Maura Murray

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
Billy did NOT call the Red Cross to assist with the extended leave, it was Sharon. Sharon also said she did not give the Red Cross Billy's cell phone number. The call was from a prepaid calling card per Billy. Perhaps the Red Cross did attempt to reach BR later, but I am of the opinion that it was Maura on that voice message.
You're entitled to your opinions Lighthouse, but not you're own "facts".:) Nice try though.
I gather you're aware of EXACTLY when LE told Sharon they had determined the call was from the Red Cross? Feel free to enlighten us as to how LE was able to obtain that information so quickly.

Thats okay Frostman. We are totally going to disagree.

This is kind of like the "blood" in the AFRAME. The LAB tested the blood, but didn't want to continue to test the DNA.

Billy gets a call from his girlfriend in distress, but the call gets deleted.

jwb wrote:

I am absolutely not thrilled with the direction things have gone and will take another route.If I am provoked I will react. If someone is kind such as Sharleen has been then all is good. I enjoy conversation with everyone here but I really hate when being verbally attacked or the condescending attitudes of some.

Jwb the only thing I think that you enjoy is control through threatening posters. Only a lowlife bully would out someone and put them and there family in danger
I don' usually complain about people but this is just wrong and I will be reporting you to Topix.
I hope others that think you are threatening to put another poster in harms way will slso report you.

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text>
It's a public forum where people are free to say whatever they want as long as it's within the Topix rules. If it bothers you so much why do you keep coming back.
You may be happier at a moderated forum where some others go to. Ask your buddy shack how to get to it.
Or maybe you've already been there and didn't like that one either.

And that is what chaffs people like JWB about no moderation. When someone says something stupid, they are called on it. They don't like that because they want any theory to be accepted as possible fact regardless of how ridiculous.

And he has been here, looked through this forum started in 2010. Since he doesn't see anything objectionable in posts from Shack, we are supposed to forget everything she did before. She hasn't done anything objectionable because there are people here who have repeatedly called her on her stupid accusations with no basis is fact. So JWB, you are not qualified to make any judgement as to what she did or didn't do based upon your own admission that you know nothing before May of 2010.

Oh, I remember when she decided to start her own forum branch. Told her I wouldn't come. Told her she could run rampant. Opps, no one came, so that kind of shot that idea to hell. JWB, why don't you start your own forum, call it: "Most outlandish theories of Maura's disappearance by JWB and Shack". I won't go, promise, see how much attention it gets. Maybe everyone will flock to the site. Then you won't have to deal with all the mean posters who try to get you to justify the position you have with some facts. Maybe Shack can finally get SBD lynched which is what she tried to do for years after Maura ran from a crashed car after drinking and he offered assistance to her.

Bill

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text>
It's a public forum where people are free to say whatever they want as long as it's within the Topix rules. If it bothers you so much why do you keep coming back.
You may be happier at a moderated forum where some others go to. Ask your buddy shack how to get to it.
Or maybe you've already been there and didn't like that one either.

While I agree that it is a public forum- I will defend that it is not right to call a missing girls forum "entertainment" and treat it as such.How would you feel if your family member was missing and people were posting on the forum that it was entertainment to them? Pretty insensitive don't you think?

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
And that is what chaffs people like JWB about no moderation. When someone says something stupid, they are called on it. They don't like that because they want any theory to be accepted as possible fact regardless of how ridiculous.
And he has been here, looked through this forum started in 2010. Since he doesn't see anything objectionable in posts from Shack, we are supposed to forget everything she did before. She hasn't done anything objectionable because there are people here who have repeatedly called her on her stupid accusations with no basis is fact. So JWB, you are not qualified to make any judgement as to what she did or didn't do based upon your own admission that you know nothing before May of 2010.
Oh, I remember when she decided to start her own forum branch. Told her I wouldn't come. Told her she could run rampant. Opps, no one came, so that kind of shot that idea to hell. JWB, why don't you start your own forum, call it: "Most outlandish theories of Maura's disappearance by JWB and Shack". I won't go, promise, see how much attention it gets. Maybe everyone will flock to the site. Then you won't have to deal with all the mean posters who try to get you to justify the position you have with some facts. Maybe Shack can finally get SBD lynched which is what she tried to do for years after Maura ran from a crashed car after drinking and he offered assistance to her.
Bill

