Maura Murray

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
There really needs to be a douche-bag icon. Hands down, you would have lots of them. You couldn't possibly be more appropriately named.
Bill

I don't usually like that name but I have to agree it's quite appropriate for this low life slug.

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Thank you very much!! I wish I coulda went out today but the nascar race fans are everywhere drunk & they are kinda loud!!... Supposed 2 b a hurricane comin this way but idk.. It hit 88 today & is usually warm here till round thanksgiving.. Lots of pretty days in Dec also & it gets around 30 or so in Jan.. I really dislike race weekend here..:(

I try to get out and enjoy the fresh air and sun every chance I get because the winters are so long and cold up here. We could get snow anytime now.
I have some friends in Surry. They are always after me to move down there. LOL

Treasonous???? Did you really get that email SS? That's hilarious, how could anything on a thread regarding a missing girl, no matter how stupid or insane ever be treason? Wow

As for this thought of Chicago corruption having anything to do with MM that is just laughable, I don't think I've ever heard anything so ridiculous.

If someone wants to theorize that there is a coverup going on in NH, that's one thing. I don't agree with it but at least they're in the right state, but to say there's some sort of national coverup involving lawyers from Chicago and possibly the mafia is just flat out insanity.

Amy- that's also really funny, I didn't know paralegals could get disbarred lol, but I also didn't know paralegals were members of any bar association. Shows what I know lol.

This is getting downright strange recently.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
I try to get out and enjoy the fresh air and sun every chance I get because the winters are so long and cold up here. We could get snow anytime now.
I have some friends in Surry. They are always after me to move down there. LOL

Surry Va or NC? Surry Va is bout 3hrs from me & is awesome! Its near the Hamptons & Williamsburg, the former capital.. Colonial Williamsburg, Jamestown, Yorktown, Historic Jamestowne, & Bush Gardens are soooo much fun!!! I went there for Memorial Day weekend... I go atleast twice a year, thats where us mountain side virginians go for vacation all the time! The people there are real nice, pure Southeren!! Surry NC is closer but not as cool lol!..

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Surry Va or NC? Surry Va is bout 3hrs from me & is awesome! Its near the Hamptons & Williamsburg, the former capital.. Colonial Williamsburg, Jamestown, Yorktown, Historic Jamestowne, & Bush Gardens are soooo much fun!!! I went there for Memorial Day weekend... I go atleast twice a year, thats where us mountain side virginians go for vacation all the time! The people there are real nice, pure Southeren!! Surry NC is closer but not as cool lol!..

Surry Va. One of these days I'll take them up on their invite and go see them. Good to know there's interesting things to see there.

Paris- interesting point about someone from umass possibly being at the court proceedings on the 16th, that is very possible and probably likely. Although it is likely someone else from umass was there it's very unlikely she knew anyone there. Umass has about 30,000 undergrads alone and most people on campus are complete strangers. My girl goes there and I can personally attest that most people at umass don't know each other, they generally know people in their major for the most part.
Although it is possible someone was at court I find it very hard to believe that Maura was threatened or in any danger because of this, she used someone's cc # to order food with, it's not like she robbed someone for thousands of dollars and even still.
If anything I would say she was embarrassed, that could very well be the reason she left school like that; out of shear embarrassment.
Maybe she was so embarrassed that she never wanted to go back to umass again, I can see a girl her age that's already shy being that embarrassed by the whole thing, especially if word started going around campus.

I find it very hard to believe that she wasn't suspended from school for that offense, particularly considering she was caught on campus by umass police. I've never heard of anyone who's been arrested at any college not being suspended. Even though she wasn't convicted. The schools rules of conduct are different than the court system and they generally don't go by convictions. If Maura wasn't suspended that would be extremely unusual. Generally students accused of something like that will be suspended from a semester and then put on disciplinary probation up returning to school. She must have been at least on disciplinary probation, it's strange we've never heard of anything like that. She must've had a disciplinary review, which consists of a few students and teachers giving you an on campus "trial" of sorts. It's this review that determines if your suspended, expelled, or just put on probation. It is extremely unusual that she wasn't suspended for a semester.
Last year when I first read about the arrest that was my first thought on her packs up room "oh, she was suspended and too embarrassed to tell her family". I believe it's very possible she was in fact suspended and that might be why she went up to NH, to think about how she was going to tell her family and friends she got suspended.

