Maura Murray

There's no way tow truck drivers wer the ones arguing over jurisdiction, tow truck drivers in nh don't have jurisdictions like the do in some cities, like Philly.

The cops generally have agreements with 2 or 3 tow companies in town to tow cars after accidents and traffic stops, etc. The cops will call these companies on a rotation, so a tow truck driver will only be on scene if called by a cop, the cops are only gonna call one company to the scene.

Lavoie's was the only tow truck company on scene. The argument in a back yard over jurisdiction, if it really happened, was not between tow truck drivers.

citi- how sure are we that this argument even took place?

Who told the family this and was the witness reliable?

is there any chance that this person might have made this up for whatever reason? It just makes no sense for LE to be arguing over jurisdiction in nh

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, in New Hampshire that is definetly normal operating procedure. NH is a mutual aid state, i believe its called, this basically means that all jurisdictions share resources and whoever is closest or in the best position to respond will. This is due to the above state reason that resources are limited up there. Most towns have very smalle polic forces of just a few cops, if even that. The state police have jurisdiction over the whole state.
This is why the whole argument over jurisdiction doesn't seem to make any sense, why would they be arguing over jurisdiction?
Something just doesn't make sense with that argument.
Citi- Does that information come from a trusted source? Were you, or someone in your family, told that info directly from the witness who claimed hearing the argument?
I'm just trying to determing the credibility of the statement because it's such a weird thing to hear in NH and I'm trying to decipher what it could possibly mean.

The witness that heard the arguing in there back yard came to the motel we were staying at and spoke to me and my sister.

Snowy may I ask what harm is coming from this conversation? You said more harm than good is being done here. Well, where is this damage?

I see people write this from time to time but none of them has ever been able to show even the slightest bit of damage that has come from people talking about this online. Nobody has ever shown any, and I've asked this probably a hundred times.

The SBD and the CW clearly got it the worst of anybody and no one has been able to show the slightest bit of damage to either of them. According to everyone who posts here the SBD was a respected member of the community that was trusted to drive people's kids to school.
So where is this damage that your referring to?

I don't think anyone posting here has the delusion that they are actually going to solve this case, nobody here has any of the resources that LE has that enables them to actually properly investigate a case like this. But we can help keep it in the public's eye, publicity might be the only thing that solves this case at this point. We know for a fact there are at least a couple witnesses out there who have never come forward, likely because they've never heard of this case. Most people have no idea that MM went missing, even in NH. Pretty much the only thing we can do is attempt to keep it in the public eye, and maybe, just maybe help bring forth a new lead to LE. If the right person hears about this case they might have the info everyone is looking for.
For all we know there is some woman from NYC who was driving to Loon for the weekend and picked maura up 100yds down the road, and she told this woman that she was going to start a new life.
We know that cars drove by the scene when maura was there who have never come forward.
There might be someone who saw her somewhere else later.
A new witness might just provide the new lead that breaks the case.
That will never happen if this case falls completely from public view.

Its my opinion that a thread on Franconia topix isn't even really publicity, but what it does do is keep the media from forgetting about this case. It's pretty obvious that if it wasn't for all the forums dedicated to MM over the years the media would have stopped covering it years ago.

But seriously, how can this thread possibly be doing more harm than good? You think its doing no good, well ok, but where's the harm thats caused?

That's really interesting that the witness seeked you guys out at the motel.

They must have really thought that was important information for the family to have to come find you like that.

Did they happen to hear any more of the conversation or just that they were arguing over jurisdiction?

Did you happen to ask them how it's possible that they knew the argument was over jurisdiction, yet they couldn't hear anything else.

Was it a heated argument or just a discussion? Were the officers yelling?

This just has to have something to do with why tropper JKM refuses to talk about what he did that night to anybody..

Does anyone know exactly how the log system works in NH?
Obviously the SP are going to have different logs than the GCSD, which logs local town calls.

The question is do the individual towns have their own logs or are they all included onthe GCSD logs? How does that work? I really don't think a small town like haverhill or bath is going to have their own logs because I don't think they have their own dispatch. The dispatch is at the GCSD.

