Maura Murray

Okay, many people who disappear talk on cell phone before they disappear because many people talk on cell phone much of time anyway. Also, could be many people who disappear are in distress before they disappear so they cry.

Okay, you make case sound good. Maybe you make good enough for place to start, but you got long way ahead.

coeur de lion wrote:

Okay, many people who disappear talk on cell phone before they disappear because many people talk on cell phone much of time anyway. Also, could be many people who disappear are in distress before they disappear so they cry.
Okay, you make case sound good. Maybe you make good enough for place to start, but you got long way ahead.

I completely agree with this.

But I need someone to provide one piece of evidence that would be able to kill this theory once and for all (like the supervisor noting she knows for sure that maura wouldn't have been away from her desk at that time).

I would gladly move on from a theory (petrit vasi hit and run link) that I never made up to begin with.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
I completely agree with this.
But I need someone to provide one piece of evidence that would be able to kill this theory once and for all (like the supervisor noting she knows for sure that maura wouldn't have been away from her desk at that time).
I would gladly move on from a theory (petrit vasi hit and run link) that I never made up to begin with.

No. Once again you have it ass backwards. What YOU need is one piece of evidence that Maura was at the scene of Vasi's accident.

You keep trying to make it everyone elses responsibility to show your theory isn't correct instead of you trying to prove your theory is correct which you are no where near accomplishing to date.

Lets try this another way, I think that it was aliens that stole Maura, and because I have no proof whatsoever, you need to prove me wrong. I mean the aliens can be anywhere they want at anytime with their highly advanced technology, and Maura was carrying that cell phone that I am sure the aliens were using as a tracking device to find where she was. Ergo, aliens took her. I dare you to PROVE me wrong.

Bill

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
I completely agree with this.
But I need someone to provide one piece of evidence that would be able to kill this theory once and for all (like the supervisor noting she knows for sure that maura wouldn't have been away from her desk at that time).
I would gladly move on from a theory (petrit vasi hit and run link) that I never made up to begin with.

Orko, didn't you mention that you've been in touch with Renner? He interviewed the supervisor, and I would hope that perhaps he questioned her along these lines if for no other reason than to put this rumor to rest. If not, maybe he is willing to follow up. Just a thought.

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow. Someone with actual information that might be helpful to somebody.
I apologize for thinking you were a troll.

I got some of your quips and they were funny as hell. Can't say I understood all of the references though.

Like the new coeur de lion, more people will likely appreciate you also. Clearly seem clever.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Lets try this another way, I think that it was aliens that stole Maura, and because I have no proof whatsoever, you need to prove me wrong. I mean the aliens can be anywhere they want at anytime with their highly advanced technology, and Maura was carrying that cell phone that I am sure the aliens were using as a tracking device to find where she was. Ergo, aliens took her. I dare you to PROVE me wrong.

Orko- This is not Bill being rude. This is called reductio ad absurdum. What this is, is Bill taking your argument points but then adding a more absurd theory to show you and the audience the flaws in the logic. Very good for math arguments of space and time, but apparently it works well here.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Orko- This is not Bill being rude. This is called reductio ad absurdum. What this is, is Bill taking your argument points but then adding a more absurd theory to show you and the audience the flaws in the logic. Very good for math arguments of space and time, but apparently it works well here.

Don't forget how I tied the all important cell phone in also. 8-)

I have to say I am very impressed, and not for the first time. I think several people have gotten what I do because I do it fairly frequently. But I don't believe anyone has ever put the correct label on it.

That education thing is working very well for you. Orko, see what happens when someone pays attention in school? Great job Lighthouse. Not only did you learn it, you are applying it. Not something done by all who go to school. Gotta ask, what was/is your major?

Bill

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Orko- This is not Bill being rude. This is called reductio ad absurdum. What this is, is Bill taking your argument points but then adding a more absurd theory to show you and the audience the flaws in the logic. Very good for math arguments of space and time, but apparently it works well here.

except for one tiny problem

The vasi hit and run angle theory is not mine.

It is a legit theory brought up by several people that have worked the case.

