an obvious factor to consider.

You might want to think that the only people who rape and drug girls are 'unsavory persons' who lurk around bars or dark alleys preying on strangers. Or that the kind of guys who drive nice cars, go to university, or went to your summer camp are not the 'type' to rape someone. But none of the above corresponds to the realities of sexual assault. Look up the statistics, especially about rape on college campuses – you might be surprised:

- Up to 25% of female students are victims of sexual assault during their college years
- In 90 % of those cases women know the assailants
- Most take place in familiar social settings (at home, parties, dorms etc.)
- in 43% of reported cases, more than one assailant is involved...

Given the facts, and the circumstances that we know about that night, I think sexual assault is a legitimate scenario to consider. That's all.

FTR, here's the legal definition and Indiana statute dealing with date rape: http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/date-rape/.

One thing I noticed is that in Indiana, the use of a 'date rape drug' (which is not limited to 'roofies' ) bumps up the severity of the charge from a Class B to a Class A felony. (Includes drugging someone or knowing the victim was drugged)

I think 43% of the cases having multiple perps sounds high... The other % 's sound about right to me, but I really would know anyways....Where did these statistics come from? were they from official records or surveys?

 

[VeryVeritas]

I think in a case where a woman is last seen totally incapacitated and being dragged off alone by a man, sexual assault is an obvious factor to consider.

You might want to think that the only people who rape and drug girls are 'unsavory persons' who lurk around bars or dark alleys preying on strangers. Or that the kind of guys who drive nice cars, go to university, or went to your summer camp are not the 'type' to rape someone. But none of the above corresponds to the realities of sexual assault. Look up the statistics, especially about rape on college campuses – you might be surprised:

- Up to 25% of female students are victims of sexual assault during their college years
- In 90 % of those cases women know the assailants
- Most take place in familiar social settings (at home, parties, dorms etc.)
- in 43% of reported cases, more than one assailant is involved...

Given the facts, and the circumstances that we know about that night, I think sexual assault is a legitimate scenario to consider. That's all.

FTR, here's the legal definition and Indiana statute dealing with date rape: http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/date-rape/.

One thing I noticed is that in Indiana, the use of a 'date rape drug' (which is not limited to 'roofies' ) bumps up the severity of the charge from a Class B to a Class A felony. (Includes drugging someone or knowing the victim was drugged)

Unfortunately, it is statistically the most likely scenario SINCE LS is missing.
If she died from OD, drug interactions, Injuries due to pharmacological effects, etc... she would most likely not have gone missing. It's true that she could be missing to cover up for recreational drugs used. But with a missing body it's far more likely that either the drugs being covered up would reveal something abnormal and specific or sexual misconduct.

 

[VeryVeritas]

Snipped by me. I agree a POI could have slipped LS something with nefarious intentions, i.e., hooking up or worse. I also agree she could have sustained a head injury when falling, but I wonder if she would have succumbed to a cerebral bleed or severe concussion that quickly. And I wonder if a severe neck injury could result in near immediate death?

It could also be someone gave her something to "wake up" and that something triggered a long QT attack. I'm not sure how long Adderall takes to kick in, but a friend of ZO's tweeted about it. This drug is readily available in schools in my region (northern east coast). A guy in my daughter's high school ended up in ER with heart palpitations after taking "A" and partying.

While it seems extreme that someone would dispose of her body if she ODed, you raise a good point that one person may have felt solely responsible when perhaps more than one actually actually provided substances that together were fatal. That one POI may have freaked out. I also find JW's behavior after the fact a little strange. I'm not suggesting he did something to LS and made her disappear, but I do wonder if he doesn't know more than he's letting on, which is strange (as the PIs and even the Spierers now note).

Yes, a broken neck could lead to rapid death, especially if the person was moved. One thing that bothered me about that face down fall without blocking (the last recorded and provable location of LS) is what type of injuries she would have sustained. Face down would very likely break the nose and leave a lot of blood. But, no blood? The nose could be pushed into the skull and cause death. If the head were slightly turned then eye and cheekbone get it... consistent in part at least with JR's notation of her injuries (wonder if someone tipped him off about her falling before he made that statement?) Mouth hanging open and possibly broken front teeth (anyone check for pieces of teeth?) While she may have had serious injuries, I would think falling face down limp like that is not usually resulting in a broken neck, but possible.

 

[AbbeyR]

I think 43% of the cases having multiple perps sounds high... The other % 's sound about right to me, but I really would know anyways....Where did these statistics come from? were they from official records or surveys?

Yeah, I thought the same thing after I posted it, but I thought no one was paying attention anyway, ha. To be honest, those stats are reported as "facts" with no documentation on a lot of university websites ( see?). I think they are intended to give an overview and warning about how common sexual assault is among university students, but obviously the 'facts' are more complicated, especially when it comes to under-reported crimes like rape.

