|
Jenkins
Greenfield, MA
|
Wowzer the real one wrote: <quoted text>
What baffles me is that so many women ride bikes and walk that very same area every summer. They ride 112 and 116 and make it safely to where ever they are going. I've walked that area before and have never felt afraid. To have someone disappear in such a short window of time is almost beyond belief.
It's apparent you have been researching. Good for you. There's a HUGE difference between what you're describing and MM's situation. Someone wlaing their dog or riding a bike is a local, near there house. A young girl from Mass, out on the road all by herself after an accident or a car breaking down is completely different. That is a VERY vulnerable position to be in for anyone, particularly a young girl. At that point she would've needed a ride, and it was so cold that she was probably looking for a ride, probably thinking what many others are thinking, what are the chances of a murderer passing by right now. But rmember that the north country has a long history of women who are out on the road alone and vulnerable like that going missing and ending up murdered. It's been happening for years, how is it so hard to believe that it didn't happen here. Just because you see people rriding their bikes and walking their dogs does not mean that MM still didn't go missing from you front yard, and that she didn't get abducted. If you go strictly by the numbers her being abducted is by far te most likely thing to have happened to her. It is very rare for a girl who's missing more than a week to be found lost in the woods, it's extremely rare for a girl who's missing to be found to be a suicide too. After that few days threshold, it's lie 3 days to a week, after that threshold is crossed it is most likely that girl got abducted and murdered. Sad but true fact about this society. Young women get murdered all the time, much more often than they run away from their life or get lost in the woods, that's for sure. THen when you consider the area and how long of a history there is of women on the road alone being murdered, then that leaves a very strong likelihood that MM got abducted and klllled.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
whatif wrote: <quoted text>
what fascinates me more about maura's disappearance than others is the seemingly improbable circumstances of her disappearance – that she could "vanish" in such a small window of time with the number of witnesses in proximity to the scene, and with the numbers of emergency responders converging on the location of her stranded vehicle. and then, with all of the interesting tidbits about the condition in which her vehicle was found and no trace or evidence of her beyond an approximate 100 yard scent trail and a specious siting of someone that might be her four to five miles east of the scene that night, which is only recounted a couple months later to investigators.
all that, and i also feel a small kinship with maura and how privately she held her feelings and thoughts. the impression i have from all i have read and watched (in terms of articles, forums, shows and interviews) is that maura appeared to have kept much of her true feelings undisclosed to most people, including her family and friends. i didn't know her, but if this is true, i have a similar trait of keeping things private from even those closest to me. so, whether based on fact or not, i don't know, but i do feel empathetic about this aspect of her that i likely don't share with other missing persons. thanks for your reply. the biggest piece of intrigue for me is the suddenness of her disappearance; that piece of information was immediately conveyed in the first reports via the media. sliding off the road in New England with damage to a vehicle is not an unusual occurrence; evidence of alcohol consumption is of greater concern; it can be presumed the vehicle occupants are evading a DUI. how could it be possible that emergency responders would know who was immediately missing from the vehicle? or that Fred Murray's daughter would disappear? hindsight is always 20/20. Taurus-borns guard their privacy with intensity. i don't necessarily understand, share or value that trait, but i can appreciate it as another way of protecting and processing one's emotions. please continue to share with all of us.:)
|
|
mcsmom
Vernon Rockville, CT
|
WW had a more than a few posts with the random cap.
|
|
Maruchan
Bowdoinham, ME
|
JWB wrote: <quoted text>
Talk about books, sewing or whatever but If you have nothing to say about the topic then maybe either be kind with your conversation or say nothing at all. Very next post: JWB wrote: <quoted text>
Ridiculous is an embarrassment to Maura Murrays forum Very next post: JWB wrote: ... My advice is to dump the old bag Snowy and re examine why you came here in the first place and what this forum was started for.... We need a "smacking my head" emoticon here.
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Goodness gracious, I go out for a little while and JWB and Bobby get into the bug juice something fierce! Granny, your a lunatic okay? Please review your history. It's right there in black and white.I haven't said a word to you, or any of your warped personalities in quite some time and you come here swinging at me. Do you not understand that your support group here consists of Bob Jenkins and Findmaura??!! Talk about trying to fly with Eagles! Bob, let me give you an example of an idiot; A person who spends half of his lengthy post to a person who is stark raving mad, explaining what's wrong with another posters posts and then the last half of the same post insisting that he doesn't read the posts he just critiqued! It's kind of sad really. Amy researches; I don't classify her with you morons. I have read all of her stuff and I do think she's made sensible contributions. I did have issues with her support of JWB in the whole stalking Wowzer situation, but, I believe she was more trying to show some compassion to a mentally unstabile person than anything else. Yes, JWB, keep doing what you do as Bob Jenkins say's...This one little bit of advice right there tells you the state of Bob's mind.. ; )
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Judged:
1
Jenkins wrote: <quoted text>
There's a HUGE difference between what you're describing and MM's situation. Someone wlaing their dog or riding a bike is a local, near there house.
