|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
BobJenkins-OG wrote: I'm gonna have to make a YouTube of this and post it because you most certainly can get a rag to stay in a muffler. A good friend of mine who is a mechanic showed me that it is possible. I can't wait to see what they use for a rag. A face cloth, probably not. A hand towel, I doubt it. A shower towel, not likely. A beach towel, probably. If it works, I am interested in knowing, did the towel found in Maura's car, was it a beach towel, folded in a specific way? Or are you fitting your choices to fit your theory. When you pull this towel out, will it be clean like Maura's was reported to be? On the youtube please label how you folded it. I need to know this special technique. Also please tell us how you put it in the exhaust, remember it has to be close enough for someone to see it. So pushing it up into the crankcase isn't legal. You also can't take the heads off and place it directly in the cylinders. I can't wait for this. It should keep them busy for weeks. Oh, one more item that you may not have been paying attention too. It has always been speculated that this method could cause a car to stall. That is why it was always discussed. No one gives a rats ass if you can keep a rag in the tailpipe. The question has always been. CAN SOMEONE STALL A CAR WITH A RAG IN THE TAILPIPE???? So, lets go over the criteria. Can you place a rag in the tailpipe, similar to the one that Maura had in the car. And place it so that it stalls the car????? Give it a try. Can't wait for the video. Bill
|
|
Elphalba
Fresno, CA
|
amy researches wrote: No, Jenkins. I've never said I think someone deserves the death penalty. I don't believe in the death penalty. Because I am familiar with our justice system, and I have seen too many innocent people get the death penalty for crimes they did not commit. I would certainly never say it about a man who not only hasn't been convicted, but never even brought in for the crime. And no, I'm not a fan of Nancy Grace.
If LE thought Beagle killed Maura, do you think he would be sitting home right now making videos? Think about it.
Any idea what might have prompted Beagle to make those videos (if in fact he did)? Renner and members of the media made assumptions and called it a cruel hoax on the family, but did Beagle ever tell you what his intentions were? If not, then I don't think it's fair to assume he was intending to torture the family.
Any idea how many times he has been harassed and accused, before the videos started?
He is innocent until proven guilty. Just like everyone else whose name has been drug into this conversation - not only by you but by others.
I have never once said I agree with those videos. But I do not agree with you saying he deserves to get his ass kicked, and other people posting his real name here. That is not helping anything. From some of the posts in the past few days, it's looking like I'm not the only one who feels this way.
How do you know he was not afraid? Did you ask him? You make a lot of assumptions about people you don't know. I made assumptions about Beagle at first too, and that was wrong, but at least I had the decency to apologize rather than say he deserves to get his ass kicked. I think Beagles videos are sick and wrong. Do I think he deserves a beating? Probably not, expecially if he belongs in a straight jacket. But that being said, to say that he does isn't nearly as extreme of a view as you are making this Amy. Many people share that sentiment, and you are smart enough to know that. Once again, you can disagree with a sentiment however making that sentiment more extreme that it is in reality comes across as a ploy just to make your point more credible.
|
|
Since: Apr 12
Lancaster, PA
|
Please wait...
If you read the ccu's mission statement it's clear they not only classified her dissapearance as suspicious, they also think she got murdered. The ccu strictly deals with homicide prosecutions. They are extremely limited as to resources, they couldn't even include all cold cases onto their list; they specifically say that there are unsolved homicides they couldn't include. There is absolutely now way that they looked at that case file and thought that Maura is lost in the woods, no way. She would not be on the cc list if they thought that. Now that doesn't necessarily mean that theyre right, there is a slim possibility that she is in the woods. But it does mean that the professionals who have really viewed the case file and are tasked with investigating it do not agree with your assessment of the case. So what, lemme guess , the cops are lying right? The cops are lying, the mechanics lying, the ems guy is lying, everybody's lying right? Idk bill, your starting to sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist here. I love it, everybody's lying, & you and a couple random anonymous Internet posters are so much better at deciphering what happened than the cops who's job it is to investigate the case, am I understanding your position?
