Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This whole story is just one of the strangest things I've ever seen.

    I wonder what the police really think. Do they think it's those guys who know her, but since there is no body or anything concrete they can't charge them? Or are they leaning toward a stranger abduction? Or do they really have no clue?

    If those guys had something to do with it then they are pretty darn good at crossing all their t's and dotting all their i's, that's for sure.

    I worry that we may never know what happened and this story will just fade into the abyss.
    It's looking to me like the most likely suspects were smart enough to lawyer up early. So that's forced the hand of the police to cast a wider net. I just think the police would've loved to really pressure all of the guys, lie to them, intimidate them, play them, etc in hopes of someone being inconsistent and that being the leverage they need. The lawyers know better than to allow that.

    I don't know if it's a sign of the times or what that these guys were smart enough to get lawyers so early on.

    None of this means they are guilty either... But had their stories held up after all of that pressure then the police could've focused elsewhere. As it is, they are left to throw spaghetti against the wall hoping something sticks. ...whether that means finding new suspects are learning something that puts the any of the original group of POI's stories into question.

    The last known person to have seen Lauren, the one with the late cell call to Rohn that was supposed to have been placed by Lauren, and the one that supposedly watched her walk away into the night... and no trace of security video ever shows her anywhere else (that we know of) lawyered up with Voyles out of Indy. I just find that curious. Voyles can't be cheap... I suppose if you have the money... and there could be some prior connection there from family or friends so it might not be he went looking for one of the top defense lawyers in Indiana per se'. Or maybe he sought out someone lower on the totem pole who instantly realized he was going to be the chief suspect and recommended looking further up the foodchain.
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

      I wonder why the family hasn't hired a private investigator at this point... assuming they could afford it? I'd be questionable about the police's ability to bring this to a timely conclusion at this point. Some things you could argue the police are not allowing the public to know everything because they don't want to jeopardize the case.... but then that doesn't explain how they couldn't have released that security camera image of her alone dressed and looking as she did the night in question. That could only have been helpful in the search for info and witnesses that night, and in particular while things were fresh in everyone's mind.

      There have been other things they've released slowly that I think is questionable but that photo proves to me they haven't always made the right call on what they release and when and how they've moved the investigation forward.

      If I was the family I would be pizsed that photo wasn't released within hours of securing that video tape.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

        Originally posted by Bball View Post
        It's looking to me like the most likely suspects were smart enough to lawyer up early. So that's forced the hand of the police to cast a wider net. I just think the police would've loved to really pressure all of the guys, lie to them, intimidate them, play them, etc in hopes of someone being inconsistent and that being the leverage they need. The lawyers know better than to allow that.

        I don't know if it's a sign of the times or what that these guys were smart enough to get lawyers so early on.

        None of this means they are guilty either... But had their stories held up after all of that pressure then the police could've focused elsewhere. As it is, they are left to throw spaghetti against the wall hoping something sticks. ...whether that means finding new suspects are learning something that puts the any of the original group of POI's stories into question.

        The last known person to have seen Lauren, the one with the late cell call to Rohn that was supposed to have been placed by Lauren, and the one that supposedly watched her walk away into the night... and no trace of security video ever shows her anywhere else (that we know of) lawyered up with Voyles out of Indy. I just find that curious. Voyles can't be cheap... I suppose if you have the money... and there could be some prior connection there from family or friends so it might not be he went looking for one of the top defense lawyers in Indiana per se'. Or maybe he sought out someone lower on the totem pole who instantly realized he was going to be the chief suspect and recommended looking further up the foodchain.

        Yeah, him hiring Voyles makes you think, at least. On one hand, why hire the best attorney in the state if you know you are just a witness who needs some basic general guidance. On the other hand though, it's likely that his parents have a bottomless pit of money like most parents of IU east coast IU kids and wanted the absolute best representation possible for their kid as they are likely scared at the situation he's found himself in. So if they are loaded, it's understandable that they wanted the best representation possible, no questions asked.

        And who does the ally security tape show her with at 2:51? They still won't say, will they?

        Comment


        • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

          At this point, I don't think we're gonna know what happened to Lauren unless they find her body.

          Has anyone heard this crazy theory that you can see Lauren in the back of the truck in the photo that's released? I can kind of see what's being talked about, but two things stand out against...

          The part that is supposed to be her legs seems to be too big for how big of a girl she was.

          And if you drove a crew cab, why are you putting a body in the back of the truck? Also, I just can't believe now that the police haven't been able to find the truck yet, there's zero reason not to be able to do it unless the truck's been disposed of or hidden.


