The Search Intensifies for Missing IU Student

Indiana University Sophomore, Lauren Spierer [20], went to Kilroy’s Sports Bar in Bloomington, IN, last Thursday night/early Friday morning (6/3/11) and has been missing ever since. Surveillance video at the bar shows Lauren drinking with a bunch of friends, and then leaving the bar with no shoes and without her cell phone at about 2:30a.m. Lauren then returned to her apartment building about a block away.

A search warrant was served to the Smallwood Plaza Apartments—where Lauren lives—at around 8:00p.m., Monday night. Oddly enough, even though the police had a search warrant handy, no one in charge at the apartment complex was willing to open the security room for them. So, police used a battering ram to brake down the security room door, where they removed three computers used to record and store information from the security cameras that record the surveillance video outside the complex.


Police say that they do have surveillance video from Lauren’s apartment showing her entering and leaving her apartment around 2:40a.m., on the morning of her disappearance. Police are searching the remainder of the surveillance footage to see if there is any other video of Lauren after that 2:40a.m., departure time. Lauren was with a friend at the time. After leaving Lauren’s apartment, Lauren and her friend headed 3 blocks north to another friends apartment. Lauren left there at 4:30a.m., and hasn’t been seen since. She was wearing black leggings, a white shirt, and no shoes.

Her purse was found in the dirt-riddled alley way that connects her apartment to her friends place. It is not known whether the purse was left there before she went to the friend’s place or after she left, according to Lt. Bill Parker, who supervises the investigation division in the Bloomington Police Department. “We believe the chance that there was foul play is very great because if not Lauren would have made contact by now,” Parker also said. Police have spoken to all of the friends that Lauren was with that night, they even searched the cars of her friends, and they have found nothing. Some credit cards were also missing from Lauren’s purse; a check has been made and none of the cards have been used as of yet. Her keys were also found on a railing near her apartment in downtown Bloomington.


Lauren’s parents, Charlene and Robert Spierer, held a press conference yesterday asking for people to continue praying for Lauren’s safe return and calling for anyone who has any information to come forward. “If anyone saw Lauren on Thursday night with anyone, please share that information with Bloomington police,” her father Robert said. “It doesn’t matter how casual the sighting was; we need to know when you saw her; where you saw her; every little piece of information we get is important.”

Hundreds of people have since converged on Bloomington to help in the search. Police, and volunteers, have canvassed the entire downtown area and they are sending more squads out a bit further, but as of now there is no specific area that police are asking people to search. Police also announced that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children have assigned a field officer to assist with the volunteer searches.

Social media outlets, such as Twitter and Facebook, are being used by many to help locate Lauren. The hashtag (#FindLauren) has been a top trending topic in recent days on Twitter.

Meanwhile, today on Twitter Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay pledged a $10,000 reward for “serious info that SOLVES Lauren’s Missing Persons…Contact Bloomy Police!!!!!”

Lauren Spierer is a white female who is 4-feet-11-inches tall, a slender build, with blue eyes and blond hair. She was last wearing a white tank top with a light-colored shirt over it and black stretch pants. Police are asking those who have any information on Lauren’s whereabouts to call or send an anonymous email or letter:

Bloomington Police
220 E Third St
Bloomington IN 47404
812-339-4477
police@bloomington.in.gov

PART 2

PART 3

Amityville Survivor Speaks!

Christopher John Quaratino [43], formerly known as Christopher Lutz, (one of the REAL children of George and Kathy Lutz, the protagonists of The Amityville Horror movie) has confirmed the haunting and is taking a stand-- challenging the makers of the new Amityville Horror movie!

In a rare comment from Quaratino, he said:

“George Lutz, brought the troubles on himself (and our family) by dabbling in the occult, it wasn’t just the House that was the problem. That’s why it followed us.”

Bob Weinstein in his joint deal with Miramax and Dimension announced at Cannes film festival that his company is moving forward with its new movie “The Amityville Horror: The Lost Tapes,” to be released in theaters 27 January 2012. Jason Blum who produced the “Paranormal Activity” films, which have grossed close to $400 million worldwide, is set to produce. Blum is quoted by Variety as saying, “I'm thrilled to be working with Bob to reinvent one of the all-time great horror franchises, and I think this new installment will really hit home with a new generation of moviegoers.”

In a recent comment Weinstein said, “We are thrilled to return to the mythology of the Amityville Horror with a new and terrifying vision that will satisfy our existing fans and also introduce an entirely new audience to this popular haunting phenomenon.”