That said, as far as I can tell, the general %'s about rape among female students seem pretty consistent. The 43% multiple assailants seems at the high end of a pretty wide scale for stats collected about the reporting of rape in general* but in line with studies that have focused on 'date/acquaintance rape' on college campuses and frats specifically (For ex.).

*A quick search of the 43% stat also led me to this article -- it has a little blurb that summarizes the scholarly lit. on multiple assailants in rape (it's possible the philadelphia study mentioned is the source):

The precise percentage of rapes committed by multiple assailants is unknown, but it is probably somewhere between 10% and 33%. At the low end, U.S. government crime victimization data suggest that one out of 10 sexual assaults involves multiple offenders (Greenfeld, 1997). A somewhat higher figure comes from a survey by Koss (1998), in which 16% of the men who admitted raping women said they acted in concert with other men. Based on a survey of the literature, Rozee-Koker and Polk (1986) estimate that about one third of reported rapes were perpetuated by multiple offenders, with a whopping three-fourths of all rape offenders being group rapists. About 41% of self-identified date rapists in a study by Kanin (1985) reported participating in group rapes. In a 1965 study by Amir (as cited in Geis, 1971), 43% of reported rapes in Philadelphia involved multiple offenders, with 71% of reported rapists being group rape offenders. Finally, Mosher and Anderson (as cited in Muehlenhard & Shrag, 1991) found that 10% of a sample of college men reported waiting their turn in line with other men to share a "party girl."

(Franklin 2004 p.29 and http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415500449/


Anyhoo, stats aren't really my thing, but the main thing I take out of this is: Rape happens more often than you think, and rapists are more likely to be the guys who sit next to you in class than a stranger in a dark alley. It's hard to believe, but that's why it happens. I mean, read that last line of the quote above..ugh. Numbers aside, it shows some of the stereotypes about (what is and isn't considered to be) rape.

 

[VeryVeritas]

More than that, Lauren's boyfriend was a big shot in their group, and hitting on his
girlfriend would be big trouble socially. Lauren was just as popular and I can imagine
hitting on Jesse would not go over well either.

Snipped out the only part that wasn't illogical and yet was also news to me.(if it's true)
What ran through my head here is that while others and myself often talk about the stats, of course the #1 stat is that the perp is usually the significant other. There has been no evidence to point to JW whatsoever.
But, if what you say is true, then how about this scenario:

I recall that LS was supposed to meet up with JW "later in the evening". It's never really been discussed where they typically would meet on such a night. Would they rendevous at Kilroy's? Or if as you say JW was such a peer in high esteem with JR, why not at JR's? So, CR carries LS back to CR/MB's place... she's laying there (likely vomiting or unconscious) Eventually MB calls JR, but JW is also there waiting for her since he couldn't get hold of her. (Did JW know that LS was going to JR's that night?) Now, it's even more sticky because if LS did make it over to JR's alive, and JW was there... the culpability picture changes again. If JW tried to revive LS and it backfired now JW and JR have to explain why they have a dead drugged 98lb girl with serious head injuries. How can this scenario be dis-proven?
The main problem with JW theories is that JW would have to be moving in stealth. He wasn't seen by anyone and didn't show up on videos.
Seems very unlikely, still I'd not considered JW actually being at JR's before.

 

[Snapfade]

Yeah, I thought the same thing after I posted it, but I thought no one was paying attention anyway, ha. To be honest, those stats are reported as "facts" with no documentation on a lot of university websites ( see?). I think they are intended to give an overview and warning about how common sexual assault is among university students, but obviously the 'facts' are more complicated, especially when it comes to under-reported crimes like rape.

That said, as far as I can tell, the general %'s about rape among female students seem pretty consistent. The 43% multiple assailants seems at the high end of a pretty wide scale for stats collected about the reporting of rape in general* but in line with studies that have focused on 'date/acquaintance rape' on college campuses and frats specifically (For ex.).

*A quick search of the 43% stat also led me to this article -- it has a little blurb that summarizes the scholarly lit. on multiple assailants in rape (it's possible the philadelphia study mentioned is the source):

(Franklin 2004 p.29 and http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415500449/


Anyhoo, stats aren't really my thing, but the main thing I take out of this is: Rape happens more often than you think, and rapists are more likely to be the guys who sit next to you in class than a stranger in a dark alley. It's hard to believe, but that's why it happens. I mean, read that last line of the quote above..ugh. Numbers aside, it shows some of the stereotypes about (what is and isn't considered to be) rape.

