Maura Murray

Appointed-didn't you say that you were 7.8 miles from the crash site or did I misunderstand your post from the other day? Wouldn't that be the same location that the hair and duct tape were found? That hunter was rather specific in his post.

Emmett- I agree that LE needs to keep things close to the vest, they can't do anything that would compromise any potential conviction, I get that.

But the NHSP's silence on things is deafening. These guys don't say shit about shit.
This is in stark contrast to many other LE agencies who often make many facts of cases public but keep certain, important things secret that could damage the investigation. In most missing persons cases and murder cases LE release much more info, they do this on purpose to drum up public interest which also often brings tips and leads.
It clearly is a grey area, there's no definitive rules that dictate what should and should not be released to the public. Anything that can compromise the investigation should not be but the fact is that most info can't do any harm. In many cases the only things they keep secret are things that could only be known by the killer.

I'll mention again that the 75% number is unequivocal bullshit. It has no meaning at all. Eight years later is it now 76% or 99% or has it dropped to 25%? Doesn't matter, until it is 100% nothing will happen. ABSOLUTELY NO USEFUL INFORMATION CAN BE EXTRAPOLATED FROM THAT NUMBER.

Bill

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Emmett- I agree that LE needs to keep things close to the vest, they can't do anything that would compromise any potential conviction, I get that.
But the NHSP's silence on things is deafening. These guys don't say shit about shit.
This is in stark contrast to many other LE agencies who often make many facts of cases public but keep certain, important things secret that could damage the investigation. In most missing persons cases and murder cases LE release much more info, they do this on purpose to drum up public interest which also often brings tips and leads.
It clearly is a grey area, there's no definitive rules that dictate what should and should not be released to the public. Anything that can compromise the investigation should not be but the fact is that most info can't do any harm. In many cases the only things they keep secret are things that could only be known by the killer.

Even the people who come forward to in the forum
Play it close vest. They find clothing and duct tape and post that info in the forum but never mention the type of clothes or the size of clothes the colors of the hair on the tape.
A cell phone is found but we don't know the make or model and if it has anything to do with the case.

interesting they directed him to troop F; that suggests that this case is more active than the NHSP leads us to believe. They define a cold case as a case that hasn't been worked actively in over a year. Makes me wonder if this case has been picked back up after its inclusion on the ccu list.
But I suppose that troop F would be the ones who would actually go out and collect the evidence, not the ccu. That could be the reason they directed him to troop F. Hard to say, but interesting no less.

WTH-the-original wrote:

I'll mention again that the 75% number is unequivocal bullshit. It has no meaning at all. Eight years later is it now 76% or 99% or has it dropped to 25%? Doesn't matter, until it is 100% nothing will happen. ABSOLUTELY NO USEFUL INFORMATION CAN BE EXTRAPOLATED FROM THAT NUMBER.
Bill

Bill your Missing the point, as usual.
They said 75% chance, that has to mean they had some sort of evidence indicating that a crime occurred.
If they had absolutely no idea, no evidence at all they would've had to say 50% or they were committing perjury, right?
50% would mean they have no clue, could be or couldn't be; 75% means they have something, some piece of evidence or knowledge that indicates there is a higher likelihood of charges than not bringin charges.

Lighthouse- judging from the fact that the hunter posted that information on the mm Amherst topix thread we can assume that he at least thought there was a good possibility the tape was connected to Maura.
From that we can safely assume that it wasn't animal hair, human hair and animal hair is completely different, so it probably was human hair. It probably was on the longer side as well.

There must've been something that caused him to think this find was potentially connected to Maura or otherwise would he have posted it on a mm thread?

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Lighthouse- judging from the fact that the hunter posted that information on the mm Amherst topix thread we can assume that he at least thought there was a good possibility the tape was connected to Maura.
From that we can safely assume that it wasn't animal hair, human hair and animal hair is completely different, so it probably was human hair. It probably was on the longer side as well.
There must've been something that caused him to think this find was potentially connected to Maura or otherwise would he have posted it on a mm thread?

