Maura Murray

Something else that shows that smiths report is inaccurate is where he damage is on her vehicle.

In his report he basically states that she spun out around the curve. Well if that was true her from left side should be the last place to be damaged.

Think about it, your turning left and you start to slide out, the most likely spot to hit would be the passenger side front, if not the ass end would start sliding to the right which would mean the next likely to hit would be the rear passenger side, then the rear end. She would've had to pretty much do a full 360 before the front left would hit. The front left is the actual least likely of all spots on the car to hit that snowbank.

The tv repair mans analysis actually makes much more sense. That she actually lost control comin into the curve, likely because the car stalled. As she was trying to regain control her front left clipped the snowbank on the left side if the road causing her ass end to spin out to the right, spin her around 180 degrees and end up ass end into the snowbank on the opposite side of the road. This is exactly how the witnesses describe the car as being immediately after the crash, she was ass end into the snowbank.

Now the Q becomes how could his report be soooo wrong? How could a cop give a much more innacurate version than a tv repair man?? She obviously didn't hit any trees, she ended up ass end into the snowbank. What did she do go crashing into the trees on the other side of the snowbank, then back out and spin out again to end up ass end into the snowbank??
Smiths report is rife with innacuracies, it's really strange. A tow truck driver and a tv repair man can give a much better description of an accident than a cop?? Their description Actually matches the damage to her car and what the witnesses saw, smiths does not. Why?? Was it just laziness? Did he not really understand what happened or did he fill it out wrong intentionally? I want to think it was unintentional, I do, but how could he possibly get it so wrong? How can a tv repair guy give a more accurate depiction than he did?

Father of missing woman frustrated with search

By KATE McCANN

Associated Press Writer


CONCORD, N.H.- The father of a missing Massachusetts woman said he wants police to start treating the search like a criminal investigation.

Since 21-year-old Maura Murray vanished after a car accident in northern New Hampshire two weeks ago, police have repeatedly said they do not suspect foul play.

Searchers found no signs of struggle at the scene, and it appears Murray was planning a getaway. She lied to professors about a death in the family, and said she would be gone from class for the week and then packed her belongings as if she was moving out.

New Hampshire investigators have been working with Massachusetts law enforcement, including campus police at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, where Murray is a nursing student.

Police said it appears she was leaving Massachusetts without telling anyone and wanted to get away on her own, and she may not know about the search if she's not in New England.

But her family is starting to suspect otherwise.

Her father, Frederick Murray, believes his daughter was given a ride from a person who won't come forward since he helped her leave the scene of an accident, or a person who gave her a ride and then abducted her.

"To take a break or start a new life, she would need money," Murray said in a telephone interview. "She hasn't used her ATM card, she hasn't used her cell phone, she hasn't spent a dime."

Searches, including a renewed search Thursday with dogs and a helicopter in northern New Hampshire, turned up no sign that the woman wandered into the snow-covered woods. Police called off the ground search in that area.

Frederick Murray said he is afraid the search is slowly grinding to a halt.

"We should think of it in terms of a criminal investigation," Murray said. "It sounds like it would be the key to expanding it. Let's grab the bull by the horns and call it foul play."

Vermont State Police, Burlington police and other local agencies were combing area motels on Saturday, after a check of Murray's computer found she had looked up directions to Burlington the day she disappeared

"Still nothing," South Burlington Police Sergeant James Snyder said of the search on Saturday. "We've already given out flyers and we've checked the hotels. All the hotels are full this weekend because we have Mardi Gras. All of the hotels are aware of it."

Police and family members are also trying to gauge the significance of a phone call that reduced Murray to tears while working her campus job at UMass-Amherst on Feb. 5. She was so disturbed by the call her supervisor had to take her home.

Police are also investigating a message on Maura's phone from a friend she talked to the day before she disappeared.

Authorities said Murray withdrew $280 from an ATM on Feb. 9. Around 7 o'clock that evening she crashed her car into a snow bank several miles from the Vermont border.

A witness, who told police Murray appeared intoxicated but uninjured, called authorities against Murray's wishes. By the time emergency workers arrived, Murray had gone, leaving most of her belongings in the car.

Maura's father and his 33-year-old son were searching along the Kancamagus highway in northern New Hampshire on Saturday, where the family goes camping every summer.