Very Interesting.......And if we were talking South Africa , 43% would be low for Multiple Perpetrator Rape. Its called "streamlining" there..... In United States its not near as prevelant but Must Say based on what I just read, there is NO WAY to rule out Rape, and I dont care what kind of car they drive or how good looking they are. LS as a victim, is in the highest % risk in every catagory. The POI's as the Perps are in the highest % in almost every catagory. This is the Link, Its a very detailed study

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13552600802653818

 

[akh]

The main problem with JW theories is that JW would have to be moving in stealth. He wasn't seen by anyone and didn't show up on videos.
Seems very unlikely, still I'd not considered JW actually being at JR's before.

The main problem with this line of thinking is two-fold:
#1 We don't really know exactly what and who is on video and when. There's a little bit of info overall, and of that if we had to swear to it we couldn't because we haven't seen the videos for ourselves. So we're stuck with other people's descriptions that may or may not be accurate or be how we'd describe what we're seeing if we were to see it for ourselves.

#2 No matter what happened, it apparently happened off video (otherwise the assumption is there'd be an arrest or at least this case would be much further advanced). So it really doesn't mean much that JW, ZO, or any other alphabet mixture haven't been reported on video doing anything because neither has anyone else past what would be expected. Whatever nefarious thing that must've happened, happened off video. And why would it be so hard to believe somebody contemplating bad acts wouldn't be acting in stealth anyway?

I wonder if we're giving too much credence to the videos, both in what we think was seen and in what we're expecting would've been seen. Between time lapse recording, functioning vs non-functioning equip, and then actual aim of the cameras maybe people and happenings not appearing on security recordings isn't that surprising for several scenarios?

 

[Btown]

The main problem with this line of thinking is two-fold:
#1 We don't really know exactly what and who is on video and when. There's a little bit of info overall, and of that if we had to swear to it we couldn't because we haven't seen the videos for ourselves. So we're stuck with other people's descriptions that may or may not be accurate or be how we'd describe what we're seeing if we were to see it for ourselves.

#2 No matter what happened, it apparently happened off video (otherwise the assumption is there'd be an arrest or at least this case would be much further advanced). So it really doesn't mean much that JW, ZO, or any other alphabet mixture haven't been reported on video doing anything because neither has anyone else past what would be expected. Whatever nefarious thing that must've happened, happened off video. And why would it be so hard to believe somebody contemplating bad acts wouldn't be acting in stealth anyway?

I wonder if we're giving too much credence to the videos, both in what we think was seen and in what we're expecting would've been seen. Between time lapse recording, functioning vs non-functioning equip, and then actual aim of the cameras maybe people and happenings not appearing on security recordings isn't that surprising for several scenarios?

Actually, I've seen some of the video from that night firsthand. I pulled it off the recorder to provide to the police when they requested it. In addition, I've seen video from other buildings in the area from that night first hand.

The main problem with video, aside from legal issues, is that if you aim the cameras where they see the street the hard drive fills up very fast from the motion of the cars going by, (using motion detection). The cameras have to be pointed down, (or block the street view with software), so that they only get the door traffic, and maybe some sidewalk traffic. This limits the amount of data recorded.

So, despite the proliferation of cameras in the area, most only see a bit of the sidewalk.

 

[Ixchel13]

Snipped out the only part that wasn't illogical and yet was also news to me.(if it's true)
What ran through my head here is that while others and myself often talk about the stats, of course the #1 stat is that the perp is usually the significant other. There has been no evidence to point to JW whatsoever.
But, if what you say is true, then how about this scenario:

I recall that LS was supposed to meet up with JW "later in the evening". It's never really been discussed where they typically would meet on such a night. Would they rendevous at Kilroy's? Or if as you say JW was such a peer in high esteem with JR, why not at JR's? So, CR carries LS back to CR/MB's place... she's laying there (likely vomiting or unconscious) Eventually MB calls JR, but JW is also there waiting for her since he couldn't get hold of her. (Did JW know that LS was going to JR's that night?) Now, it's even more sticky because if LS did make it over to JR's alive, and JW was there... the culpability picture changes again. If JW tried to revive LS and it backfired now JW and JR have to explain why they have a dead drugged 98lb girl with serious head injuries. How can this scenario be dis-proven?
The main problem with JW theories is that JW would have to be moving in stealth. He wasn't seen by anyone and didn't show up on videos.
Seems very unlikely, still I'd not considered JW actually being at JR's before.

BBM. There is absolutely no evidence that Lauren was laying anywhere unconscious and/or vomiting. IF everything went down as you say, maybe. First, "we" decide these guys are guilty of conspiracy, murder, and rape and then disposing of their friend's body; then, "we" suppose all the scenarios that could have made those things happen. This speculation is no better than speculating that maybe these guys weren't the types to do this.
Next, someone will reply that there is no "type" of person that tries date rape. To that I say BS. There is a type, again, rich or poor, someone disturbed enough to do this. For CR to rufie Lauren, he would know that A) he was at least gonna get the bjesus beat out of him for it if not outright killed by those underground frat boys that Jesse was the leader of
B) going to get arrested C) totally shunned by everyone forever. IMO, CR did not rufie Lauren, but they both showed signs of being rufied.