A young girl from Mass, out on the road all by herself after an accident or a car breaking down is completely different. That is a VERY vulnerable position to be in for anyone, particularly a young girl. At that point she would've needed a ride, and it was so cold that she was probably looking for a ride, probably thinking what many others are thinking, what are the chances of a murderer passing by right now.
But rmember that the north country has a long history of women who are out on the road alone and vulnerable like that going missing and ending up murdered. It's been happening for years, how is it so hard to believe that it didn't happen here. Just because you see people rriding their bikes and walking their dogs does not mean that MM still didn't go missing from you front yard, and that she didn't get abducted.
If you go strictly by the numbers her being abducted is by far te most likely thing to have happened to her. It is very rare for a girl who's missing more than a week to be found lost in the woods, it's extremely rare for a girl who's missing to be found to be a suicide too. After that few days threshold, it's lie 3 days to a week, after that threshold is crossed it is most likely that girl got abducted and murdered. Sad but true fact about this society. Young women get murdered all the time, much more often than they run away from their life or get lost in the woods, that's for sure.
THen when you consider the area and how long of a history there is of women on the road alone being murdered, then that leaves a very strong likelihood that MM got abducted and klllled. Maura Murray, at age 21, was a young woman; an adult. the evidence of open alcohol container(s) is certainly something that would make anyone vulnerable to mishap. and, a driver under the influence could most certainly compromise the safety of the public.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Maruchan wrote: <quoted text>
Very next post:
<quoted text>
Very next post:
<quoted text>
We need a "smacking my head" emoticon here. or a good mattress to rest upon. i am in the market for a new "queen-size" for a guest room. some good sales in February. different than "Queen" - love Queen. still, i get your point. an exorcism may soon be in order, but not for you.
|
|
Jenkins
Southbury, CT
|
Judged:
1
Tang Zoi wrote: Who's who here.....?
Cyberlaw....Heron in the Snow....BJack.....Suru...... Ehh? What the heck does this post mean? If you don't mind me asking
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Bill, It is nice to hear from you and I agree with, and concur with your excellent response to Whatiff. We both now I had to learn the hard way concerning researching this case! I have tried and tried to reason with those that are employed at the fruit farm that post here. It's like trying to reason with a three year old in the middle of a temper tantrum. I think we are all so fortunate to have a dim lightbulb and a gender challenged person with more personalities than the original Sybil explain our motives, knowledge and contributions for us. One who is so closed minded that he can't even fathom that there may be another scenario to Maura's disappearance than the one he espouses and another who spends two pages worth of posts discussing someones sugar lips and anatomical proportions, then after finally getting slapped for it, wants to insist that it was he/she that was affronted and was only defending his/her self.. Enough serious talk, let's get down to the usual sunday binge drinking interaction with Granny. Bob, feel free to fire up the bong and pitch in here okay?
|
|
Jenkins
Southbury, CT
|
Snowy- You musst know there's a big difference between having a drink and being intoxicated. This is why the law give you up to a .08 BAC level before you're considered legally drunk. Having a drink or 22 does not put most people above this limit, especially if they regularly drink, which maura obviously did. There is evidence of an open container, which is an infraction, not an arrest, but there is nothing to indicate she was actually intooxicated. the SBD, bills personal hero, who actually spoke to her specifically said that she was NOT intoxicated. The other witnesses who saw her describe a person who is walking just fine, even on the skippery ground on the side of the road, no slips or falls, no staggering or looking off balance in any way whatsoever. Absoutely none of the classic signs that indicate someone is intoxicated. If you actually read an analyze what the witnesses said, instead of going by your ass backwards assumptions you would know that she was not intoxicated. Big difference between having a drink or two and being intoxicated, bbig difference. You really need to stop stating your assumptions as fact.
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Jenkins wrote: <quoted text>
Ehh? What the heck does this post mean? If you don't mind me asking Ehh? Enunciate Bobby, for the sake of God sounds like you're choking..Oh yes, you ignore my posts and only attack when my back is turned. Hey, I know you aren't listening, but, I still want to discuss your wonderful and informative expose on victim type. Remember that one? Please, come back to the table, let us break bread and drink "whine" and discuss the groups of predators that congregate outside of Hooters..If only all of these " hot chics" had a registered seeing eye dog to protect them, ehh?