In response to the films announcement, Quaratino has made a clear challenge to the makers of the movie:

“They want to reinvent the story? A whole new generation won’t know what really happened? Just as all those that don’t know, who have followed this story for the last 35 years. The time has come for me to set the record straight, a fresh look from an alternative perspective, through the eyes of one of the children who peered out from those iconic quarter round windows. An eyewitness to the actual events that occurred in the Amityville house and what followed.”


“Therefore, I am calling out The Weinstein brothers, Bob and Harvey, your producers and writers. And Hannibal Films who have already begun making the next movie sequels to the story that should have died so long ago “The Amityville Horror". To these companies, who are bowing down to the golden calf milking the story one more time allying themselves with the top horror writers and producers in the business.”

“I SAY THIS, at what you do, you are good, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO ‘AMITYVILLE and what happened after...I CAN TELL A CREEPIER STORY THAN YOU!”

“I am challenging you to a contest. The contest should be judged in the vein of American Idol, where the public casts their vote to decide the outcome, and ultimate winner. The specific categories to be judged, should be the very thing your audiences so desire. The best stories of all time are what they are, because of the very things I am challenging you in.”

“The specific categories are as follows:
1. You keep it Realistic. I'll keep it Honest.
2. Thought Provoking
3. Genuine Chill Producing (shocking jumps, don’t count)
4. Psychologically Impacting”

“If you choose to accept this Challenge, do so publicly. I await your answer!”


Quaratino is looking to generate enough media attention that the movie companies and the media take him seriously. He also appears very serious about setting the record straight. Quaratino has invited the public to follow along as he faces the demons of his past and the movie giants of today by logging on to:

http://www.amityvillehorrorchallenge.com/

and on Facebook at

http://on.fb.me/kdGM4L

Human Intelligence Models

The definition of human intelligence “depends on whom you ask, and the answer differs widely across disciplines, times, and places” (Sternberg & Kaufman, 1998). A rough description is “the ability to excel in a variety of tasks, especially related to academic success” (Davis & Palladino, 2009). Gauging human intelligence has never been easy or an exact science. In fact, no topic in psychology has stirred-up more public controversy (Gottfredson, n.d.). French psychologist, Alfred Binet, was the first to develop an intelligence test (Davis & Palladino, 2009).

It seems as though the answers that we receive from any type of intelligence testing (psychometric intelligence tests) just lead us to more questions. For instance, we know that racial and ethnic groups differ on average when scores are tallied from conventional tests of intelligence (Sternberg & Kaufman, 1998). Various questions arise from these varying scores; in terms of social, environmental, and economical. The goal of these intelligence models is to consider the mental processes that account for human intelligence.

Spearman’s Model



It was British psychologist, Charles Spearman, who introduced factor analysis, which is known as the two-factor theory. Spearman believed that there were two factors (or two types of intelligence): general intelligence (g) and the other representing a number of specific abilities (s) (Davis & Palladino, 2009). Spearman believed that testing a person’s abilities to complete tasks against expected outcomes could be measured in a mathematical formula known as the Tetrad Equation. Spearman hypothesized that if a person scored highly on an intelligence test there was a high probability that they would score well in other areas of intelligence also. Through his various experiments, Spearman concluded that through the use of "g," there was now theoretical basis for Binet's way of designing tests (Spearman, 1904). Spearman also believed that his theory was supported by Karl Lashley’s experiments with rats, because the loss of cerebral tissue would cause rats to thwart specific functions (Spearman, 1904).

Sternberg’s Model



Cognitive psychologist, Dr. Robert Sternberg, first began with intelligence testing by testing a 7th grade class for a science project. This led him to create his own test, the Sternberg Test of Mental Abilities (STOMA) ("Human Intelligence: Robert J. Sternberg," n.d.). Dr. Sternberg eventually created his own model of intelligence called the “triachich theory.” This theory asserts that human intelligence derives from a balance of three types of intelligences: analytical, creative, and practical.

• Analytical intelligence - The ability to break down a problem or situation into its components. This type is assessed by most intelligence tests
• Creative intelligence - The ability to cope with novelty and solve problems in new and unusual ways
• Practical intelligence - Also known as common sense. This type of intelligence is the one that is understood by the public but it is missing from standard intelligence tests

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences



Harvard graduate, Howard Gardner, believed that there was more to intelligence than what had been previously introduced, or what was being tested. Gardner believed that there were a wide range of characteristics that accounted for intelligence that needed to be considered. According to Dr. Gardner, there are nine different characteristics that make-up human intelligence:

• Verbal/linguistic intelligence
• Logical-mathematical intelligence
• Pictures/spatial intelligence
• Musical intelligence
• Self-reflection (intrapersonal intelligence)
• Kinesthetic (physical) intelligence
• Interpersonal (social) intelligence
• Naturalist (experience in the natural world) intelligence
• Existential (ability to pose and ponder questions of existence)

Compare and Contrast

Some critics argue that intelligence research is misleading, and that no general mental capacity exists--only opportunities to learn skills and information that is valued in a particular cultural context (Gottfredson, n.d.). However, there is much research that proves that the research done thus far is not only credible, but applicable to real-life situation (as well as a direct correlation to past scientific research).

