Maura Murray

OKAY wrote:

<quoted text>
huge, active conspiracy going on here {sarcasm} diverting away from essential conversation going nowhere 9 years later. the participants are being paid per post, and the trolls want to end this immensely important conversation. yeah, they can really make that happen!!
uhhhh, i don't believe her route of travel has ever been established; at least, what's known to the public.
lots of tidbits, but no bites.
try again.

If the conversation is going nowhere, why do you waste sooooo much time here for years? How does that make any sense? It's a pointless conversation at this point is what you're pretty much sayin, but yet you're here every day for years....how does that add up?

As for her route of travel, that's one thing that's pretty well been established. She travelled up 91n, that's pretty much her only option to make it to where she was at that time. There is about 30-45 minute slack time in that trip though so we don't know if she took any side trips, met up with someone along the way, was already in Haverhill before that.
Remember that Anne, and apparently others as well, heard on their scanners that there was a car they slid off the road around 7pm. The call was ended with driver left in private vehicle. This and a stop for gas could account for the slack time in her trip.
This is the call missin from the logs, part of the whole hour that's missin from the logs for some reason. It's weird that according to the logs nothing happened between like 6:15 and 7:27 when FW called 911. Seems strange that there would be zero calls between those times, especially when you consider the fact that the lines were so busy that sbd had to call Hanover dispatch. Interesting, according to the log nothing happened in that time, but yet 911 was so busy they couldn't take a call? That dowsnt add up.

Something else I find interesting is that the 911 lines were busy, so a lot of calls were made right at that time, but yet there isn't very much action in the dispatch logs. What's up with that? All these
People calling 911 just to chit chat? Is it possible there were several more 911 calls about MM then we are aware of? Is this why the investigation has never travelled more than several miles from the WB curve? The only thing I can think of is those calls were regarding MM, since LE wasn't dispatched to anything else. We know the wman's and the m-otte's made 911 calls but two calls aren't gonns tie up the lines, I wonder how many others called about it that we aren't aware of?

I also wonder how many 911 operators there are on duty at once, has to be more than 2, I would think in a quiet area like that probably around 5? I'm not sure, maybe someone like bill who has more experience dealing with 911 calls could make a more accurate estimate.

They weren't 'bowling style shoes', they were regular Adidas sneakers.
If anythin they should be called soccer style shoes because that's what that type of sneaker is modeled after, addidas soccer cleats.

Aftermath wrote:

<quoted text>
Shack,
Why was the FBI restricted to asking questions in MA? I see a lot of cases in other states where local LE when confronted with similar missing person cases, turn them over to the FBI. Have all of the residents who lived along that stretch of highway where the accident occurred moved away or do some still live there? I know SBD moved to FL and passed away.

You are asking me...?
I have written many times that I did not hear anything within the public or local newspapers about Maura Murray Missing on route 112
in North Haverhill within the months until the Spring of 2005.
I did not know of the Maura Murray Missing Family Forum until November 2005.
I wrote then when people were talking about SBD's variable statements.
I said what I meant and I meant what I said.(still do)

Aftermath wrote:

<quoted text>
That "ping" occurred when someone driving north into New Hampshire from the WAKEFIELD/BOSTON area got within about a 23 mile range of the Londonderry NH Sprint tower. Now who did Maura know around there? Those little day trips to Boston even back while she was in high school. Let's see..... Wakefield, Bartlett, Boston???????

I know for a fact she had relatives in the suburbs of Boston, among others the one with the house in Bethlehem. There have been rumors she had relative/s in Londonderry, NH too.

Jenkins wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey aftermath- how could you possibly know this person was travelling up from the Wakefield or Boston area? Obviously if this person was travelling up they were coming from eastern mass but why do you say Wakefield? How do you know it wasn't Lowell? Or Worcester, or the south shore, RI, anywhere in the eastern half of the state where you would take 93 instead of 91?
How do you know this stuff? Do you have any sorry of info to back this up or are we just supposed to take you at your word?
I'm not trying to get on your case, I agree with most of what you say and think you're a valuable contributor here. Just sometimes you say things that just make me wonder how the hell you could possibly know it unless you are much more closely related to this case than anyone thinks.

I believe Aftermath has inside information.

