Maura Murray

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
The reason I asked is because if they saw the SBD stop they probably figured there was no need to call the police.
If a car goes off the road up here in the wintertime the driver usually goes to the nearest house and asks for help to either help push or pull their vehicle out with chains.
I've gone off the road twice in the past. One time a neighbor stopped and pushed me out of the bank I was stuck in and the second time two young guys stopped and pulled my car out with a chain. No police were ever called although several people saw my car off the road.

Wowzer reread Citigirls posts.

First, the house saw the accident but no one called LE.

Second, They said they didn't see the accident.

Third, if no one said they saw the accident then why would anyone call LE if they didn't see the accident.

Am I missing something?

Ridiculous wrote:

Lighthouse,
I believe it was something like thirty people that were aware that something was going on and no one called? Didn't the perp actually leave and then come back and finish what he started?

Something like that

Fred Garvin wrote:

I'm in a story telling mood apparently.
Once coming home from my business I found a car sitting on its side in a muddy field right next to my neighborhood. My wife and I rand into the field and the car was empty, but blood on the steering wheel. We got back in the car and drove around and found the driver wandering. I called 911 and put it on bluetooth speakerphone. We offered help and she kept saying no. I thought she was delirious, but my wife thought she was drunk. The police showed up and she took off like a bat-out-of-hell towards some woods.
She was a huge alcoholic with a long record, as it turned out.
If there was no tandem driver that is my second scenario, not an abduction. She took off into the woods to avoid the police and who knows.

Hello Frank, personally I think that your story perfectly shows the most simple explanation as to what happened. Had your incident happened in the weather that Maura's did, I think it could well have been an identical outcome. Without any proper evidence of a second driver, this is the first scenario for me.

I hope the woman in your story was ok!

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Were you here when he threatened to throw eggrolls at me if he saw me in a restaurant.That was a hoot.
Since he's never seen me I prayed he wasn't going to the few Chinese restaurants around here and throwing eggrolls at the noggins of every woman he thought might be me. I listened to the scanner for days for anyone reporting an eggroll assault.:)

Wowzer, that's so funny!! I think you should stick to Indian and Thai restaurants until the heat is off.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Wowzer reread Citigirls posts.
First, the house saw the accident but no one called LE.
Second, They said they didn't see the accident.
Third, if no one said they saw the accident then why would anyone call LE if they didn't see the accident.
Am I missing something?

No you didn't miss anything. I was wondering how there could be ANY witnisses if no one saw the accident.
To run off the road on that curve is not a big deal in the winter. Who knew that it would be different from all the other times and the driver would end up missing.

Fred Garvin wrote:

I'm in a story telling mood apparently.
Once coming home from my business I found a car sitting on its side in a muddy field right next to my neighborhood. My wife and I rand into the field and the car was empty, but blood on the steering wheel. We got back in the car and drove around and found the driver wandering. I called 911 and put it on bluetooth speakerphone. We offered help and she kept saying no. I thought she was delirious, but my wife thought she was drunk. The police showed up and she took off like a bat-out-of-hell towards some woods.
She was a huge alcoholic with a long record, as it turned out.
If there was no tandem driver that is my second scenario, not an abduction. She took off into the woods to avoid the police and who knows.

Seriously? Someone drinking who crashed her car and ran off to avoid the police. And then even more irrationally running off into the woods. Giving the appearance of no real end plan? Well I for one am totally shocked. Oh wait, I think I have been saying that is a very possible outcome for years.

I wonder how anyone with any sense could watch one of those police car chases on tv and not see that type of irrational flight syndrome that overcomes some people. Maura was clearly of the same mindset. And once started it is hard to reign in. She left the scene of an accident after drinking. From what we understand she was on a form of probation that if she kept clean, her crime would be expunged. Looks like that was swirling down the drain if she was caught drinking and driving. Did that also put her nursing career in jeopardy? All sound like reasons someone might run to me.

I personally use to have a serious shortcoming that I have discovered in my years as an EMT. I use to always try to look for how people will behave/react based upon the rational choices in front of them. This can be a real problem because once in a while, you will come across people that don't do what is in their best interest or what is rational. To me they are the most dangerous to deal with for me and themselves. Short answer. People do stupid shit. Happens all the time.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
I personally use to have a serious shortcoming that I have discovered in my years as an EMT. I use to always try to look for how people will behave/react based upon the rational choices in front of them. This can be a real problem because once in a while, you will come across people that don't do what is in their best interest or what is rational. To me they are the most dangerous to deal with for me and themselves. Short answer. People do stupid shit. Happens all the time.
Bill

You're spot on, and once you add alcohol into the mix, it just gets worse. I can honestly say that some of the worst decisions I've made came from times I've been out and drinking. I can easily see how a slightly drunk mind could rationalise running off from that situation.

