Maura Murray

It's all entertainment anyway. The family doesn't deserve any respect. My life is so fulfilling that I spend my time insulting the family members of missing persons for asking a question about my credentials on an internet board. But you all should grow up and get a life. Nothing wrong with me at all. Keep posting, I need the entertainment.

jwb wrote:

FRMLE- Thinks the FBI has Jurisdiction over everything including local and state LE.

I'll post this again because clearly you must be ignoring this piece of your stupidity.

WHERE DID HE EVER WRITE THIS? PLEASE POST THIS FOR EVERYONE TO SEE.

Or we will just consider that you have been caught in another of your bullshit statements that aren't true.

Bill

jwb wrote:

Right from the FBI Website http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/faqs "The FBI has special investigative jurisdiction to investigate violations of state law in limited circumstances, specifically felony killings of state law enforcement officers (28 U.S.C.§ 540), violent crimes against interstate travelers (28 U.S.C.§ 540A0, and serial killers (28 U.S.C.§540B). A request by an appropriate state official is required before the FBI has authority to investigate these matters."

Excellent information. If you call an FBI field office you'll get the same answer. Thank you for that.

Anon Cop wrote:

It's all entertainment anyway. The family doesn't deserve any respect. My life is so fulfilling that I spend my time insulting the family members of missing persons for asking a question about my credentials on an internet board. But you all should grow up and get a life. Nothing wrong with me at all. Keep posting, I need the entertainment.

Family members??? What family members?? This is a public forum. You should enter knowing there may be things that you might not want to hear. If you don't know that, you are not that bright.

But, thanks for coming on and playing.

Bill

FrmLE wrote:

<quoted text>
So, you are hinging your entire argument on the fact that I don't know the requirement to get into Canada in 2004? Thats it? That's your argument?
I have never been to Canada, btw. Don't care to go, have no idea what you need to go there. Why would I want to go there when I live in the greatest Country on the Planet?
You are so reaching, lets get back to the FBI being prevented from working Maura's case, lets talk about that instead of all the irrelevant things I don't care to know.
So funny that this is your best argument.

ha ha ha forgot about you post about the FBI needing permission already? A detective that says he goes undercover in a border state and he doesn't even know passport details? ha ha ha

hey - I got you figured out
FRMLE- Former Male Lapdincing entertainer ? right

FrmLE wrote:

.
You can post all the anonymous links about what someone said to someone about how the FBI needs to be invited, it is just absolutely crap.

If anyone had any idea about how these things really happen, behind the scenes, they would realize how absurd and ridiculous the idea is.

Right there, you said it's absolutely crap that the FBI needs to be invited.

I can't believe this is even a debate, it was determined long ago that if the FBI was going to have any more involvement than interviewing people in Amherst they would need to be invited.
The NHSP has never requested their help in NH.
FrmLE- your saying that the NHSP didn't refuse help from the FBI? really? SO the family and the media both have it wrong, and your an anonymous internet poster and you got it right, is that a correct summary?

In reality I dont see what the FBI is going to do that the NHSP can't, except maybe the fact that they have much better forensics guys who could process the vehicle more effectively than the NHSP can.
Other than that what are the FBI even really going to do here?

Seems pretty obvious that the NHSP has a suspect in their crosshairs, but without her body being found or some other piece of physical evidence being found then there isn't really much they can do right now. Without probable cause they can't get the proper search warrants. At this point they are going to have to get lucky. Either the suspect makes a mistake leading to a search warrant, or another witness comes forward that saw something that night that hasn't known Maura went missing.

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
Excellent information. If you call an FBI field office you'll get the same answer. Thank you for that.

Your welcome Frosty and yes I did call the Office to confirm it.

I'm sorry but anyone who was LE in the state of NH would know that you didn't need a passport for canada until 2009.

After 911 there was a big push for this to be changed, and everyone in LE knew this.
Anyone in LE, particularly one who was in narcotics would know about this and the rules for someone to get into and out of canada.

jwb wrote:
Right from the FBI Website http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/faqs "The FBI has special investigative jurisdiction to investigate violations of state law in limited circumstances, specifically felony killings of state law enforcement officers (28 U.S.C.§ 540), violent crimes against interstate travelers (28 U.S.C.§ 540A0, and serial killers (28 U.S.C.§540B). A request by an appropriate state official is required before the FBI has authority to investigate these matters.

MM is a missing person as classified by the NH DOJ; there is no evidence of "violent crimes against interstate travelers" or "serial killers" that have been made known to the public.

Further, there is no official, updated statement published that contradicts the following:

SnowyB wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.mauramurraymissing.com/VTSPNHSPPre ...
Special Agent D.J. Corbet of the Burlington Vermont office of the FBI participated in the joint agency meeting.
SA Corbet reiterated that the FBI has been involved with both missing person investigations since the onset of
each. The FBI has offered several resources and continued support to the two state police agencies heading
these cases and will continue to do so in the future.

