Maura Murray

Maura did not know Floyds son. This was just a rumor that came out after the tragedy of Liko and Mckay. I had heard that they were going to be digging up Floyds yard. Dont know if they ever did or if infact that it ever had anything to do with Maura.

lol, the definition of camping. I actually laughed when I just read that, No i missed that lecture but I'm sure it was enlightening
Let's google the definition of camping, makes everyone else look real stupid doesn't it?
I just loved last week when he copy and pasted that ridiculous equation about heat exchange.
I clearly asked him if he even understood the equation and how it relates to the topic and obviously he didn't answer.
Thats just crazy

I've never seen anyone think theyre such a genius because they know how to look things up online and then copy and past them to a message board

IIRC the SP took custody in the week or 2 following the joint press conference between the NHSP and the VSP and the FBI, the one where they said brianna and maura's cases are not linked, even though they also claim to know nothing about either of the cases. If you know nothing about the cases then how can you possibly say they arent related? but whatevs

I always got the sense that when they sat down with the FBI and showed them the case file the BI agents were probably like "what? you don't even have possession of the car"
They must have felt pretty stupid in that meeting with the FBI when they had to tell them that they never took possesion of the car or conducted any forensic testing of the car.
Its theoretically possible that car was a treasure trove of trace evidence but theyll never know because they waited so long to examin it forensicly

citigirl wrote:

Maura did not know Floyds son. This was just a rumor that came out after the tragedy of Liko and Mckay. I had heard that they were going to be digging up Floyds yard. Dont know if they ever did or if infact that it ever had anything to do with Maura.

Thank you citigirl - It was obvious based on ages etc

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Seriously, how much shit can one guy do? And not only do but be a complete expert on, its hilarious.
Your so right about him calling them "the whites" very impressive, he calls them the whites, he must really know his way around the whites, regular old mountain man. I loved when he was talking about going out in the middle of the night in the middle of the winter and setting up camp, he does it "all the time" lol. Who the hell sets up camp in the middle of the night all the time? Maybe once or twice but he really expects us to believe he's done this a lot?
and i just loved when he forgot how many houses he said he owned,that was classic. and then tried to explain it away as a typo, but it was a whole post and he said it a few times. totally classic. After that I dont see how anyone can trust a word out of this guys mouth. I'm sorry but you don't forget how many houses you own unless your really old and really rich, kind of like John McCain. lol

An overgrown Weeblo-In real life people most likely consider him a dweeb-on here he can be a homeowner-or maybe theres a creepy dude that camps at night "hidden agenda" whoosh whoosh

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

IIRC the SP took custody in the week or 2 following the joint press conference between the NHSP and the VSP and the FBI, the one where they said brianna and maura's cases are not linked, even though they also claim to know nothing about either of the cases. If you know nothing about the cases then how can you possibly say they arent related? but whatevs
I always got the sense that when they sat down with the FBI and showed them the case file the BI agents were probably like "what? you don't even have possession of the car"
They must have felt pretty stupid in that meeting with the FBI when they had to tell them that they never took possesion of the car or conducted any forensic testing of the car.
Its theoretically possible that car was a treasure trove of trace evidence but theyll never know because they waited so long to examin it forensicly

Jenkins- My gut tells me that everything took place away from the car- you think different?

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

IIRC the SP took custody in the week or 2 following the joint press conference between the NHSP and the VSP and the FBI, the one where they said brianna and maura's cases are not linked, even though they also claim to know nothing about either of the cases. If you know nothing about the cases then how can you possibly say they arent related? but whatevs
I always got the sense that when they sat down with the FBI and showed them the case file the BI agents were probably like "what? you don't even have possession of the car"
They must have felt pretty stupid in that meeting with the FBI when they had to tell them that they never took possesion of the car or conducted any forensic testing of the car.
Its theoretically possible that car was a treasure trove of trace evidence but theyll never know because they waited so long to examin it forensicly

So if the FBI studied the files,why didnt they check back in or stick around?Just the Logs alone should have sent up red flags.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
That's right citigirl - when did LE take custody? How many days was it at lavois?

I dont have an exact date but it was months. Iam not saying that Lavoies was doing any thing wrong. He towed the car like he was instructed to do by LE. It was towed to Lavoies auto center on the night of Feb.9,2004 and was still there in in April of 2004. There was a photo of the vehicle in a local newspaper in April of 2004 with the drivers door open which means others had access to the vehicle. It was months later after the accident that NHSP impounded the car and brought it to Twin Mountains. Before this Fred had assumed police had already done forensics on the vehicle. But with info he had found out later he began to question whether or not they did forensics. He wrote to the AGs office and asked for the car back and they said no.

findmaura wrote:

<quoted text>
So if the FBI studied the files,why didnt they check back in or stick around?Just the Logs alone should have sent up red flags.

