Maura Murray

JWB wrote:

<quoted text>
It matters to me

I understand that. The question is, why? What do you think the color will tell you? If it is red, is that because she planned a special signal to others, or was red the only color she had? I am of course assuming that they had a rag display bag, so all the colors of the rainbow were usable, all having special meanings to those who see them. Kind of like boat pennant flags. So instead of the color of the rags, we actually should be asking did anyone come across this in the car:

http://www.flagandbanner.com/images/NINTE0FS_...

of course not this flag version but the rag version and if they didn't find it in the car. Did she make sure to also stuff that into her backpack and take it with her when she ran from the car?

Bill

Sharon could see the marks from the car door in the snowbank....think about that. And then wonder at which time she moved her car from that spot. It's easy. That came next.

Just me--paris wrote:

Sure, it could have some old roots to the concept back in the day. In a world with horse and buggy, maybe it meant you'd be back to claim it.

So if today we shove the rag up the tailpipe on the car. Where were we shoving this rag back in the days of the horse and buggy when it broke down??

Bill

And how much did the horse object?

Bill

Well, and after the SBD had come and gone.

WTH-the-original wrote:

And how much did the horse object?
Bill

Ah ha, I knew someone might say that, lol. Can't blaime a girl for trying though, lol.

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
The white rag flies at night. Meet me at the corner of Weather and Barn to complete the transaction. And tell Bubba I say hello.
-- Hater #6

Hater 6 this base. The house with 101 lights says the weather and barn site is hot. Turkey drum sticks all over. Say again turkey drum sticks all over.

Someone knows

Everybody's makin' me laugh today.

Gerbil, heh.:)

Maybe the rag was to keep the gerbils, bunnies, kitties, turkey drumsticks, lions, tigers and bears from falling OUT, didya ever think of that.:)

Yeah, yeah, I'm on to something now.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Hater 6 this base. The house with 101 lights says the weather and barn site is hot. Turkey drum sticks all over. Say again turkey drum sticks all over.
Someone knows

Turkeys trot west. Shine 101 lights east. MC with the EW on the DL. Cowbell.

whiston wrote:

hi all ,now i am thinking there were several rags stuffed in the saturn talpipe.if the rag found at Lavoies was 'down in the tailpipe'and could be seen on the 9th feb then it was either a huge shop rag or more than one.there was some talk a while back about it being a towel.take care philip

there was one rag. JWB I dont know the color. Responders never stated they found a towel. What they did say is they saw a clean rag in the tailpipe.

Just me--paris wrote:

It bothers me that the family had to look at the area where her car was at FIRST. She moved it according to the other neighbors. So the second are that was a bit further East would have been more telling as to footprints and/or more that one set.

There was only one neighbor that said they saw the vehicle back up. The distance as to where this person seeing the vehicle back up is unknown. It was actually the Ws whom had said months later that the tree with the photos on it was not the correct area. They had stated it was further down the road.

So you guys are saying Nike lavoie was lying when he told renner the rag was "stuffed way up there"
I believe dick guy said something to that effect as well but I can't find the quote right now(haven't really looked very hard)

The point is that jus because the first responders saw the rag doesn't mean it was hangin out. If you were a responder and someone said there was a rag in the muffler wouldn't you wanna take your flashlight and look for yourself?? Just because the first responders all saw it means absolutely nothing in regards to how deep it was in the muffler.
That is clearly an assumption.

Citi- I know you said they all saw it but what did they say to you about it? Did they say it was hanging out in plain sight or just that they saw it?

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
See Jenkins. Instead of all the effort to make up things. Trying to draw pictures of Smith wandering around, looking under cars, examining exhaust pipes. "Wondering" out loud about his suspicious behavior. The simpler explanation of people being able to see the rag because it was exposed, the simpler explanation is the correct one. Two people are telling you everyone saw the rag in the tailpipe. Instead of making stories up, you should inquire about what is known. If you really want to make up stories, you should at least also try to find the simplest answer rather than going immediately to the "brain tumor" explanation. You would be much better served using simple explanations. You really don't have the talent to make involved, complex stories.
Bill

Who the hell is making anything up? Except maybe you when your saying I'm making shit up.

Lavoie clearly said that the rag was stuffed way up there. The quote from citi you posted only says that they saw it. It makes absolutely no mention of how deep it was. You are making an assumption, an assumption that differs from what an actual witness said.

Now again: is there any responder who has spoken publicly about the rag that described it as hanging out?

I'd be glad to admit that it was hanging out if there's anyone who saw it and described it as such, that would make the whole thing make a lot more sense.

How hard is it to understand that at least one respinder(I'm pretty sure two) who spoke on record about it described it being stuffed way up there?

Bill I'm sorry but you have to go by what witnesses who actually saw it said, not on assumption.

you and fakeLE's whole entire theory is based on assumptions; assumptions that actually don't for what witnesses said. Why is that?

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>There was only one neighbor that said they saw the vehicle back up. The distance as to where this person seeing the vehicle back up is unknown. It was actually the Ws whom had said months later that the tree with the photos on it was not the correct area. They had stated it was further down the road.

Thanks citi, it helps when you reply like this, and i do recall how the W's helped the family learn what they hadn't known.
But what do you mean the distance was unknown? I'm guessing you mean that it was unknown to people from the onset, but was revealed to them later on?
I thought it was the orange peeling couple who witnessed the car (moving back and then parking parallel to the road), I thought that they were the ones who saw the car move, and all the activity at the trunk. But I do recall there was one other person who spoke as to what he could see too.
~But my point was that family was directed to the wrong spot and even though I'm sure they looked long and hard, it would have been better to know that the car was NOT where the "budging" of snow was, rather where the car was found parked.