Spearman’s model is an older model, created at the turn of the century. Still, it is based on the scientific method and still holds much credence in our current world. Spearman’s “positive manifold” gave the best evidence for a general type of intelligence, which supports several different areas of cognitive ability (Spearman, 1904). Moreover, there is an extremely high correlation between IQ (testing) and simple cognitive tasks, which supports the theory of general intelligence (Eysenck, 1982). Spearman ultimately believed that intelligence could be defined by a limited number of factors when he said, “cognitive events do, like those of physics, admit throughout of being reduced to a small number of definitely formulatable principles in the sense of ultimate laws” (Spearman, 1904).

Sternberg’s triachich theory is “a comprehensive theory, more encompassing. . . because it takes into account social and contextual factors apart from human abilities" (Li, 1996, p. 37). Sternberg's theory has particularly proved itself to be most valuable in real life situation, which is the reason for its credibility. For example, Brazilian children who work for street vendors can do the math that is required for running a street business, but they cannot pass a math class in school (Carraher, Carraher, & Schliemann, 1985). This evidence strongly suggests that there is a practical intelligence of math and an analytical intelligence.

Dr. Gardner believed in challenging the current educational system, which assumes that everyone can learn the same materials in the same way—a theory that is heavily biased and based only on linguistic and mathematical models (Gardner, 1993). Gardner’s theory is clearly the most comprehensive model. Gardner believed that ignoring biology when attempting to define and understand intelligence is a mistake. In Gardner’s own words, “Now it has been found that certain brain parts do distinctively map with certain cognitive functioning, as evidenced by certain brain damage leading to loss of certain cognitive function…Conclusion: Therefore, multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1993). Gardner’s theory was truly biological, as he studied people with speech impairments, paralysis, etc. Gardner was concerned with localizing the areas in the brain which were responsible for each function. "Gardner found seven different areas of the brain, and so his theory consists of seven different intelligences, each related to a specific portion of the human brain" (Li, 1996).

Many children learn differently and their gifts, unfortunately, are not correctly burgeoned. Most of these children are simply diagnosed and labeled with ADD (attention deficit disorder) and some are simply labeled underachievers. Gardner’s theory calls for a transformation of the entire educational system. Gardner declares that our teachers need to be retrained on how to present their lessons in a more creative way, using music and other types of multimedia in order to accommodate all students (Gardner, 1993). In this way, it is Gardner’s theory that will not allow certain children to fall through the cracks of society; hence, bettering our society as a whole.

Knox Appeal: Tears & Twists

As expected, The two court-appointed experts—Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti—from La Sapienza University officially stated that they could not retest the contested DNA evidence and are now assessing the reliability of the tests that were originally conducted (as has been previously predicted—nothing new). Today, during the seventh hearing (which laster about two hours), the two experts asked the court for a six week extension to examine DNA evidence on the knife and bra clasp and their request was granted. Vecchiotti and Conti will finish their report 30 June 2011 and describe their findings to the court at a 25 July 2011 hearing.

Dressed in a beige satin top and black trousers, a teary-eyed and emotional Amanda Knox briefly addressed the appeals court in Perugia today. “I don’t want to spend my whole life in prison as an innocent,” she asserted during her 90-second statement.

Another important decision made today was the decision to allow five new defense witnesses, all of whom are inmates in Italian prisons who claim to have information clearing Knox and Sollecito. Which, if any, are we to believe? The new witnesses, as have been well documented for months now, include convicted child murderer, Mario Alessi—along with newly documented, three witnesses called to back up Alessi's claim—as well as jailed mobster, Luciano Aviello .

And, as if there wasn't enough drama in this case already; a new surprising and bizarre twist has now emerged! Today, the court discussed a three-page handwritten document dated 6 May 2011, that was sent to the court and to Knox's defense team by (oh yes, it’s true!) another inmate, Tommaso Pace.

In this latest version, Pace sent a written statement to the court claiming that a drug dealer had paid €100,000 to have Meredith Kercher murdered over an unpaid debt. In his letter Pace named the man he said had ordered the murder, paying two brothers to carry it out, and said that the Marietti knife (alleged murder weapon) was not the weapon used to kill Miss Kercher. Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman ruled that he would delay any decision on whether or not to admit Pace as a witness but said that the first prisoners would be heard on 18 June 2011 (the next hearing) with special arrangements being made for them to testify.

