Maura Murray

WTH-the-original wrote:

And as an addendum. Cold cases occur when people set out on adventures, without telling anyone their intentions, and run from simple traffic accidents. It is not the governments job to protect people from themselves, and I pray that it is never their job. If you are going to take those types of risks, you alone bear the responsibility for what becomes of you. Had she told someone what she was doing instead of lying; if she had not been drinking would have there been an accident; if she had stayed at the car and faced the music would we be having this conversation? Cold cases are usually the creation of the people who are being searched for but actively attempt to evade, because of their own selfish reasons.
Bill

Bill,
Cold cases occur when they are initially chalked up as, "...oh, probably just another impulsive, drunk teenager who ran away....or ran off and commited suicide. We get 'em all the time." All of your comments regarding the victim are interestingly sad. They provide much insight as to why cases often end up cold (lack of objectivity regarding the victim).

Bill,
Thanks for removing my response to your lengthy note. Based on observations that included a damaged windshield to driver's side of the Saturn I would have had concern the driver may have sustained head trauma. In light of SBD's report that a shivering person had been at the scene,(but now absent) and it was a cold, dark winter evening,I would have had concern the driver of the Saturn might experience hypothermia. I would have called for assistance...either another officer or contacted the state police asking for their assistance which would have involved patroling the stretch of highway 10 to 15 miles in each direction, checking side of highway, ditches for footprints, tracks. Documentation of any potential evidence would have been important. The car would not have been dropped off at a local garage, but would have been impounded. Although I do not believe her family had anything to do with her disappearance, items from the Saturn would not have been returned to the family especially when the family was being told the case was "active." This seemed odd especially when Fred M. could not obtain any information regarding the case and had been informed the case was "active." It is my understanding items in the car were turned over to the family and then were retrieved 2 years later. In the meantime, Fred M.'s requests for information regarding the case were rejected. Based on license plate number I would have contacted the owner of the Saturn, Fred M. I would have noticed the UMASS-Amherst parking sticker and number and would have contacted the university. Based on the urgency of finding Maura, the university may have given me names and phone numbers of family members. I would not have concluded, "Oh well, just another drunk young person who probaby ran off to avoid being ticketed." Once I'd interviewed family members and they were insisting this is not a case involving a runaway or a suicide...I would have seriously considered what they were conveying to me and would not have waited several days before launching a serious search. Finally, if I were in charge of protocol there would be almost continuous review of 10 or 12 cases at a time. Review would involve "reviewing" cold cases...to identify what might have been done immediately, initially to have increased the probability that these would have never become cold cases. It would be important to use objectivity v subjectivity in the initial assessment of an accident scene. Sure, one can mentally visit subjective thinking but it is important to not allow it to interfere with hurting case outcome.

rozShoem wrote:

<quoted text>
Bill,
Cold cases occur when they are initially chalked up as, "...oh, probably just another impulsive, drunk teenager who ran away....or ran off and commited suicide. We get 'em all the time." All of your comments regarding the victim are interestingly sad. They provide much insight as to why cases often end up cold (lack of objectivity regarding the victim).

Again you have to remember that when it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably going to be a duck. We do not (as a country) devote thousands and thousands of dollars and tremendous numbers of man-hours etc. for people that run from cars especially when there has been drinking involved. To do that would be a tremendous waste of resources and totally incompatible with a standard of practice that any department in the country could afford or that any citizenry would be willing to foot the tab for or any organization could properly staff for.

I have already explained in depth why we don't do that. And why we won't do that. If you want to try to go to your legislation and convince them that every drunk that runs from a car crash should be treated as a murder investigation please tell me when you are going to do that. I want to watch when the hilarity starts. The laughter would be deafening.

Bill

rozShoem wrote:

<quoted text>\
Doubt? Maybe, I'm uncertain as none of us know what actually transpired in terms of content of the condo inquiring. I know the existing perspective is that Maura had phoned to inquire about a condo earlier in the day, the Monday that she disappeared. I believe some information exists about the approximate time she left campus. It seems strange or let's say a bit unusual that she would pack her belongings in boxes and then call inquiring about availability of a condo. Monday more places would be open so possibly this was her reason for not phoning over the weekend (Sunday and Saturday) regarding housing, rentals. What seems strange is that she only made the one call and yet had all of her belongings packed. Also, that one inquiry regarding one condo was made so close to her departure time when given that she could have phoned in advance of that one day (Monday). To have a sense that one might be moving it is reasonable to pack a few items at a time, here and there....but to pack everything you own including pictures off the wall into boxes and then phone only one place about rental of a condo....then shortly take off for Grafton County NH seems more than a bit strange. Most people who plan to move ususally pack everything once they know where they will be moving. The only way one might place everything in boxes and then leave boxes in the dorm room would be if it was anticipated no more overnight stays in that room and would only be returning to pick up one's belongings. If suicide had been contemplated, why pack belongings? The runaway theory.....? Possibly one would pack belongings, have them ready for a quick pick-up. Maybe she had an idea where she might be staying but had to explore the situation further. However, the ONE phone call about possibly renting a condo does not make a whole lot of sense, especially when belongings are all packed.

less is better than more. brevity is a virtue. cyber-space is being used up too quickly. kindly count to ten (and back) before hitting the send button.

rozShoem wrote:

Bill,
Why are you so sure that Maura did not tell at least one person she was planning a trip, headed somewhere? That someone may not be coming forth for the very same reason that Maura had decided not to leave her travel itinerary with family and friends. She may have determined that she was safe because at least this one person knew of her plans. What she and that one person never suspected would happen, then occurred. Maura may have been abducted. She may not have told others she was headed to Vermont, New Hampshire or elsewhere because they might have then questioned, "Why?" Someone knows exactly what Maura's plans had been...but that person has decided for whatever reason to remain quiet.

Roz, I don´t believe you ever answered the question posed a few pages back: What makes you so certain she told anyone of her plans? Do you know something we, media and LE don´t?

rozShoem wrote:

Bill,
Thanks for removing my response to your lengthy note. Based on observations that included a damaged windshield to driver's side of the Saturn I would have had concern the driver may have sustained head trauma. In light of SBD's report that a shivering person had been at the scene,(but now absent) and it was a cold, dark winter evening,I would have had concern the driver of the Saturn might experience hypothermia. I would have called for assistance...either another officer or contacted the state police asking for their assistance which would have involved patroling the stretch of highway 10 to 15 miles in each direction, checking side of highway, ditches for footprints, tracks. Documentation of any potential evidence would have been important. The car would not have been dropped off at a local garage, but would have been impounded. Although I do not believe her family had anything to do with her disappearance, items from the Saturn would not have been returned to the family especially when the family was being told the case was "active." This seemed odd especially when Fred M. could not obtain any information regarding the case and had been informed the case was "active." It is my understanding items in the car were turned over to the family and then were retrieved 2 years later. In the meantime, Fred M.'s requests for information regarding the case were rejected. Based on license plate number I would have contacted the owner of the Saturn, Fred M. I would have noticed the UMASS-Amherst parking sticker and number and would have contacted the university. Based on the urgency of finding Maura, the university may have given me names and phone numbers of family members. I would not have concluded, "Oh well, just another drunk young person who probaby ran off to avoid being ticketed." Once I'd interviewed family members and they were insisting this is not a case involving a runaway or a suicide...I would have seriously considered what they were conveying to me and would not have waited several days before launching a serious search. Finally, if I were in charge of protocol there would be almost continuous review of 10 or 12 cases at a time. Review would involve "reviewing" cold cases...to identify what might have been done immediately, initially to have increased the probability that these would have never become cold cases. It would be important to use objectivity v subjectivity in the initial assessment of an accident scene. Sure, one can mentally visit subjective thinking but it is important to not allow it to interfere with hurting case outcome.

there*was*little*to*no*evidenc e*that*a*driver*or*passenger*w as*badly*hurt.
no*blood*no*disabled*driver*or *passenger.
with*little*to*no*cell*recepti on*driver*and/or*passenger*mig ht*have*sought*assistance*to*c all*tow*truck*from*neighboring *homes.
not*initially*a*crime*scene.

rozShoem wrote:

<quoted text>
Cold case? Here is another meaning: Cold case occurs when minimal evidence is collected or collected in such a way that the evidence is contaminated, not collected at all or attempts are made to collect it (evidence at scene)weeks or months later. This often occurs when a disappearance is automatically and immediately treated as a "runaway" or a "suicide." The initial treatment of a disappearance as a runaway or a suicide unfortunately is the rule, not the exception....this is one of the main reasons why so many "cold" cases exist. What is needed is some type of initial, multifaceted, standardized assessment of what exists. Throwing the old "oh...it's just another runaway" theory or "oh....probably another suicide" theory at the very beginning of a disappearance case, increases the difficulty of solving the case for several reasons.