Im under the assumption that the post has nothing to do with mm. I'm not even sure if anything was found in the woods.
Some people do post on forums to get attention or to create a stir out of people.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Bill your Missing the point, as usual.
They said 75% chance, that has to mean they had some sort of evidence indicating that a crime occurred.
If they had absolutely no idea, no evidence at all they would've had to say 50% or they were committing perjury, right?
50% would mean they have no clue, could be or couldn't be; 75% means they have something, some piece of evidence or knowledge that indicates there is a higher likelihood of charges than not bringin charges.

I would think if LE had a very strong poi they would tell fm that they were very close and he shouldnt continue the case to open the files because it may botch the investigation or
Give the poi a heads up and flee. I would think he would be reasonable to understand this.

Again, there are people here without a clue of how statistics work. 75% of what? Does that mean they have three of the four "culprits" names? Does it mean that they have three of the four pieces of evidence to complete the case? Does it mean that their Ouija board has given three quarters of the name of the person that committed this "crime". Or is it what we call a WAG a wild ass guess because frankly, they haven't a clue where this evidence might lead to? I recognize a WAG when I see one.
And the question you want to ask yourself, to prove what a line of bullshit that number is, is this. If it was 75% eight years ago, and there has been thousands more hours of investigation. Wouldn't be safe to assume that they would be at 76%? But at that rate, they would only need another 192 years to solve this, to get to 100%. Well wait, maybe they are at 99%. Great that means with 1% left it should be finished in a month. I'll wait.

But wait again, considering the press and mind numbing bullshit that they have put up with in this case. If they thought that they were at 85% or 95% finished, don't you think they would at least have a press conference stating that. Nothing else needs be said, just that they are making progress and they are way past that old 75% meaningless statistic, but of course they haven't.

There is absolutely nothing that can be gleaned from that 75% statistic. It is absolutely meaningless.

Now that I have stated it recently twice, I won't waste anymore time with this. The people that can learn would have done so, others, for them there is no point repeating.

Bill

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Im under the assumption that the post has nothing to do with mm. I'm not even sure if anything was found in the woods.
Some people do post on forums to get attention or to create a stir out of people.

Ok well first of all that assumption is clearly wrong. It was posted on a thread about MM, it also was posted on the anniversary of her dissapearance in 2010; so the post definitely had something to do with mm.
That being said we really have no idea if the tape was connected to mm or not, this guy was clearly implying that being a real possibility., it is possible this was posted just to create a stir; I don't believe it was but honestly I don't know
Based on the info I currently have.

But obviously the post has something to do with mm, I don't see how anybody can say otherwise.

AppointedNH wrote:

<quoted text>
The answer is, I can't compromise the investigation on little details that may interest a few, spoil a whole caseload in the event that a trial may be held in the future. I would share more with a search partner if I had a search partner, more boots on the ground is a great idea. Snow is coming in though...

Not to sound rude:
If you can't compromise the investigation why post anything?
What would prevent a search partner from sharing on the forum?
If snow is coming and you told LE a couple months ago maybe it isn't important because I would think they would be all over it. And it probably survived 8 snow falls.

It sounds like your in need of a search partner and I can't stress to anyone how important it is to not randomly just go into the middle of the woods with someone to search for anything regardless of the cause.
Not saying Appointed is a bad person but please remember Internet safety rules.

WTH-the-original wrote:

Again, there are people here without a clue of how statistics work. 75% of what? Does that mean they have three of the four "culprits" names? Does it mean that they have three of the four pieces of evidence to complete the case? Does it mean that their Ouija board has given three quarters of the name of the person that committed this "crime". Or is it what we call a WAG a wild ass guess because frankly, they haven't a clue where this evidence might lead to? I recognize a WAG when I see one.
And the question you want to ask yourself, to prove what a line of bullshit that number is, is this. If it was 75% eight years ago, and there has been thousands more hours of investigation. Wouldn't be safe to assume that they would be at 76%? But at that rate, they would only need another 192 years to solve this, to get to 100%. Well wait, maybe they are at 99%. Great that means with 1% left it should be finished in a month. I'll wait.
But wait again, considering the press and mind numbing bullshit that they have put up with in this case. If they thought that they were at 85% or 95% finished, don't you think they would at least have a press conference stating that. Nothing else needs be said, just that they are making progress and they are way past that old 75% meaningless statistic, but of course they haven't.
There is absolutely nothing that can be gleaned from that 75% statistic. It is absolutely meaningless.
Now that I have stated it recently twice, I won't waste anymore time with this. The people that can learn would have done so, others, for them there is no point repeating.
Bill

Bill how do you not understand this?
75% means that they must have something indicating foul play occurred; either that or they were committing perjury.