I'm under the impression that her reason for leaving campus is something that happened in Amherst, but that doesn't neccesarily have anything to do with her dissapearance. I find it very hard to believe that any other umass student is the perp here but that's obviously not out of the question. It is a possibility.

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Thats new to me.. I didnt know it was anything other than that pizza place close to the college.. I read that she would get off if she stayed good untill March.. Is this true? & if it is, is it normal up yonder to only get 3 months of "good behavior" for CC Fraud? Im sure she showed up to court cus she would have a FTA or atleast a "show cause".. Court in December, gone off her record for good in March (I read, not sure).. I guess that would fall under the "first offender law" if yall have one, so she left to NH/VT in Feb., could she have been real worried about some sort of trouble?

No, that is not normal at all.
Apparently what Maura got was a CWOF(continued without a finding), which means if she doesn't get in any more trouble the charges will be dropped. But a 3 month CWOF? I've never heard of one being that short ever, generally they're a year or two minimum, how hard is It to stay out of trouble for 3 months? Does anyone know where renner got this info from and how valid it is? Because to me a 3 month CWOF doesn't sound right, but just because I've never heard of one that short doesn't mean they don't exist.
She must've had a really good lawyer because the evidence against her seems pretty damning, I can see a prosecutor giving her a break by giving her the CWOF so her nursing degree wouldn't be in jeapordy but a 3 month CWOF is a REALLY big break, almost unheard of.

As for the states sharing information: honestly it is very possible she could get a DUI and they would have no idea about it in mass. States are notoriously bad about sharing information with each other. But would she know this? Probably not. I would think that most people assume that the states share all info and if she got arrested that they would definitely know about it down in mass. I can see her being Very scared about this. Although I don't believe she was in danger of a DUI, she almost certainly would've gotten an open container charge. That is a very minor violation, just a ticket, but she might not have known that.
This is most likely the reason she dropped her guard and got a ride from a stranger, she was worried about getting arrested
But is that enough to make her take a suicide mission into the woods to avoid LE? I find that extremely hard to believe. Also why go in the woods when she could've just caught a ride? Besides for the fact that the woods would've been a terrible spot to hide right then, they could've just followed her footprints into the woods. If she was scared of LE, which does make some sense, wouldn't it Make much more sense to just take a ride from a passing motorist who's offering her help? To me that makes way more sense than her entering the woods in 2.5' of snow while wearing sneakers. The woods would've been a terrible spot to hide and she would've known that, even the stupidest person in the world knows that it is ridiculously easy to follow footprints in the snow, particularly when there's over 2' of fresh snow.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

Paris- interesting point about someone from umass possibly being at the court proceedings on the 16th, that is very possible and probably likely. Although it is likely someone else from umass was there it's very unlikely she knew anyone there. Umass has about 30,000 undergrads alone and most people on campus are complete strangers. My girl goes there and I can personally attest that most people at umass don't know each other, they generally know people in their major for the most part.
Although it is possible someone was at court I find it very hard to believe that Maura was threatened or in any danger because of this, she used someone's cc # to order food with, it's not like she robbed someone for thousands of dollars and even still.
If anything I would say she was embarrassed, that could very well be the reason she left school like that; out of shear embarrassment.
Maybe she was so embarrassed that she never wanted to go back to umass again, I can see a girl her age that's already shy being that embarrassed by the whole thing, especially if word started going around campus.
I find it very hard to believe that she wasn't suspended from school for that offense, particularly considering she was caught on campus by umass police. I've never heard of anyone who's been arrested at any college not being suspended. Even though she wasn't convicted. The schools rules of conduct are different than the court system and they generally don't go by convictions. If Maura wasn't suspended that would be extremely unusual. Generally students accused of something like that will be suspended from a semester and then put on disciplinary probation up returning to school. She must have been at least on disciplinary probation, it's strange we've never heard of anything like that. She must've had a disciplinary review, which consists of a few students and teachers giving you an on campus "trial" of sorts. It's this review that determines if your suspended, expelled, or just put on probation. It is extremely unusual that she wasn't suspended for a semester.
Last year when I first read about the arrest that was my first thought on her packs up room "oh, she was suspended and too embarrassed to tell her family". I believe it's very possible she was in fact suspended and that might be why she went up to NH, to think about how she was going to tell her family and friends she got suspended.
I'm under the impression that her reason for leaving campus is something that happened in Amherst, but that doesn't neccesarily have anything to do with her dissapearance. I find it very hard to believe that any other umass student is the perp here but that's obviously not out of the question. It is a possibility.