You are missing the point- I have no problem at all with disagreeing. That is how a forum works right? The problem I have is your attitude towards others. The condescending attitude that you spew is very ugly.You by the way have no more facts than anyone else that posts here but keep patting yourself on the back.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
I come back because it is a free forum and I said what I wanted.
I see- so it is ok for myself -Shack -Jenkins etc to be crapped on but when the tables are turned then it is different?If that is what you are saying then that thinking is where the problem lies.

I have not seen anywhere on this forum where you have been threatened by another poster to have you're true identity posted online and put the safety of your family in jeopardy
If you don't know the difference then you are more dangerous than I thought
You cannot control a forum by threatening the posters.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>Thats okay Frostman. We are totally going to disagree.
This is kind of like the "blood" in the AFRAME. The LAB tested the blood, but didn't want to continue to test the DNA. Billy gets a call from his girlfriend in distress, but the call gets deleted.

Well at least we can disagree amicably.:)

Apparently a recording of the message on BR's cell was given to LE and BR finally deleted it many months later. I can only guess that he was devastatingly tormented by the message and at some point his family, friends & colleagues advised him to delete it and move on.

Ok MR fact man WTH.

Where is the fact that Maura was drinking or intoxicated? You keep putting that out there but that is merely just an accusation right? No blood test and no evidence. In fact your hero SBD said she did not appear intoxicated.

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text>Jwb the only thing I think that you enjoy is control through threatening posters. Only a lowlife bully would out someone and put them and there family in danger
I don' usually complain about people but this is just wrong and I will be reporting you to Topix.
I hope others that think you are threatening to put another poster in harms way will slso report you.

Knock your socks off

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>It was PIs that searched the AFrame and took possesion of the carpeting. The carpet came back positive for blood. To this day it is unknown whether or not it was tested for DNA.

Citigirl I need your help sorting this out please help. The Whiteman Hanson Express wrote a very large article we all read it, but can you read this part.

"Fred was also present for the search and aggressively pushed investigators to search an A-frame house on Valley Road near the scene of the accident. He suspected it might be somehow connected.

The property was on the real estate market, so Fred sought out real estate agent Stan Davis and asked permission to search the house. Davis confirmed that he gave Fred his consent and provided him with a key to the house.

The fight for the house search was worth the effort.

On the first day, a cadaver dog searched the house and had hits on the second level; the next day four more cadaver dogs were put to work in the house and went "bonkers," Fred said. The strongest hits by the dogs were in a downstairs closet. Cadaver dogs are skilled in sniffing for decomposing bodies but are not able to distinguish the identities of bodies.

Though a dead body could have been stored in this closet, the dogs were not capable of identifying if the body was Maura.

The investigators took a few trash bags filled with items from the house and a piece of carpet from the closet. According to Fred, the carpet was to be divided into two pieces: a portion of the carpet was to be given to state police, who were not present for the search, and the other portion was to be held by the group of volunteer investigators. A medical laboratory examination was to determine if stains on the carpet were blood, and if available DNA matched Maura's. Seven months later, laboratory test results have not been made available from either group."

Citigirl - here it states that Fred contacted the Real Estate agent. The Real Estate Agent gave Fred permission and the Key. Fred makes the "bonkers" comment and then it says that a medical laboratory was to find out if the carpet stains had blood and if the DNA matched.

You made a comment that Fred "was in another state" I read it as if he was there.

I also read that he the blood and DNA are going to be tested. So if you know for a fact that it is really blood, someone was given the results of the tests for you to make the comment about it being human blood.

This article was written in 2007 so I'm guessing the laboratory results have been out for some time now.

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text>I have not seen anywhere on this forum where you have been threatened by another poster to have you're true identity posted online and put the safety of your family in jeopardy
If you don't know the difference then you are more dangerous than I thought
You cannot control a forum by threatening the posters.