I agree it is the most linear explanation, but what about her body? I would have guessed they would find it if it is there.

Fred Garvin wrote:

I agree it is the most linear explanation, but what about her body? I would have guessed they would find it if it is there.

Now we get to how large predators in that area can spread bodies far and wide and leave very little to be found.

Like I have said before. I have actually documented how rapidly this can occur. And in my area we don't have bears. Coyotes alone can do remarkable damage and spreading of the remains very quickly. And even in winter bears do come out of hibernation at time. Sometime for hours or days.

Bill

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree. It have not found anything saying searches were conducted past the five mile point. I did come across this about the search conducted after CW's sighting was reported. I topic=568.15

I thiink you guys are missing a HUGE thing when you say no searches were cpnducted past the 5 mile point; the HELICOPTER searches.
On wednesday morning they were up in the fish and game helicopter and searched 20 miles of 112 along the edges of the road looking for any signs that any human entered the woods, and found nothing..
In addition to that, the conditions were in their favor; according to both Lt.. Scarinza and lt. Bogardus the "conditions could not be better for tracking" due to fresh snowfall. Scarinza personally flew in the F&G helicopter and they were using FLIR to assist in the search for prints. Scarinza describes being able to see game trails and animal tracks clearly, and human foorprints. WHen you know what you're looking for it is easy to distinguishh between animal tracks and human footprints. They flew 20 miles of 112, that's the entire length from 302 up to N woodstock and they saw no human foorprints leading into to the woods. They actually did this twice, just to be surre.
You gotta remember there was 2.5' of snow, it was a fresh snowfall and the snow was fluffy. She would've left a HUGE trail walking into the woods in those conditions, one that would've been relatively easy to spot, and there was no such trail. If they could see animal tracks, game trails and human foorprints; they should've seen her trail if she left one.
Now that obviously isn't 100%, it is POSSIBLE that they missed her trail, however unlikely that is. But when you combine that with the fact that the tracking dog lost her scent 100yds up the road, that paints a pretty strong picture indicating that she did most likely catch a ride from the area, and probably caught the ride right where the dog lost here scent. Neither of those alone are 100%, but when you consider both of them I think it is extremely unlikely that she is in the woods anywhere along rt 112. I would think that since they were in a helicopter they flew a few miles at least up 116 looking as well, it would make sense they would do that as well.
So they DID conduct a search ot the whole length of 112, it wasn't a ground search but often times in situations like this an air search is more effective than a ground search. There are more types of searches than ground searches and a ground search just isn't feasible to cover 20 miles.
This is probably why the NHSP has stated in a couple different articles that they believe she caught a ride from the area.
It's also the only thing that makes logical sense, considering the condittions and what she was wearing. She was wearing jeans and low top sneakers, not exactly the gear you're gonna make it very far into the woods wearing. She didn't even grab one of the 3 pairs of gloves she had in her car. If she was planning on running for miles or entering the woods don't you think she would've at least grabbed a pair of gloves?
It also makes no logical sense that she would've entered the woods after running that far anyways. She was a long distance runner. If she had made it 5 miles up the road then that would've meant that she got away, the cops didn't catch her; why on earth would she THEN choose to enter the woods at that point?! How does that make any sense?? She runs for miles to avoid LE only to enter the woods affer she got away?
Remember, ground searches aren't the only kind of searches that exist and in a situation like this an air search would be more effective bc it's the only way you're covering 20 miles effectively.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>

To run off the road on that curve is not a big deal in the winter. Who knew that it would be different from all the other times and the driver would end up missing.

exactly. this is new england.

amy researches wrote:

Maybe small towns are different, but I don't call LE every time someone has an accident on my street. It happens quite often. Unless I happen to be walking by and someone asks me to phone for help, it wouldn't even cross my mind to call LE if I saw the person was alive and able to walk around their vehicle. Especially if they saw the bus driver stop. It also wouldn't cross my mind that the person would later turn out to be missing.

agree.

citigirl wrote:

Not saying it has anything to do with Mauras disappearance but there was a red pick up truck that I had seen parked in the back yard of one of the witnesses homes that never contacted LE.