If the red truck seen by RO really did have MA plates and was really waiting for Maura, then I think it's a lot more likely that this person could have been someone she knew from schooor one of her jobs. Just my opinion but I think it's way more likely (if she was killed) that she was killed by someone she knew than a total stranger who happened to pass by in those few minutes.

Sorry, for the spelling police, I meant "school or one of her jobs".

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Thats new to me.. I didnt know it was anything other than that pizza place close to the college.. I read that she would get off if she stayed good untill March.. Is this true? & if it is, is it normal up yonder to only get 3 months of "good behavior" for CC Fraud? Im sure she showed up to court cus she would have a FTA or atleast a "show cause".. Court in December, gone off her record for good in March (I read, not sure).. I guess that would fall under the "first offender law" if yall have one, so she left to NH/VT in Feb., could she have been real worried about some sort of trouble?

No, that is not normal at all.
Apparently what Maura got was a CWOF(continued without a finding), which means if she doesn't get in any more trouble the charges will be dropped. But a 3 month CWOF? I've never heard of one being that short ever, generally they're a year or two minimum, how hard is It to stay out of trouble for 3 months? Does anyone know where renner got this info from and how valid it is? Because to me a 3 month CWOF doesn't sound right, but just because I've never heard of one that short doesn't mean they don't exist.
She must've had a really good lawyer because the evidence against her seems pretty damning, I can see a prosecutor giving her a break by giving her the CWOF so her nursing degree wouldn't be in jeapordy but a 3 month CWOF is a REALLY big break, almost unheard of.

As for the states sharing information: honestly it is very possible she could get a DUI and they would have no idea about it in mass. States are notoriously bad about sharing information with each other. But would she know this? Probably not. I would think that most people assume that the states share all info and if she got arrested that they would definitely know about it down in mass. I can see her being Very scared about this. Although I don't believe she was in danger of a DUI, she almost certainly would've gotten an open container charge. That is a very minor violation, just a ticket, but she might not have known that.
This is most likely the reason she dropped her guard and got a ride from a stranger, she was worried about getting arrested
But is that enough to make her take a suicide mission into the woods to avoid LE? I find that extremely hard to believe. Also why go in the woods when she could've just caught a ride? Besides for the fact that the woods would've been a terrible spot to hide right then, they could've just followed her footprints into the woods. If she was scared of LE, which does make some sense, wouldn't it Make much more sense to just take a ride from a passing motorist who's offering her help? To me that makes way more sense than her entering the woods in 2.5' of snow while wearing sneakers. The woods would've been a terrible spot to hide and she would've known that, even the stupidest person in the world knows that it is ridiculously easy to follow footprints in the snow, particularly when there's over 2' of fresh snow.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
No, that is not normal at all.
Apparently what Maura got was a CWOF(continued without a finding), which means if she doesn't get in any more trouble the charges will be dropped. But a 3 month CWOF? I've never heard of one being that short ever, generally they're a year or two minimum, how hard is It to stay out of trouble for 3 months? Does anyone know where renner got this info from and how valid it is? Because to me a 3 month CWOF doesn't sound right, but just because I've never heard of one that short doesn't mean they don't exist.
She must've had a really good lawyer because the evidence against her seems pretty damning, I can see a prosecutor giving her a break by giving her the CWOF so her nursing degree wouldn't be in jeapordy but a 3 month CWOF is a REALLY big break, almost unheard of.
As for the states sharing information: honestly it is very possible she could get a DUI and they would have no idea about it in mass. States are notoriously bad about sharing information with each other. But would she know this? Probably not. I would think that most people assume that the states share all info and if she got arrested that they would definitely know about it down in mass. I can see her being Very scared about this. Although I don't believe she was in danger of a DUI, she almost certainly would've gotten an open container charge. That is a very minor violation, just a ticket, but she might not have known that.
This is most likely the reason she dropped her guard and got a ride from a stranger, she was worried about getting arrested
But is that enough to make her take a suicide mission into the woods to avoid LE? I find that extremely hard to believe. Also why go in the woods when she could've just caught a ride? Besides for the fact that the woods would've been a terrible spot to hide right then, they could've just followed her footprints into the woods. If she was scared of LE, which does make some sense, wouldn't it Make much more sense to just take a ride from a passing motorist who's offering her help? To me that makes way more sense than her entering the woods in 2.5' of snow while wearing sneakers. The woods would've been a terrible spot to hide and she would've known that, even the stupidest person in the world knows that it is ridiculously easy to follow footprints in the snow, particularly when there's over 2' of fresh snow.