Another question I have is how is it not a much bigger deal that there are more than one version of the logs? As far as I can tell currently there are 3 different versions, definetly at least 2.
How is this possible?
Arent the logs supposed to be a legal document, one that could be used as evidence in court?
Well clearly the GCSD logs from that night are not worthy of being evidence in any court of law, there are multiple versions.

I just don't understand how this isn't a huge deal. What is going on here? How could there possibly be 2 different versions of the same log if there isn't anything shady going on? I'm not saying this is definitive evidence of something shady happening, but it sure looks bad if you ask me.

Shack wrote:

I, for one, am tired of the rag thing...my Saturn was a year older...and drove my mechanic nuts shoving rags...only to blow 'em out....the "rag" would have had to be the size of a bath towel...I think it was just hung out to warn drivers heading West. aarrghhh!

Shack one thing we can be absolutely sure of about the rag was that it was definetly not put in her tailpipe to warn other drivers.
First of all her car was facing westbound in the eastbound lane, meaning the front of her car was facing oncoming traffic. So unless we are to believe that Maura was ridiculously stupid and had no commone sense I think we can be confident it wasn't put in there to warn other drivers.

the other thing is that the rag has been described as being shoved way up there, so there just no way it could even warn an oncoming driver.

It also couldn't be left in there after a diagnostic tes accidently like someone else suggested because her car wouldn't drive more than a couple miles, if even that far, with a rag in her tailpipe.

The rag also most definetly wouldn't have to be the size of a bath towel either, it just has to be folded the correct way. There is a very specific way to fold the rag to make it stay in there.
Mike Lavoie is a mechanic that has about 30 years of experience and his direct words were that that could be a good way to disable a car. I've spoken to a good friend who is a very experienced mechanic and he says that this is an old school method of troubleshooting a car and that a car can drive a few minutes like that, maybe as long as 10 minutes if conditions were right for it. He also said it could be a good way to disable a car. So that's 2 very experienced mechanics that both say it could be used to disable a vehicle.

So a rag could certainly be used to disable a vehicle. Another thing is the fact that maura most likely didn't spin out after the WB curve, its more likely that her car lost power just before the corner and she was trying to regain control when she sheared off the snowbank on the left side of the road, causing her to spin around and end up ass in to the other side of the road(the EB lane)

The thing is, we have a missing girl, who's vehicle was found with a rag stuffed up her tailpipe. In my eyes that rag could very well be the evidence of foul play.

What possible reason could Maura have to shove a rag deep in her tailpipe after that crash? It wouldn't be the easiest thing in the world to do either, particularly since i'm sure she's never done that before. She would need someting long and skinny, like a coathanger or possibly a stick. Since a stretched out coathanger wasn't found in her car then she would have had to find a stick to even get it up there. The westmans reported seeing her go back and forth to the trunk, sitting there leisurely for a few minutes with the door open, but definetly not going into the woods looking for sticks to shove a rag deep in her tailpipe.
So how did it get there?
I can really only think of 2 logical reasons, either a perp did it to disable her car, or he put it there after the fact to muddy the waters a little bit, maybe try to make it look like suicide? But even that seems impossible, what did he do go back to her car and shove it deep up her muffler after he abducted her and before the cops showed up? How would that be possible?
The other thing that makes that not sound right is the fact that it was deep up the muffler. If the perp was trying to muddy the waters you would think that he would put it somewhere where it would be seen easily, to make sure that it would definetly be seen. What would be the point of shoving it way up there where it likely would never be seen?

The other thing about this rag is how it was even found. It is not normal for a cop to look up the muffler of a car found abandonded on the side of the road. Who ever heard of that? That is highly unusual. What was it about that scene that made him take such an action?
Judging by what the EMS driver and Lavoie said about the sheared off snowbank, Smith must have seen this as well. When seeing this he must have realized that her car likely lost power before the curve, causing her to lose control.
It looks to me like he was looking for something that may have disabled the car, like something in her muffler, why else look deep in the muffler?