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
I'm trying to figure out how fullofBSbobjenkins "proved 100%" that I was lying? bobby bobby I already told you I was never a cop, just joshing ya thats all. ;) lol, oh it's so sad, and funny.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
BobJenkins-OG wrote: If you read the ccu's mission statement it's clear they not only classified her dissapearance as suspicious, they also think she got murdered.
The ccu strictly deals with homicide prosecutions. They are extremely limited as to resources, they couldn't even include all cold cases onto their list; they specifically say that there are unsolved homicides they couldn't include.
There is absolutely now way that they looked at that case file and thought that Maura is lost in the woods, no way. She would not be on the cc list if they thought that. Have you ever considered the possibility that the CCU unit has the occasional political pressure applied that creates a motivation to put certain cases on the 'list'? Hey, it's just a question. BobJenkins-OG wrote: So what, lemme guess , the cops are lying right?
The cops are lying, the mechanics lying, the ems guy is lying, everybody's lying right?
Idk bill, your starting to sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist here. I love it, everybody's lying, & you and a couple random anonymous Internet posters are so much better at deciphering what happened than the cops who's job it is to investigate the case, am I understanding your position? This, may be the funniest thing you have ever written, lol. You calling Bill a conspiracy thoerist? Seriously, have you any idea what the perception of you is, at least on this little forum? That is definitely the funniest thing I have ever read on Topix, no bull.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
BobJenkins-OG wrote: If you read the ccu's mission statement it's clear they not only classified her dissapearance as suspicious, they also think she got murdered.
The ccu strictly deals with homicide prosecutions. They are extremely limited as to resources, they couldn't even include all cold cases onto their list; they specifically say that there are unsolved homicides they couldn't include.
There is absolutely now way that they looked at that case file and thought that Maura is lost in the woods, no way. She would not be on the cc list if they thought that.
Now that doesn't necessarily mean that theyre right, there is a slim possibility that she is in the woods.
But it does mean that the professionals who have really viewed the case file and are tasked with investigating it do not agree with your assessment of the case.
So what, lemme guess , the cops are lying right?
The cops are lying, the mechanics lying, the ems guy is lying, everybody's lying right?
Idk bill, your starting to sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist here. I love it, everybody's lying, & you and a couple random anonymous Internet posters are so much better at deciphering what happened than the cops who's job it is to investigate the case, am I understanding your position? Again, you are way off base. I wish you could just stick to one badly developed thought at a given time because it is really a pain when you write six or seven things at one time that are all incorrect. And they don't just work on homicide investigations. It clearly states that they also look at missing persons and even suspicious deaths. Lets look at what the CCU says SPECIFICALLY about Maura. "Her disappearance is being treated as suspicious." It's being TREATED as suspicious. Doesn't mean it is, doesn't mean that they think it is, or there is evidence to support this. It just means that is the way they are investigating it. I mean, how else can they treat it? Like a Sunday walk away? It simply means they are using the tools of the investigation as if it was suspicious. Notice that they aren't saying they are investigating it as a murder? They aren't investigating it as a kidnapping? They clearly don't know what to make of it and have no evidence of crime, so they are investigating it as suspicious. Again, you read too much into things. Actually, you read into things what you want to see. Bill
|
|
GrampaMo
United States
|
BobJenkins-OG wrote: First of all bill I'm not the one who classified her dissapearance as suspicious, LE did that.
LE clearly view her dissapearance as suspicious as evidenced by the fact she's included on the ccu list. The ccu is under very limited resources and there were a lot of cases left off that list. She would not be on that List if LE thought she us lost in the woods.
So you are saying that these mechanics are lying to the media? Why would they do that? Why should we believe anything you have to say on this? Are you a mechanic?
I'm gonna have to make a YouTube of this and post it because you most certainly can get a rag to stay in a muffler. A good friend of mine who is a mechanic showed me that it is possible.