The min. Good behavior down here is 6mnths & thats for a small charge like reckless driving (here its 25mph over).. I remember back in the mid 00s, & she was busted back then, that credit card fraud (no matter food or not, I know what its like to he hungry) was a Huge offense! Thats back when the orignal Nigerian scams came out... She had to copped a plea or something.. All the docs ive read since Whistons post have her making multiple uses, which is more charges!! It doesnt matter that she was a college girl, I was a college guy a year younger & had to spend a minute..

CC fraud is NO Joke! I looked it up & its not a small charge up yonder.. As to what happened to her, rather she was facing the man/min sentance, she could have run & found a guy with a home & just waited untill the stat of limitations ran out, then maybe she liked her life & is chillin.. On the other hand, id not like to think about what could have happened to a young woman like that..

Just not enough evidence either way... The family not being open & honest really hurts the whole thing in my opinion.. The whole All American Girl just doesnt fit.. The rest of the ID shows atleast the fam tells it like it is.. & everyone using a HS Pic doesnt help.. The arrest pic looks sooo much different... I mean no offense but that arrest pic makes it look like she had been on a crack or meth binge just by the way her eyes look..

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
No, that is not normal at all.
Apparently what Maura got was a CWOF(continued without a finding), which means if she doesn't get in any more trouble the charges will be dropped. But a 3 month CWOF? I've never heard of one being that short ever, generally they're a year or two minimum, how hard is It to stay out of trouble for 3 months? Does anyone know where renner got this info from and how valid it is? Because to me a 3 month CWOF doesn't sound right, but just because I've never heard of one that short doesn't mean they don't exist.
She must've had a really good lawyer because the evidence against her seems pretty damning, I can see a prosecutor giving her a break by giving her the CWOF so her nursing degree wouldn't be in jeapordy but a 3 month CWOF is a REALLY big break, almost unheard of.
As for the states sharing information: honestly it is very possible she could get a DUI and they would have no idea about it in mass. States are notoriously bad about sharing information with each other. But would she know this? Probably not. I would think that most people assume that the states share all info and if she got arrested that they would definitely know about it down in mass. I can see her being Very scared about this. Although I don't believe she was in danger of a DUI, she almost certainly would've gotten an open container charge. That is a very minor violation, just a ticket, but she might not have known that.
This is most likely the reason she dropped her guard and got a ride from a stranger, she was worried about getting arrested
But is that enough to make her take a suicide mission into the woods to avoid LE? I find that extremely hard to believe. Also why go in the woods when she could've just caught a ride? Besides for the fact that the woods would've been a terrible spot to hide right then, they could've just followed her footprints into the woods. If she was scared of LE, which does make some sense, wouldn't it Make much more sense to just take a ride from a passing motorist who's offering her help? To me that makes way more sense than her entering the woods in 2.5' of snow while wearing sneakers. The woods would've been a terrible spot to hide and she would've known that, even the stupidest person in the world knows that it is ridiculously easy to follow footprints in the snow, particularly when there's over 2' of fresh snow.

Didn't you just say this same thing a couple of posts back? Why are you copying your own post and pasting it so we have to read through the long tedious post a second time?

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
If the red truck seen by RO really did have MA plates and was really waiting for Maura, then I think it's a lot more likely that this person could have been someone she knew from schooor one of her jobs. Just my opinion but I think it's way more likely (if she was killed) that she was killed by someone she knew than a total stranger who happened to pass by in those few minutes.

Your right Amy, statistically speaking its way more likely she got killed by someone she knew than a stranger, either 90 or 95% of murder victims are killed by someone they know.
That's what makes it so extremely difficult for LE to catch someone who kills strangers. When there's no known link between victim and perp those are the hardest cases to solve by far.

