Maura Murray

Major Do-Do wrote:

<quoted text>
To the casual and occasional observer, the only thing that appears to be twisted are your knickers.
Lowlifes? But WTH has always spoken so highly of you.

I think any reader with even the slightest bit of intelligence can figure out who the lowlifes are that threaten to out other posters.

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text> I think any reader with even the slightest bit of intelligence can figure out who the lowlifes are that threaten to out other posters.

Bullocks.

I don't who is low life...high life..but, it has been written that this is "entertainment"...I just see see this Forum for Maura as an agenda for anger. Who or what the anger is for...I don't know.
I do know that Maura hasn't returned to her family and so far it just appears that anger is winning. Was her disappearance for entertainment or anger?

I feel disappointment that snarky strangers exchange hateful words supposedly for Maura.

jldross wrote:

<quoted text>Thanks very much Frostman. Some interesting quotes from the family in these.

""I think she accepted a ride at the scene of the accident, which would enable her to get closer to public transportation, and she got out by bus," Fred Murray said."

Wonder where he thought she was going.

I think in the early days of a disappearance family members tend to look at all the scenarios that might involve their loved one still being alive rather than contemplate the worst possible outcome.

Shack wrote:

I don't who is low life...high life..but, it has been written that this is "entertainment"...I just see see this Forum for Maura as an agenda for anger. Who or what the anger is for...I don't know.
I do know that Maura hasn't returned to her family and so far it just appears that anger is winning. Was her disappearance for entertainment or anger?
I feel disappointment that snarky strangers exchange hateful words supposedly for Maura.

From past reading isn't that what you did? Before it was taken down there was a forum online that had some posts from you. There were some very hateful words from you there. So hateful in fact that many left and any hope of contributing anything worthwhile that might have been helpful was lost. I'm sure there must have been many that were disappointed by your hateful words too.
Remember shack that once the send button is hit your words are in cyberland and can't be taken back or forgotten.

I don't think NHSP released a photo of Maura in the initial days of her disappearance, and we know that Kathleen forwarded a pic via email for them to have.

The BOLO to all fire units only said female at about 27 mins after FW 911 call.

Maybe fire was already searching for the troubled suicidal youth.

Given the length of time they lived on Rte 112 and all the previous accidents at the WB I find it difficult to think FW didn't know the eastbound from the westbound lane.

GrampaMo wrote:

<quoted text> I also think that why Maura left in such a hurry holds some answers as to where and why she headed to the mountains and told no one.

We're all ears if you'd care to elaborate.

mcsmom wrote:

I don't think NHSP released a photo of Maura in the initial days of her disappearance, and we know that Kathleen forwarded a pic via email for them to have.
The BOLO to all fire units only said female at about 27 mins after FW 911 call.
Maybe fire was already searching for the troubled suicidal youth.
Given the length of time they lived on Rte 112 and all the previous accidents at the WB I find it difficult to think FW didn't know the eastbound from the westbound lane.

mcsmom,
I´m sure this has been gone over a multitude of times before on this forum, but I seem to recall that the Haverhill LE dispatch quoted Mrs W-n as having mentioned a car in the westbound lane facing east, rather than the opposite direction.
Do I remember this correctly?
Thanks!

mcsmom wrote:

I don't think NHSP released a photo of Maura in the initial days of her disappearance, and we know that Kathleen forwarded a pic via email for them to have.
The BOLO to all fire units only said female at about 27 mins after FW 911 call.
Maybe fire was already searching for the troubled suicidal youth.
Given the length of time they lived on Rte 112 and all the previous accidents at the WB I find it difficult to think FW didn't know the eastbound from the westbound lane.

FD and CS was dispatched for the youth after the 9:20pm call from the counselor at the Becket school

They were not searching for the youth prior to Mauras crash.

Bumping for Maura wrote:

<quoted text>
mcsmom,
I´m sure this has been gone over a multitude of times before on this forum, but I seem to recall that the Haverhill LE dispatch quoted Mrs W-n as having mentioned a car in the westbound lane facing east, rather than the opposite direction.
Do I remember this correctly?
Thanks!

According to the dispatch report I have in front of me, quote: " At 1927 FW called to advise of a vehicle in the ditch right on sharp turn after the WB, UKN if PI, but can see a man in veh smoking a cigarette, was eastbound Rte 112, but ended up in westbound ditch facing westbound."