Lastly, there is absolutely no evidence she was drunk. She def had a drunk or 2 but the sbd said she wasn't intoxicated and judging from the other witnesses she disnt sound like she looked very impaired at all.
It also doesn't sound like she was very worried about the cops either; the wmans describe her sitting there with the door open for several minutes "leisurely smoking a cigarette" leisurely being the key word there.
Who the hell sits there leisurely with their door open if they are so afraid of a DUI that there about to go walk miles into the woods to their death?
Everything you said there is so wrong Its ridiculous. You throw out statements from experts and assume things based on what? Because you said so? Because a few anonymous people online say so?
You also make statements that are toraly contradictory to the witness statements and statements by LE.
Can you say bullshit! yes, your post is complete and utter bullshit (She def had a drunk or 2) If she had a drunk or two then she probably had some alcohol before. (It also doesn't sound like she was very worried about the cops either; the wmans describe her sitting there with the door open for several minutes "leisurely smoking a cigarette" leisurely being the key word there.) I thought one of them said they thought they saw the glow of a cigarette and the other thought it might be a cellphone. Can you please put a link to where they say she was sitting with the door open for several minutes "leisurely" smoking a cigarette. I guess I must have missed that comment.
|
|
Since: Jun 08
Arizona
|
Please wait...
And another thing ... if CS lied to the family about who he thought was driving the car, what makes anyone think that he didn't lie about the rag in the tailpipe? Of course, too, no one is EVER mis-quoted by reporters doing a story .... So there are lies, damn lies and statistics (thank you Mark), all of which are likely involved in this case. Assumptions and embellishments are not needed.
|
|
hannah_b
Sweden
|
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>
I don't suppose that anyone noticed that the officer doesn't say in his report that the rag was in the tailpipe when he was there???
Is it possible that the mysterious rag was put in the tailpipe after it left the accident scene??? We all know that a rag can't stay in the tailpipe of a running car, correct? So when was the rag put there? Did the officer ever make mention of it?
Whoosh.......whooosh......whoo osh......whooosh.......
Look everyone, pay attention. They are back to the rag in the tailpipe (for the thousandth time). This is where it gets really exciting and they think that they come very close to solving the case.
Bill No, Bill. No woosh woosh woosh. If the rag was put up the tailpipe after it left the scene it would have been possible to determine who put it there and when and why. Witness statements also does not support this. But, ok. Maybe Sasquatch put it there.
|
|
hannah_b
Sweden
|
Judged:
1
Advocator wrote: And another thing ... if CS lied to the family about who he thought was driving the car, what makes anyone think that he didn't lie about the rag in the tailpipe?
Of course, too, no one is EVER mis-quoted by reporters doing a story ....
So there are lies, damn lies and statistics (thank you Mark), all of which are likely involved in this case. Assumptions and embellishments are not needed. I agree some of these inconsistancies could possibly be due to erroneous reporting.
|
|
hannah_b
Sweden
|
Judged:
1
1
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>They clearly don't know what to make of it and have no evidence of crime, so they are investigating it as suspicious. Correct. This is the bottomline of this case. Everyone should print this out and tape it to there computer.
|
|
hannah_b
Sweden
|
...THEIR computer of course...
|
|
“snapshots, you/by ur vehicle”
Since: Feb 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
CS evidently asked Faith "Where's the girl"....."the one with the rag in her tailpipe" So was this asked in exactly that order? OR when retelling the events of that night, did someone say that CS asked if they,(the W-Mans), had seen the girl, and THEN later, it was added that she had a rag in the tailpipe,(too)?...... In my mind I always pictured the officer "rushing" over to that house right away, and saying the whole thing without interuption. And others thought that was odd, why would he ask the W-Mans that, and how would he know. Maybe it didn't exactly go that way is my answer.
|
|
“snapshots, you/by ur vehicle”
Since: Feb 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
.......... how would he know.......that she had a rag in the tailpipe, already, and by then.
|
|
Shack
Groton, MA
|
Just me--paris wrote: .......... how would he know.......that she had a rag in the tailpipe, already, and by then. AND...the words "something they do in Massachusetts"...
|
|
citigirl
Fall River, MA
|
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>
I don't suppose that anyone noticed that the officer doesn't say in his report that the rag was in the tailpipe when he was there???