Who says they didn't stick around? They might be part of the investigation and we don't know it.

yea that rumor was pretty easy to debunk.

I would really like to know if they ever dug on his propery and if it was in relation to maura, someone else, or just looking for bodies.

THe more I've read about this guy the scarier he seems. Theres more than a couple quotes from him that are chilling, and he certainly claims to have killed people. Right after killing Liko and almost killing Macaulay he told Macaulay that this is the 20th person he's killed.

Well we know he wasn't in vietnam so who are all these people he's killed. A lot of the other times, like when he claimed he killed 42 people in nam, can be written off as just some weirdo bullshitting, but to say that right after he had just killed someone seems like it should be looked at a little more close IMO. Because the main thing isnt neccesarily that he said it, its more how comfortable he seemed with killing liko. He didn't seem troubled by it at all, he actually seemed perfectly happy about it.

An average citizen is going to feel remorse, most people would be deeply troubled if they had to kill someone like that. Even if they thought it was life and death, this is just what most people who have had to kill someone report. This guy seemed super cool with it, like it was killing a rabbit, like he's done this before.
It truly seemed like he had killed before.
But he wasn't in nam, he would have only been 17 at the time.

Could he potentially be the CRV serial killer? He sure fits the profile, like exactly. The profiler even said something about the perp likely being related to the military. Floyd was definetly trained by the marines, sounds like he's pretty bummed that he missed nam.
The fact of the matter is that most people that were really in Nam are not happy that they had to kill people, nobody is. All of my buddies that went to the middle east and had to kill people are troubled by it. They certainly are not bragging about it and certainly aren't happy about it.

The guy is a seriously scary individual, it scares me to think that he would have heard the call out on his scanner, he would have known that there was a young little girl possibly walking his direction in the middle of the night in february. If she actually walked a few miles up 112 she would have been freezing. She also, at that point, would have escaped any troble that the cops would bring. So you would think she'd be feelin pretty lucky at that point. I could see her letting her guard down a little bit if she's freezing her ass off and she knows she has another 12 miles to get to civilization.

Somebody needs to take a long, hard look at Floyd. Even if not for this crime, but for other crimes as well. I feel this guy is like the exact profile of a person likely to be a killer. Scary dude for real

findmaura wrote:

<quoted text>
So if the FBI studied the files,why didnt they check back in or stick around?Just the Logs alone should have sent up red flags.

Wow Citigirl that's all I can say!! I am shocked that the NHSP didn't take the car sooner. Stunned!! What about forensics? A hasty forensic search of the car? make sure right?

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
Look at WTH and his so called resume - EMT part time- engineer - ones tons of houses - knows everything about everything - a line of bull crap and it it is so easy to see. A part time emt and he knows all about Flir and all the trails in the "whites" oooh impressive he says the whites isn't it ? like he knows the whites. he is so full of shit it stinks and so is his alter ego FRMLE. All one in the same.
The rest of the morons are obvious and don't bite on it. they are not here for the right reasons- so this forum is rather useless.

you missed a couple key points of his reaume- he also was an army scout for 20 years, done wilderness search and rescue for 25 years and he's also on the fire department.

His words carry weight that would break a lesser man's jaw...
He is...The most interesting man in the world

stay thirsty my friends

jwb wrote:

<quoted text> Did you ever read the lecture I got about the definition of camping? Hilarious OMG I am afraid to go camping because I don't know if I am doing it right now.

There is no need to get your tent pegs in a knot, crampons in a twist or ever get lost in a posthole, help is always available right here. Think of the money you'll save JWB by not having to buy the Outdoor Living App.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
Jenkins- My gut tells me that everything took place away from the car- you think different?

No, I agree with you completely.
BUt that doesn't neccesarily mean there couldn't be any evidence associated with the car, mainly finger prints.

What if the guy stood next to the car speaking to maura and he touched the car, like often if someone is sitting in the car the person will put their hands right above the door as they lean in to talk to them.
ALso right on the front of the hood there could porentially be prints if the guy "helped" her with her car, or maybe at the trunk or something like that.

Also we aren't 100% sure what happened so theoretically something could have happened in the car but they would never know that unless they forensically examined it for trace evidence.

I think a great place to start the investigation would be to take fingerprints all over the car and first figure out who had been in, or touched the car. All of this would have had to been done very soon after the accident to be ablt to have trace prints still on the outside of the car.
I wonder why the elected not to do this.
What did they know that we don't?