Something to consider is that NH temp plates have red writing like mass plates do. They look very similar to mass plates and RO did say that while she believed they were mass plates that they could've been temp plates too, she didn't pay that close attention because she obviously wasn't expecting someone to go missing around the corner that might.
Also who's to say that the truck had the correct plates on it? I'm not saying this is the case here but if your some sick bastard out looking for a woman to abduct are you really going to have the proper plates on your truck? Seems like a good idea to put stolen plates on, and plates from mass would throw things off even more.

That being said, it does look very possible that the person in the red truck knew Maura, that would make sense. But it also sounds like they didn't know Her, at least not well. RO specifically stated that she did not look like Maura, completely different body type. Maura was a skinny little girl and it sounds like RO was a bigger woman.
If the person in the red truck was traveling with maura he probably would've known what she was wearing & what she looked like. You gotta remember that the driver slowed and backed up to get a look at RO, but it was dark so they couldn't get a good look. We know that because the driver then waited in the parking lot of the store for RO to come under the streetlights. When she got under the streetlight the person could finally see her well enough to know it wasn't Maura. I feel like if this person knew Maura they would've been able to tell it wasn't her just by seeing what she was wearing and her body type.
It's really hard to say IMO, there's a few things that make me think the driver of the red truck knew Maura but then there's a few things that make me think otherwise too.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Didn't you just say this same thing a couple of posts back? Why are you copying your own post and pasting it so we have to read through the long tedious post a second time?

Sorry it was soo big it double posted my answer also!...

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry it was soo big it double posted my answer also!...

You didn't do anything to be sorry about. He copied the whole thing and pasted it including your reply.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
No, that is not normal at all.
Apparently what Maura got was a CWOF(continued without a finding), which means if she doesn't get in any more trouble the charges will be dropped. But a 3 month CWOF? I've never heard of one being that short ever, generally they're a year or two minimum, how hard is It to stay out of trouble for 3 months? Does anyone know where renner got this info from and how valid it is? Because to me a 3 month CWOF doesn't sound right, but just because I've never heard of one that short doesn't mean they don't exist.
She must've had a really good lawyer because the evidence against her seems pretty damning, I can see a prosecutor giving her a break by giving her the CWOF so her nursing degree wouldn't be in jeapordy but a 3 month CWOF is a REALLY big break, almost unheard of.
As for the states sharing information: honestly it is very possible she could get a DUI and they would have no idea about it in mass. States are notoriously bad about sharing information with each other. But would she know this? Probably not. I would think that most people assume that the states share all info and if she got arrested that they would definitely know about it down in mass. I can see her being Very scared about this. Although I don't believe she was in danger of a DUI, she almost certainly would've gotten an open container charge. That is a very minor violation, just a ticket, but she might not have known that.
T

We discussed this in-depth awhile back. I found it surprising that she was given a diversionary suspended sentence without any form of probationary requirements - usually, here in IL, at least, you are required to check-in with your probation officer, attend meetings if it's a substance-related crime (not only DUIs but also thefts associated from substance abuse), community service, etc.

That being said, she was, on paper, a good kid who messed up. I am not familiar with the law in MA but I feel confident that the general consensus of State's Attorneys is that, a first-time fuck up (for lack of a better word) should not, and IS not, punished as harshly as a repeat offender.

That being said, depending on the precise disposition of the case (what makes you think it's CWOF, Jenkins? Has that been confirmed? Not being snarky, but there are various other forms of probation/diversionary sentences that could have been applied to this case)- she was eligible to have her record sealed.(Despite a CWOF final judgment of the case, it would still be seen by any agency doing a full, complete background check - so, not Walmart, but definitely a hospital.) Sealing the case would remove those confinements from her and it would, literally, be as if it never occurred.

All this is predicated on the thought that she was to make it through her probationary period without violating the terms thereof: A new arrest, misdemeanor or felony, would NECESSARILY be a violation.

Thus, if she were to receive a DUI that fateful night of the accident - she would not only have to deal with the new charges, but she would be sentenced on the original offense, as well.

Sounds like a good motivation to run into the woods, in my book, but that's just me.