We know that Smith didn't just treat this like a normal car that got left on the side of the road after an accident in the winter, he was on scene for almost 2 hrs. Cops don't stay on scene that long for a normal car left on the side of the road, you would think like a half hour-45 mins max. What is there to do except call the tow truck and make notes on the scene so you could fill out a report later.

What was so strange about the scene to cause Smith to do what he did? Why was he there so long? Why did he feel the need to look deep in her muffler?

It sure looks like Smith thought foul play could have occured that night, nothing else really explains his actions that night. Then when you combine this with them pulling over only trucks that night, 3 of them being red, including one with a temp plate that looks like a mass plate, it starts to paint a picture of them believing she got abducted.

But then on wednesday we got Smith lying to the family saying he thought it was Fred driving the truck. What caused him to lie? What changed between the 9th and the 11th that caused him to lie to the family?
I believe that he originally thought it was foul play. I also believe that someone higher up in the department told him to lie. I think that once the night was over and they realized they had absolutely no idea who the driver of the red truck was, they were probably never going to find the guy. Rather than admit that a violent crime happened and they don't know who the perp is they decided to play down the foul play angle. As far as we know there was no direct evidence supporting foul play, I think they capatilized on this fact, even though they thought she had been abducted. Nobody wants to be the cop that has that happen on their watch. No cops, or departments want that stat on them. YOu have to remember that this is NH so just one violent crime like that can mess with their crime rate. Also they could have been afraid of the town losing faith in them. I'm sorry but it looks really bad if you were on the scene within minutes of the abduction, you knew she was abducted, and you can't find the guy. In reality them being on the scene that quick doesn't really make it easier to find the guy, but to the public it just looks bad.
Smith knew something bad happened that night, he had to have. There had to be some reason that caused him to treat this scene so much different than a regular car that was abandonded after a minor accident in the winter.
This is obviously just my opinion but it is the only thing that explains Smith's actions from that night.
I think he not only knew she was likely abducted, but also that she definetly didn't go east. If he was truly looking for her on foor there is just no excuse to not send somebody east for a few miles to make sure she wasn't walking that way. Either he knew she didn't go east on foot, or its just shoddy police work plain and simple. We know it wasn't a resources issue as some posters have suggested because there were several cars that looked west.

What caused him to look up that muffler and what caused him to only search west of the scene?

It seemed like the back seat of Maura's car held something that was interesting enough to one poster years ago on the old MMM forum to ask what we'd expect to find in the backseat if we could look into Maura's car.

Turns out this guy is a dispatch person with some ties to NH.

So, it kind of begs the question, what would be in Maura's backseat, that would prompt Smith to look deep into the tailpipe of Maura's car and why would he keep EMS/Fire away from the vehicle?

If you blow up the photo of Maura's car it looks like there may have been some sort of heat transfer around the area near the brake/gas pedal as the plastic floor mats appear to have slightly melted.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

That's really interesting that the witness seeked you guys out at the motel.
They must have really thought that was important information for the family to have to come find you like that.
Did they happen to hear any more of the conversation or just that they were arguing over jurisdiction?
Did you happen to ask them how it's possible that they knew the argument was over jurisdiction, yet they couldn't hear anything else.
Was it a heated argument or just a discussion? Were the officers yelling?
This just has to have something to do with why tropper JKM refuses to talk about what he did that night to anybody..

This person had heard arguing in the back yard as to whos jurisdiction it was. I believe if they had heard any other conversation they would have said so.

1 of 2

Jenkins, thank you for inquiring. I'll try to be brief.

Helping or hurting?
How can you assess and measure the "damage" caused to others when individuals are named online in connection with the disappearance of a missing person?

Consider that the SBD has been described as "a respect member of the community that trusted to drive people's kids to school" but not, as you state, "according to everyone who posts here". Anonymous posters imply his guilt by his presumed actions and inactions by suggesting he didn't stay long enough at the scene of the accident after offering help, and after it was refused; he is regarded with suspicion for parking his bus a certain way; he is suspect for "changing" his account to the media (to suggest he lied). Anonymous posters have nothing to lose by casting suspicion, but SBD had everything to lose for his charitable offer to assist a stranded motorist. I cannot quantify for you the probable fallout for his being targeted by online posters; perhaps his family can.

