Maura Murray

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>Saying there's a 75% chance clearly indicates they have something more than nothing.

For the math challenged among you. 1% or more indicates more than nothing. 0% by definition is nothing. But for those that forgot those little things from 2nd grade consider this a refresher.

Bill

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Bobfather - you are misunderstanding this. I or not, but it doesn't make perfect 50-50 chance scenario.

LOL, bobfather......that's some funny shit right there

But for real, you do see the difference between the chance of snowfall in Arizona and the chance of foul play in a missing persons case right?
That wasn't exactly a good comparison.
It rarely, if ever, snows in Arizona. But just the fact that she is missing presents a 50/50 chance that foul play was involved, does it not? Then to say there's a 75% chance must mean that they have something more than just the fact that she is missing, which would make it 50% theoretically.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Orky- I'm talking about the judgement that the court handed down in which it agreed with the state, not Fred. Obviously Fred wasn't going to be allowed into the in-camera review of the files, that would be the same as letting him view the files.
Remember that the judge clearly stated that the state can't withhold info because they want to. They can't even withhold info because they're might be a prosecution at some point. They had to prove to the judge that there was an active, ongoing investigation that was likely to result in a criminal prosecution, that was the crux of the case.
the fact that the judge handed down a judgement that kept the files sealed proves that there had to be something in that case file. That proves that they weren't just lying and claiming there's a criminal case when there isn't. The judge looked over the case file and agreed that there was an ongoing criminal investigation and there was a likelihood of charges being filed. If there was no evidence in the file that indicated foul play that judge would've released those files.
This is the whole point of the right to know law, to prevent authorities from withholding information from the public that the public has a right to know.
If their investigation indicated that she killed herself then her family would clearly have a right to know that. If there was a suicide note on her computer her family would definitely have a right to know that as well, that would have nothing to do with anything criminal.
Her family does not have the right to know anything pertaining to a criminal investigation. The judge reviewed the case file and determined that there was in fact a criminal investigation ongoing and that there was a good chance that it would result in a prosecution, that is why the files were kept sealed, not because the AG's office wanted them sealed.
If that judge looked at that file and thought that she killed herself and the state was just trying to keep it sealed for the sake of keeping it sealed he would've released those files to Fred, this much is clear. There has to be something more to this then just a couple clown AG's lying in court pretending there's a criminal investigation going on just to keep the files sealed.

And i am telling you, I just re-read the court's conclusion and it was the investigators convincing the court that releasing info to fred was a mistake because (they don't trust him).

The court was convinced not because of evidence showed to them that there was foul play but rather convinced to not release court info because where fred murray stands and how he would react remains a mystery.

Now onto my opinion:

I bet a good chunk of their investigation (early on) was on fred himself and his family and not directed towards some random boogey man.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>curious if you found a cell phone that maybe connected to a missing person then why was it thrown back out? Where did you find it and what type of phone was it? thank you.

Hi Citigirl-let me explain the cell phone. I was hiking around the woods with my friend on an old road on rte 25 pike area, we found a phone in the water. He picked it up and brought it to the car with us. He took the battery out to see if it might work in his phone. The thinking at this point had nothing to do with anyone missing or anything unusual in our minds, as the Maura Murray case was not in my forethought, I had only moved back to that area about one year before and was not "up" on the case. I did know about it but didn't know the actual location.
At that time I said why do you want that thing, it's old it's not going to work, its been wet, etc. He tossed it out the door. I know it sounds crazy now, but truely at that point, I did not think anything of it.
2 days later it came over me like a ton of bricks. Some how I put it togather and I realized the area was so close to the accident.(close in NH small town road terms). I had something to do that next day but all I could think of was that phone, so the next day I drove back up there, alone, and looked all around for it. It had snowed lightly and I just couldn't find it. I had such creepy feelings, as though, someone was around or knew where the area was, because I had asked about it on a site to see if her phone was ever missing or found. I believe it was that one writers site that has been doing all the investigating. When I posted about it, they seemed so unenthused. I had sent an email to an address he/they referred me too, but never heard anything else. I will look back and see if I can find any of the info of whom it was sent to. This case always bothers me because I've lived up there and heard so many stories from the natives about what they think happened and all. From a lesbian cop picked her up to a guy that lives in Pike and travels all the back roads when he hears calls over the police scanner.
If you have anything else, I will check back...