Simply Caustic wrote:

<quoted text>
That's because I wrote it in an awkward and queer way.
What I meant was, the investigating agencies would all have been listed, regardless of the value of their input. So if some snitch in the county jail in NH told the warden he had valuable information, and the warden then reported it to the State Police or whomever, that's two investigating agencies that would be listed - but maybe his information was bunk. IIRC, that's how some of the information in the Brianna Maitland case came to light - either through a snitch, or just some dealer who had a pending case, and wanted leniency, so he made a statement regarding her purported death.
I'm not saying that necessarily is the case here, but, it's possible. Or, it could be some guy she was fooling around with right before her disappearance, that shared lots of phone calls and emails with Maura, that was locked up for a DUI and they interviewed him at the prison. The possibilities are endless, and I wish we had a tad bit more information from the fam to go on here....but I don't know how I would react in their shoes, so I'm trying not to judge.

Bringing forward some old posts

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
The min. Good behavior down here is 6mnths & thats for a small charge like reckless driving (here its 25mph over).. I remember back in the mid 00s, & she was busted back then, that credit card fraud (no matter food or not, I know what its like to he hungry) was a Huge offense! Thats back when the orignal Nigerian scams came out... She had to elp.. The arrest pic looks sooo much different... I mean no offense but that arrest pic makes it look like she had been on a crack or meth binge just by the way her eyes look..

What your saying about 6 mos minimum sounds right, I've never heard of a 3 month CWOF.
Her charge was misuse of a cc under $250, that is a misdemeanor, not the biggest charge in the world. Also, while it seems she used the cars multiple times it looks like she was only charged with one offense: misuse of a cc under $250. She could've been charged multiple times but it looks like the cops took mercy on Her, probably because she admitted to it on the spot.
If you look at the first page of those documents it looks weird, to me there looks like there's something wrong with it. The biggest problem I have with it is that it says "sentence: 3 mos good behavior". It SHOULD say: CWOF for 3 months. I've never heard of 3 mos good behavior as a sentence, that's weird. to my knowledge there's no such thing in mass as "3 mos good behavior" but I'm definitely not a mass attorney so I'm not 100% sure on that. I do know quite a bit about the court system in mass though and I've never heard of anything like that. Also, why is her name redacted? Obviously her phone # and adress should be but her name? That's weird too.
Something else that makes absolutely no sense is how could she possibly already have a sentence? She had only been arrested for it at the beginning of nov. that means her appearance on dec. 16th was likely her first pretrial hearing on the matter. Courts are notoriously slow, considering the evidence against her she must have had the best lawyer in w mass to get a deal that great at her first pretrial hearing. That just makes no sense, it's almost unbelieveable.
Also, if you look further back into the report it says: cont'd to 5/30. That is clearly more than 3 months away, almost 6 months. How can her sentence only be 3 mos good behavior if the case has been continued to 5/30?? To me that looks like that would be her next pretrial hearing.
To me the whole 3 mos good behavior thing just sounds strange.
When you combine that with people saying she got absolutely no disciplinary action from umass something just isn't adding up about this whole thing. Either there's some bullshit mixed in here or she is the luckiest criminal ever in mass. Idk.
Emmett you looked it up? It said there was a mandatory minimum for misuse of a cc under $250? That doesn't sound right, I didn't think there was any man/min's for misdemeanors, but I'm not sure about that.
Also, statute of limitations only apply to the time before your charged, once your charged there is no more statute of limitations. So she couldn't have been runnin hoping for the statute to run out.

Advocate wrote:

Could the grand jury have been called regarding the credit card fraud by Maura but determined not to indict her? If so, presumably that would have been in the fall of 2003. Or, possibly she had done it again and a grand jury was called early in Feb 2004 to look into indicting her? If she knew about it, that would be reason to get away for a few days (to think) or to run.

Last Feb 4 and on...very good posts on this subject.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
What your saying about 6 mos minimum sounds right, I've never heard of a 3 month CWOF.

If you look at the first page of those documents it looks weird, to me there looks like there's something wrong with it. The biggest problem I have with it is that it says "sentence: 3 mos good behavior". It SHOULD say: CWOF for 3 months. I've never heard of 3 mos good behavior as a sentence, that's weird. to my knowledge there's no such thing in mass as "3 mos good behavior" but I'm definitely not a mass attorney so I'm not 100% sure on that.

Jenkins, you state above 'It SHOULD say CWOF for 3 months.'

It's frustrating me, because nowhere has it been clarified/verified that her case was continued without a finding....granted, it appears that is the case, but...we can't make up facts.

It's not been verified as such.

There's such a thing as judicial discretion.

Where are you getting this CWOF from?