          Comment


          • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

            I think people that see her body are like those who claim to see the Virgin Mary in an image. You're seeing what you want to see. There is no way that you can make any reasonable guess as to what is in the back of that truck. You can make a grainy image anything you want it to be if you are desperate enough.

            Trader Joe, I agree 100% that we aren't going to know what happened unless there is a body. One of these days this story isn't going to be the first thing on indystar.com and all of the local stations. It's eventually just going to sink into the abyss and everyone is going to be left wondering what really happened. Were those guys in someway responsible, or was this just a random nut who took advantage of target of opportunity? Sadly, we may never know.
            Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-19-2011, 01:42 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

              Saw a truck like this on 465 in Indy tonight so I took down the license just in case. It had a tool box in back and nothing on the doors so false alarm

              Comment


              • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                http://twitter.com/#!/NewsOnLaurenS/...65837923434497

                "BPD are following a lead, searching fields/wooded areas south of Martinsville/ north of Bloomington near State Road 37" (Via @FOX59)


                Doesn't look good.....so sad.

                Comment


                • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                  Originally posted by PacersFan1991 View Post
                  http://twitter.com/#!/NewsOnLaurenS/...65837923434497

                  "BPD are following a lead, searching fields/wooded areas south of Martinsville/ north of Bloomington near State Road 37" (Via @FOX59)

                  Fox 59 is reporting that they found nothing

                  http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-new-t...,6866396.story
                  Police have finished searching a section of land near the Monroe-Morgan County line after getting a lead in the case of missing IU student, Lauren Spierer.

                  Investigators tell Fox59 News they received a tip Sunday about a suspicious smell and went to check it out.

                  They found a 2-foot by 4-foot mound of fresh dirt, but think it was from utility work.
                  Last edited by Dab; 06-19-2011, 07:49 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                    Adam, it's already been pushed from the front page of the indy star.


                    Comment


                    • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      I think people that see her body are like those who claim to see the Virgin Mary in an image. You're seeing what you want to see. There is no way that you can make any reasonable guess as to what is in the back of that truck. You can make a grainy image anything you want it to be if you are desperate enough.

                      Trader Joe, I agree 100% that we aren't going to know what happened unless there is a body. One of these days this story isn't going to be the first thing on indystar.com and all of the local stations. It's eventually just going to sink into the abyss and everyone is going to be left wondering what really happened. Were those guys in someway responsible, or was this just a random nut who took advantage of target of opportunity? Sadly, we may never know.
                      One of the reports I read said the search is losing momentum. As TJ said, it's fading from the Star's front page.

                      Unless the police have or get some info they can use as leverage against any of the current people of interest, or the path leads to some new person of interest they can leverage, then it's looking like closure might be slow coming.

                      I still can't believe that the truck has not or won't be identified. Whether it's ultimately a red herring is another story. Ultimately, there just cannot be that many vehicles like that in that area in that time frame for the connections not to be made... unless that truck was from out of state, detouring thru Bloomington, and is far, far away from here with no regular Bloomington connection to anything or anyone here. As you said, the blurry image in the back could be anything. People are seeing what they want to see.

                      I suppose the BPD and prosecutor could look for a Hail Mary and offer some form of immunity (or limited prosecution) if there's truth to the partying and panic scenario.... and if someone comes forward with a story that checks out. IOW, whether they supplied any drugs or not as long as she took them of her own free will then certain charges would be off the table for anyone who would tell the story and help bring closure to the case. ...But that scenario isn't particularly appealing from a political sense, and there'd be no way to control what the parents could do with civil charges. But it might loosen someone up to the right thing versus gambling they just won't ever get caught (and any accomplices will remain quiet). ...considering if they lose that gamble it could be very bad.

                      And it would bring closure to the family and finality to the case (which would allow limited resources to be utilized for other cases).

                      If it was an accident and a party and panic scenario is what played out then it isn't like these are hardened criminals that prison would serve as any type of rehab anyway. And they'd still face civil charges so they wouldn't escape punishment.

                      Although technically, I guess Federal charges could still apply unless they'd agree to the same type of scenario.
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                        The white truck was a dead-end.
                        http://www.indystar.com/article/2011...t|IndyStar.com
                        The search for missing Indiana University student Lauren Spierer has stalled, with some promising leads having fizzled.

                        Bloomington Police have ruled out any connection to a white vehicle that was captured on video surveillance around the same time and near the location Spierer was last seen.