Aftermath wrote:

Orko Kringer wrote:
"Common sense would say that if you are investigating a missing person you are INTERESTED IN THE PERSON THAT IS MISSING'S phone and when it pings and when it doesn't ping.
But I guess I am missing something."
Given that it's years later, undoubtedly "common" sense is not what is needed. Maybe we should give "uncommon" sense a little try. I am curious as to what type of cell phone Maura owned and even more curious as to the cell phone's features.

Here you go:

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php...

Aftermath wrote:

<quoted text>
OKAY,
I do not believe the conspiracy theory and have never seen a troll (seeing is believing?)....don't believe the alien theory or that she was the victim of researchers. Do not believe the route the Saturn took is that important. Actually, I'm more interested in her cell phone, what kind it was and it's features.

We know what kind it was. We know the features it had. Those things have been known for almost 9 years. Doesn´t seem to have helped much. We´ve been told it´s gps was not functioning. Really? Can we be sure?

Also, can we be absolutely sure Maura had her phone with her? Maybe someone else had it? We can´t just deduct her phone was pinging somewhere, therefor Maura was there too. Phones are not glued to peoples foreheads. There actually was a case here some time ago where the suspects tried very hard to fool police by sending someone on a car ride with the victims phone to make it look like he had been places he had not.

mcsmom wrote:

Below is a link to a training manual for LE specific to steps to obtaining cellular records from cell companies. My understanding is that NH LE could have found a call to Maura's phone from the "dump tower" in this case, according to the affidavit, it was located in Londonderry, NH. Chances are they would have needed to freeze information within a specific time frame in order to gather this info. Scarinza was very well informed on the details of cellular communication.
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/329943/...
It would have been great if LE had Sprint clone Maura's shut off phone, a method called triggerfishing. But maybe they did IDK.

Not to break balls here but in the interest of accuracy triggerfishing is actually a method LE uses to pull cell phone #'s out of the air. They use a device called a triggerfish machine. The target really needs to be under surveillance for it to work though. If you know what time a target makes a call, hence the surveillance, then you can get all numbers off that tower at that time, this is called the baseline. Then from there you narrow it down the next time this person takes a call. Say the first time there was 800 phones that pinged the tower at the same time. The next time the person takes a call there might be a hundred of the same numbers that pinged the tower, since most people stay in the same general area all day. From that the next time will probably bring it down to 20, and you go from there until there's only one number left. Sometimes it can be super quick and easy, sometimes it can take a while. This method is predominantly used on drug traffickers/organized crime to figure out their phone number for a wire tap. In this day and age with burner phones people might dump phones every few weeks, even says depending on how paranoid they are. Also only 1 or two people might know their number, all their calls go to someone below them and then that person calls them. The triggerfish is an ingenuis device and has been used successfully to get wiretaps on many people who thought it would be impossible because of their disposable cell phone.
As for sprint clowning her phone, which they could do, I'm not sure what your getting at, what would be the investigative purpose of doing that? Her phone was off, if they cloned her phone the clone would be off as well. If she turned her phone on they would know if it pinged a tower, even if sprint didn't have towers in that area. If your phone says no service it'll still ping off of other companies cell towers even thought it won't work, unless your way up the mountains and there's absolutely no cell towers from any company anywhere within 20-25 miles, which isn't very many places anymore.
So without cloning her phone they would know if she turned it on or if it pinged any towers so I don't see what the benefit would be to cloning it. What do you see as a benefit of doing that? Not trying to break your balls at all I'm truly wondering what the value you think that could've brought to the investigation.

Aftermath wrote:

There WAS a flat tire on Maura's car. There WAS a flat tire on Pam Webb's truck. Deny all you wish, but both vehicles had a flat tire. Slow leaks.

So what are you suggesting??Tow truck?LE?A weirdo?

mcsmom wrote:

Below is a link to a training manual for LE specific to steps to obtaining cellular records from cell companies. My understanding is that NH LE could have found a call to Maura's phone from the "dump tower" in this case, according to the affidavit, it was located in Londonderry, NH. Chances are they would have needed to freeze information within a specific time frame in order to gather this info. Scarinza was very well informed on the details of cellular communication.
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/329943/...
It would have been great if LE had Sprint clone Maura's shut off phone, a method called triggerfishing. But maybe they did IDK.

