Maura Murray

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Citi you are definitely wrong about this.
The registry does not need to be open to buy a car.
When you buy a car you put your old plates right on the car. Your old registrations combined with your transfer of ownership form that the dealer gives you is your registration for the next 7 days.
You can definitely buy a car and legally drive it off the lot on the same day, I've done it before. We traded in my girls old jetta and bought a Subaru outback. The dealer stapled the transfer of ownership form to our old registration and that was the registration for the next 7 days, or until you get to the rmv. It is called the 7 day registration, look it up. This is how it was in'07 and probably was like that in 04. Mass does this because they don't have temp plates, most states the dealer just gives you a temp plate, but in mass that is not how it works. There may b some sort of temp plate in mass but if you already owned a car you don't need one.
It has to be set up like that, otherwise you wouldn't be able to buy a car on a weekend and trade in your old car.
I believe you actually have 30 days to get the car inspected, I could be wrong about that.

I didnt say the registery needed to be open in order to buy a car. A car needs to be registered and insured in order to drive it legally on the road in Ma.If you take plates off of another vehicle and put it on a vehicle that is not registered and you get pulled over you can be charged with detaching plates and also have your vehichle towed.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>The registery in Ma is closed on weekends. So if you buy a car during the weekend you cannot register it until Monday when the registery is open. They are open Monday through Friday. When the vehicle has been insured and registered you have 7 days from that point on to have the vehicle inspected.

Thats also the way I understand it here in Ma....You COULD drive it home,but it would be illegal.

http://www.mass.gov/rmv/forms/21426.pdf

Wowzer the real one wrote:

http://www.mass.gov/rmv/forms/ 21426.pdf

The link you provided is an FAQ pertaining to a TRANSFER of registration when trading in/disposing of a car..If they werent trading in the Saturn or "taking it off the road" none of this would apply..

What does it matter, as to registration of a mv in MA. How does that help in discovering what happened to Maura in NH......?

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>I didnt say the registery needed to be open in order to buy a car. A car needs to be registered and insured in order to drive it legally on the road in Ma.If you take plates off of another vehicle and put it on a vehicle that is not registered and you get pulled over you can be charged with detaching plates and also have your vehichle towed.

This is incorrect as well. Your registration is stamped with your insurance carrier, ours is called safety insurance. The insurance gets transferred automatically with the registration, but only for the 7 day grace period. If you have your registration and your transfer of ownership form that is provided by the dealer you are perfectly legal to drive the car off the lot that day.

Yes you definitely can buy a car and LEGALLY drive it home the same day, look it up, it's called a 7-day registration. I've done it personally, there is no way in hell me or my girl would've illegally driven a car anywhere. There is no way in hell I would ever risk my assetts by driving an uninsured vehicle on the road.
It HAS to be set up like this, otherwise you wouldn't be able to go trade in your car with a dealer because you wouldn't have a ride home.

No legitimate car dealership would ever let you illegally drive a car off the lot, they would be open to serious liability.

I don't see how this is even a debate, obviously you can buy a car and drive it off the lot the same day, any time your ever at a car dealership that's all they want you to do lol.

Thanks for the link wowzer, I think that pretty cleary shows what I've been saying to be true.

You can clearly drive a car off the lot the same day you buy it LEGALLY, it is fully insured and completely legal to drive . you have 7 days to legally drive the car so you can transfer the registration and the insurance to the new car.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>BTW you received this information from them during an ongoing investigation?

This is the kind of information that an investigator can tell a journalist. Knowing that Fred wouldnt sit down for a formal interview for 2 years has nothing to do with any sort of evidence and in no way could it harm any prosecution or provide info to any potential suspects that could help them cover their tracks.

The bigger question is why the hell wouldn't Fred sit down for a formal interview for 2 years?? That's insane, I feel completely scammed by Fred. In those first two years I was on the mm and the MMM forums, there was some serious critisisms of LE and their investigation. I was criticizing as well. Problem was that I was taking Fred at his word. If I had any idea he still hadn't even sat down for a formal interview I probably would've had a different opinion.

He was constantly criticizing them for not treating it as a criminal investigation. Well it seems like they truly were treating it as such from the earliest days of the investigation. Early on one of the spokesman for the NHSP, I'm not sure if it was scarinza but maybe sgt Bruno of Troop F? Well the spokesman said they spoke to everyone in a 5 mile radius of the crash scene, I think he even said he spoke to most of them twice. That's a pretty serious canvas of the area, that's pretty much exactly what you would expect in a murder investigation.
Bottom line is that with all Fred's crying about the investigation it's completely ridiculous that he didn't sit down for a formal interview for 2 years and when he did he brought two lawyers.
I wonder if Fred is one of the people whom were polygraph tested during the investigation, I don't think so, you would think if we know about the two year thing then we would also know about him taking a poly; I wonder if lE asked him to submit to one, I feel like they would have. They did use them in the investigation, I wonder If Fred's lawyers said no.
All this critisism and it turns out there actually was a huge criminal investigation and Fred wasn't very helpful, or so it would seem.

Many parents of missing people will go to the cops early and request polygraphs and interviews so they can be eliminate and the cops can move ion towards finding the real perp. Doesn't seem like Fred did anything of the sort.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
Jenky,
I beg to differ on the book being accurate.
And james also interviewed the girl that fred and maura went and picked up and she also noted that maura went to her room after the dorm party while she was escorted to her dorm by a male. The distinction was made that maura stayed in the building and the friend got someone to walk her to her dorm.