Does the winner of this pointless debate get a free pony?

FrmLE wrote:

<quoted text>

I spent years working Narcotics as an undercover officer, with several alternative identities, provided to me by the Federal Government, so I know what it takes to 'create a new identity.' It is not easy.
....

OK FrmLE, on april 20 you said you had several alternative identities provided by the federal govenrment.

Now your saying you had 10 ID's at different times.
So what is it? Identities provided by the federal gov't ID's are 2 completely different things.

Why does it seem your story always changes?

Don't worry, im gonna get into your bullshit post about undercover work in a minute. Sorry I couldn't do it yesterday, I had a long day at the unemployment office again lol, then I had to take my girl out to dinner in noho. I only had time to post the south shore express article where I got the info about Le taking her car in as evidence 2 weeks following the meeting with the FBI, showing that you were completely full of shit when you said that I just made it up. What, you couldn't look that up yourself? Easier to just spout off bullshit than do 5 minutes of research??

Mister E wrote:

Does the winner of this pointless debate get a free pony?

Not to worry. citi and others will repeat the original statement countless times again in the future, and in the same context of LE's not doing enough to find MM. Nothing has or will ever change.

SnowyB wrote:

jwb wrote:
Right from the FBI Website http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/faqs "The FBI has special investigative jurisdiction to investigate violations of state law in limited circumstances, specifically felony killings of state law enforcement officers (28 U.S.C.§ 540), violent crimes against interstate travelers (28 U.S.C.§ 540A0, and serial killers (28 U.S.C.§540B). A request by an appropriate state official is required before the FBI has authority to investigate these matters.
MM is a missing person as classified by the NH DOJ; there is no evidence of "violent crimes against interstate travelers" or "serial killers" that have been made known to the public.
Further, there is no official, updated statement published that contradicts the following:
SnowyB wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.mauramurraymissing.com/VTSPNHSPPre ...
Special Agent D.J. Corbet of the Burlington Vermont office of the FBI participated in the joint agency meeting.
SA Corbet reiterated that the FBI has been involved with both missing person investigations since the onset of
each. The FBI has offered several resources and continued support to the two state police agencies heading
these cases and will continue to do so in the future.

Bottom line is the NH police would have had to ask the FBI to be involved in the case and they did not. They were involved with the vt police with B maitland and were looking at the possiblility of a serial killer or connection. The FBI does not need permission to do that. They were not knocking on doors or helping with forensics etc in mauras case.

Mister E wrote:

Does the winner of this pointless debate get a free pony?

Just tie him up to the trees at the WB curve and I will pick him up tomorrow. Don't put him to close to the road as you never know when someone may oversteer and ruin my prize. And Bill- No rags in my prizes tailpipe ok ?

Is there known evidence of a crime in this disappearance? In my opinion it's human nature for a family to feel no one is doing enough, if the relative missing is victim of foul play and the adbuctor isn't caught.

If there's no evidence, then it's possible that she ran away or took her own life, as commenters at Websleuths debate. Could be that the FBI found no evidence of foul play. Simple as that.

If FBI is still involved then what are they doing?

The debate is pointless either way and I don't need a pony, but I'll bite.

JWB wrote:

<quoted text>
Just tie him up to the trees at the WB curve and I will pick him up tomorrow. Don't put him to close to the road as you never know when someone may oversteer and ruin my prize. And Bill- No rags in my prizes tailpipe ok ?

Thanks JWB. I needed a good laugh.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>Thanks JWB. I needed a good laugh.

yea that was a beuty wasn't it? I think I might have even made Bill smile a little bit on that one. No disrespect intended but it feels good to laugh doesn't it ?

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
Leah seemed to be on a longer Kerouac-esque "On the Road" type of adventure, but her credit cards and bank account went dormant after she was last spotted in Bellingham, WA in March, 2000 and she hasn't been seen since.
You're right TeeJay, there seem to be a lot of career criminals and murderers who excel at honing their skills when selecting quarry to prey upon. They know where to look, what they’re looking for and what they need to do to be successful with their hunt. Both girls were driving cars with out-of-state plates, which would be a definite standout for a predator.
In Leah's case the lead investigator retired 6 years after she went missing and a new detective took over the case and had everything reexamined -- the car and its mechanical system was checked, forensics completely reprocessed her Jeep and they went through her personal belongings again with a fine tooth comb. Previously unprocessed fingerprints were found under the hood of her car, the Jeep was found to be professionally tampered with and other DNA was found elsewhere (not specified in the Disappeared segment). Her vehicle had been sitting outside for nearly 7 years in a police compound before the new investigator chose to take a closer look at all the evidence.
The show is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch... . It's about 44 minutes and the last six minutes pertains to the re-examining of the evidence almost seven years after Leah seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth.