"Time's running out. Somebody must have seen something, somewhere," Fredrick Murray said. "One tip from anybody, you could be the person who saves this girl's life."

An award fund for any information about Murray is now more than $20,000.

Sharon Rausch, the mother of Maura's boyfriend, said Duke University basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski has donated an undisclosed amount to the fund. Rausch said the coach met Maura at Madison Square Garden over the holidays. Krzyzewski's daughter is friends with Maura and her boyfriend, Army Lt. Bill Rausch.

OOPS, FORGOT TO INCLUDE THE DATE OF THIS ARTICLE

Saturday, February 21, 2004
Father of missing woman frustrated with search
By KATE McCANN
Associated Press Writer

If I could highlight words from the article, these would be it.

"To take a break or start a new life, she would need money," Murray said in a telephone interview. "She hasn't used her ATM card, she hasn't used her cell phone, she hasn't spent a dime."

.....hmmmm, The $4,o0o.00? Where did it go?

Police are also investigating a message on Maura's phone from a friend she talked to the day before she disappeared.

......hmmmm, what did the friend have to tell Maura? Did that person move on, T00?

"To take a break or start a new life, she would need money," Murray said in a telephone interview. "She hasn't used her ATM card,......

<snip>

She hadn't used her ATM card because she knew she had drawn all that she could draw? Which makes me wonder. Did Maura have other cards from a family member?

S0 why would Fred extend himself, in all of his grief, by going in search of Maura every, and every other weekend for how L0ng? My thought, if true, would be that Fred hadn't expected her to keep going without keeping in contact. He may have had his ``~hunches~``, that s0mething MUST have gone wrong. Why else would she leave him this way?

Relevant to possibly hitting Petrit. Kathleen had said that "Maura might think she's in tr0uble.....,we just want to let her know it's gonna be fine.....or, it's gonna be 0K...

Could that have been a cryptic message to Maura,~that PV was going to be alright?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search... +(2+March+2004).+%22Where+coul d+Maura+be%3F%22.+Boston+Globe .&cd=2&hl=en&ct=cl nk&gl=usFamily, Friends of Maura Murray Upset With Investigation
By GARY E. LINDSLEY, Staff Writer

Friday February 27, 2004

HAVERHILL NEW HAMPSHIRE
Family and friends of 21-year-old Maura Murray believe someone picked up the University of Massachusetts at Amherst nursing student after she was involved in a one-car accident in Haverhill, N.H., Feb. 9.

They have hired an outside investigator to find out what happened to her.

It has been more than 2-1/2 weeks since Murray's car failed to negotiate a sharp curve near The Weathered Barn on Route 112 and crashed into a stand of trees about one mile east of Swiftwater.

"With all the attention from the media, if a good person had picked her up, he would have come forward," said Sharon Rausch, mother of Bill Rausch, Murray's boyfriend. "It leads us to believe a bad guy picked her up.

"I just wish they would treat this as a criminal investigation. If they treated it as such, the FBI could become more involved."

The "they" she is referring to is New Hampshire State Police Troop F and the Haverhill Police Department.

Rausch said her son Bill, Murray's father, Fred, and Murray's siblings, Freddy, Kathleen and Julie, are all frustrated with the lack of leads and the apparent belief by law officials that Murray's disappearance is nothing more than a person not wanting anyone to know where she is.

They believe Murray would have fought anyone trying to abduct her.

Family members and friends are also frustrated with conflicting information in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

Murray, who is 5 feet 7 inches tall, weighs about 120 pounds and has brown hair and blue eyes, was last seen on the UMass campus between 4 and 4:30 p.m. Feb. 9.
<snip>, read more at that weblink I put here.

Again I say, highlight of the above is this:

Murray, who is 5 feet 7 inches tall, weighs about 120 pounds and has brown hair and blue eyes,

was last seen on the UMass campus between 4 and 4:30 p.m. Feb. 9.

The article was written Feb 27, 2004
The first accounts may be more accuate?

Something that sticks out to me is the fact that in that early article LE had made up a witness who thought she appeared intoxicated, which it turns out this witness never existed. That's pretty messed up if you think about it, you make up witnesses that make her look bad? That's pretty bad. I'd bet the HPD were responsible for that bullshit. They showed a clear proclivity towards lying when they lied to the family upon their arrival to Nh telling them that they thought it was Fred driving the car and that he went snowmobiling, or something along those lines.