So you're saying that dhe was a good runner, so she ran away. Its solved.

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/franconia-nh/...

post #4....December 1, 2009....great summary, Bill....same ole, same ole BS continues, year in and year out. it takes fortitude to endure the repetition of red herrings.
Dec 1, 2009


**Wait a minute. You need to help me here. Are we talking about murders or are we talking about disappearances or are we talking about accidents or are we talking about solved cases? I get confused when we lump them all together as some want to do. You say that it was suspicious Pauline Clarks drowning. It apparently was a drowning, why suspicious, other than to you? Case closed. Did Louise Chaput die from drowning under supposed mysterious circumstance or was it simply a murder that is being investigated? Then we look at dates, and some people like to include a death from the 60’s and I guess expect that the same person is responsible for the disappearance last year. One might be a 45 year old man who disappeared in the 1960’s and the other a 20 year old girl who disappeared 100 miles away and yet a third whose case was solved as a drowning death. It’s called a red herring because it really doesn’t look like it should be in the same pool, kinda sticks out. But, some people MUST have them all lumped together, even the solved ones, because if they don’t, the whole weak premise falls apart. So irrational thought is again King.

Bill**

rozShoem wrote:

Bill,
Why are you so sure that Maura did not tell at least one person she was planning a trip, headed somewhere? That someone may not be coming forth for the very same reason that Maura had decided not to leave her travel itinerary with family and friends. She may have determined that she was safe because at least this one person knew of her plans. What she and that one person never suspected would happen, then occurred. Maura may have been abducted. She may not have told others she was headed to Vermont, New Hampshire or elsewhere because they might have then questioned, "Why?" Someone knows exactly what Maura's plans had been...but that person has decided for whatever reason to remain quiet.

So you think that she lied to get away from everyone with no questions asked by lying about a death in the family and not telling any family including her soon to be fiancee, but still told some unknown person where she was going? Who would she do that with and that person hasn't come forward? Someone that she trusted more than mother, father, fiancee, etc and that person hasn't come forward?

The obligation remains with the person who thinks this happened to show why they believe so since it doesn't fit with any known information and sounds, well, made up. The "mystery person" who Maura told her plans to. It must be her bestest friend ever since she didn't tell mom, dad, or fiancee and lied to workers, professors, bosses and every other known person. But his "mystery person" knows where she was going but for some reason will take that knowledge to the grave with them because of a promise made to Maura? Seriously?

Do I sound skeptical?

Bill

rozShoem wrote:

<quoted text>
WHAT a vocabulary! Says a lot about you.

You best simmuh.

Double posting this, intentionally.

Anyone with interest in how a real search is done would probably be interested in watching on 20/20 tonight on ABC from 9PM to 11PM (in know that is late for some of you) "Wrong Turn". About the misadventures of the Kim family from San Francisco. It is not a happy story but it may provide some insight to what people walking around unprepared is like in the wilderness and what rescuers go through as well.

I haven't seen it. I will watch it. You can never underestimate how badly television people can screw things up and how much they can get wrong, but we will see.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

You can never underestimate how badly television people can screw things up and how much they can get wrong...
Bill

You ain't kiddin.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>less is better than more. brevity is a virtue. cyber-space is being used up too quickly. kindly count to ten (and back) before hitting the send button.

Snowy, if there were ever a posting on this forum that the idiom of “pot calling the kettle black” applied, it would be to your post above.

I mostly read and rarely post and I have yet to determine your reason for being on this particular topic of a missing woman.

Hope_Eternal wrote:

<quoted text>
Snowy, if there were ever a posting on this forum that the idiom of “pot calling the kettle black” applied, it would be to your post above.
I mostly read and rarely post and I have yet to determine your reason for being on this particular topic of a missing woman.

I see you would like an extra figyourereene.