Not to break balls here but in the interest of accuracy triggerfishing is actually a method LE uses to pull cell phone #'s out of the air. They use a device called a triggerfish machine. The target really needs to be under surveillance for it to work though. If you know what time a target makes a call, hence the surveillance, then you can get all numbers off that tower at that time, this is called the baseline. Then from there you narrow it down the next time this person takes a call. Say the first time there was 800 phones that pinged the tower at the same time. The next time the person takes a call there might be a hundred of the same numbers that pinged the tower, since most people stay in the same general area all day. From that the next time will probably bring it down to 20, and you go from there until there's only one number left. Sometimes it can be super quick and easy, sometimes it can take a while. This method is predominantly used on drug traffickers/organized crime to figure out their phone number for a wire tap. In this day and age with burner phones people might dump phones every few weeks, even says depending on how paranoid they are. Also only 1 or two people might know their number, all their calls go to someone below them and then that person calls them. The triggerfish is an ingenuis device and has been used successfully to get wiretaps on many people who thought it would be impossible because of their disposable cell phone.
As for sprint clowning her phone, which they could do, I'm not sure what your getting at, what would be the investigative purpose of doing that? Her phone was off, if they cloned her phone the clone would be off as well. If she turned her phone on they would know if it pinged a tower, even if sprint didn't have towers in that area. If your phone says no service it'll still ping off of other companies cell towers even thought it won't work, unless your way up the mountains and there's absolutely no cell towers from any company anywhere within 20-25 miles, which isn't very many places anymore.
So without cloning her phone they would know if she turned it on or if it pinged any towers so I don't see what the benefit would be to cloning it. What do you see as a benefit of doing that? Not trying to break your balls at all I'm truly wondering what the value you think that could've brought to the investigation.

Lighthouse, why are you interested in tower data on Feb 10 and 12?

Jenkins wrote:

<quoted text>
Not to break balls here but in the interest of accuracy triggerfishing is actually a method LE uses to pull cell phone #'s out of the air. They use a device called a triggerfish machine. The target really needs to be under surveillance for it to work though. If you know what time a target makes a call, hence the surveillance, then you can get all numbers off that tower at that time, this is called the baseline. Then from there you narrow it down the next time this person takes a call. Say the first time there was 800 phones that pinged the tower at the same time. The next time the person takes a call there might be a hundred of the same numbers that pinged the tower, since most people stay in the same general area all day. From that the next time will probably bring it down to 20, and you go from there until there's only one number left. Sometimes it can be super quick and easy, sometimes it can take a while. This method is predominantly used on drug traffickers/organized crime to figure out their phone number for a wire tap. In this day and age with burner phones people might dump phones every few weeks, even says depending on how paranoid they are. Also only 1 or two people might know their number, all their calls go to someone below them and then that person calls them. The triggerfish is an ingenuis device and has been used successfully to get wiretaps on many people who thought it would be impossible because of their disposable cell phone.
As for sprint clowning her phone, which they could do, I'm not sure what your getting at, what would be the investigative purpose of doing that? Her phone was off, if they cloned her phone the clone would be off as well. If she turned her phone on they would know if it pinged a tower, even if sprint didn't have towers in that area. If your phone says no service it'll still ping off of other companies cell towers even thought it won't work, unless your way up the mountains and there's absolutely no cell towers from any company anywhere within 20-25 miles, which isn't very many places anymore.
So without cloning her phone they would know if she turned it on or if it pinged any towers so I don't see what the benefit would be to cloning it. What do you see as a benefit of doing that? Not trying to break your balls at all I'm truly wondering what the value you think that could've brought to the investigation.

Jenky,

Here is what I am suggesting concerning how police found out maura checked her phone for messages at 4:37 p.m.

Maura's phone came on briefly between the time she left campus and it was the last time her phone was turned on ever.

after police and sprint got done doing the court dipsy doo to get that bit of info released police likely asked sprint security what does that mean?

Why would a person's cell phone come on for just seconds (ping to a cell tower and leave a trace) and then have no further activity.

And the answer from sprint security back to police was that maura was likely checking her phone messages briefly and then turned her phone back to the off position.

and that is how the answer came to be and it has been reported since.

Back then in 2004, cell phones COULD NOT be traced when they were off.

If Maura didn't have her cell phone off, her movements to include how long she stayed in a certain town or at a certain stop, would be well known by everyone to this day.