That she really was seen at 4 or 4:30?
Could the witness to that be the one who left Maura a voicemail the day before she leaves?

At 3:30 a.m. Feb. 8, Maura crashed her father's new Toyota into a roadside post. She told her father about the accident later that morning. Just after midnight on Monday morning, Feb. 9, she conducted a MapQuest search of the Berkshires and Burlington, Vt., on her personal computer.

At 3:40 p.m. Monday, she withdrew $280 from an area ATM, then stopped at a liquor store. Surveillance cameras at the bank machine and in the store show that she was alone.

Thrasher said that Maura had fastidiously packed all her belongings into boxes before she left school, even removing the art from her dorm room walls. Meanwhile, one UMass friend has seemingly withheld information from police, saying she didn't want to get Maura "in trouble."

At 3:30 a.m. Feb. 8, Maura crashed her father's new Toyota into a roadside post. She told her father about the accident later that morning. Just after midnight on Monday morning, Feb. 9, she conducted a MapQuest search of the Berkshires and Burlington, Vt., on her personal computer.

At 3:40 p.m. Monday, she withdrew $280 from an area ATM, then stopped at a liquor store. Surveillance cameras at the bank machine and in the store show that she was alone.

Thrasher said that Maura had fastidiously packed all her belongings into boxes before she left school, even removing the art from her dorm room walls. Meanwhile, one UMass friend has seemingly withheld information from police, saying she didn't want to get Maura "in trouble."

was looking for something else, found this instead....read that whole website for the whole story.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Something that sticks out to me is the fact that in that early article LE had made up a witness who thought she appeared intoxicated, which it turns out this witness never existed. That's pretty messed up if you think about it, you make up witnesses that make her look bad? That's pretty bad. I'd bet the HPD were responsible for that bullshit. They showed a clear proclivity towards lying when they lied to the family upon their arrival to Nh telling them that they thought it was Fred driving the car and that he went snowmobiling, or something along those lines.

Hi, I saw that too on the weblink I posted. Maybe you can continue on for me while I get my beauty rest.
Hmmm, might have to sleep a week to achive the slightest difference, but I'm hoping.

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

Something that sticks out to me is the fact that in that early article LE had made up a witness who thought she appeared intoxicated, which it turns out this witness never existed. That's pretty messed up if you think about it, you make up witnesses that make her look bad? That's pretty bad. I'd bet the HPD were responsible for that bullshit. They showed a clear proclivity towards lying when they lied to the family upon their arrival to Nh telling them that they thought it was Fred driving the car and that he went snowmobiling, or something along those lines.

"which it turns out this witness never existed."
This has been discussed before. At the time I don't believe that the SBD was called the "SBD" he was just a "witness".

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure, but she would want it back eventually right? When Ms X who borrowed the car returns to the party and Maura's car is gone, towed off, I would think she would want to go get it back. Maybe not that night if she was drinking, but the next day. Wouldn't you?

Amy when entertaining these ideas you have to keep all the information that you know and keep on playing the whole story out each time you make a proposed action.

For example - throwing the keys to someone at a party to lend your car so that more cars don't have to be moved makes sense. But in this version MM or somebody that she lent her car to just hit a pedestrain four days ago. I doubt she throws her keys to anyone ever again. How many people leave school and pack up their dorm pull $280 out of the ATM just to attend a party? Must have been some big party. Usually must college people would have a party on a Friday or Saturday not sure a monday is the right way to start a week.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Amy when entertaining these ideas you have to keep all the information that you know and keep on playing the whole story out each time you make a proposed action.
For example - throwing the keys to someone at a party to lend your car so that more cars don't have to be moved makes sense. But in this version MM or somebody that she lent her car to just hit a pedestrain four days ago. I doubt she throws her keys to anyone ever again. How many people leave school and pack up their dorm pull $280 out of the ATM just to attend a party? Must have been some big party. Usually must college people would have a party on a Friday or Saturday not sure a monday is the right way to start a week.

Good points.

I doubt Maura had arrived at a party because to me a party involves a number of people who would later remember/recognize her as the girl who disappeared. One person might be able to keep a secret but I doubt a whole party could.