Is it possible that the mysterious rag was put in the tailpipe after it left the accident scene??? We all know that a rag can't stay in the tailpipe of a running car, correct? So when was the rag put there? Did the officer ever make mention of it?
Whoosh.......whooosh......whoo osh......whooosh.......
Look everyone, pay attention. They are back to the rag in the tailpipe (for the thousandth time). This is where it gets really exciting and they think that they come very close to solving the case.
Bill Did notice that the rag in the tail pipe was not mentioned in the report. CS did go to the Ws house and asked if they had seen the girl with the rag in her tail pipe according to the Ws when talking to a family member. Both fire and EMTs had seen the rag in the tail pipe at the scene. I and others personally talked to fire about the rag and an EMT talked to another searcher concerning the rag. There were to many people that had seen the rag stuffed in the tail pipe at the scene so no I dont believe it was put there after it left the scene.
|
|
hannah_b
Sweden
|
Judged:
3
1
citigirl wrote: <quoted text>Did notice that the rag in the tail pipe was not mentioned in the report. CS did go to the Ws house and asked if they had seen the girl with the rag in her tail pipe according to the Ws when talking to a family member. Both fire and EMTs had seen the rag in the tail pipe at the scene. I and others personally talked to fire about the rag and an EMT talked to another searcher concerning the rag. There were to many people that had seen the rag stuffed in the tail pipe at the scene so no I dont believe it was put there after it left the scene. Citigirl, did you ask who first noticed the rag and what prompted that person to look up the tailpipe?
|
|
citigirl
Fall River, MA
|
Just me--paris wrote: CS evidently asked Faith "Where's the girl"....."the one with the rag in her tailpipe"
So was this asked in exactly that order?
OR when retelling the events of that night, did someone say that CS asked if they,(the W-Mans), had seen the girl, and THEN later, it was added that she had a rag in the tailpipe,(too)?......
In my mind I always pictured the officer "rushing" over to that house right away, and saying the whole thing without interuption.
And others thought that was odd, why would he ask the W-Mans that, and how would he know.
Maybe it didn't exactly go that way is my answer. According to Faith this was the exact order the questions were asked that night. He knew because he and other responders had seen the rag when responding to the scene.I honestly dont believe all these people would not be honest as to what they had seen concerning the accident scene
|
|
citigirl
Fall River, MA
|
hannah_b wrote: <quoted text>
Citigirl, did you ask who first noticed the rag and what prompted that person to look up the tailpipe? gave the info to a pi.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Just me--paris wrote: CS evidently asked Faith "Where's the girl"....."the one with the rag in her tailpipe"
So was this asked in exactly that order?
OR when retelling the events of that night, did someone say that CS asked if they,(the W-Mans), had seen the girl, and THEN later, it was added that she had a rag in the tailpipe,(too)?......
In my mind I always pictured the officer "rushing" over to that house right away, and saying the whole thing without interuption.
And others thought that was odd, why would he ask the W-Mans that, and how would he know.
Maybe it didn't exactly go that way is my answer. Yep. No one ever seemed to have a tight enough timeline to prove when that rag appeared and who said they saw it when. What we do know for certain is that the only independent documentation doesn't say anything about it. The rest is such old, unreliable information, regurgitated for years, and twisted to suit certain peoples notions of what happened. That no one knows when the rag was placed in the car. The bigger question is WHO CARES AND WHY???? I have always considered it a red herring. It has nothing to do with why Maura disappeared. If it was her at the car. Or why she ran. Even if it was her that put it there. Why does it matter? For the those still looking under the lamppost. Whooosh....whooosh....whoosh.. . Bill
|
|
|
Dating