Eight years later and NO ONE has been able to not tie maura murray to vasi.

The same people - whether you are talking about the young lady who won an award for her five-part maura murray series coverage or even more currently James Renner - have each gone on to conclude that they don't believe maura had anything to do with petrit vasi's hit and run.

Good to know, but the reasons they gave to come up with their conclusions have turned out to be FACTUALLY WRONG.

I have personally tested their reasons and they are WRONG.

It still doesn't mean maura was involved, but it does mean that someone needs to take a harder look.

And what ambulance wannabe bill should know is that life doesn't work in the way that he thinks.

If investigators hear about the petrit vasi hit and run, they DO NOT automatically dismiss it (since they don't have facts in their face about it). They would pursue it out until they came up with something concrete that dismisses the theory outright.

If any investigator working any case, just went off of the few facts they had, no case would ever be solved. Solving a case does include following up on tips, hunches and the like. you pursue until you prove true or false.

That is the kind of reasoning I would take about anything concerning this case.

We are so quick to dismiss maura's potential involvement in a hit and run but yet we throw around wild theories that maura was running off to canada or meeting some mystery lover or that some mystery guy just happened to get into her trunk and decide 'hey that rag right there' would be a great abduction tool yuk yuk.

Plenty of holes in all of those brilliant theories, now find some holes in the vasi hit and run theory. All I have every really been saying is that I haven't found any holes and I have looked into the matter.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
If investigators hear about the petrit vasi hit and run, they DO NOT automatically dismiss it (since they don't have facts in their face about it). They would pursue it out until they came up with something concrete that dismisses the theory outright.

Is this guy dumb as a bag of dirt or what?

No one automatically dismissed anything. BUT, they must have evidence to INCLUDE it. A point you apparently don't get. Even if there is not enough evidence to explicitly exclude it. Many times things cannot be put in a category that totally excludes them. That DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY PUT THEM IN THE CATEGORY OF BEING INCLUDED. And that is what you want to do.

With that, I think that most thinking people have enough proof that they can ignore Orko's ramblings about this now so I'll likely not waste more time with it. Bottom line is what happened to Maura happened in NH and I think we have a clearer picture of her state of mind from other things that have been shown to be going on in her life.

I might have more free time coming up though. I plan to be in NH for more than a week starting Thursday or Friday. Lots of time to help Orko.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Is this guy dumb as a bag of dirt or what?
No one automatically dismissed anything. BUT, they must have evidence to INCLUDE it. A point you apparently don't get. Even if there is not enough evidence to explicitly exclude it. Many times things cannot be put in a category that totally excludes them. That DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY PUT THEM IN THE CATEGORY OF BEING INCLUDED. And that is what you want to do.
With that, I think that most thinking people have enough proof that they can ignore Orko's ramblings about this now so I'll likely not waste more time with it. Bottom line is what happened to Maura happened in NH and I think we have a clearer picture of her state of mind from other things that have been shown to be going on in her life.
I might have more free time coming up though. I plan to be in NH for more than a week starting Thursday or Friday. Lots of time to help Orko.
Bill

A point you don't seem to grasp is that the hit and run theory should be relatively easy to disprove if false.

One call to maura's supervisor to verify whether or not maura was working at the desk at the time of the vasi hit and run took place should put an end to this theory. the area supervisor is on 30 minute rounds to the various dorms, however, if maura was on break, she would likely be in the loop that someone was subbing for maura while maura was gone.

Police never even bothered to interview the supervisor and they also never bothered to work out what happened to vasi.

Those are facts and that is why eight years later, there are still questions left to be answered.

The vasi hit and run angle is not a made up theory, I wouldn't have any reason to even know about the hit and run if it hadn't been brought up by people in tune with the maura murray case.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
Police never even bothered to interview the supervisor and they also never bothered to work out what happened to vasi.