The CW. Why did he report his sighting and observations a number of weeks later? Again, anonymous posters sought information about his life, work and relationships in an attempt to informally "profile" him and measure any appearance of guilt.

A former police chief's addictive and unlawful behaviors were reported to the media; he, too, was examined by online anonymous posters relative to MM's disappearance. Recently, 4 DUIs were attributed to the wrong police chief on Topix before the statement was corrected by the author....not retracted, it is incorrect and remains online.

Beagle, clearly a scapegoat by his accounts of investigations about him secondary to the official investigation, appears to remain in a cycle of fear and reactivity to complex triggers reinforced by Topix posters. Can you measure the effects?

Property damage and trespassing has been documented; newcomers have been made aware of these offenses, and yet deny them and shift the blame back to property owners. This is unacceptable, IMO.

Attempts to discredit Fred Leatherman/Mason continue to circulate on and offline in the form of retaliation at a personal level. Why? Because his theoretical conclusions, drawn from information he gleaned and evaluated as an experienced criminal defense attorney, don't match up with her family's assessment of circumstances surrounding MM's disappearance.

What do we have here? Free speech, yes. Opinions, yes. Proof, rarely. And a spiteful exchange of finger pointing. Helpful or damaging? Any luck, so far, in finding Maura in this manner?

Floyd and McKay are local targets for having been in the news. In addition, an individual associated with a local prominent family has been targeted for blame. The details leave little to the imagination.

How is damage inflicted? Directly and indirectly. Remember, asking a question can imply guilt. Several posters are adept at that superficial skill.

But it's natural and common to dissect every tragic news story online, isn't it? Imagine it is your family...a wife or young child is missing....or there was a tragic car accident with a death involved...or a shooting. How can the public possibly know the details and facts known to law enforcement? While you are free to express your opinions, and make statements about situations where you are not fully informed, SHOULD YOU? Is there a moral obligation to avoid making declarations of guilt or innocence about strangers?

The conversation had already deteriorated elsewhere before coming toTopix; Maura's sympathizers and advocates had been eyeing, targeting and blaming certain individuals early on.

2 of 2

You write: "We know for a fact there are at least a couple witnesses out there who have never come forward, likely because they've never heard of this case. Most people have no idea that MM went missing, even in NH. Pretty much the only thing we can do is attempt to keep it in the public eye, and maybe, just maybe help bring forth a new lead to LE. If the right person hears about this case they might have the info everyone is looking for."

I highly doubt media coverage about MM will be prompted and sustained in the future by the web of irrational accusations made here and elsewhere in her name. Raising awareness does not, IMO, mean shoveling dirt on a daily and hourly basis.....for 8 years. A formal web presence already exists; media coverage exists; flyers/posters in key locations can inform the public, as can memorials, and even billboards.

There is one more element to this craziness; the -I'll punish you for saying and thinking differently than I do, so I'll find out who you are in "real" life and find ways to embarrass and discredit you-
That hasn't been your game, Jenkins, but a few of the lesser principled dogs play that card. Helpful? or Harmful?

Just my opinion.

mcsmom wrote:

It seemed like the back seat of Maura's car held something that was interesting enough to one poster years ago on the old MMM forum to ask what we'd expect to find in the backseat if we could look into Maura's car.
Turns out this guy is a dispatch person with some ties to NH.
So, it kind of begs the question, what would be in Maura's backseat, that would prompt Smith to look deep into the tailpipe of Maura's car and why would he keep EMS/Fire away from the vehicle?
If you blow up the photo of Maura's car it looks like there may have been some sort of heat transfer around the area near the brake/gas pedal as the plastic floor mats appear to have slightly melted.