I understand that date rape is usually someone you know, and that yes, it happens alot, and anyone, rich or poor, could attempt it. And, these guys could be lying, etc.
Date rape happens without rufies. I'm not good at stats, but I'll bet that date rape happens more often than not WITHOUT rufies. And, people are slipped rufies for more reasons than date rape. About ten years ago, sorority girls were busted selling rufies!! Once I overheard two employees (coeds) talking about splitting a rufie before they went out. I asked, "are you crazy!?" they replied that half a rufie made them really effed up with only one drink, so they don't get all the calories. Cross my heart. Slipping someone a rufie is a good way to rob someone.

I also understand that it doesn't have to only be an unsavoury person who did this, but unsavoury people do hang out at Kilroys looking to take advantage of/beat up/ deal drugs to college students. It's a huge cottage industry here.



Indiana Daily Student ran an article Feb 2 about a sexual assault on campus at 4:30 in the morning. A young man was assaulted at knifepoint by a man with dreds.
Very Veritas, do you remember what that CIA psychic said about Lauren's abductor? Dreds. And at the same time, 4:30 a.m.
I live in Bloomington, and one of my concerns is that this person , maybe not this one exactly, is out there, and if so, probably feeling pretty damn smug.
Unless someone is being particularly stalked by someone, every horrible crime committed on an unsuspecting innocent person happens because the unsuspecting person is there at just the moment the bad person is. And what are those chances? Probably the same as being on a carnival ride that
goes off the rails and kills people, or on a plane that crashes. And yet,
we read about these things and never think it could happen to us.
IMO, either JW or random/random by sight.

 

[Jacobite]

Why hire an expensive lawyer if you thought your friend was simply missing and could reappear at any moment? And isn't that attorney known for representing bad guys?
The PsOI seem to have made themselves look guilty.

 

[Jacobite]

Actually, I've seen some of the video from that night firsthand. I pulled it off the recorder to provide to the police when they requested it. In addition, I've seen video from other buildings in the area from that night first hand.

The main problem with video, aside from legal issues, is that if you aim the cameras where they see the street the hard drive fills up very fast from the motion of the cars going by, (using motion detection). The cameras have to be pointed down, (or block the street view with software), so that they only get the door traffic, and maybe some sidewalk traffic. This limits the amount of data recorded.

So, despite the proliferation of cameras in the area, most only see a bit of the sidewalk.

Are you able to share with us what you saw on the cams?

 

[imkeylime]

BBM. There is absolutely no evidence that Lauren was laying anywhere unconscious and/or vomiting. IF everything went down as you say, maybe. First, "we" decide these guys are guilty of conspiracy, murder, and rape and then disposing of their friend's body; then, "we" suppose all the scenarios that could have made those things happen. This speculation is no better than speculating that maybe these guys weren't the types to do this.
Next, someone will reply that there is no "type" of person that tries date rape. To that I say BS. There is a type, again, rich or poor, someone disturbed enough to do this. For CR to rufie Lauren, he would know that A) he was at least gonna get the bjesus beat out of him for it if not outright killed by those underground frat boys that Jesse was the leader of
B) going to get arrested C) totally shunned by everyone forever. IMO, CR did not rufie Lauren, but they both showed signs of being rufied.

Snipped by me. Playing devil's advocate, CR did kind of have the bjesus beat out of him, if you believe his story. To me, his behavior that night ("She's with me ...") suggests he had intentions when it came to LS ... that's a possessive statement. IDK whether that suggests a date-rape drug or not. But hitting on LS if she was still in a relationship with JW is kind of brazen. Maybe that's his personality, though? JMO.

But ... I do wonder this. Say CR did give LS a date-rape drug. Where did he plan to take her? Her place? 5 North but get MB to leave? Outside somewhere? If outside somewhere, where? Another long shot ... CR had intentions but did indeed pass out, leaving MB with LS. Or was MB and/or JR involved from the start? That doesn't feel right to me, since they were in different places.

Also ... IMO, CR could show signs of 1) lying, 2) drinking too much that night before getting hit by ZO, or 3) being slipped or voluntarily taking something that night as well.

 

[akh]

Why hire an expensive lawyer if you thought your friend was simply missing and could reappear at any moment? And isn't that attorney known for representing bad guys?
The PsOI seem to have made themselves look guilty.

Being the last known people to see her alive that evening/morning is plenty to make them appear guilty. They'd be stupid to not get lawyers for that fact alone (considering the circumstances) and seem connected enough to get the advice that they need lawyers ASAP.

Plus, it's entirely possible that LE's initial handling of this case came down hard enough on them that it didn't take a brain surgeon for them to realize they were the chief suspects.