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Jenkins wrote: Snowy- You musst know there's a big difference between having a drink and being intoxicated. This is why the law give you up to a .08 BAC level before you're considered legally drunk. Having a drink or 22 does not put most people above this limit, especially if they regularly drink, which maura obviously did.
There is evidence of an open container, which is an infraction, not an arrest, but there is nothing to indicate she was actually intooxicated. the SBD, bills personal hero, who actually spoke to her specifically said that she was NOT intoxicated. The other witnesses who saw her describe a person who is walking just fine, even on the skippery ground on the side of the road, no slips or falls, no staggering or looking off balance in any way whatsoever. Absoutely none of the classic signs that indicate someone is intoxicated.
If you actually read an analyze what the witnesses said, instead of going by your ass backwards assumptions you would know that she was not intoxicated.
Big difference between having a drink or two and being intoxicated, bbig difference.
You really need to stop stating your assumptions as fact. Bobby, This is a much nicer approach than " Epic Bitch". You may have to use this gentle approach a little longer though before you earn back all of her respect. I do commend you on following JWB's advice concerning gathering Bee's with honey..Did you really lecture her on stating assumptions as fact?! I would like to query the group here; Is it possible that Bob Jenkins is actually just another one of Granny's personalities? I am seeing more and more of the very peculiar psychological patterns that Granny presents in each of his posts. Considering his paranoid tangent of a few weeks ago, wherein he stated that people were usurping peoples monikers, or even going so far as to state that people were quite literally eating other people, there is valid cause for concern here. Ehh?
|
|
“"Johnny Tango "”
Since: Dec 12
Franconia, NH
|
Please wait...
Judged:
1
1
Jenkins wrote: <quoted text>
Ehh? What the heck does this post mean? If you don't mind me asking Websleuths posters from times of old.....I smell the blood of an
|
|
Since: Feb 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
JWB wrote: but If you have nothing to say about the topic then maybe either be kind with your conversation or say nothing at all. THEN..... JWB wrote: My advice is to dump the old bag Snowy and re examine why you came here in the first place and what this forum was started for.. Cough, cough...hypocrite... Secondly, it's not only incredibly rude to call Snowy an old bag, but it really shows something about you, that you need to do so. It shows that you are low-rent. You know, without class. Sans couth. I'd say 'Why don't you man up?' But, given your penchant for the Granny persona, it seems almost disingenuous.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
whatif wrote: <quoted text>
well, to be fair, i don't consider myself having finished yet, so i'll probably go dark again for another several weeks while i continue reading. i do, however, feel that i will be adequately informed enough to know when i am posting new or at least original thoughts on maura's disappearance by sheer fact of having read through and researched most available online resources.
and, for the record, i have had no prior affiliation with any of the aforementioned forums before posting here, am in no way affiliated with the murray family or with locals in the area of maura's disappearance or with amherst and umass. additionally, i am not a journalist undercover, or working with one, nor am i involved with any of the investigations – past or present – into maura's disappearance.
what i am is just an ordinary person who is intrigued with the story and with a personality quirk of wanting to know every last by of information about anything that interests me. occasionally that extends to stories like maura's disappearance and wanting to know and organize all available information into a coherent whole. the chances of that happening in this case are small, but the story still intrigues me enough to want to try. Snowy and wowzer can tell you what they think but from what I remember. If you got through the first two years that will probably be enough. Everything after that I think you will discover becomes what we refer to as "the windmill". The same conversations with the same results, over and over and over. And the funniest part, I think you will find, is that the results are that there just isn't enough information to solve this. But it is a full time job keeping nut jobs from adding information who are trying to make this disappearance into a lifetime movie. There is lots of room for discussion, no room for the creation of "facts". Oh and about the disappearance. It is amazingly easy to disappear. As a test, I suggest you watch someone jog by your house. You will be amazed how soon they "disappear". Now imagine if you were actively trying to not be seen. And did Jenkins actually say 22 drinks?? Was he out during what "drunk means" day during his criminal science classes? There is an actual legal definition. Just because someone may be use to drinking, that doesn't change their blood alcohol level. A little more than two drinks in an hour for her would almost certainly put her over that level. And their blood alcohol level is all that matters. Oh and I forgot, a big hello to Maruchan and Simply Sarcasm also. Bill
|
|
“"Dancing with wolves"”
Since: Oct 10
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Jenkins wrote: Snowy- You musst know there's a big difference between having a drink and being intoxicated. This is why the law give you up to a .08 BAC level before you're considered legally drunk. Having a drink or 22 does not put most people above this limit, especially if they regularly drink, which maura obviously did.