After the witnesses and experts testify, the court will adjourn for a summer break and pick up again in September, at which time the prosecution and defense lawyers will give their closing arguments. A verdict by the appeals court is expected after the summer, but don’t hold your breath.

Knox’s Slander Trial Begins

Amanda Knox was back in court today, a saying that has become very familiar over the last few years. This hearing, however, was not part of her appeals trial, but rather on charges of slandering seven Perugia police officials and an interpreter. Dressed in a white long-sleeve t-shirt, black slacks, and a green band in her hair, Knox entered the courtroom and smiled as soon as she saw her father, Curt Knox.

During the seventeen-minute session, Knox answered, “Si” (yes in Italian), to the question from Judge Daniele Cenci if she understood Italian.

Knox's lawyer, Luciano Ghirga, said that the slander trial was adjourned until 15 November 2011, after a brief hearing devoted to procedural issues raised by the defense.

Knox’s appeals trial resumes this Saturday. Independent experts had been scheduled to discuss their review two pieces of DNA evidence that the defense is contesting; however, the independent forensic experts have requested 40 more days to file their report. They are expected to formally make this request on Saturday in front of the judges, at which time a decision on the matter will be rendered.

CNN Special on Knox Case: Embarrassing!

This special was all I though it would be, and worse! This CNN report goes down as top 5 most grossly reported stories on this case, and I may be being kind—it could be numbers 1 or 2 (click here to see documentary). As I predicted, Knox’s family members were heavily relied on in the documentary. Moreover, I predicted that Mignini’s interview was going to be a set-up to make him look like the “Monster” he has been portrayed throughout—this is just what happened people. In fact, it was Mignini that appeared to be on trial in this documentary, not Amanda Knox.

At 7:20 of the video, Drew Griffin explains the evidence against Amanda as the Marietti knife, the bra clasp, and the homeless man, Antonio Curatolo. Coincidentally, he does not mention all of the other evidence against Knox and Sollecito. Moreover, these three evidentiary items are the only things being contested in the appeals of both Knox and Sollecito (Hence, you are witnessing the Knox PR spin in full force). So, as we begin to see, Griffin has excluded all other evidence—as he knows much of his audience will take his word as truth—in a sinister attempt to later dispute and ultimately reveal these evidentiary items as faulty; thus, “proving” Knox’s innocence. It is as if Griffin is unaware of all of the other evidence against Knox and Sollecito’ as if he had begun his research from the appeals and had skipped researching the original trial.

Griffin provides a telling statement at 8:04, “For the next hour forget everything you know,” he says. This makes sense, because if we forget everything that we know about the case then Griffin’s reporting seems plausible. However, if we remember the mixed blood evidence, the footprints, the numerous lies of Knox and Sollecito, the phone records, the computer records, and more...then we have a hard, if not impossible, time believing this putrid reporting!

Let’s go over some clear inaccuracies reported by Griffin:

At 13:36, he says that Knox testified that she was denied a translator when referring to her interrogation/arrest.

Fact: Knox testified that she did have a translator at that time, by the name of Anna Donnino, who testified at the original trial.

Griffin intentionally omits all other evidence against Knox and Sollecito, physical or otherwise (other than his brief reference to Knox’s strange behavior, which he seems to have brought up only to scoff).


At 21:13, Dr. Greg Hampikian, a forensic biologist at Boise State University and Director of Idaho’s Innocence Project (also working with Knox’s defense team), says, “I don’t think this [the knife] would have made it onto a U.S. lab report.” He says this because LCN DNA is not really held as a legit form of DNA testing in America.

Fact: However, the fact is that once Sollecito is told by investigators that they had found Meredith’s DNA on the tip of the blade he confirmed this, telling them that he had accidentally pricked Meredith with the knife while he was cooking at his flat—even though Meredith had never been at his flat. Bringing this admission into consideration, which Griffin or Dr. Hampikian both fail to mention, this evidence would have most likely been admitted into a U.S. court room.

At 14:57, after explaining Knox’s confession and fingering Lumumba as the murderer, Griffin says, “Police didn’t bother to check the facts about Lumumba.”

So, Griffin is actually putting this responsibility on police and not on Knox. I don’t care what country you are in, if a woman was murdered and her female roommate says that she was there and “so and so” was the murderer, police are going to arrest that person and sort things out later.

At 15:52, griffin says, “But almost immediately after the arrests, Mignini had a problem, Lumumba had an air tight alibi…he was in his crowded bar.”

