Maura Murray

Beating dead horses - so acccording to the mythbusters' website everthing they put into a tailpipe shot out when the engine was running. So it would have been placed there after the car was off.

Ridiculous wrote:

Spending so much time with her father on weekends is very unusual.
This is something that keeps popping up that makes me cringe. I don't know whether there was an inapropriate relationship between Maura and her Dad or not, but, there is nothing unusual about a daughter spending so much time with her father on weekends. Particularly if her parents are divorced.
So many single dads out there that have done the right thing and maintained close relationships with there kids after divorce....Hate to hear someone insinuate that it's inapropriate to do so...

Im in agreement.. I also agree with Snowy because there are many single parents out that are sickos..

As a single parent, I have a wonderful time with my daughter! But, I figure when she goes off to college in 8-10 more years, I will only prolly see her during holidays & stuff :( sad but thats life.. & I want her to have a great one, much much better than mine!! As someone else stated, I also wouldnt be drinking with her & one of her friends like I was "part of the group".. I dont drink anyway But I did when I was younger & I know its a "normal" thing at colleges..

I really just dont know where I stand in all of this.. I fully understand both sides But have personally never been in a situation like that..

Fred Garvin wrote:

Beating dead horses - so acccording to the mythbusters' website everthing they put into a tailpipe shot out when the engine was running. So it would have been placed there after the car was off.

This has been stated literally dozens of times. I have personally done this experiment decades ago with the same effect. But certain people want to believe what they want to believe.

And certainly the facts shouldn't get in the way of what they consider a great story. And a great story it becomes because the facts aren't needed.

Bill

Emmett Dove wrote:

<quoted text>
Im in agreement.. I also agree with Snowy because there are many single parents out that are sickos..
As a single parent, I have a wonderful time with my daughter! But, I figure when she goes off to college in 8-10 more years, I will only prolly see her during holidays & stuff :( sad but thats life.. & I want her to have a great one, much much better than mine!! As someone else stated, I also wouldnt be drinking with her & one of her friends like I was "part of the group".. I dont drink anyway But I did when I was younger & I know its a "normal" thing at colleges..
I really just dont know where I stand in all of this.. I fully understand both sides But have personally never been in a situation like that..

seems like you stand in a ace where you understand the appropriateness of clear boundaries.
it wS mSon who regularly referred to FM as "jerk". i believe it was mason's visceral reaction to something not being quite right by all appearances. as a defense attorney, i respected his questioning which cues were evident to him.
family, friends and peers closer to MM might know better about what was going on in her life, however. not Ruthless Jackasses on some Topix thread.:)

place
mason

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Why is your answer not a surprise. Guess I'll chalk that up to another untrue rumor.

He's an ass and an attention seeker who'll lead u into his bullshit, ignore the question and deny u an answer. He's talking out of his ass to get attention that's why he said "menstrual blood".

I never intimated that their was anything inapropriate in their relationshp, just that it was very unusual. I still would absolutely not spend a great deal of time at the bar with my daughter and her friend.

Getting her a new car is fine but I do not believe that ever happened. I do believe that he got loaded with them and he could not drive. The fact at he slept through her arrival back to the motel and some of the telphone conversations.

Spend as much time with your children as possible but make sure that it is quality time or, perhaps, live to regret it.

WTH-the-original wrote:

And then there are some that don't get the fact that she DID run away. She was int he process of running away when she had the accident. And to that ends she lied to faculty and friends to create a story that gave her at least several days to not be bothered by anyone. Was that time to get permanently lost, or to commit suicide with no worries that she would be caught? I don't know but it certainly gave her a large window of opportunity to do whatever she had planned. The car crash, absolutely screwed those plans up. May have pushed an already fragile person over the edge. Was she rational, I don't know, is it rational to run from a simple car accident in winter, in an area like that? Stupid? No, she wasn't stupid. Some might even call her cagey. Was she in a fragile state, I certainly believe she was.
Bill

Gee, "Bill" waht do you "KNOW" about this that no one else KNOWS? You absolutetly do not know for a fact that she ran away. You know nothing of the sort. Is it possible? Of course it is. Is it an established fact? By no means whatsoever.

Welcome, anyone who cares about what happened to Maura. Please understand that if you have any ideas, or even facts, to contradict the insistence of some here that she ran away from school and home either committed suicide or fled the scene of an accident and perished in the woods. No other ideas are facts are welcome or permissible here. There is zero interest or concern from those people for Maura or anyone who cares about her, and interest only in padding their own far too fragile egos. Any attempt at discussion here continues, after 9 years, to be a total waste of time.

On the other hand, the total insistence of some that Maura could not be and was not a victim of a crime does make one wonder about their insistence, almost as if someone knows something that they really don't want uncovered. I guess I could understand skepticism about the possibility, but the outright refusal to consider it and the level of vitriol directed toward anyone who even asks the question seems very, very odd.

chris fowler

hey "Jiffy" avoid and deflect attention much? just curious. thanks for proving my point.

sophie bean wrote:

Welcome, anyone who cares about what happened to Maura. Please understand that if you have any ideas, or even facts, to contradict the insistence of some here that she ran away from school and home either committed suicide or fled the scene of an accident and perished in the woods. No other ideas are facts are welcome or permissible here. There is zero interest or concern from those people for Maura or anyone who cares about her, and interest only in padding their own far too fragile egos. Any attempt at discussion here continues, after 9 years, to be a total waste of time.
On the other hand, the total insistence of some that Maura could not be and was not a victim of a crime does make one wonder about their insistence, almost as if someone knows something that they really don't want uncovered. I guess I could understand skepticism about the possibility, but the outright refusal to consider it and the level of vitriol directed toward anyone who even asks the question seems very, very odd.