Advocator wrote:

Regardless of whether the cell phone tower was Londonderry VT or NH, I d of backs up my question here as to how could even Sprint know from just a "ping" that someone was trying to call any individual person?

Cell towers have many many phones pinging off them at once. Not sure how many in NH, I know in a city the size of Springfield, ma there could be well over 8,000 phones pinging a tower at once. That would mean up in NH it'd probably be more like a thousand or less.
But any cell company absolutely knows exactly what phones pinged their tower and it's all saved on their computer systems. In order for a phone to be pinging a tower it needs to have a service contract with which a number comes attached. That's how the company's keep track of what phones which pinging which tower, with it's ohone number. So every ohone number that pings a tower is always recorded on the phone company system. Not sure how long but definitely months and months later at least LE can go back and see records of pings. I would suspect they keep this info saved forever on their computers. How much space does one ping take up? Pretty much nothing when you consider how much memory their computers probably have.
So yes, every number is known and saved off of the cell towers. This can be used to track a missing person, or find out someone who attempted to call the missin person but never got through. But that would only apply if her phone was turned on. If it was off it would go straight to vmail & it would be on the records. The only ones that wouldn't hit the record is if the person hangs up before the person answers or vmail answers.
Let's say someone went to call Maura dialed and it started ringing and at the last second they realized they called her wrong phone, they were suppose to call her burner. If they hung up real quick that would not show up on her records, only the person who dialed. Since the phone had to ping the tower to make the call that call would be recorded by the tower.
Honestly the Londonderry ping could be nothing and probably is. It could've been someone who dialed the wrong number and hung up real quick, I've done that, realized I hit one wrong # and hung up on the first ring.
But it could also be a crucial piece of this case. If it could be proved that someone did call her that afternoon that would certainly be a direct indication that someone was likely travelling up to meet her up there. That would make sense actually, that would make more sense than her going up there and not telling anyone, maybe she told that person. Still wouldn't prove this person is the perp or anything, they coulda went to meet her and she never made it and they thought she stood them up or something. Then once the story hit the media I could see this person not wanting their name brought into it, if they never saw her they would be just as baffled as everyone else and they might not want LE thinking they killed her or something.
Only thing about that is if we could figure out if she was going up to meet a friend and she never made it to meet that friend that would sure eliminate the suicide theory altogether. That wouldn't eliminate the lost in the woods theory but it would sure make the abduction theory that much more likely.

I'm sorry orky but what you're saying makes absolutely no sense.
First of all they were talking about NH, not Vt, that is well established. I'm pretty sure there isn't even a cell tower in Londonderry VT. Vermonters are very picky about cell towers and they have them all documented on several different types of sites, I've seen none in Londonderry VT.
Do you have info indicating a cell tower even exists there?

The info about her last call that was in Maribeth's article did not come from that affidavit in any way, it didn't need to be.
They knew her last call since day one of the case, that was known for absolute certainty from her cell records which Maribeth was apparently shown a copy of, probably from the family actually.

The Londonderry ping has nothing to do with her last call to check her vmail, this much looks pretty much obvious.

Jenkins wrote:

I'm sorry orky but what you're saying makes absolutely no sense.
First of all they were talking about NH, not Vt, that is well established. I'm pretty sure there isn't even a cell tower in Londonderry VT. Vermonters are very picky about cell towers and they have them all documented on several different types of sites, I've seen none in Londonderry VT.
Do you have info indicating a cell tower even exists there?
The info about her last call that was in Maribeth's article did not come from that affidavit in any way, it didn't need to be.
They knew her last call since day one of the case, that was known for absolute certainty from her cell records which Maribeth was apparently shown a copy of, probably from the family actually.
The Londonderry ping has nothing to do with her last call to check her vmail, this much looks pretty much obvious.

Jenky, there is a cell tower for every 12 miles in the USA.

Cell towers can be registered through FCC but they also can be unregsitered and the unregistered ones you won't find them doing an internet search.

Finally, a cell phone tower is not just some tower that sits up in a field and does its magic. Cell phone tower is just a generic name for them, but buildings can also serve as cell towers as well.

I just watched an episode of 48 hours on Saturday where they were able to track a murderer to a crime scene area because he had his cell phone on and it pinged. He killed his ex girlfriend at her apartment and then killed the ex girlfriend's dog in a remote area.