                        Police had received hundreds of tips, including photos, leading back to the business and owner of the truck. Police said the owner, whose name was not released, had cooperated fully. The owner was driving in that location, an area with a lot of ongoing construction, to pick up a worker, police said.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                          I was sort of expecting that to be the explanation. That they had already found the truck and the business owner didn't want to be publicly associated with it, it's not every good publicity.


                          Comment


                          • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                            With the truck ruled out it does bring up some questions- How likely is it a random abduction scenario wouldn't have a vehicle caught on camera? We know the police were able to focus on this truck. Makes it seem there weren't many other vehicle options to focus on in that area... yet there are cameras...

                            And the random abduction theory has to be statistically low when all possibilities are weighed in these type of things.

                            I know some people elsewhere have remarked about the boys being handled differently because they are rich. For one thing, I'm not sure they are actually rich but for another thing, the lawyers are going to see to it that their clients' rights aren't trampled in any rush to judgment. So the police can't just focus in on someone like on "Law and Order".

                            Also, and this is a biggie, based on what we know (or think we know) there are two groups of people that you could theorize a motive and opportunity. And these people are not connected. You have the boyfriend and his friends as one group. Then you have the other group of guys at the other apartment. You could focus in on the most likely in either group to have done something nefarious and then raise the stakes, possibly to the point of charges, with the hope either you have the right person or that the person knows something about the group and will spill it under threat of prison.

                            But what if you pick someone from the wrong group? What if your theory is wrong? You're going to make it doubly hard and you (police) will look much less credible when you then have to switch gears and theories of the crime and go after people in the other group. ..or then look to a 3rd possibility entirely.

                            Having lawyers is forcing the police not to solely focus on these groups in order to eliminate as much signal from noise as possible.

                            I'm sure that is a big reason the guys have all gotten the slack they've gotten- There are two competing theories (jilted boyfriend and/or violent friends of boyfriend acting out versus party scenario where something went wrong). Those would point to a person or persons in two different groups. And the two theories almost exclude one group has any chance of being involved with the other in any way once the truth is known. IOW, the boyfriend and his friends are not going to help cover for the other guys (and the party went wrong scenario), while those guys aren't going to help cover for the boyfriend and his friends. It's more likely the two sides are pointing fingers, not working in cahoots.

                            The witness that is throwing a kink into the timeline is also a good lesson on why as a person of interest talking to the police can hurt you more than help because that sheds doubt on the stories the guys in the second apartment have given. Sometimes inconsistencies can be easily explained, especially in regards to the time, but once they are out there you immediately are called into question (whether explained or not). It's how innocent people get wrongly convicted.

                            The time issue is one thing but it makes the 4:30AM phone call more suspicious as well. But maybe she didn't go directly from one room to the other like the boy's think she did in their apartment complex.
                            Last edited by Bball; 06-20-2011, 03:23 PM.
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                              I'm beginning more and more to suspect that for whatever reason, she never left someone's apartment. Whether it's this Rossman kid's or someone else's she was never out on the streets by herself. Just my opinion though. They took her purse and stuff and planted it in the alley way to look like an abduction and she OD'd or something like that at their place. Sad, sad story. I don't think we're going to have a happy ending in any way, shape, or form.


                              Comment


                              • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                I'm beginning more and more to suspect that for whatever reason, she never left someone's apartment. Whether it's this Rossman kid's or someone else's she was never out on the streets by herself. Just my opinion though. They took her purse and stuff and planted it in the alley way to look like an abduction and she OD'd or something like that at their place. Sad, sad story. I don't think we're going to have a happy ending in any way, shape, or form.
                                I'm pretty sure the only thing found in the alley that was her's was the keys sitting on a handrail leading into the apartment. The purse they found in the alley belonged to a someone else and that person was a murder victim. Strange, huh?

                                EDIT: I went back to read up on this. Sounds like there's confusion on this point. There might be a 2nd purse. Or else still only one. There was a purse found by the searchers that turned out to be the purse of a recent murder victim in Bloomington.

                                And in some early reports the purse found in the alley was referred to as a "coin purse" that was found with the keys in the alley. But then later reports seemed to have stopped mentioning the purse at all and just refer to the keys in the alley.

                                I think maybe reporters have been confused and changed their reporting and that has confused the public as well.

                                Maybe the keys were attached or in the coin purse and the implication of there being two separate and distinct things found in the alley is wrong. Maybe the terminology of calling it a 'purse' at all has been questionable. Maybe 'coin purse' or even 'keychain' was what it was? And to set the keys on the railing would mean the two things were really one and the same....
                                Last edited by Bball; 06-20-2011, 04:02 PM.
                                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                                ------

                                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                                -John Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X