Let's look at a few of the innacuracies in this book. First it says that she completely missed the corner and ended up in the wood barely missing a tree. She definitely didn't go into the woods she crashed into the snowbank.
Then it said that the SBD asked if he should cal Aaa. That's wrong too, he asked if she wanted police and she said no. Also says nothing about her objecting to him calling police.

Then it says that Atwood thought she looked like she was drinking. There isn't one quote where sbd says this, he actually said the exact opposite.
That's all just on the first page

Then it says there was a can of skyy blue malt liquor was found on the front seat; are they just making shit up here?

I can go on but I think I've made my point, that article's information isn't exactly correct.

Shack wrote:

What does it matter, as to registration of a mv in MA. How does that help in discovering what happened to Maura in NH......?

Well if it proves someone isn't telling the truth about the events leading up to the disappearance of MM I would think that could help.

I find your silence about the hotel room rather interesting. If it was the SBD in the hotel room would you be any different?

You are always one to make dramatic statements to get the attention of the readers of the forum. Yet nothing about the hotel room.

To pay the best homage I can to you I will try to create a Shackian post:
"Only two people know really happened in the hotel room that night and one of them went missing the next day to never be heard from again. We will only know FM's version."

Advocator wrote:

<quoted text>
It makes total sense for her to want to get the car back to him that same night so the next-day plans could proceed without anyone having to wait on anyone.

Total sense? Advocator - do you think MM would want to change out of the clothes she went drinking in the night before? Do you think maybe she would want to put something comfortable on to sleep? Could you try to make sense out of a weird situation you sure can, but you can't say it makes total sense. If this made total sense no one would be questioning it because more people would be doing the same thing, but the reality is they aren't.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>

I don't want to create a hail storm on FM about what happened in the room, however no one can change the fact that about 37 hours after the hotel room MM goes missing.

197 years after the Battle of Eylau MM goes missing.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Well if it proves someone isn't telling the truth about the events leading up to the disappearance of MM I would think that could help.

I don't remember Fred ever giving a reason as to why they did not purchase the car that weekend. People have speculated that maybe he didn't buy the car the same weekend due to MA's regulations, but I don't remember reading Fred himself giving this as the reason. Did he say this somewhere?

Amy,

They had picked out a car, something like a Geo Prism?
Maura had it picked out and "she would have had it" by/in the next week. If they didn't make it to the place on time Saturday, nothing would stop them from walking car to car and figuring the "Geo" looked good. At some point Fred said "all the car places are closed Sunday", but they'd come back for it later in the week. Maybe the following weekend?

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Total sense? Advocator - do you think MM would want to change out of the clothes she went drinking in the night before? Do you think maybe she would want to put something comfortable on to sleep? Could you try to make sense out of a weird situation you sure can, but you can't say it makes total sense. If this made total sense no one would be questioning it because more people would be doing the same thing, but the reality is they aren't.

There were pajamas found in a "bag", maybe that same duffle bag where the running shoes, etc were found......IN THE TRUNK OF THE SATURN.(remember that picture with Kathleen clutching Maura's belongings) Not yelling. But after having been at the exercise room of the motel where Fred was staying, that same bag may have been packed for that purpose: pajamas and all, instead of a dorm party at the end of the day. That Maura would return, work out again, maybe take a run in the morning. And so I wonder if that bag was transfered to the Saturn when Fred dropped her off at Campus Sunday. Instead of walking the bag back up, it was put it the trunk instead.
\Not that it matters much, just thinking out loud mostly.

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't remember Fred ever giving a reason as to why they did not purchase the car that weekend. People have speculated that maybe he didn't buy the car the same weekend due to MA's regulations, but I don't remember reading Fred himself giving this as the reason. Did he say this somewhere?

I was responding back to Shack more as a generalized response. I haven't looked into the statements of whether or not a car was set to be purchased.

Expanding on that thought. it occured to me that the bag had her nursing books and other things for personal hygene & well being.
Maura may not have "BROUGHT" these things at all (which could take away any value or credit for having packed them (on purpose) for her trip), when she left college and headed for VT or NH.

To go out on Saturday, Maura might want to wear her good jewelry. Maybe that's the only reason it was found "packed"
She had worked out at the motel and likely taken it off to shower, and put it in the BAG, afterwards.

....and after a long day or night packed with suprises, she found herself back at the motel. At some point, not wanting to wear the neclace to work, she packed it away in the bag she had packed for the workout and night she would have rather had.

I think now that it could matter. That the BAG was given back to her and put in her own trunk,(the saturn), when she was dropped off at Campus for the last time.

Highly likely that Maura felt very uncomfortable staying in her dorm room post sting.

There's always the possibility that she was threatened by any individual(s) who thought Maura guilty of identity theft. The phone call from somewhere inside UMASS the night she was on security duty, crying, and not wanting KM to accompany her back to her room, leaves me to think she had already removed her valuables and belongings from her dorm room to her car. The only reason fro her to return to her room would have been Internet access, which she could have been using another location on campus, may have been the computer info Fred was seeking.

She returns to her dorm room per KM the night of the Alfieri party, and perhaps the reason for her late night retreat to the safety of Fred's hotel room. Her accident could have been mistakenly reasoned for the cuts and bruises, and possibly why the lack of release of photos from the ATM.

Why did KM feel the need to have male escort her to her dorm room?

Not everything is always as it seems.