He was tracked to The killing of a dog in the remote area because of a cell phone ping that hit off a normal looking office building.

findmaura wrote:

<quoted text>
So what are you suggesting??Tow truck?LE?A weirdo?

Hope the forum police to jump on me for answering a q for someone else like they usually do but I think it's pretty clear he's talking about some weirdo.

Aftermath has suggested a serial killer lives in the area, probably grafton county, which is very likely.
Whether the person is technically a serial killer or not is no clear but there is clearly at least one killer prowling the area that takes advantage of women stranded by themselves on the side of the road.
Pamela Webb was abducted from the Maine turnpike and her body was found murdered in Franconia. It's a known fact that killers often dump bodies in places they are familiar with, somewhere they have some knowledge and maybe even control of the situation.

There have been far too many murders in the north country involving women out on the road alone to just write that likelihood off. Honestly I hope it's a serial killer because otherwise there's like a bunch of oppurtunistic killers in the north country. I'd estimate there's probably 2-3 oppurtunistic killers out there right now, maybe more but that number is a complete guess.

Maura's dissapearance is just too similar to many of these unsolved cases to just write off the possibility that it could've happened.
If you look at the numbers it's actually way more likely that she fell victim to a predator than walked into the woods never to be found again.
Can anybody find one case, just one case, where a young girl like that walked into the woods by herself in the middle of winter with that much snow? I can't find any evidence it's ever happened, I'm sure it must've before but that's extremely unusual.
Can't find one case of that but there are more than several cases of women in the road alone at night that got abducted. Pretty little girl like she was, she was seriously exposed out there that night in those conditions. It's scary.

I just don't see how anybody could possibly think that she actually walked into the woods after that crash, the worst spot to hide imaginable, as opposed to catching a ride from the scene in a nice warm car of a seemingly nice passerby. It's just the simplest answer here.
Occams razor here people, the simplest answer is usually the correct one. The simplest answer is clearly that she caught a ride from the scene. Does this mean she definitely got murdered? No.
But after all these years it's beginning to look like that is becoming increasingly the simplest answer.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
Jenky, there is a cell tower for every 12 miles in the USA.
Cell towers can be registered through FCC but they also can be unregsitered and the unregistered ones you won't find them doing an internet search.
Finally, a cell phone tower is not just some tower that sits up in a field and does its magic. Cell phone tower is just a generic name for them, but buildings can also serve as cell towers as well.
I just watched an episode of 48 hours on Saturday where they were able to track a murderer to a crime scene area because he had his cell phone on and it pinged. He killed his ex girlfriend at her apartment and then killed the ex girlfriend's dog in a remote area.
He was tracked to The killing of a dog in the remote area because of a cell phone ping that hit off a normal looking office building.

Well duh there not all 'towers' go to any city, the term tower is a generic term that means cell phone broadcaster/receiver that can be placed on any tall object. Anywhere really, but the taller, the better the spread. they're on too of buildings, billboards, all over the place but you won't see many actual towers in Boston or NYC. The phone cos try to hide them pretty well.
There are really cell towers that aren't registered with the FCC? How does that work? And it's a legal tower? That seems strange to me but I'll take your word for it.
As for the cell tower every twelve miles thing, that's on average. VT and NH don't have towers ever twelve miles. Have you actually driven up 91n before? You must've once but the cell service in the highway sucks, because there's no towers in VT, exageration there but there definitely isn't one every twelve miles I'll tell you that much. Vt has the worst cell coverage of anywhere I've ever been in my life.
This is because cell towers are a hot button issue in VT, everyone wants full cell coverage but nobody wants a tower in their town. there's a lot of environmentalists in VT and they keep extremely good tabs on all cell towers in the state. They know when and where they're being built and the try to stop most of them from being built. Before a tower can be put up there are town meetings, it has to be approved, a cell co can't just buy a piece of land and throw one up. Down in CT theres a fight going on in the town of Roxbury over putting up a tower so even down there people don't want em near their homes.

So the environmentalists don't go by what's registered with the FCC, they go by the towers that are built. I've seen nothing that indicates a tower was ever in Londonderry vt. At this point I'm almost certain that there is NOT a tower in that town.

Can you provide any evidence indicating there is a cell tower in Londonderry VT?