Frostman, THANK YOU for posting that link. I'm about to watch it right now.

FrmLE wrote:

Jenkins, there was no movie, lol, you are such a stooge.
It is a saying, "Surely you have seen the movie or read the book?"
What it means is that there is common knowledge out there about how things work that surely you must know, do you understand?
I really must ask you this, perhaps you care to answer? How do you know all this information about police work? About how undercover narcotics operations work?
You make such bold statements, yet I can't help wonder, how do you know? Aside from 'literally' watching movies or reading books, how would you know how a major narcotics operation works? The logistics of it?
You are so silly, every one of your opinions is based on complete garbage, you have no experience whatsoever. You are a 30-something unemployed kid who writes in Text and has never been a police officer, yet you expect anyone to believe when you say that things work this way, they don't work that way?
It's absurd, you are ridiculous and frankly I suspect your IQ is barely above room temp.
Just the statement that undercover cops don't need and therefore don't have alternate ID's because no one at the drug deal asks you for your license, is absolutely absurd. Just that alone should demonstrate to the 6 readers that you are full of shit.
Seriously? There is no need for a cover ID because no one asks you for it? So, I am to assume that undercover cops just cruise around with their badge, ID, and pictures of the wife and kiddies in their wallet?
LOL, ridiculous, absolutely riduculous. The only time I EVER did any business without at least a partial cover, to include a cover ID, was when I was meeting with a CI who I knew and trusted, other than that I never had less than 1 or 2 cover ID's on me. Never.
Ridiculous, you should stop watching so many movies, start to use your head and think before you type.
You make me laugh, as well as the other chumps who will jump and and say something witty like "get a life", lol. So original.

Ok first off all about your saying, "surely you have seen the movie or read the book"
Are you actually trying to say that undercover operations are really like the movies? Really? any real narcotics officer would know that very very rarely are undercover operations ever like they are in the movies, thats completely ridiculous. Arent you the one who's always talking shit to posters for thinking things in real life are really like the movies or tv? now your saying that movies and TV are like real life, correct? that was the point of that comment was it not? What movie are you even referring to?
Again, the only movie I'm aware of that a state cop is given a true new identity is "the departed", and that movie is not accurate at all. The real life person that character is based on never received a new identity, he was really just a CI working for the SP after he got out of prison for robbing armored cars. So what the hell are you talking about? In general a real narcotics investigation is absolutely nothing like real life and you would know this if you were really who you are claiming to be.

I actually know quite a bit about how undercover narcotics investigations operate. I was a criminal justice major in college and I have many friends who are cops all around New England. I have more than a couple friends who work narcotics in different states too. I know 2 people currently assigned to the NH drug task force(DTF), another on the VSP DTF, another who is a narcoticsfficer in Holyoke, ma, and a very good friend of mine who is a seargent on the Bridgeport,ct TNT(technical narcotics task force iirc), so I know a lot of people who are narcotics officers. I graduated in 2004, im 32 now so a lot of my friends are the perfect age to be undercover narcotics guys because they still look young enough. Your claim your retired now so you must be what, 60? What years were you working underdcover? Were you doing undercover narcotics work at age 50?

One of my best friends from school is currently on the NH DTF. I showed him the post where you claimed to have been provided "several new identities by the federal government" and he literally laughed his ass off. He's never heard of anyone in the SP being provided a new identity by the federal government. He said to me that he couldn't garauntee that its never ever happened in the past but if it had it would be extremely rare and there is no way that one person would be provided multiple identities by the feds. The only kind of operation that would warrant such a drastic action would be one where the officer goes deep undercover to infiltrate an organized crime group. Those are the operations that they make movies about, because theyre so rare. Those operations use giant amounts of resources and take years. You don't only have to provide a new identity to this person, he also needs to dress, act and live like these criminals for a long period of time to gain their trust. This is the only kind of operation that would require a true new identity. My friend also seems to think that the feds would much rather send in one of their own FBI or DEA agents to do an operation like this rather than provide a new identity to a state cop. But if a state police did do this then the operation could take years to accomplish, theyre not going to give this guy another new identity immediately after so he can go deep cover into a different crime organization. How much organized crime does NH even have? Do you really expect us to believe that you've done this multiple times? Who are you super cop?
Any cop who's ever done something like this would never ever talk about it online in a public forum. That would confirm to criminals that they do this kind of thing and could potentially put other undercover operatives in danger. Just the fact that FrmLE said this should prove to just about anybody that he's lying as a real undercover cop would never talk bout it online, ever.

It is extremely rare for a cop to ifiltrate an organized crime group, extremely rare. Go search news articles for the state of NH, try to find one where they talk about a cop infiltrating any group. I can't find one. So FrmLE, you've done all this crazy undercover work but you've never made an arrest?