It seems as if they know that there would be no evidence at the car, almost as if they know that she walked about 100 yds up the road and caught a ride and that person either went up BHR or west down 112. That would explain why the only searched west and they never really seemed very interested in a forensic examination of the saturn

How could they not at least want to print the car?
wouldn't that be a smart, logical way to start the investigation, by determining who had been in the car and why.

As far as I can tell theres only 2 reasons not to do a forensic search. Either you know for a fact your not going to find anyhting and your wasting your time, or shoddy investigative practices.

Unless you know that there is no evicence that can be gleened from the car I see no reason why you wouldn't want to forensically examine it.

Even if she did get picked up 100yds from the scene and they knew it you still should want to forensically examine it. THink about it, theres evidence that her car actually dies before the corner and thats why she crashed, rather than he spinning out around the corner. In all likelihood that is exactly what happened.
Well what if she already was having car troubles and somebody offered to "help" her at a gast station or something like that.
WHat if he spoke to her at another spot earlier in her ride and touched the car then?

There could be, and probably isn't much that can be obtainted from the car but the fact is that the possibility was there and they didn't act on it, why not?

But something else is the damage to the front end. I wonder if LE ever had it examined by a forensic accident reconstructionist like the NHLI.
THe expert that volunteered his time for the NHLI said the daage was not possibly caused by a tree or a snowbank but rather by some sort of "overhang object", such as a bumper or a tow hitch or something that overhangs and is high enough to not touch the bumper.

Something that is very troubling is the fact that in the last few years the car has been damaged, fairly extensively, while being held as evidence at the troop F barracks. Why?
How is it that a car gets more smashed up while being held as evidence at the SP barrack.
Is it common for the NHSP to damage vehicles that they are holding as evidence for what they believe is most likely a murder case??
Do other items being held for evidence at their barracks regularly get damaged?
How often is it that cars in their possesion get damaged?
Did other cars being held as evidence also get damaged?
WHy is it that all the new damage to the car is right wshere the old damage is, completely ruining any evidentiary value?
Is it a coincidence that the damage used to show that it definitely wasn't a snowbank or a tree, because there was no bumper damage, now has damage that is potentially consistent with hitting a tree? Really? Just the bumper gets damaged? and right at the exact right spot to ruin the evidence it held? Something is really messed up here

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
I think a great place to start the investigation would be to take fingerprints all over the car and first figure out who had been in, or touched the car. All of this would have had to been done very soon after the accident to be ablt to have trace prints still on the outside of the car.
I wonder why the elected not to do this. What did they know that we don't? It seems as if they know that there would be no evidence at the car, almost as if they know that she walked about 100 yds up the road and caught a ride and that person either went up BHR or west down 112. That would explain why the only searched west and they never really seemed very interested in a forensic examination of the saturn

After Leah Roberts went missing from North Carolina in 2000 her crashed Jeep was found in a remote mountainous area of Washington State with Leah nowhere to be found. SEVEN years after her disappearance LE reexamined her vehicle and found a series of previously undocumented fingerprints and evidence that the Jeep had been tampered with.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
Who says they didn't stick around? They might be part of the investigation and we don't know it.

I suppose that's theoretically possible but it seems pretty unlikely, especially with Fred and everyone else's crying for the FBI to be brought in. I would think that if the FBI was helping they would say so.

It seems like the nhsp are more than happy to investigate it themselves. & in reality they have more than enough resources to conduct a proper investigations, the question is whether or not they're using their resources as best they can. Judging by the forensic work to the car it wouldn't appear so, we can only hopetjere was a damn good reason not to.
But judging by the the fact they took the csr following the meeting with the FBI I'm gonna say no, their reason wasn't good enough and they should've forensically examined that car in te first week when it became clear she wasn't just coming home after partying for a week

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
After Leah Roberts went missing from North Carolina in 2000 her crashed Jeep was found in a remote mountainous area of Washington State with Leah nowhere to be found. SEVEN years after her disappearance LE reexamined her vehicle and found a series of previously undocumented fingerprints and evidence that the Jeep had been tampered with.

Wow thats crazy Frosty, 7 years? Thats exactly what I'm talking about. Who knows what a proper forensice examintion could have produced. I guess it even potentially still could produce results.
I would hope that when the SP took the vehicle they did a proper exam of it.

Thats interesting that they found evidence the car was tampered with.
I always thought the rag very well could be that evidence, it surprises me that everyone writes it off so quickly.
Laboie is an expert on cars and he said it could be a good way to disavle a car. I asked a friend and he said that if a shop rag is folded a praticular way it definitely can disable a car, it was an old school way of troubleshooting a motor.