Can't leave this one alone. Just like you knowing what Fred's and Maura's schedule was, how exactly do you know who the police interviewed? I would be almost as surprised if you told me they didn't interview you either. Maybe because there was nothing to point them towards Maura? Oh, except for that compelling phone evidence and the crying. Are you sure you weren't also on your cell phone 30 minutes before or after the 1220 time-frame and then seen laughing hysterically minutes later. Unable to compose yourself. Sounds very suspicious to me. So where exactly were YOU at the time of this accident Professor Plum.

And one more point. Just because you don't know where Maura was, during that time. Still doesn't put her at the scene of Vasi's accident.

Gotta love this guys tenacity if nothing else. He keeps getting hit with that stupid stick but he just keeps coming back for more. I assume he has a very thick skull because most would have blacked out by now.

Doesn't anyone have anything interesting to talk about, a diversion from this? Just because this thread of stupidity is still going doesn't mean that useful conversation can't run in parallel.

Bill

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Orko- This is not Bill being rude. This is called reductio ad absurdum. What this is, is Bill taking your argument points but then adding a more absurd theory to show you and the audience the flaws in the logic. Very good for math arguments of space and time, but apparently it works well here.

While it may have been an attempt at, it was not a valid use of reductio ad absurdum I saw it as more of a straw man attempt in the sense that it really does not deal with or build upon the assertions of Orko's aregument at all. WTH's response was simply absurd for the sake of absurdity.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
A point you don't seem to grasp is that the hit and run theory should be relatively easy to disprove if false.
One call to maura's supervisor to verify whether or not maura was working at the desk at the time of the vasi hit and run took place should put an end to this theory. the area supervisor is on 30 minute rounds to the various dorms, however, if maura was on break, she would likely be in the loop that someone was subbing for maura while maura was gone.
Police never even bothered to interview the supervisor and they also never bothered to work out what happened to vasi.
Those are facts and that is why eight years later, there are still questions left to be answered.
The vasi hit and run angle is not a made up theory, I wouldn't have any reason to even know about the hit and run if it hadn't been brought up by people in tune with the maura murray case.

Orko - I'm trying to help you I'm not trying to be rude. You know she disappeared four days later? Can you speed up to how the Vassi hit and run effects where she is now? I'm hoping you might have some other clues in the back end of the disppearance that may help your theory, and or find her location.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Orko - I'm trying to help you I'm not trying to be rude. You know she disappeared four days later? Can you speed up to how the Vassi hit and run effects where she is now? I'm hoping you might have some other clues in the back end of the disppearance that may help your theory, and or find her location.

Not to speak for him, but I think that was asked (by Amy) and answered. Assuming that the connection is real, it does not prove or disprove anything as far as what happened later. It however would change, in his opinion, the likelihood and probability of the discussed scenarios. For example, it could possibly be assumed that she would have been more suicidal if such a horrific occurence happened.

elphalba wrote:

<quoted text>
Not to speak for him, but I think that was asked (by Amy) and answered. Assuming that the connection is real, it does not prove or disprove anything as far as what happened later. It however would change, in his opinion, the likelihood and probability of the discussed scenarios. For example, it could possibly be assumed that she would have been more suicidal if such a horrific occurence happened.

And I haven't wavered from the theory that I believe which is that maura took her own life.

Whether or not the petrit vasi hit and run had anything to do with maura, I think her ultimate fate was suicide.

If she was involved, it only adds weight IMO to the suicide theory and it clears up almost all of the odd behavior maura exhibited in during the stretch that began around 1 a.m. on early Friday Feb 6, 2004 and lasted up until just before 7:30 p.m. Mon feb 9 at which time maura went missing.

elphalba wrote:

<quoted text>
While it may have been an attempt at, it was not a valid use of reductio ad absurdum I saw it as more of a straw man attempt in the sense that it really does not deal with or build upon the assertions of Orko's aregument at all. WTH's response was simply absurd for the sake of absurdity.

As with all straw man arguments that is the part you are not suppose to notice. And I would have to classify it as more than just absurd for the sake of absurdity. It has many of his elements included, though his elements are not pushed over the edge.

Still, all in all a very effective use in my opinion. I think most get it.

