Maura Murray

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, I am assuming that they removed the arms and legs. Easy to do. I mean we are talking about seasoned serial killers I thought. According to Shack there are serial killer all over those woods in NH and VT. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a serial killer in those woods.
Bill

My bad. I figured the seasoned serial killers would know that you can evidently just dump the body in those woods and wait a week or less for it to be eaten by wild animals. If it works for people who die accidentally in the woods then it should also work for murder victims of serial killers, right?

hiding bodies is hard.. & you have CSUs that can pull a fiber from anything in your house..

I like to stare someone in the eyes so its the last thing they ever saw & put a .50 threw the face.. Then I own their soul..

In VA they just seal the bodies in a 55gallon drum & drop it in Phiillpot Lake.. True stories.. Google

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
I can actually multi-task and cook and watch tv at the same time.:) Move on up and I'll be happy to show you how to make a pie. I'll warn you though, I make the crust from scratch. None of that store bought stuff used here.

You are more talented than I am! I'll take you up on the pie offer. I buy cherry ones at the store. Betty Crocker I am not. lol

Man, this topix thing has ruined me for wanting to ever go ice fishing. Are the ice fishing shacks (if that's what it's called) close to where Maura crashed and they searched them to see if she hid in there or something?

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>But there is definitely a way around that, you poke holes in the skin to let the gases out.

Oooooowww, gross.

Again, Bobby, the things you don't know would fill volumes.

Yes, you can do that but then lots more smaller chunks float to the surface, and of course that peculiar very identifiable odor, rises to the surface. Not a real problem in the ocean, but more of a problem in a pond.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
We all want that. There are questions about drunk driving and possibly leaving the scene of an accident in NH. And apparently there are credit card charges still pending in MA.
Bill

Nope, wrong again.
Un-freakin-believable.

Actually there is no question about leaving the scene of an accident. Leaving the scene of an accident is called a hit and run, it is when you drive away from an accident. In NH the law is if there is property damage, personal injuries or damage to another vehicle then the driver needs to stay on scene.
This accident satisfies none of those requirements, there was absolutely no need for her to stay on scene, legally speaking. Personal safety speaking then yes she should've stayed there, but she was under no obligation to.

As for the drunk driving statement that isn't right either. She most certainly wouldve gotten a ticket for open container but the witnesses say she did not appear intoxicated and it sounds like she was moving around just fine, her motor skills were still fine. No stumbling, falling down or anything you would expect from a drunk person on the side of the road where there's ice and snow.

Your talking about a minor infraction here, we are talking about a missing person. Did you ever hear LE come out and say "we are looking for Maura who's suspected of drunk driving and leaving the scene of an accident"???? There are absolutely no pending charges for her in Nh and never were.

As for the CC thing, that was also a very minor misdemeanor, how does that really have anything to do with her going missing in Nh?

How is that your answer to 'I hope the ccu solves this case'?? Seriously, what are you saying that they shouldn't solve her case because she might have been drinking? What he hell are you talking about??

everyone knows u poke the holes in the lungs to let the air out.. Thats basic 101 stuff..

To tired to go back to what was said about Maura drinking that night....no proof...maybe it was the
Chief of police in Haverhill..?
And while I am here...Maura a liar..? OR was it SBD...?

For goodness sake...take off the blinders...
Tom C. Christopher G....?
etc
I hate that swinging a dead cat talk..sickening.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Hold on, did you really just say that?
You really just said that since the body didn't bob to the surface that it didn't get placed in a pond?? Really dude??
That is the same EXACT thing as saying we know she isn't in the woods because she hasn't been found yet, exactly the same thing.
The fact is that you can definitely get a body to stay underwater. Yes it's hard to weight a body enough to make it stay down, the gases made in decomposition make it very buoyant. But there is definitely a way around that, you poke holes in the skin to let the gases out. It's very simple to do and you can be damn sure people know about that. Yes many bodies come up from the water, Scott peterson's wife comes to mind, but that's people who don't know what they're doing. One good hole in the gut area is actually enough. If someone used a bunch of holes a body will never surface even without much weight at all, it won't be buoyant in the slighted.
So saying that we know this didnt happen because the body didn't float to the surface is just completely 100% wrong, just like saying if she was in the woods she would've been found by now.