Jenkins, can you possibly tell us how far is 'way up there'?

Is it 2 inches? Is it 2 feet? What is your understanding of what the measurement of "way up there" is?

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

So you guys are saying Nike lavoie was lying when he told renner the rag was "stuffed way up there"
I believe dick guy said something to that effect as well but I can't find the quote right now(haven't really looked very hard)
The point is that jus because the first responders saw the rag doesn't mean it was hangin out. If you were a responder and someone said there was a rag in the muffler wouldn't you wanna take your flashlight and look for yourself?? Just because the first responders all saw it means absolutely nothing in regards to how deep it was in the muffler.
That is clearly an assumption.
Citi- I know you said they all saw it but what did they say to you about it? Did they say it was hanging out in plain sight or just that they saw it?

They said they saw a clean rag in the tailpipe. This is my opinion if the rag was stuffed way in there it would not be clean. Responders never would have seen the rag if it was stuffed way in there. CS made fire move away from the vehicle and EMS was only there for minutes.The problem is you read it on Renners blog.

just me wrote:

<quoted text>Thanks citi, it helps when you reply like this, and i do recall how the W's helped the family learn what they hadn't known.
But what do you mean the distance was unknown? I'm guessing you mean that it was unknown to people from the onset, but was revealed to them later on?
I thought it was the orange peeling couple who witnessed the car (moving back and then parking parallel to the road), I thought that they were the ones who saw the car move, and all the activity at the trunk. But I do recall there was one other person who spoke as to what he could see too.
~But my point was that family was directed to the wrong spot and even though I'm sure they looked long and hard, it would have been better to know that the car was NOT where the "budging" of snow was, rather where the car was found parked.

Just me I spoke with the orange peeling guy. This person stated that they saw the vehicle back up. They never stated from where the vehicle backed up from. I dont know if family was directed to the wrong area or if it was just a misunderstanding. I did not become involved in the search for Maura until March of 2004.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
See Jenkins. Instead of all the effort to make up things. Trying to draw pictures of Smith wandering around, looking under cars, examining exhaust pipes. "Wondering" out loud about his suspicious behavior. The simpler explanation of people being able to see the rag because it was exposed, the simpler explanation is the correct one. Two people are telling you everyone saw the rag in the tailpipe. Instead of making stories up, you should inquire about what is known. If you really want to make up stories, you should at least also try to find the simplest answer rather than going immediately to the "brain tumor" explanation. You would be much better served using simple explanations. You really don't have the talent to make involved, complex stories.
Bill

I agree with your about occam, generally the simplest answer to a question is the correct answer as well.

So if that's how you think you must think that she caught a ride from the area correct?
Wouldn't that be the simplest answer to this whole thing?

How does that not make more sense than her running miles up the road and then walkin miles into the woods through 2+ feet of snow in the dead of winter wearing tennis shoes and jeans? Deep into the woods through the snow without leaving a trail. Deep enough where she hasn't been found for 8.5 years?

That sounds like a brain Tumor answer if I've ever heard of one.

Oh ya, and the whole theory is also based on you assumption that she was drunk, which clearly does not match any witness descriptiom, except the witness who was obviously made up by LE in the first couple weeks .
Then the other part of you theory, which is also based on the assumption she was drunk is based on the assumption that she was trying to elude LE. This also directly contradicts witness statements. She is described as gettin things from her trunk and then sitting there on the side of the road with her door open leisurely smoking for a few minutes. Whether she was smoking or usIn her phone doesn't matter, point is she was leisurely sitting there with her door open. Who sits there leisurely doing anything when they're so scared of police they're about to walk miles into the woods to their death to avoid them?

Saying she was drunk is an ASSUMPTION straight up.
Saying she was trying to elude LE is an ASSUMPTION.

Your whole theory is based on assumptions and it is not even close to the simplest explanation.

The simplest explanation is she got her stuff together, tried to use her phone and then caught a ride when she realized it wasn't going to work. Occam would clearly fit with that explanation.

That doesn't neccesarily mean she got killed, but catching a ride is the simplest answer that fits best with known evidence.

Doesn't it make way more sense that this young girl would catch a ride to leave the area rather than walking miles up the road and then miles into the woods to her death? How does that make any sense. Occam's razor here buddy

FrmLE wrote:

Jenkins, can you possibly tell us how far is 'way up there'?
Is it 2 inches? Is it 2 feet? What is your understanding of what the measurement of "way up there" is?

Ok Jenkins, FRMLE just put this golfball up on a high tee for you. Now is the oportunity to tell him how far is far when you cram a rag (or object) up his tailpipe.

Q: How far is far up FRMRLE tailpipe

Mulitple choice answers:

A) till he confesses he is not former LE

B) Till he says he really is WTH

C) Till he can tell you when you needed a passport to get into Canada

D) He admits they should have searched east

JWB wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok Jenkins, FRMLE just put this golfball up on a high tee for you. Now is the oportunity to tell him how far is far when you cram a rag (or object) up his tailpipe.
Q: How far is far up FRMRLE tailpipe
Mulitple choice answers:
A) till he confesses he is not former LE
B) Till he says he really is WTH
C) Till he can tell you when you needed a passport to get into Canada
D) He admits they should have searched east

Tough one JWB. I will flip a coin between A and B.

Ok JWB, My answer is A