Idk where your getting this VT thing from and why you're holdin into it so strong. It's clear they were were talking about NH, it had nothing to do with her final call to check her messages and they were tryin to find the identity if somebody else. You're normally good at analyzing stuff orky, I like your passion for digging things up, but as far as I can tell you're waaayyyy off base on this one.

You're gonna have to provide much more proof that what your saying is at all possible because it's not making any sense at all, respectfully.

Jenkins wrote:

<quoted text>
Well duh there not all 'towers' go to any city, the term tower is a generic term that means cell phone broadcaster/receiver that can be placed on any tall object. Anywhere really, but the taller, the better the spread. they're on too of buildings, billboards, all over the place but you won't see many actual towers in Boston or NYC. The phone cos try to hide them pretty well.
There are really cell towers that aren't registered with the FCC? How does that work? And it's a legal tower? That seems strange to me but I'll take your word for it.
As for the cell tower every twelve miles thing, that's on average. VT and NH don't have towers ever twelve miles. Have you actually driven up 91n before? You must've once but the cell service in the highway sucks, because there's no towers in VT, exageration there but there definitely isn't one every twelve miles I'll tell you that much. Vt has the worst cell coverage of anywhere I've ever been in my life.
This is because cell towers are a hot button issue in VT, everyone wants full cell coverage but nobody wants a tower in their town. there's a lot of environmentalists in VT and they keep extremely good tabs on all cell towers in the state. They know when and where they're being built and the try to stop most of them from being built. Before a tower can be put up there are town meetings, it has to be approved, a cell co can't just buy a piece of land and throw one up. Down in CT theres a fight going on in the town of Roxbury over putting up a tower so even down there people don't want em near their homes.
So the environmentalists don't go by what's registered with the FCC, they go by the towers that are built. I've seen nothing that indicates a tower was ever in Londonderry vt. At this point I'm almost certain that there is NOT a tower in that town.
Can you provide any evidence indicating there is a cell tower in Londonderry VT?
Idk where your getting this VT thing from and why you're holdin into it so strong. It's clear they were were talking about NH, it had nothing to do with her final call to check her messages and they were tryin to find the identity if somebody else. You're normally good at analyzing stuff orky, I like your passion for digging things up, but as far as I can tell you're waaayyyy off base on this one.
You're gonna have to provide much more proof that what your saying is at all possible because it's not making any sense at all, respectfully.

Respect right back at ya fella.

Anyway, I have notified Maribeth. Hopefully she will get back to me on this, I know she is a very busy lady running her own magazine now.

All this stuff people are suggesting about "pinging"..

Here are some well known facts that came from my boss..

Pinging cell phones has been around for a very long time.. It started in the early 90's (earlier for the government & military) with rich families as an option for when someone had been kidnapped as a way to find said people.. As cell phones became popular where the "average joe" could afford them, they put the GPS function for all 911 calls to be able locate where crimes were being committed ... By 1999 almost every carrier had this function ...

Sprint, which changed their corporate name to Embarq in the very early 00's ,had said service.. Her phone, the Samsung ,has all the features to "narrow" her last known locations.. Instilled in the late 90's, LE has a direct line to every provider to issue to them any activity in any REAL crisis situation concerning the last times a phone was used, where it was near, where it pinged, etc;

This info will never be released to the Public in an active investigation! No matter how much you think you know, this info would be close to vest in an active investigation. Also, could be part of the "one party intercept" people talk about.. These records are not there for FOIA, Journalist, Family, etc; ONLY LE would have these special requested records.. Releasing them would compromise their investigation .. Releasing a fake one would only benefit if they were trying to get someone to get "sloppy" & talk.. Even TracPhones (disposable) had the GPS back then. Sprint had it & a decent version of the software at that...

She got said phone in 2003, Windows XP was out years before that! This was Feb. 2004, the technology needed was available then... It's way more advanced now, but was active back then.. Until their investigation is over, the general public will NOT know if her cell phone was ever turned back on..

Believe me or not, it's the truth.. No one would compromise said information & is not available via FOIA! Anyone claiming to know the full story behind her cell phone needs to really think about what they are trying to state as facts here..

If I had more time, I would have typed it better, but I'm sure most of you can understand the way I talk/type/try to get my point across by now.. I'm working & doing as much as I can, so I can get home for Christmas..