There is evidence of an open container, which is an infraction, not an arrest, but there is nothing to indicate she was actually intooxicated. the SBD, bills personal hero, who actually spoke to her specifically said that she was NOT intoxicated. The other witnesses who saw her describe a person who is walking just fine, even on the skippery ground on the side of the road, no slips or falls, no staggering or looking off balance in any way whatsoever. Absoutely none of the classic signs that indicate someone is intoxicated.
If you actually read an analyze what the witnesses said, instead of going by your ass backwards assumptions you would know that she was not intoxicated.
Big difference between having a drink or two and being intoxicated, bbig difference.
You really need to stop stating your assumptions as fact. Do you think that an open container in the car and evidence of a possible drink that the driver had in a bottle with pink liquid splashed inside the car would be nothing to worry about? I believe the police would not take it lightly if they found someone sipping even one drink while driving. And I doubt the box of wine in plain view would have helped the situation. Who were the witnesses that saw her and said she was walking just fine on the slippery road?
|
|
“"Dancing with wolves"”
Since: Oct 10
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Ridiculous wrote: <quoted text>
Bobby,
This is a much nicer approach than " Epic Bitch". You may have to use this gentle approach a little longer though before you earn back all of her respect. I do commend you on following JWB's advice concerning gathering Bee's with honey..Did you really lecture her on stating assumptions as fact?!
I would like to query the group here; Is it possible that Bob Jenkins is actually just another one of Granny's personalities?
I am seeing more and more of the very peculiar psychological patterns that Granny presents in each of his posts. Considering his paranoid tangent of a few weeks ago, wherein he stated that people were usurping peoples monikers, or even going so far as to state that people were quite literally eating other people, there is valid cause for concern here. Ehh? I think it's a great possibility.
|
|
Since: Feb 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Jenkins wrote: Snowy- You musst know there's a big difference between having a drink and being intoxicated. This is why the law give you up to a .08 BAC level before you're considered legally drunk. Having a drink or 22 does not put most people above this limit, especially if they regularly drink, which maura obviously did.
There is evidence of an open container, which is an infraction, not an arrest, but there is nothing to indicate she was actually intooxicated. the SBD, bills personal hero, who actually spoke to her specifically said that she was NOT intoxicated. The other witnesses who saw her describe a person who is walking just fine, even on the skippery ground on the side of the road, no slips or falls, no staggering or looking off balance in any way whatsoever. Absoutely none of the classic signs that indicate someone is intoxicated.
If you actually read an analyze what the witnesses said, instead of going by your ass backwards assumptions you would know that she was not intoxicated.
Big difference between having a drink or two and being intoxicated, bbig difference.
You really need to stop stating your assumptions as fact. Jenkins, This is one of your arguments that I don't quite grasp. Why is it that you think she wasn't intoxicated? I'm not saying I know conclusively either way - I simply don't. But I would hazard a guess that she was, given the limited information that we have on the issue. Do you acknowledge that it's more likely than not, that she was intoxicated, or, given that no empirical evidence can be ascertained regarding this, do you discard it as a likelyhood, out of hand? I think an a priori argument could be made regarding her ingesting alcohol, but that's just me. And, of course,up for debate.
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Bob is now taking the high ground, much like his mentor did a while back. He is in that particular phase of moral altitude that he can't see his posting history anymore and so it appears to us mere terrapins that he is in denial. This is not the case, he has transcended his past and will from this point forward be known as soaring Buteo (buzzard) or flapping ass for those that insist on nick names. In this new persona, all talk of " Ass bacwards ASSumptions will only be allowed if one can state the particular measurements and relative hotness of the ASSumptions one wishes to discuss. It is further encouraged to pack these ASSumptions into a pair of tight jeans and deliver them to Bob post haste as everyone knows they are prone to predation.....
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Jenkins wrote: Snowy- You musst know there's a big difference between having a drink and being intoxicated. This is why the law give you up to a .08 BAC level before you're considered legally drunk. Having a drink or 22 does not put most people above this limit, especially if they regularly drink, which maura obviously did.
There is evidence of an open container, which is an infraction, not an arrest, but there is nothing to indicate she was actually intooxicated. the SBD, bills personal hero, who actually spoke to her specifically said that she was NOT intoxicated. The other witnesses who saw her describe a person who is walking just fine, even on the skippery ground on the side of the road, no slips or falls, no staggering or looking off balance in any way whatsoever. Absoutely none of the classic signs that indicate someone is intoxicated.
If you actually read an analyze what the witnesses said, instead of going by your ass backwards assumptions you would know that she was not intoxicated.
Big difference between having a drink or two and being intoxicated, bbig difference.
You really need to stop stating your assumptions as fact. the evidence....EVIDENCE.....of an open container, a crash, and person / persons having left the scene might suggest to authorities a DUI. that would be azz-forward thinking.
|
|
|
Dating