Report it, why post it here. Unless you want one of our crazy topix people to go banging on their door.

Fred Garvin wrote:

I maintain the tandem driver took MM to a new life, but it feel like there are times that people can walk out of existence.
One of my twins disappeared for 30 minutes once and I swear she blinked out of existence. I methodically checked every conceivable nook she could have hid in and she was gone. After I drove like a madman around our neighborhood screaming her name I came home and she showed up back in the hallway.

kids hide; we had to do "go seek" when a mother came to pick up her son after playgroup.
he was hiding from her in the basement.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Seriously? Someone drinking who crashed her car and ran off to avoid the police. And then even more irrationally running off into the woods. Giving the appearance of no real end plan? Well I for one am totally shocked. Oh wait, I think I have been saying that is a very possible outcome for years.
I wonder how anyone with any sense could watch one of those police car chases on tv and not see that type of irrational flight syndrome that overcomes some people. Maura was clearly of the same mindset. And once started it is hard to reign in. She left the scene of an accident after drinking. From what we understand she was on a form of probation that if she kept clean, her crime would be expunged. Looks like that was swirling down the drain if she was caught drinking and driving. Did that also put her nursing career in jeopardy? All sound like reasons someone might run to me.
I personally use to have a serious shortcoming that I have discovered in my years as an EMT. I use to always try to look for how people will behave/react based upon the rational choices in front of them. This can be a real problem because once in a while, you will come across people that don't do what is in their best interest or what is rational. To me they are the most dangerous to deal with for me and themselves. Short answer. People do stupid shit. Happens all the time.
Bill

Alcohol not only would have impaired her judgment to do things rationally. The adrenaline rush she would have had knowing all the trouble she was about to be in would have made her desperate to leave the scene one way or another.

It would have lowered her guard and left her very vulnerable if she did hitch a ride.

I just can't ever be sold on the "lost or ran into the woods and died" theory.

I have always believed she hitched a ride and met foul play.

Is it possible that whoever she was going to meet picked her up and shortly there after she decided to run from it all and start completely over. Id say from her bad behavior- its very possible too.

oo00oo wrote:

<quoted text>
Report it, why post it here. Unless you want one of our crazy topix people to go banging on their door.

no witch hunts will be tolerated in 2013.
those days of fun in the name of MM and at the expense of innocents are over.

Ridiculous wrote:

Another interesting point about the Chandra Levy case was what happened to Gary Condit. I make this statement not in support of the abduction theory, but to show that perception is very often off. Condit was publicly accused by other Congressmen and tried and convicted in the media.

yes, absolutely; rendering Condit a victim.

impaired running...flight.
a few scenarios are quite possible...but running into woods before or after accepting a ride is not only possible, but probable, given there is no trace.
either that, or she's alive, having started a new life.
she was in flight mode...she fled both from UMASS and family.
jmho

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
no witch hunts will be tolerated in 2013.
those days of fun in the name of MM and at the expense of innocents are over.

Very FIRMLY agree!!!!

BobJenkins-OG wrote:

<quoted text>
Remember, ground searches aren't the only kind of searches that exist and in a situation like this an air search would be more effective bc it's the only way you're covering 20 miles effectively.

I didn't read it all but I did see this tidbit.

Absolutely incorrect. While air searches can cover HUGE amounts of area they can and often have a very low probability of detection. Particularly in woods as dense as they are in that forest.

Consider a human searching for a track 6 feet off of the ground (getting on hand an knees at times, with their face literally in the dirt/snow) walking at a speed of 2 MPH. Then a helicopter at 100 - 500 feet at a speed of 10 - 20 miles per hour. Who would consider them equal?

One also needs to ask oneself these questions as well. If it was stated that "they could see moose and other prints" on the snow. How could the snow have been 2.5 feet deep. I mean, the last I checked moose can't hover and put their prints on the top of 2.5 feet snow, so how did they know it was moose PRINTS? It should have just been gashes in the 2.5 foot deep snow, no prints, except on the bottom of the 2.5 feet of the snow. These are just some of the contradictory things I read that make no sense to me. Especially when combined with the weather reports.

The belief that Maura would have had to "broken trail" to get in the woods is very likely another fabrication.

Bill