Mcsmom, did your post previous to this one just vanish? The one about why CS looked up the tailpipe and found the rag, and there was a reason they didn´t search east or possibly just shoddy work?
I too have come to believe they didn´t search east for a reason. There may have been a witness withheld from the public, SBD or somebody else. Maybe Aftermath was right after all, that evidence at the accident scene were overlooked. Question is, how would he know if he wasn´t there?

hannah_b wrote:

<quoted text>
Mcsmom, did your post previous to this one just vanish? The one about why CS looked up the tailpipe and found the rag, and there was a reason they didn´t search east or possibly just shoddy work?
I too have come to believe they didn´t search east for a reason. There may have been a witness withheld from the public, SBD or somebody else. Maybe Aftermath was right after all, that evidence at the accident scene were overlooked. Question is, how would he know if he wasn´t there?

I recall a similar post, but the basis of it was that perhaps there was strong indication at the scene that evidence pointed to an easterly retreat of one set of prints.

No recollection of my suggesting that searching west only was a "shoddy" tactical assumption.

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
I recall a similar post, but the basis of it was that perhaps there was strong indication at the scene that evidence pointed to an easterly retreat of one set of prints.
No recollection of my suggesting that searching west only was a "shoddy" tactical assumption.

My bad.... that would be evidence indicating a westerly retreat.

I agree with you, two people depart both searching in one direction out of two, usually means the race is on so to speak.

hey mcsmom where are the pictures that show the melting on the floor of the car?

That could be evidence that the car was in fact driving with the rage clogging the tailpipe.

If a rag is in the tailpipe the car would start, because it's not an airtight seal. But the car won't run long because the motor would be burning way to hot and rich due to being unable to properly exhaust the motor.
The muffler would get hot quick, particularly after a 3 and a half hour drive when it already was hot.

I really want to view those pictures, can you plese link them or tell them where I can find them? I'm looking for them and I've seen them before but I cant seem to find them right now

Snowy,

We haven't always agreed, but I believe in putting aside differences and disagreements to give credit where it's due. I agree with your assessment about this discussion doing more harm than good.

I've come to a similar conclusion about my own contributions on this thread. I've publicly speculated on things that are none of my business, and no good has come of it. Although I've had the best of intentions, intent doesn't affect the outcome in these situations. Google doesn't forget, and this stuff has real lasting unmeasurable effects on people's lives. The potential damage is unknown...at least until somebody sues.(legal joke)

With nothing left of value to add here, I've chosen to remove myself from the conversation to focus on personal matters that deserve my attention.

On a personal note, I'll add for anyone reading that it doesn't feel good to become the target of topix-spawned accusations. This is something I've experienced more than once here, by more than one poster. My favorite was that I'm being paid to post here to cover for someone. I eagerly await that paycheck. LOL. At least no one has accused me of killing anybody - not to my face anyhow. Haha.

Back to Topix Rehab I go. Whomever said "Lord of the Flies" had it right. I'm rescuing myself from this hellish island.

I wish everyone here the best and hope that Maura will be found, justice served, and all of that. Once again. Peace, love and free peanuts to all.:-)

Phoebe Prince wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Whiston writes in post 20242 "...anybody that has been arrested for ANYTHING and lives or lived near the weathered barn."
MERELY arrested? Anybody arrested for ANYTHING? Regardless of whether or not charges were quickly dismissed or dropped because no crime was committed? Or maybe they were arrested because they opposed the Vietnam War? Or because they conducted a civil rights sit-in at a Woolworth's? Or they protested at a Planned Parenthood facility?
Or maybe it was later found that the dope they were too quickly accused of possessing actually belonged to someone else, so the charges were dropped? Or maybe they were convicted wrongfully, like all those people now released by the work of the Innocence Project? Wow! Did you investigate Martin Luther King, Jr.? Maybe he drove past the weathered barn in the 1960s. He was arrested a bunch of times. Get him, too! Oh, King died in 1968? No problem! Tar and feather him like the rest of those your posse rounds up.
You must have been hugely disappointed when Richard Jewell and Stephen Hatfill were finally cleared by the FBI.
So in your amateur investigation, you, like Renner, have decided to just throw mud anywhere and everywhere you can?
You damn well know whose name is going to be connected to someone of the same name in Springfield.
This is what Renner writes, in the first person, about the non-conclusion of his "investigation" into the murder of Amy Mihaljevic:
"Note to the Killer: I hope there were times during the last two years where you felt me breathing down your neck. If you're feeling secure in the fact that I couldn't catch you, don't get too comfortable. Smarter, more experienced journalists will be looking over my notes in the near future. We both know your name is in there somewhere."
**********
Yup. Somewhere. Among all the names of the innocent people Renner could get his hands on and smear for life, there might - might - be the name of a truly guilty person. And the gang of duty-bound "investigative journalists" that he predicts will follow him will hunt down... someone. Anyone will do. As long as it gets good press and helps deliver another book contract.
You're just like him, Whiston. You and many others. I'm surprised you're not a "true crime" writer, or a so-called "investigative journalist."
Just so you know, there are some people who may have possibly been arrested in the past for a crime they never committed, or committed in all good conscience. Maybe they get cleared. There's a big difference, since you don't seem to get it, between arrest and conviction. But go right ahead, Harry Callahan, make that person's day. Hunt him down like a dog.