There is also evidence that her car died BEFORE the corner causing her to lost control, this is consistent with something disabling the car.
What caused it to die before the corner? We know that the motor wasn't dead because once the rag was removed the car started right up.

Another big question is what caused smith to look up the tailpipe in the first place? THis is not normal for a cop to do when he finds a car after a minor accident. Who ever heard of a cop looking up a tailpipe? Thats really weird.
Almost as if he was looking for something that could have disabled the car.
WHy else look up the tailpipe>?
YOu have a missing girl and it looks like her car could have been disabled.
We have a rag that was found in the tailpipe.
Maybe its nothing but to me that sounds like it could be evidence of foul play.

We also have some guy in a red truck that was looking for someone on foor, almost as if he expected her car to die. He was looking originally west of the SSS, maybe he didn't think her car would have been able to make it that far with the rag up the muffler.

I know Fred said the rag came from her trunk but he's said a lot of things that turned out not to be true. How was he so sure? Did he look in the trunk?> it sounds like it was a common shop rag so it could've been a different rag. He supposedly said that to Lavoie, I kind of get the sense that he said that off the top of his head to try to make it look like she wasn't suicidal. I'd bet the first thought to his mind was that Lacoie thought she was trying to kill herself and he was making an excuse for her.

The whold thing about the rag is just weird but the fact is that a rag can potentially be used to disable a car. I know it sounds strange but she is missing, her car did probably die before the corner, someone looked like they were looking for her and there was a rag found in her tailpipe.
Aldo the scene was so strange to Smith that he decided to look up the taipipe and was on scene for almost 2 hours. That in itself is not normal. Generally a cop finds a car, calls the tow truck and is gone pretty quickly. Maybe a half hour-45 mins max in most cases. What made him stay on scene so long? What was so strange about the scene that it warranted extra attention and a full examination of the car, one that includes looking up her tailpipe?

FrmLE wrote:

I tried to read through that long rambling nonsense you wrote jenkins, I really did, but you lost me on the second or third run on sentence. Learn to write, go back to school or something.
You are right, I never was a NHSP Detective, never worked NIU, NHAG's DTF, or on a DEA TF. Never did any of those things you mention. Nope, I made it all up, just like you I saw the movie and spun my web of lies.
Yep, that's it you caught me. Darn
Go back to your fantasy world as a make believe copper here on topix, instead of looking for a real job, I will leave you to it buddy.

That is so funny, you clearly can't answer any of the questions I asked, if you could have you would have. YOu know that if you answer them you are just going to look like the complete bullshit artist that you really are.
So much easier to claim you can't understand the questions right?
Since when are you illiterate?
I read through my post and I couldnt find one run on sentance. Maybe one at the end where I forgot to type a period but its still very easy to read.
WHy don't you show me one run on sentance from that post that doesn't make sense?

Here's the first paragraph:

?Ok so your saying you were an NHSP detective, correct? And your saying that just because you were an NHSP detective that you know what happened? or are you saying that you were actually able to obtain the evidentiary findings? So basically what your saying is that any former NHSP detective can walk into the SP barracks and request evidentiary findings just because they want to know? Why? because you used to be a detective and your interested? Why can't Frank Kelly, John Healy or any of the NHLI go do that? They were all former NHSP detectives, What makes you so special that they share their findings with you just because you want to know? bullshit! total bullshit! totally epic amount of bullshit! "

That was the first paragraph, exactly what sentance is a run on and what sentance can't you understand?
Or is it that I clearly show that your totally lying about having inside information and its blatanly obvious?
Back to the arguments of 5 year olds for you, personal attacks.
Its actually hilarious.
You can't even answer one question can you?
YOu know that as soon as you start answering details like that your gonna be proved a liar to everyone.
lol, what a joke this guy is

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
After Leah Roberts went missing from North Carolina in 2000 her crashed Jeep was found in a remote mountainous area of Washington State with Leah nowhere to be found. SEVEN years after her disappearance LE reexamined her vehicle and found a series of previously undocumented fingerprints and evidence that the Jeep had been tampered with.

It's interesting that you mention Leah Roberts. There are some very weird similarities between the disappearances of Leah Roberts and Maura Murray. Both young women were nearing completion of their college studies, and both had left on a whim without discussing their plans with any friends or family. Both disappeared during winter in rural mountainous areas, and both disappearances involved wrecked abandoned vehicles.

These coincidences probably don't mean anything... But who knows. There are serial criminals out there, and there are plenty of criminals who stalk college campuses.