<p>Absolutely, Consolation. I follow a blog, “Justice for Henry”, where a mother is determined that the two people who housed her 18 year old son and may have given him drugs (he was junkie already, something she readily admits) should be charged with murder. He woke up in bad shape, the two did not call the ambulance right away, she charges, and the young man died a month later in the hospital due to brain damage caused by the OD. She has a point, in that federal law as well as her state law, has it in place that anyone giving illegal drugs to someone is culpable, and people are prosecuted for this and convicted when the evidence is there. </p>
<p>In the LS case, they could have gotten rid of the coke in the apartment and refused to take a drug test. There is no reason to have to submit to one under such circumstances. That way, they have someone who ODed, yes, in their apartment but the source of the drugs would not necessarily have to be pinpointed.</p>
<p>Sigh. The things that can happen when they are off at school. I am hurting for Lauren’s family, and so hope she is found safe. I can also feel the pain of the parents’ of those kids who were with Lauren last as well as any other who are “persons of interest”. Though the term does not mean they are suspects, the implication is certainly there.I don’t blame the parents for getting those guys attorneys and I am surprised that two of those guys are still in town even if they are registered for the summer term. I think I would want them home, and away from all of this. Too much can happen.</p>
<p>It seems odd that the young man or men who were in the altercation…have not had their names released, but the other guys have. I’m not saying they are involved in Lauren’s disappearance but why are all the other kids’ names released who were with her in any capacity that night and theirs are not?</p>
<p>The corroborated stories that she was seen leaving the apartment and walking down the street are meaningless if she OD’d on coke in the presence of those same 2-3 people and her body was then removed from premises and they are covering it up.</p>
<p>Soozie, I’ve wondered about that too. I have refrained from using their names. I understand that since they are not minors, their names can be released, but it does cause extra problems. I think the reason is that the 3 guys whose names were released were specifically with her before she disappeared. One states he saw her walking away, even. That the one guy cannot remember anything really does not sound good for him at all though heavy drinking and drugs as well as the punch could have done the job.</p>
<p>The other name released is the boyfriend, for understandable reasons. I guess no one else has such a strong connection to the case in terms of possibilities. The altercation supposedly had nothing to do with Lauren but was because the young man was not allowed in the building, and the kid who struck him wanted him to leave, is what I heard. He was not decked, and did not show injury the following days so is getting derision about his story. My guess is that he does not want to say he was indulging in contraband that night. </p>
<p>This whole thing does not give an attractive picture of any of the young people’s behaviors that night. Something to consider. The old adage about wearing clean underwear in case you get into an accident can take a metaphorical application. You never know when something will happen to put you in the spotlight and exposes your “dirty underwear”.</p>
<p>Ema, although someone doesn’t get prosecuted for possession, as you mentioned in your story, there can be civil suits. I know of a story about a kid in a few towns away who OD’d of heroin. While the kid was obviously a junkie and took the drug voluntarily, those who supplied the drugs were sued.</p>
<p>I agree with soozie there is something fishy about the “altercation”, but the police are going on all cylinders trying to follow up everywhere, so they’ll have to explore that one too.</p>
<p>Oh, they are focusing on that a lot. That has been a big complaint from those on the scene in Bloomington. They feel the police are overfocused on that.</p>
<p>The thing about the altercation is that it was reported (not sure if this is true?) that the boy(s) doing the hitting were friends of Lauren’s boyfriend. All along it has seemed to me that it is awfully coincidental that all these things went on during the same late evening and why I’m getting doubtful Lauren’s disappearance involved random strangers to her.</p>
<p>I am still hoping that Lauren is discovered alive. And if not, I hope the answer absolves all of those in the IU community. This is really tearing up a lot of people.</p>
<p>They’re now looking at a different timeline. From the updated article in the link:</p>
<p>"Spierer disappeared sometime after 3 a.m. June 3 after going out with friends to Kilroy’s Sports Bar in Bloomington, police have said. Surveillance camera footage from around 2:30 a.m. showed her and a male student, Corey Rossman, returning to her apartment building, Smallwood Plaza.</p>
<p>An altercation with other people occurred there that led to Rossman getting punched in the face, his attorney told CNN affiliate WISH, and he said he has no memory of what happened after that.</p>
<p>Police have said additional surveillance video from an alley between Smallwood Plaza and Rossman’s apartment a few blocks away showed them walking toward his building around 3 a.m. Her keys were later found in that alley.