I would also like to know where the duck tape was found to see if it was in the area of where the cell phone was found.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL, bobfather......that's some funny shit right there
But for real, you do see the difference between the chance of snowfall in Arizona and the chance of foul play in a missing persons case right?
That wasn't exactly a good comparison.
It rarely, if ever, snows in Arizona. But just the fact that she is missing presents a 50/50 chance that foul play was involved, does it not? Then to say there's a 75% chance must mean that they have something more than just the fact that she is missing, which would make it 50% theoretically.

The purpose of the example was to show you that you are randomly taking the percentages to make them work.
I'd like to know how you can even quantify to get a 75% chance of conviction? Did the courts bring in a vegas odds maker to establish this? Again you are hanging on to every word.
I also encourage you to go to Renners blog and watch the 15 minute clip. The court does not look for a moment that they have any intention of opening up this case for public record. It seems in my humble non court opinion that the justices were scared that every case would come under in camera review. Rather than go through every page of every case and decide for LE what is important and what isn't they decided to close the book on this.

In the last two days more people have reported stuff on here than in 9 months of me being here...

Someone looking for a partner & needs to contact the family? Cells, lesbians, drug dealers.. Rollin on people over some oxycontins?? Hillbilly herion..

The area went from a vacation spot to gangland overnight..

Next there will be meth labs, crack houses, blood5s 5rip5 (crips) elm city boys, neitas, aryan brotherhood & maybe just maybe..
Sons of Liberty, Free Masons & The Illuminati..

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...

Just catching up here so excuse me if you've already answered.
If you can't give out even a little detail because it may compromise the investigation then what exactly was your purpose for coming to this internet forum?
Do you think the hint of sharing information would get someone to go off into the woods with a total stranger? Just wondering what what you are hoping for here.

Nhlover wrote:

<quoted text>
I was hiking around the woods with my friend on an old road on rte 25 pike area, we found a phone in the water. He picked it up and brought it to the car with us. He took the battery out to see if it might work in his phone....

JR Site started in 2011 or 2010. The phone looked old enough to be phone for you to think it could have been MM's phone from 2004.

Why would your friend pick a cellphone (that looks six years old) out of water to see if the battery fits? I'd imagine even if it did fit - his phone would be old and he would be due for an upgrade from the carrier.

AppointedNH wrote:

<quoted text>
The topo map tied to the post indicates the area where I hunt. The major sandpit is now a private road and two dwellings. I hunt behind the pit, on the backside roughly. There's so much area to cover and dropped ground to investigate. I have covered the stream and northern edge of the timber trail today. The drainage created by the feds is complex and extensive. I'll have to spend next weekend hiking deeper with muzzleloader in tow.

Are you talking about Williams Pit RD across from Tunnel Stream?

Glad to see others are skeptical of oppointedNH's claim of finding stuff on the missing poster. Reading that left this writer somewhat skeptical as well.

I thought that something just doesn't sound right about it. He told the board that he found something but then said that saying he found something could compromise the investigation. If it could compromise it then didn't he already compromise it by saying he spoke to the NHSP about stuff on the missing poster?
He also said that it isn't going to change the world and it sounded like the NHSP was none too interested in what he found.
Somebody made a point that if the hair and duct tape find didnt compromise anything then his find that the NHSP wasnt interested in cant really hurt things, good point.

I really hope this guy isn't just saying things that will get peoples hopes up that would be pretty messed up.
I kind of think that he found something but it is probably not connected to Maura Murray, I think this because it sounds like the NHSP were not interested at all.
That whole group of posts by that man just did not sound right and I just got a distinct feeling that he was possibly just kind of making things up. Maybe not really making things up but more of overstating the importance of what he found.
People like to feel like they are more important than they really are, I just got that feeling reading those messages and was glad others were skeptical too.

Someone made the point that why would he state on the forum that he needs to contact the family. Emmett Dove I think. Good point. He found this website just fine, how hard is it to find mauramurraymissing.com and notice the option for contacting the admin? It sounded like he was saying that more to garner attention than to really contact the family, which he could have done easier than posting on this message board that he needed to contact them.

Good to see some healthy skepticism on this board.

I want to apologize if I was rude in my first post that I made last week. I have been a long-time lurker on this board and others related to this case. The conversations here can sometimes get nasty but always interesting. I was just dissapointed to come here last week and find pages and pages of people talking about the waffle house and pies. It really did seem like a diversionary tactic. Coming back I see that ever since then there has only been a little talk about off topic stuff like that. That is to be expected. People talk on message boards and every post doesnt need to be on topic. People are going to talk about off topic things. That is how things are supposed to be but to see pages and pages of off topic posts just kind of startled me and startled me enough to make a post about it. I like to think that I helped get the board back on topic but maybe thats me feeling more important than I really am.
But I do apologize if I offended people.