Bob wrote:***But there is definitely a way around that, you poke holes in the skin to let the gases out. It's very simple to do and you can be damn sure people know about that. Yes many bodies come up from the water, Scott peterson's wife comes to mind, but that's people who don't know what they're doing. One good hole in the gut area is actually enough. If someone used a bunch of holes a body will never surface even without much weight at all, it won't be buoyant in the slighted.***
No Bob actually I don't think many people know about this. I never heard of it. But my biggest question is how do YOU know so much about it? How do you know it's very simple to do? You sound like an expert on the subject. You've just gone into my "scary" book.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't either. Wonder if you would notice oblong holes hacked out of the ice, or holes large enough to capture Moby Dick?
Bill

Another just blatantly misleading post.

A hole big enough to catch moby dick? Could you be any more ridiculous?
A 15-20" hole is not out of the norm, neither is a 24" hole.
Do you not read what others have written?
What you dont know could clearly fill volumes.
It's called "sight fishing", I believe, something like that.
In it they use large diameter holes so they can see down into the water better.
It is a fact that you can put an entire body through a hole on the ice, that is a obvious fact.
It Is also a fact that a hole that is a few inches larger, or even oblong, is not going to be noticed by anybody.
Nevermind that fact that it's going to freeze over rather quickly, but don't let facts get in the way, forget about those.

Shack wrote:

To tired to go back to what was said about Maura drinking that night....no proof...maybe it was the
Chief of police in Haverhill..?
And while I am here...Maura a liar..? OR was it SBD...?
For goodness sake...take off the blinders...
Tom C. Christopher G....?
etc
I hate that swinging a dead cat talk..sickening.

Shack wrote:***sickening***
Yep I've said that too over many things you've said. Remember calling us rats and saying the area lived in incest? I thought that talk was quite sickening.

Shack wrote:

To tired to go back to what was said about Maura drinking that night....no proof...maybe it was the
Chief of police in Haverhill..?
And while I am here...Maura a liar..? OR was it SBD...?
For goodness sake...take off the blinders...
Tom C. Christopher G....?
etc
I hate that swinging a dead cat talk..sickening.

These ideas you suggest seem very plausible..but the diversinary clan will do anything to shut you up..Do you believe Tom C. and christopher G. may have met with the same killer as Maura?No blinders here..

Im curious,has anyone read the Casey Sherman book "Bad Blood"?I guess it relates to the Mckay/kenney "thing"..I've got my copy,just need to get going on it.

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Another just blatantly misleading post.
A hole big enough to catch moby dick? Could you be any more ridiculous?
A 15-20" hole is not out of the norm, neither is a 24" hole.
Do you not read what others have written?
What you dont know could clearly fill volumes.
It's called "sight fishing", I believe, something like that.
In it they use large diameter holes so they can see down into the water better.
It is a fact that you can put an entire body through a hole on the ice, that is a obvious fact.
It Is also a fact that a hole that is a few inches larger, or even oblong, is not going to be noticed by anybody.
Nevermind that fact that it's going to freeze over rather quickly, but don't let facts get in the way, forget about those.

In the past I've done some ice fishing in different lakes and ponds. Most use a 6 or 8 inch auger. I don't think I'd want to be in one of those little ice shanties with a 24 in hole in it especially if I decided to have a few beers.

findmaura wrote:

Im curious,has anyone read the Casey Sherman book "Bad Blood"?I guess it relates to the Mckay/kenney "thing"..I've got my copy,just need to get going on it.

It has nothing to do with Maura Murray and doesn't belong on her forum as it opens a whole new can of worms and soon becomes the topic as we have seen happen before.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with Maura Murray and doesn't belong on her forum as it opens a whole new can of worms and soon becomes the topic as we have seen happen before.

I dont think you can just flat out say it has nothing to do with Maura..Unless of course you have the definitive suspect list available..I believe Maura was in the area of Mckays sidekicks house..

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
I read it. I thought it was well-written, and it gave me some background info to better understand the bits and pieces that I've seen come up on topix occasionally.

Great..I was hoping it might possibly help understand more of the local flavor.

"Diversionary Clan"....interesting...ha ve to think on it before I answer. So many relationships within close envolvements.....

I wish I didn't know relationships......

Does everyone share the fishing shantys?Are they mostly visible from shore(Close by)?

Shack wrote:

"Diversionary Clan"....interesting...ha ve to think on it before I answer. So many relationships within close envolvements.....
I wish I didn't know relationships......

I think you know of some important relationships within the clan..Just a hunch :)