Simm mim mim mim.
Simm mmmim mmimm mimmm
Simmm mmmmim mmmmuh dahhhnah simmadahn

Simma down dow.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Again you have to remember that when it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably going to be a duck. We do not (as a country) devote thousands and thousands of dollars and tremendous numbers of man-hours etc. for people that run from cars especially when there has been drinking involved. To do that would be a tremendous waste of resources and totally incompatible with a standard of practice that any department in the country could afford or that any citizenry would be willing to foot the tab for or any organization could properly staff for.
I have already explained in depth why we don't do that. And why we won't do that. If you want to try to go to your legislation and convince them that every drunk that runs from a car crash should be treated as a murder investigation please tell me when you are going to do that. I want to watch when the hilarity starts. The laughter would be deafening.
Bill

I believe you'd mentioned you had directed, lead one of the searches for Maura. Your description of a person as "every drunk that runs from a car crash" provides great insight as to why Maura has never been found. Let's hope that others in the search did not share your attitude. Policy SHOULD change regarding resources for local police departments. When an abandoned car is found it should be impounded, not hauled off to a local garage somewhere. When it is specifically NOT known what happened to the vehicle's driver....the car should not simply be hauled off to a local garage somewhere. You talk about the expenditure of money. Possibly had enough funding (manpower and other resources) been available within the first several hours of Maura's accident, funding for searching for her over the last 6 years might have been unnecessary. She might not have ever been found, but there may have at least been a few more clues, leads than what investigators have. Your words, "every drunk" says it all. If you see the drivers of abandoned vehicles as drunks....if you automatically assume they are all drunks, then we have a sad situation. You may be able to laugh, but quite frankly I find nothing to laugh about if this is your belief and as you say...you actually lead searches looking for the missing.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
less is better than more. brevity is a virtue. cyber-space is being used up too quickly. kindly count to ten (and back) before hitting the send button.

...then you'd better assist your close friend "Bill" with editing his lengthy note. Good luck with that.

Hope_Eternal wrote:

<quoted text>
Snowy, if there were ever a posting on this forum that the idiom of “pot calling the kettle black” applied, it would be to your post above.
I mostly read and rarely post and I have yet to determine your reason for being on this particular topic of a missing woman.

with seven posts and hope springing up eternal, i guess you hardly have a basis for comparison, one poster to another.
why so nasty, newbie?
to know me is to love me.:)

rozShoem wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe you'd mentioned you had directed, lead one of the searches for Maura. Your description of a person as "every drunk that runs from a car crash" provides great insight as to why Maura has never been found. Let's hope that others in the search did not share your attitude. Policy SHOULD change regarding resources for local police departments. When an abandoned car is found it should be impounded, not hauled off to a local garage somewhere. When it is specifically NOT known what happened to the vehicle's driver....the car should not simply be hauled off to a local garage somewhere. You talk about the expenditure of money. Possibly had enough funding (manpower and other resources) been available within the first several hours of Maura's accident, funding for searching for her over the last 6 years might have been unnecessary. She might not have ever been found, but there may have at least been a few more clues, leads than what investigators have. Your words, "every drunk" says it all. If you see the drivers of abandoned vehicles as drunks....if you automatically assume they are all drunks, then we have a sad situation. You may be able to laugh, but quite frankly I find nothing to laugh about if this is your belief and as you say...you actually lead searches looking for the missing.

as mentioned before, it is an absurdity to call upon major resources, to include search and rescue, air and land, as you might suggest, when circumstances involving a relatively minor car accident are evident. your stinking attitude reflects the relentless finger-pointing of the combined sisterhood, then as now. give it up. you don't have a clue what happened to her....so don't pretend you know how her disappearance might have been prevented.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
as mentioned before, it is an absurdity to call upon major resources, to include search and rescue, air and land, as you might suggest, when circumstances involving a relatively minor car accident are evident. your stinking attitude reflects the relentless finger-pointing of the combined sisterhood, then as now. give it up. you don't have a clue what happened to her....so don't pretend you know how her disappearance might have been prevented.

not to mention, there would be major searches almost DAILY on 112 as people leave their cars on the side of the road to hike the Appalachian Trail all the time....day and night...winter and summer....I see it all the time. Maura's car was no different.

Looking4AMoose wrote:

<quoted text>
not to mention, there would be major searches almost DAILY on 112 as people leave their cars on the side of the road to hike the Appalachian Trail all the time....day and night...winter and summer....I see it all the time. Maura's car was no different.

or leave their cars overnight in the breakdown lane on highways.
who is looking out for you? really, only your loved ones...family and friends. there cannot be an expectation that authorities be able to protect us from our ourselves, or be ever-present to protect us from the actions of others.