Ummm, what the hell is going on here?

That last post Above I did not write.
There must be some sort of glitch in the system here because I wrote a response to orky on my signed in account and for some reason that's what showed up?? Weird

Bobjenkins-OG wrote:

Glad to see others are skeptical of oppointedNH's claim of finding stuff on the missing poster. Reading that left this writer somewhat skeptical as well.
I thought that something just doesn't sound right about it. He told the board that he found something but then said that saying he found something could compromise the investigation. If it could compromise it then didn't he already compromise it by saying he spoke to the NHSP about stuff on the missing poster?
He also said that it isn't going to change the world and it sounded like the NHSP was none too interested in what he found.
Somebody made a point that if the hair and duct tape find didnt compromise anything then his find that the NHSP wasnt interested in cant really hurt things, good point.
I really hope this guy isn't just saying things that will get peoples hopes up that would be pretty messed up.
I kind of think that he found something but it is probably not connected to Maura Murray, I think this because it sounds like the NHSP were not interested at all.
That whole group of posts by that man just did not sound right and I just got a distinct feeling that he was possibly just kind of making things up. Maybe not really making things up but more of overstating the importance of what he found.
People like to feel like they are more important than they really are, I just got that feeling reading those messages and was glad others were skeptical too.
Someone made the point that why would he state on the forum that he needs to contact the family. Emmett Dove I think. Good point. He found this website just fine, how hard is it to find mauramurraymissing.com and notice the option for contacting the admin? It sounded like he was saying that more to garner attention than to really contact the family, which he could have done easier than posting on this message board that he needed to contact them.
Good to see some healthy skepticism on this board.
I want to apologize if I was rude in my first post that I made last week. I have been a long-time lurker on this board and others related to this case. The conversations here can sometimes get nasty but always interesting. I was just dissapointed to come here last week and find pages and pages of people talking about the waffle house and pies. It really did seem like a diversionary tactic. Coming back I see that ever since then there has only been a little talk about off topic stuff like that. That is to be expected. People talk on message boards and every post doesnt need to be on topic. People are going to talk about off topic things. That is how things are supposed to be but to see pages and pages of off topic posts just kind of startled me and startled me enough to make a post about it. I like to think that I helped get the board back on topic but maybe thats me feeling more important than I really am.
But I do apologize if I offended people.

Why are you using Jenkins' name?

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
It rarely, if ever, snows in Arizona.

100% wrong.

In her own priceless words:

Nancy Smith AAG NH

“Because of the facts of the case we don't have a body; we can't say for sure if Maura Murray is alive somewhere," Senior Assistant Attorney General Nancy Smith said in court.

"We can't rule out that she may have left of her own volition. We cannot with 100 percent certainty say that a crime has been committed."

Translation:
basically we have concluded with our 2,000 plus pages of evidence that we don’t know where maura’s body is. Maura could be alive. Maura may have left on her own accord. A crime may have happened to Maura.

Wow, impressed. Now on to the next New Hampshire caper … how to catch a cold:

fred murray in his own words about strezlin's 75 percent goofball predicition as told by the Whitman-Hanson Express

Fred Murray thinks that prediction has more to do with public relations than any accurate assessment of Maura's case.

"They [police] wouldn't hold up under a close look at their performance. They didn't do what they were supposed to do and they've been covering up ever since," Murray said.

Orky- I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree with your assessment of the court case, it's way off IMO.
Your missing the whole point of the case, it wasn't to determine Fred's sanity or whether he could be trusted with sensitive info; it was to determine that the state has the right to withhold info from the public, including the family, in a criminal case.
Fred's sanity or ability to keep secrets is actually irrelevant.
The judge clearly stated that for the state to withhold info they needed to show there was an active criminal investigation ongoing that could result in criminal charges; if not they have to release the info to him..
If they were pursuing information that the case was a suicide, then Fred was entitled to that info under the right to know law.
Fred clearly has the right to know that LE believes his daughter committed suicide. Any evidence of suicide would be something he is entitled to, as this has absolutely nothing to do with a crime. A suicide note on her computer is a perfect example of something that is not exempt from the right to know law. The only things that are exempt are things that could be used in a criminal prosecution.
The state argued that it was pursuing a crime and that a criminal prosecution was likely. They also couldn't just say this and make it so, they had to prove to the judge that it was a legitimate investigation..
So in reality Fred was pretty irrelevant, what was relevant was that case file..
The judge reviewed the case file and agreed with the state; he agreed that there was a legitimate criminal investigation going on and that a prosecution was likely.