They specifically stated they have information they are pursuing that this may be a crime. That would be the 75%, obviously. They have information that this was foul play and that they have a suspect, or suspects in their sights.
But without her body and the evidence that comes along with it they aren't going to bring charges.
It's very likely they are in the same spot they were 6 years ago when this was said to the court, they have a suspect and evidence indicating they are pursuing a crime but until they have her body they can't do anything. I'd bet if they were asked today they'd still say 75%.
Hard to say but they must have some evidence indicating foul play. If not, they committed perjury in court that day and should be brought up on charges for lying under oath.

WTH-the-original wrote:

Again, there are people here without a clue of how statistics work. 75% of what? Does that mean they have three of the four "culprits" names? Does it mean that they have three of the four pieces of evidence to complete the case? Does it mean that their Ouija board has given three quarters of the name of the person that committed this "crime". Or is it what we call a WAG a wild ass guess because frankly, they haven't a clue where this evidence might lead to? I recognize a WAG when I see one.
And the question you want to ask yourself, to prove what a line of bullshit that number is, is this. If it was 75% eight years ago, and there has been thousands more hours of investigation. Wouldn't be safe to assume that they would be at 76%? But at that rate, they would only need another 192 years to solve this, to get to 100%. Well wait, maybe they are at 99%. Great that means with 1% left it should be finished in a month. I'll wait.
But wait again, considering the press and mind numbing bullshit that they have put up with in this case. If they thought that they were at 85% or 95% finished, don't you think they would at least have a press conference stating that. Nothing else needs be said, just that they are making progress and they are way past that old 75% meaningless statistic, but of course they haven't.
There is absolutely nothing that can be gleaned from that 75% statistic. It is absolutely meaningless.
Now that I have stated it recently twice, I won't waste anymore time with this. The people that can learn would have done so, others, for them there is no point repeating.
Bill

This post makes sense, and I'm in 84% agreement with you.

I once found an empty bottle of liquor out in the woods in WA. Same kind that was possibly missing from MM´s car. Had I announced it on MM 8 year anniversary, would that imply it necessarily had anything to do with MM case?

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
This post makes sense, and I'm in 84% agreement with you.

I wouldn´t be surprised if the three quarter of a name given by an ouija board was correct.

hannah_b wrote:

I once found an empty bottle of liquor out in the woods in WA. Same kind that was possibly missing from MM´s car. Had I announced it on MM 8 year anniversary, would that imply it necessarily had anything to do with MM case?

See now this makes the point of what I'm saying perfectly.
Your talking about finding a liquor bottle in WA, even if you posted it on the anniversary there would be absolutely no reason to ever think it has a connection to mm.
Now if you Found that 7.8 miles up 112 from the crash site that would be a completely different story, would it not?

Jenky,

The 75 percent statement by the NH AAG was made to protect having to release info to the murray family. Period.

If he had said 50 percent chance of solving the case, the judge would've ordered them to release all the info to the murray family. I listened to the court case testimony. What I gleaned from listening to the judge was that they were not impressed with the investigators and their reasons for keeping everything under wraps INDEFINITELY and wanted them to either pony up what they were holding or prove why it was important for them to keep everything top secret.

Then out of the blue comes this 75 percent chance of conviction statement by the clown AAG from NH ... JS.

Maybe if the arguing went down here by about 39.629% ..

hannah_b wrote:

<quoted text>
I wouldn´t be surprised if the three quarter of a name given by an ouija board was correct.

Well it came out:

lkiencos

They are pretty certain 75% of the letters are there. They just have to decode and figure out what the remaining letters are and of course re-arrange them into a name. At least that is what my Ouija board came up with, but mine has been proven unreliable.

Bill