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
According to the dispatch report I have in front of me, quote: " At 1927 FW called to advise of a vehicle in the ditch right on sharp turn after the WB, UKN if PI, but can see a man in veh smoking a cigarette, was eastbound Rte 112, but ended up in westbound ditch facing westbound."

mcsmom,
Thanks for that quote from the dispatch report.
So, unless dispatch and/or Mrs W-n somehow got things wrong it would seem that Maura was travelling east, but her car ended up facing west in the westbound ditch.
"Westbound ditch" to me would indicate that the Saturn came to rest in the ditch on the same side of rte 112 as the W-n house, rather than on the opposite side of the road as I´ve always understood to be the case.
This might just be a matter of semantics, I guess...

There is not a ditch on the west side of the road

hannah_b wrote:

Some of the reasons suggested on the forums over the years Maura drove a malfunctioning (???) car into NH, in no particular order:
1. pregnant and was keeping the baby
2. pregnant and was having an abortion
3. boyfriend trouble and wanted to think things over
4. was going to commit suicide
5. was running away from some criminal offense
6. running away to start a new life
7. was meeting somebody in NH
8. was overworked and needed a break
9. was abducted from Amherst and taken to NH
10. didn´t go to NH and never left Amherst
I´m sure there are more, but these are the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

1. pregnant and was keeping the baby - Would effect the way she looked on ATM and the picture could still be released.
2. pregnant and was having an abortion - Wouldn't effect the way she looked on the atm and the picture could have been released.
3. boyfriend trouble and wanted to think things over - Wouldn't effect the way she looked on the atm and it should have been released.
4. was going to commit suicide - Wouldn't effect the way she looked on the atm and it should have been released.
5. was running away from some criminal offense - Even more reason to show the picture.
6. running away to start a new life - Maybe if domestic violence was there they would hide the picture.
7. was meeting somebody in NH - Would show ATM picture.
8. was overworked and needed a break - Would show ATM picture.
9. was abducted from Amherst and taken to NH - Maybe they would hold the picture if they had a lead and wanted it secret.
10. didn´t go to NH and never left Amherst - would show atm picture.

All of these reasons except for #9 would not be a sufficient reason to with hold and not show the ATM footage.

I do not think that her face showing signs of a fight or domestic violence is any ploy to re-direct. It shows good motive to leave quickly without being seen by the smallest amount of people.

The ATM footage can be withheld because it shows a lie in someones testimony. Like if LE asks "when you saw her leave how did she look?" If that person says "fine" you want to keep that ATM picture to yourself and question why your being lied to.

The ATM footage was withheld because it is a piece of evidence in an open investigation. Same reason all the other pieces of evidence have not been released, standard operating procedure for every investigation.

FrmLE wrote:

The ATM footage was withheld because it is a piece of evidence in an open investigation. Same reason all the other pieces of evidence have not been released, standard operating procedure for every investigation.

Since we know what she looks like. Wouldn't a picture not be considered evidence unless ofcourse there was more to the picture than just her withdrawing money? Just a question.

FrmLE wrote:

The ATM footage was withheld because it is a piece of evidence in an open investigation. Same reason all the other pieces of evidence have not been released, standard operating procedure for every investigation.

FrmLE,

Just a question, if I may:
Why is it then that available video footage very often and in most missing persons cases are being shown to the public, even while those cases are being deemed an open investigation?
Just curious about this.
Thanks!

Video or pictures are shown when the investigators believe the images may help the investigation. Since there were other/better pictures of Maura available to show to the public there was no reason to show the ATM footage.

Have you ever seen ATM, Bank or general surveillance video? Even under the best conditions it is usually absolutely awful quality. What benefit would there be showing a grainy, blurry video capture of Maura when they could show a current, representative photo instead?

Detectives don't think in terms of what the public may want, what is interesting or satisfies 3rd party curiousity. They think in terms of what helps them solve the case.

If releasing the video would have helped the case, it would have been released. Since they didn't release it one could assume it did not benefit the investigation.

FrmLE wrote:

Video or pictures are shown when the investigators believe the images may help the investigation. Since there were other/better pictures of Maura available to show to the public there was no reason to show the ATM footage.
Have you ever seen ATM, Bank or general surveillance video? Even under the best conditions it is usually absolutely awful quality. What benefit would there be showing a grainy, blurry video capture of Maura when they could show a current, representative photo instead?
Detectives don't think in terms of what the public may want, what is interesting or satisfies 3rd party curiousity. They think in terms of what helps them solve the case.
If releasing the video would have helped the case, it would have been released. Since they didn't release it one could assume it did not benefit the investigation.

So your saying when you saw the picture it gave you no information?

What about the rug samples from the AFRAME?

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
So your saying when you saw the picture it gave you no information?

No, that's not what I said. I said that it makes sense to me that because the images were not released to the public that the investigators did not believe there was any benefit to releasing the information.