I hope people will read this post of yours as many times as it takes to understand where you're coming from. They won't, and that depresses me, but I just want you to know that I heard you and get it. It's a real shame that most people never will see where you're coming from. Please take care.

Snowy I read your post and you still have failed to show any damage done to any of these people. I'm talking real damage, not just some people talking about them online.

You bet your ass that with all this talk of potential damage that if there was any real damage caused we would've heard about it.

And it's not like we are just choosing random innocent people to pick on, ever notice how nobody ever questions the westman's? Why is that? because their story never changed in the slightest.
We aren't suggesting that the SBD lied, he did lie, on multiple occasions. He told at least 3 different versions of events, all differing on fairly major points. Nobody is getting on him because he was a good samaritan and tried to help, he was the last known person to see her alive and he's been caught in numerous lies. Sorry but his story deserved to be looked at very closely, when your the last person to see someone who is now missing and your caught lying about details, people are going to question whether you did something wrong and they are right to do so. Why did he lie to the family and to the public? What damage was caused to him?

As for the CW, he did not come forward weeks later, he was overheard talking about it to someone around town. Why didn't he bring his new info to LE? But again, where is the damage done to him? He's doing just fine according to all accounts, so what are you talking about?

The ex cheif had 4 dui's?? Really? Haverhill didn't have a better guy than this to make cheif? How did this idiot become the cheif of police? The bigger question is whether he was on scene or not. HPD1 was his truck, and it was saw on the scene, yet he claims to not have been there, so what is going on? How is this so hard to figure out?

As for the poster who confused him with Smith, come on is this the worst thing that happened to him? THe poster confused the 2 and was then corrected immediately and then corrected themself. So anybody who read the first post could read right below it and realize it was a mistake. That is real damage?
Smith lied to the family, straight up. Why? WHy would he lie to the family of a missing girl? Do you not think thats wrong? WHy should we believe anything he has to say after he's caught in a definite lie? After being caught in a lie shouldn't anything he say be brought under higher scrutiny?
Also its pretty obvious that his accident report is seriously flawed. How is it that a TC repair man and a tow truck driver have a much more accurate depiction of events than a sworn police officer? WHy is it that their stories fit much better with the damage to the saturn than what was written on Smith's report?
But Smith actually went on to become cheif, and then left for other emplyment, so he's obviously doing pretty good for himself. Where's the damage caused to either of these guys? Smith clearly is doing well and the ex cheif brought all damage onto himself.

I hear people talk about this damage all the time, but once again nobody can show even the slightest bit caused by these forums, not even a little. remember, a few people questioning someone's lies online is not real damage, not even close.
These are people that have been caught in lies and doing strange things around the dissapearance of a young girl, some scrutiny of their words and actions are warranted.

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
My bad.... that would be evidence indicating a westerly retreat.
I agree with you, two people depart both searching in one direction out of two, usually means the race is on so to speak.

Could this possibly mean Maura´s last known location away from the accident scene was somewhere to the west (or northwest)?