The interesting thing about her packing her dorm is that she didn't take the packed boxes with her. Whether she intended to come back for her belongings we don't know. If the email about Billy cheating on her was in fact left out intentionally to make a statement then I'm of the mind that she didn't plan to return.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
"which it turns out this witness never existed."
This has been discussed before. At the time I don't believe that the SBD was called the "SBD" he was just a "witness".

What you said here is so completely wrong.
They were NOT talking about sbd..

Sbd has always said, since his earliest interview, that she did NOT appear intoxicated. Early on there were these reports of a witness who thought she was intoxicated but it is clear now that witness never existed.
The NHSP now states that she appeared uninjured but shook up & that the witness who saw her says she did not appear intoxicated.
So someone in LE, likely someone from the HPD IMO, basically made up a witness who said she appeared intoxicated. Pretty f'd up if you ask me

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
What you said here is so completely wrong.
They were NOT talking about sbd..
Sbd has always said, since his earliest interview, that she did NOT appear intoxicated. Early on there were these reports of a witness who thought she was intoxicated but it is clear now that witness never existed.
The NHSP now states that she appeared uninjured but shook up & that the witness who saw her says she did not appear intoxicated.
So someone in LE, likely someone from the HPD IMO, basically made up a witness who said she appeared intoxicated. Pretty f'd up if you ask me

Jenkins: It is one thing to have the wrong opinion about something it is a honest mistake. But what you do is take wrong information, that you try to prove as fact using words like "clearly, if you really think about it, it just is" and make up theories based off that wrong information. This is what creates a fallacy. Any theory that you have that is based on the witness being "made up" is a fallacy because the witness wasn't made up.

The "witness" never became important until she was missing for a longer period of time. As the witness became more important his occupation and name came out.

From article Paris posted:

"A witness, who told police Murray appeared intoxicated but uninjured, called authorities against Murray's wishes. By the time emergency workers arrived, Murray had gone, leaving most of her belongings in the car."

It is clearly SBD that they are referring to as he was the one who called authorities against her wishes.
SBD written accounts about being intoxicated differed in different articles.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Jenkins: It is one thing to have the wrong opinion about something it is a honest mistake. But what you do is take wrong information, that you try to prove as fact using words like "clearly, if you really think about it, it just is" and make up theories based off that wrong information. This is what creates a fallacy. Any theory that you have that is based on the witness being "made up" is a fallacy because the witness wasn't made up.
The "witness" never became important until she was missing for a longer period of time. As the witness became more important his occupation and name came out.

You could not be more wrong here, a witness was most certainly made up.

They said early on there was a witness who thought she appeared intoxicated. There was no witness who said she appeared intoxicated.

If your tryin to say they were talkin about sbd and just made up that he said she appeared intoxicated that's one thing. But either way, they lied. They either made up a witness, or lied about what the witness said, either way they definitely lied.

I gotta couple quotes I'm gonna dig up to show that they did seem to make up a witness. The sbd's name was then in the paper, making it appear as if there were two separate witnesses who stopped and spoke with her, we now know there was only sbd.

Whether they lied about the witness or what the witness said isn't the important thing, what's important is that they did lie about someone saying that she appeared intoxicated, which is really f'd up.

The only fallacy here was created by LE when they stated there was a witness who said she appeared intoxicated

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
You could not be more wrong here, a witness was most certainly made up.
They said early on there was a witness who thought she appeared intoxicated. There was no witness who said she appeared intoxicated.
If your tryin to say they were talkin about sbd and just made up that he said she appeared intoxicated that's one thing. But either way, they lied. They either made up a witness, or lied about what the witness said, either way they definitely lied.
I gotta couple quotes I'm gonna dig up to show that they did seem to make up a witness. The sbd's name was then in the paper, making it appear as if there were two separate witnesses who stopped and spoke with her, we now know there was only sbd.
Whether they lied about the witness or what the witness said isn't the important thing, what's important is that they did lie about someone saying that she appeared intoxicated, which is really f'd up.
The only fallacy here was created by LE when they stated there was a witness who said she appeared intoxicated

Bobfather- I don't mean to go against you or the family. Have a safe and healthly Thanksgiving.