Bill

elphalba wrote:

<quoted text>
While it may have been an attempt at, it was not a valid use of reductio ad absurdum I saw it as more of a straw man attempt in the sense that it really does not deal with or build upon the assertions of Orko's aregument at all. WTH's response was simply absurd for the sake of absurdity.

Orko says: Maura was involved with a hit and run, until you can disprove otherwise (supervisor interview in this case) she did it.

Bill says: Aliens stole Maura, until you can disprove otherwise aliens stole her.

Bill inserts his theory of aliens stealing Maura (which is absurd) but by the premise set by Orko of having to be disproved first can't actually be disproved (Any arguement should be proven first and not have to be disproven which was the original arguement a few posts back by Bill)
A strawman wasn't actually created and wasn't off topic, because he used Orko's premise.

You see Absurd for the sake of Absurdity - I see ART.

Can't leave this one alone. Just like you knowing what Fred's and Maura's schedule was, how exactly do you know who the police interviewed?
Bill

Here you go bill, don't let some silly old facts get in the way of your rants and rumblings. Also notice very clearly how the vasi hit and run angle is NOT MY THEORY.

ON WETHER POLICE INTERVIEWED THE SUPERVISOR:
Excerpt from James Renner’s interview and story with maura’s supervisor that took place in 2011

“It was the last time she (the supervisor) saw her. The next day, a Friday, morning classes were canceled due to snow. The following Tuesday, she filled out a report of her interaction with Maura that night and filed it with local law enforcement.
SHE HAS NEVER SPOKEN TO THE DETECTIVES WORKING THE CASE."

ON POLICE INVESTIGATING HIT AND RUN

New Hampshire Sunday News
Nancy West
Oct 28, 2007
Campus hit-and-run
A series of reports in Murray's hometown newspaper, the Hanson (Mass.) Express, raised the question of whether Maura could have been involved late that same Thursday night or early Friday morning when fellow student Petrit Vasi of Dorchester was injured in an apparent hit-and-run accident about 1.2 miles from the dorm where Maura worked.

Vasi's mother, Aprhodite Vasi, said her son has recovered but still doesn't remember what happened to him that night at about 12:20 a.m.

Mrs. Vasi was told at the emergency room her son was involved in a hit-an-run accident, BUT THERE WAS NEVER A FOLLOW-UP INVESTIGATION. Mrs. Vasi said.

Mrs. Vasi said Petrit remained in a coma for two months and remained hospitalized for a month after that. He had to cut short rehabilitation therapy, she said, because his insurance ran out.

“He doesn't know what happened, and nobody investigated for him,” Mrs. Vasi said.

Sharon Rausch doesn't believe Maura was involved in the accident that injured Petrit. Murray couldn't have left her burrito long enough to be at the accident scene and return to the dorm, Rausch said.

Police also don't appear to be pursuing a Vasi-Murray link.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Orko says: Maura was involved with a hit and run, until you can disprove otherwise (supervisor interview in this case) she did it.
Bill says: Aliens stole Maura, until you can disprove otherwise aliens stole her.
Bill inserts his theory of aliens stealing Maura (which is absurd) but by the premise set by Orko of having to be disproved first can't actually be disproved (Any arguement should be proven first and not have to be disproven which was the original arguement a few posts back by Bill)
A strawman wasn't actually created and wasn't off topic, because he used Orko's premise.
You see Absurd for the sake of Absurdity - I see ART.

Lighthouse,
you are way off

I said the theory needs to be re-looked at. The information used to discredit the theory has been proven false.

that is not the same as saying the hit and run indeed happened and was related to maura.

cliff notes lesson for the day.

The maura link about the hit and run theory was talked about by several news organizations establishing the theory.

Maura's supervisor (which would likely be a valuable source to weigh in on the matter) was never interviewd about maura's whereabouts during the time vasi was struck and then subsequently found.

Police never followed up an investigation into what happened to vasi.

Same news organizations that brought up the maura-vasi hit and run link and theory, discredited her involvement by turning to two falsehoods (1. hit and run happened across town miles away. 2. Maura was glued to her desk for the entire shift, so it couldn't have been her.)

This matter has not been resolved and that is really the most basic thing that i have been trying to convey all along.