Fact: The bar was not even close to crowded; with only 2 patrons and the alibi was not air-tight at all. In fact, it took police nearly two weeks to track these patrons down to confirm Lumumba’s alibi. All the while, Knox never mentioned to police that she lied and incriminated an innocent man.

Then there was the 10min rant about the Monster of Florence case, which was a clear attempt to persuade the audience into believing that Mignini is just a terrible prosecutor who pressures innocents to admit that they are guilty.


Mignini explained it well when he said (27:45), “The two things are completely different, because I interrogated Preston; Amanda was interrogated by the police. Preston wasn’t arrested, Amanda was arrested. The two things are completely different. They have nothing in common apart from the fact that I was the public prosecutor.”

In fact, Mignini is spot on here. Mignini was not called into Knox’s interrogation until after she confessed that she was at the crime scene and Lumumba killed Meredith. Knox’s status was at that time officially changed from witness to suspect and Mignini was then called in.

At 34:16, Griffin says, “The case against Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito seems to be hanging on two very small pieces of DNA evidence.”

Fact: Actually, it is Knox and Sollecito’s defense teams and their appeals that seem to be hanging on these evidentiary items. As for the remainder of the evidence, those which I have listed numerous times throughout this blog; the defense teams have not made any attempts to challenge; and, apparently the media has made no effort to research or mention. The only thing that is clear to me by the end of this documentary is that Griffin is not even qualified to investigate who drank the last glass of the milk from his fridge.


And, as for the bra clasp: there is absolutely no question whether Sollecito’s DNA was or was not on it—it was! There is less than one chance in a trillion that this was not Sollecito’s DNA. This is a mathematical fact, as plenty of his cells were present to provide a reliable test (1.4 nanogram or 1400 picograms—which contains approximately 160 cells). The only thing that can be contested was contamination from the machine [not the machine on this message board], which is virtually impossible to prove—and would almost have to be performed by monkeys to occur, because of the large amount of cells present. Or, due to some type of physical transfer, prior to removal or testing, that would involve an incalculable improbability, considering that Sollecito’s DNA was not found in the cottage anywhere else (other than a cigarette but).

As "The Machine" from TJMK points out, "Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti weren’t able to carry out new tests on the knife and the bra clasp. They will have to look at the same data as Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Francesca Torricelli, Luciano Garofano and Professor Giuseppe Novelli. The fact that these experts looked at the data and came to the same conclusions as Dr. Stefanoni..." is telling and foreshadowing to say the least.

PART 1

Purchase Savive's Latest Book: THE STUDY ABROAD MURDER (Amazon.com)

‘Murder Abroad: The Amanda Knox Story’ – CNN’s Drew Griffin Reports

Do we finally have a fair and accurate account from the American media regarding the Amanda Knox case? Don’t bet on it! This Sunday, CNN will debut a one-hour documentary on the case (May 8, 8:00p.m., ET & PT).

It has been reported that, in the special, the host, Drew Griffin, will conduct a rare television interview with the chief prosecutor in the case, Giuliano Mignini. However, don’t expect a very fair analysis from Griffin, as he reports that Mignini “reveals a pattern of prosecutorial behavior that raises questions about the original conviction” (CNN).

Griffin traveled to Perugia to report for this story. He also traveled to Seattle to speak to Knox’s family, which I am assuming will be the bulk of the special (YAWN)—like we have not heard that side many times. Moreover, Griffin reports much more of the same: rehashed inaccuracies of the case. For example, regarding the special Griffin writes that he [Griffin] will “debrief viewers on Knox’s now-disputed confession – obtained after days of unrelenting questioning, and according to Knox, even physical abuse by police interrogators” (CNN).

So, all in all, this documentary is shaping up to be more of the same: more inaccuracies, more biased reporting, more “proclaimed case experts” who show little real knowledge of the events, and more one-sided reporting. I will give credit to Griffin for actually traveling to Perugia to interview Mignini, if that is in fact what has occurred. However, I expect this interview to be somewhat of a set-up, insofar as Griffin only did the interview to put a spin on Mignini’s position and paint him as the “Monster” he has been portrayed throughout. Just my opinion, time will tell…

Todd Schwarzchild is the senior producer for Murder Abroad; Marcus Hooper is associate producer. Bud Bultman is managing editor and Scott Matthews is the executive producer for the CNN Special Investigations and Documentaries productions unit.

In case you miss it or your TiVo is broken, CNN will also replay the special on Saturday, May 14 at 8:00p.m., ET & PT.

PART 2

Purchase Savive's Latest Book: THE STUDY ABROAD MURDER (Amazon.com)