I don't get it. I always thought she ran away. Didn't she lie about leaving and didn't tell anyone she was going and took off to NH rather quickly instead of waiting till morning?
That's running away in my opinion. What else could you call it?
I think it's odd to say she didn't run away.

sopie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
Gee, "Bill" waht do you "KNOW" about this that no one else KNOWS? You absolutetly do not know for a fact that she ran away. You know nothing of the sort. Is it possible? Of course it is. Is it an established fact? By no means whatsoever.

SB really? So calling friends/professors and lying about a death in the family so she could secret herself away from school for days while driving hundreds of miles away from where she was supposed to be and not telling boyfriend/family isn't running away?

I think some might disagree.

Bill

I did not say that she did not run away. I have never said that was not possible. I am saying that you do not KNOW that's what happened, period.

sophie bean wrote:

I did not say that she did not run away. I have never said that was not possible. I am saying that you do not KNOW that's what happened, period.

I'll try to help you again with this. This is what we know:
She called her friends/professors and lied about a death in the family so she could secret herself away from school for days (at least) while driving hundreds of miles away from where she was supposed to be and not telling boyfriend/family?

By definition that is running away.

Bill

sophie bean wrote:

Welcome, anyone who cares about what happened to Maura. Please understand that if you have any ideas, or even facts, to contradict the insistence of some here that she ran away from school and home either committed suicide or fled the scene of an accident and perished in the woods. No other ideas are facts are welcome or permissible here. There is zero interest or concern from those people for Maura or anyone who cares about her, and interest only in padding their own far too fragile egos. Any attempt at discussion here continues, after 9 years, to be a total waste of time.
On the other hand, the total insistence of some that Maura could not be and was not a victim of a crime does make one wonder about their insistence, almost as if someone knows something that they really don't want uncovered. I guess I could understand skepticism about the possibility, but the outright refusal to consider it and the level of vitriol directed toward anyone who even asks the question seems very, very odd.

SB hasn't contributed here for many months so she might need a refresher on how this actually works. You can obviously repeat any reasonable theory and call it that, a theory, while backing it up with evidence. Has been done by many with nary a cross word. Well except by some that don't understand the logical process. You may also spout bullshit and give no evidence and expect many people to spank you for spouting bullshit. You may also spout pure unadulterated speculation and stating it as such can also go on your way with not a scratch. Some might ask why you think that, but hopefully you would have thought far enough ahead that you would have an answer. And the last category is asking questions that have some basis in logic. They are always appreciated but be aware you might not get an answer because there is a lot in this case that is unknown. Now the spouters that try to crouch questions in a manner to make them appear as fact (we have a couple of those people here), have also gotten body slammed in the past. The reason is that there is so much that is not known, several of us don't want to contaminate it with harebrained theories and gross unsubstantiated rumor. That doesn't help Maura or anyone else. And the people that have been here, try to make sure evidence creep doesn't happen. It is unfortunate that there are some who think it is their right to turn Maura's disappearance into a Lifetime made for TV movie by making "facts" up. Especially making up "facts" on the backs of people who had nothing to do with her, except in some cases to help her. There have been people here in the past whose entire function was to accuse and point fingers at people who had done nothing except to try to help. And some locals have become the subject of a witch hunt by some. That type of activity was something that eventually wasn't tolerated in the past and I suspect still won't be tolerated anymore. Again, one has to wonder if we would even be talking about this if Maura had just stayed at the car like she should have.

Oh, and those that want unfettered access to any unsubstantiated half-assed theory that they want to bellow about. Always has Webslothes. A kinder, gentler place were any half-wit with their mommy's computer can speculate to their hearts content. It is a place that it is possible to spout unsubstantiated bullshit and have others agree with you, and add to the height of the bullshit, rather than using the scientific method that questions how you derived that theory.

Welcome to Topix.

Bill

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll try to help you again with this. This is what we know:
She called her friends/professors and lied about a death in the family so she could secret herself away from school for days (at least) while driving hundreds of miles away from where she was supposed to be and not telling boyfriend/family?
By definition that is running away.
Bill

Like I said. A little more help for you. By definition:

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn...

Noun

S:(n) running away (the act of leaving (without permission) the place you are expected to be)

Bill

ob·nox·ious


adjective
1.
highly objectionable or offensive; odious: obnoxious behavior.

2.
annoying or objectionable due to being a showoff or attracting undue attention to oneself: an obnoxious little brat.

3.
Archaic. exposed or liable to harm, evil, or anything objectionable.

4.
Obsolete . liable to punishment or censure; reprehensible.

By definition

Mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
Ha ha! I love you!

Some things are better said....than NOT..!

Thank You

Tang Zoi wrote:

ob·nox·ious
adjective
1.
highly objectionable or offensive; odious: obnoxious behavior.
2.
annoying or objectionable due to being a showoff or attracting undue attention to oneself: an obnoxious little brat.
3.
Archaic. exposed or liable to harm, evil, or anything objectionable.
4.
Obsolete . liable to punishment or censure; reprehensible.
By definition

Tang. I learned long ago you shouldn't put labels like that on yourself. People will realize what you are like by just reading your posts.

Bill