I have been threatened by Snowy.She has said that she has information that she is going to post on me.

jwb wrote:

Where is the fact that Maura was drinking or intoxicated? You keep putting that out there but that is merely just an accusation right? No blood test and no evidence. In fact your hero SBD said she did not appear intoxicated.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Maura Murray was intoxicated or even drinking.

She's not here today and a suspicious Red Truck was seen lurking in the area just before she vanished. Search dogs traced her scent a few hundred feet down the road. No evidence was found that she entered the surrounding woods. She was apparently out of the sightline of local witnesses for 10-12 minutes and that's plenty of time for a perpetrator(s) to grab her and leave no trace.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
While I agree that it is a public forum- I will defend that it is not right to call a missing girls forum "entertainment" and treat it as such.How would you feel if your family member was missing and people were posting on the forum that it was entertainment to them? Pretty insensitive don't you think?

Holy shit, if this isn't entertainment, what is it? You try to make believe something useful is going on here, it isn't. This isn't anyone's job. The only people here are people doing this for fun, in their part time, after their real work, if they even have a job. If it wasn't fun, they wouldn't come. By definition, it is entertaining to them.

Bill

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
You are missing the point- I have no problem at all with disagreeing. That is how a forum works right? The problem I have is your attitude towards others. The condescending attitude that you spew is very ugly.You by the way have no more facts than anyone else that posts here but keep patting yourself on the back.

Yes, yes. I know you have a problem with my "attitude". Don't give a rats ass. I only generate attitude with people who deserve attitude. I have some "friends" on this forum, many because of my blunt manner. It is who I am, have been for a long time, and don't plan to change any time soon. If you want to participate and not get attitude, don't give attitude, and don't expect to get a pass with stupid comments not based in reality.

You are correct in one aspect. I have the same five or so facts as anyone else. The patting on the back comes from not letting people expand that into twenty "facts" that don't exist and inferences created from the few facts that are known.

Bill

jwb wrote:

Ok MR fact man WTH.
Where is the fact that Maura was drinking or intoxicated? You keep putting that out there but that is merely just an accusation right? No blood test and no evidence. In fact your hero SBD said she did not appear intoxicated.

I will leave this to the reader. Any intelligent reader can go back, yet again, and review what I have written on "patterns" and re-read the mechanic story. Maybe that will help you.

Bill

And sorry, I need to get back to work. Talk to you later.....maybe.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
I will leave this to the reader. Any intelligent reader can go back, yet again, and review what I have written on "patterns" and re-read the mechanic story. Maybe that will help you.
Bill

No facts I guess?- well nothing new move along

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Holy shit, if this isn't entertainment, what is it? You try to make believe something useful is going on here, it isn't. This isn't anyone's job. The only people here are people doing this for fun, in their part time, after their real work, if they even have a job. If it wasn't fun, they wouldn't come. By definition, it is entertaining to them.
Bill

How about we come here because the case is of interest? There is a big difference.You come and weave a toxic forum and then wonders what happened when it comes back at you. To say you are entertained by someones misfortunes of a missing family member is just wrong.

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
Well at least we can disagree amicably.:)
Apparently a recording of the message on BR's cell was given to LE and BR finally deleted it many months later. I can only guess that he was devastatingly tormented by the message and at some point his family, friends & colleagues advised him to delete it and move on.

Its good to see you back. I hope all is well.

jwb wrote:

<quoted text>
How about we come here because the case is of interest? There is a big difference.You come and weave a toxic forum and then wonders what happened when it comes back at you. To say you are entertained by someones misfortunes of a missing family member is just wrong.

Again, trying to twist words. I don't find the disappearance of a young girl who disappeared after she crashed her car while drinking entertaining. I find the collection of people who congregate and feign moral outrage and try to use their superior sleuthing skills entertaining. Especially when they seem to be versed in nothing related to any science or craft related to finding people or using any known form of logic. Good god is that entertaining. It's like watching a monkey trying to drive a car. Yep, he has hands and feet like a human and you might keep hoping that it will turn out OK. But in your heart, you know it's not going to end well and hilarity will ensue.

Bill