SamIAM wrote:

<quoted text>
100% wrong.

Lol really sammie-girl, that's wrong?
I believe it, certainly no expert on Arizona weather, and it doesn't really matter anyways cuz the point I was making still stands, your critisism has nothing to do with the point that I made, your splitting hairs.
But for the record, does it snow in AZ?? Where? In the way north of the state? In most of the state snow is not a common occurrence right? Isn't that why old people move to AZ, to get away from the snow and cold weather??

And Sammie-girl, btw, what exactly is your purpose of posting? So far I've seen you add exactly nothing of any substance, exactly no positive, usefull information to this thread. As far as I can tell your only reason for being here is to stir shit, cause problems. Pretty much all of your posts are critisisms of me. So is your whole entire purpose of being here just to critisize me? Nit-pick little stupid inconsequential things about my posts that don't matter, just distract from the conversation and topic at hand? Is that a correct assessment??

Can you point to even one interesting post you've ever made on this thread? Have you ever even made a post that's not nit-picking my posts??

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Orky- I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree with your assessment of the court case, it's way off IMO.
Your missing the whole point of the case, it wasn't to determine Fred's sanity or whether he could be trusted with sensitive info; it was to determine that the state has the right to withhold info from the public, including the family, in a criminal case.
Fred's sanity or ability to keep secrets is actually irrelevant.
The judge clearly stated that for the state to withhold info they needed to show there was an active criminal investigation ongoing that could result in criminal charges; if not they have to release the info to him..
If they were pursuing information that the case was a suicide, then Fred was entitled to that info under the right to know law.
Fred clearly has the right to know that LE believes his daughter committed suicide. Any evidence of suicide would be something he is entitled to, as this has absolutely nothing to do with a crime. A suicide note on her computer is a perfect example of something that is not exempt from the right to know law. The only things that are exempt are things that could be used in a criminal prosecution.
The state argued that it was pursuing a crime and that a criminal prosecution was likely. They also couldn't just say this and make it so, they had to prove to the judge that it was a legitimate investigation..
So in reality Fred was pretty irrelevant, what was relevant was that case file..
The judge reviewed the case file and agreed with the state; he agreed that there was a legitimate criminal investigation going on and that a prosecution was likely.

Jenky,

I have both rulings (one which favored fred) and the final one done on June 11, 2007 by the superior court judge Vaughan in front of me as I type this.

The ultimate reasons given for not releasing the info to fred were:

And i put this in the order of priority determined by judge

1. The info release could reasonbly be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.

2. the info release could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.

the utlimate decision by the judge came from a result of pouring over the affidavits that strezlin, landry, smith all typed up for the court and the sealed in-court testimony (done by Nancy Smith) which took place on April 13, 2007.

The affidavits are all public released documents and if you bother to get a hold of them, like the affidavit of Strezlin and lt. Landry, you will see that they don't mention specifics about the case at all, just hypothetical situations that could arise if information was to be released to fred and family.

the judge found that line of reasoning to be credible. Period.

No talk about murder suspects or anything of the like.

And the judge also used Strezlin's 75 percent chance of conviction statement as part of his evidence that the investigation should remain under wraps as well.

Emmett Dove wrote:

In the last two days more people have reported stuff on here than in 9 months of me being here...
Someone looking for a partner & needs to contact the family? Cells, lesbians, drug dealers.. Rollin on people over some oxycontins?? Hillbilly herion..
The area went from a vacation spot to gangland overnight..
Next there will be meth labs, crack houses, blood5s 5rip5 (crips) elm city boys, neitas, aryan brotherhood & maybe just maybe..
Sons of Liberty, Free Masons & The Illuminati..

LOL, funny post Emmett.
But for the record there already are meth labs and crack houses in grafton county. Not sure about now but several yrs ago more meth labs were found in grafton cty then in the rest of the state combined. there's definitely a lot of pills like oxy's& the like.
Not sure about bloods & crips, But there's definitely Hells angels & outlaws and theres other smaller biker gangs like flyin iron and a couple more I can't think of off the top of my head, but I think most of them are affiliates of the Hells angels and the outlaws. Sonny Barger, the leader of the Hells angels actuallly owns a house over in Laconia where they have the huge bike week every year. It actually was a controversy when he tried to buy the house. The town actually tried to block him from buying it, being the leader of a violent criminal organization but in the end they couldn't block a private citizen from buying a house.

But you are right about all the different things that have came out in the last few days. Very interesting to say the least.