A neighbor of Rossman reported seeing Spierer leave around 4:30 a.m., but police have said they have found no sign of her after the 3 a.m. sighting on any of the surveillance video they have viewed from the blocks between the two buildings.</p>
<p>Attorneys for Rossman, his roommate and his neighbor did not return calls seeking a comment Tuesday. Neither did the attorney for Spierer’s boyfriend, who has also been questioned."</p>
<p>^^ and where did you get this from? apparently as of last night, the police had not confirmed that the 4:30 sighting (or the exit from the building prior to that) was valid…</p>
<p>from what I could glean from the most recent press conference which was yesterday, the surveliance tape does not show her at 4:30 am; that report was from one of the boys…which means it is possible she never left the building…</p>
<p>was this from something new? who “last saw her” on the street?..</p>
<p>“A neighbor of Rossman reported seeing Spierer leave around 4:30 a.m., but police have said they have found no sign of her after the 3 a.m. sighting on any of the surveillance video they have viewed from the blocks between the two buildings”</p>
<p>I wondered where this discussion about LS’s her last known location started. For awhile, I thought someone (maybe here?) said she was last seen walking down some alleyway on her way home… that some guy watched as she made her way back to her room. But, wait! This is what the police confirmed, at least at the beginning. Did that change?
</p>
<p>I also read Rossman firmly stated he wasn’t the last person who saw her but at another time stated he can’t remember anything of that evening. Another something I read Mike Beth, Rossman’s roommate, said he and LS put Rossman to bed after the altercation. I’m all confused with where everyone was.</p>
<p>^^exactly why I clarified that…there is no concrete evidence that she actually left the building…</p>
<p>very quiet the last couple of days; hope the trail is not going cold (if it hasn’t already)…not really sure about this photo of the pick-up truck materializing anything new though…</p>
<p>That is one timeline that the police have released. It is not definite as it does depend on the testimony of people that has not been confirmed by video camera. The last sighting of Lauren is really in the Smallwood apartment as she walks down the hall in the released picture. The keys and change purse are a marker going from Smallwood to her companion’s place. That she got there is based on testimony of the companion’s roommate and then supported by another young man who also saw her there and reports seeing her leave their area to go back to Smallwood where she lives.</p>
<p>The reason that the truck is so important is that, given the statement of the last person who saw L that early morning, it places L right about where the truck would have passed. Perhaps someone in the truck picked her up, perhaps they saw her, perhaps they saw something else that caught their eye. Or the truck could have just been in the area at the time for no associated reason. The truck does not look like anything a student would be driving as it is a large 4 passenger truck that appears to have work equipment in the back. It could point away from the IU students who are now under a cloud of suspicion. It would be some solace to the community if some outsider was responsible for L’s disappearance rather than an IU student.</p>
<p>Rodney, there is rarely proof of people’s movement that are so accurately corroborated by surveillance camera proof. That there is so much here is unusual, so more of L’s movements can be definitely traced right down to the minute without relying on statements alone. The scenario of her leaving the young men’s apartment area is being taken seriously even though it is not 100% that it did happen. Clearly she left there sometime, somehow. The theory that she may not have left as told, and that foul play at the men’s place is being seriously considered.</p>
<p>But there is a definite statement from a witness that she did leave at that time, along with a definite direction that she took. That she left unaccompanied at that time in the morning does not reflect well on those young men, and puts them under all kinds of suspicion. That all of them were impaired due to the hour, activities and contraband seems to be pretty much assumed. There is also a witness who has surfaced saying that L was with a male at 3:38 along that route, and that she was seriously out of it. But what times and what scenarios are correct are still up in the air. That truck on the video at 4 AM is highly sought, because the police feel it could have seen something that has bearing on the case, right down to being the abduction vehicle to being able to report seeing no one or nothing. There is some evidence that the driver was impaired too, in that it circled the block, and ran the stop sign, and also given the hour. All possibilities right now.</p>
<p>Inasmuch as communities and businesses determine they want cameras recording people’s identities and behaviors as well as vehicle ID , why can’t the quality of the images be improved? Whenever I see the tape of a bank robbery it amazes me that if the robber wears a baseball cap, his identity is protected. Why can’t the police see the driver of the truck or the license plate?</p>
<p>Money. Those cameras cost money. I guess the camera for the vehicle traffic is not to catch those who run the stop signs since you can’t go after them easily if they do. That would be a typical bureaucratic blunder to have a camera to catch those who run the stop sign not good enough to read the plates of those who do run the stop sign. Ha. </p>
<p>I suspect that the cameras are there because of all of the college students in that area who are not exemplary in their behavior. It is a sad truth that behavior, destruction, crime is rampant in a college community. A lot of it is the hormones, that many of the kids are on their own for the first time, contraband, and plain foolishness and bad judgment. The one young man was already on a “no trespassing” list at the Smallwood apartments for previous incidents that made him persona non grata there. The story I am getting is that the altercation is because someone saw him who knew he was not allowed in the building and told him to leave. </p>
<p>None of the kids’ behaviors come off well from that night/morning.</p>