Maura Murray

I think that now that jerky 'boy' has come back I will leave again. I really can't take his little boy antics, I feel like I have schooled him soooo many times and it never does any good whatsoever.

I do miss posting here, it was so much better before he came along. <<Sigh>>

Such is life, see you later all!

If you don't understand that part of the law that you're quoting is talking about after being in an accident with another car or damaging somEone else's property idk what to tell you. I find it very hard to believe that you don't understand what that law says, it's pretty clear. Can you just not admit when you're wrong?

They clearly are not talking about a one car accident in that phrase you quoted. A way you can tell that they definitely aren't is in the next section of that statute that deals with a SINGLE CAR accident, once where nobody else's car or other property is damaged. It clearly states that in a single car accident that there was more than $1,000 of damage the driver or the owner of the car must report the accident within 15 days UNLESS an officer is present.

It doesn't matter if the owner of the car is driving or not, the laws for conduct after an accident stay the same. Listen to what you're saying, the person borrowed somebody's car & if they crash it they have to look around for the owner of the car they borrowed or go to the nearest police station?? What are you even talking about? You realize that makes no sense right? They know where the person is, back home or wherever they borrowed the car from.
Obviously if you borrow someone's car and you crash it into a snowbank you dont have to look around for the owner of the car you borrowed! Lol, come on dude.
If you crash a car you're borrowing you're expected to follow the same exact rules that the owner would have to follow.
You're completely misinterpreting the statute, read the whole thing in its entirety

FrmLE wrote:

Sure jenky, here you go. Just curious, will you apologize for your comments a few pages back regarding the violations/ Crime issue that I clarified? I think you will not..

No you're right, I did accidentally mischarecterize what you said in my response to your post, I'm not afraid to admit I was wrong. I definitely misinterpreted what you said thinking you said she committed 2 crimes. And you're right, while she didn't committ 2 crimes she did break the law once with the open container.

As can be read in the statute it was clearly legal for her to leave that scene, particularly after waiting 20 minutes. That's why they can't even make it a law that you have to wait for police after a one car accident. What if you're in the middle of nowhere? How could you even know if LE was called.
How long are you supposed to wait until you can leave the scene? Where's the law on that? How long are you suppose to wait 4 hours?

Jenkins wrote:

If you don't understand that part of the law that you're quoting is talking about after being in an accident with another car or damaging somEone else's property idk what to tell you.

I does not say someone elses property. It says, property.

The law is wirtten very specifically, if it meant someone elses property it would say someone elses property. It does not.

Do you know how I know the way this law is applied? Because I have arrested, prosecuted this statute dozens and dozens of times. I know it without googling it and trying to read it.

Read what it says, it is very clear.

You are wrong, what else can I say.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
i'll venture a guess...i don't have the findlaw content in front of me...
damage to personal property.
even more so if MM was not the driver.
it gets sticky, yes?
regardless, it is the responsible course of action not to flee / leave / run. alcohol in an open container(s) was present.

not if tou are being abducted.

Jenkins wrote:

If you don't understand that part of the law that you're quoting is talking about after being in an accident with another car or damaging somEone else's property idk what to tell you.

Let me help you, regarding the difference between 'PROPERTY' and 'PROPERTY OF ANOTHER'.

634:2 Criminal Mischief:

A person is guilty of criminal mischief who, having no right to do so nor any reasonable basis for belief of having such a right, purposely or recklessly damages property of another.

Notice? PROPERTY OF ANOTHER.

264:25 Conduct After Accident:

The driver of a vehicle who knows or should have known that he or she has just been involved in any accident which resulted in death, personal injury or damages to property,

Notice? PROPERTY.

See the difference? If they meant someone elses property. they would have said property of another. It does not say that.

Learning anything yet?

FrmLE wrote:

<quoted text>
Here jenky, just for you I copied my earlier post. Maybe read it and consider for a second that people do NOT ALWAYS DECIDE WHAT TO DO IN AN INSTANT.

Making decisions like whether you're gonna take the week off from school to go to NH & lie to your teachers about a death in the family, those decisions take time. Many decisions take time.

But the decision to run because you're drunk & you just crashed your car? How long does that generally take? 10 seconds probably.
The thing is her that you lost in the woods people base your whole theory on the ASSUMPTION that she was drunk and running away from the cops so therefore she was not in the proper state of mind and making rash decisions, like running away from the car.
If the witnesses say she crashed, say there for a minute or 2 and then grabbed her shit and left in a hurry, I would agree with that assessment. But that's not the case here at all. Honestly she did exactly what many, if not most people would do.

You crash, you survey the damage and try to use your cell phone. If you don't get signal you sit there for 20 minutes & if the cops don't show up within 20 minutes of crashing you assume they personably sent coming & you grab your shit and leave. Some people may go to a nearby house but I don't know of any girls that would just walk up to a house at night. Most people would rather take the ride from the seemingly nice person that stopped to help.
Another reason she would rather take a ride than go to a nearby house issue would still be stuck without a ride if she went to a house nearby. But If she caught a ride from someone who said they were going to Lincoln or n Woodstock then she wouldn't need a ride. She could go get a hotel & then call for a tow later. Who was she gonna call for a ride up there in Nh? I doubt she wanted to call her parents at that point. She probably figured she'd hitch a ride, get a room & have the car towed in the morning.
That's logical, that's what most people would probably do in that situation. Shes not gonna think the person who stops is gonna abduct her, what are the chances?
Bottom line is she sat there for almost 20 minutes, that's more than enough. Maybe she should've waited longer but who's to say, that 20 minutes could've felt like a much longer time for her too.

& people take time to make decisions but the 'I'm drunk and not thinking right so I'm gonna run into the woods' decision probably doesn't take almost 20 minutes to make. Eithe your scared of the cops or you're not, you don't sit there for that long thinking about it If you're that scared of the cops.

BillNH wrote:

Interesting that Julie Murray said "FINDING my sister is still the number one priority."
The choice of words implies, to me at least, that she does not believe she is dead. Finding my sisters body, finding her killer, finding who took her...seem like more suitable things to say if she was convinced MM was abducted and killed or even died of exposure in the woods.
And "number one priority"? What else is going on that may put 'finding her sister' on the back burner?
Very curious.

Bill NH "FINDING my sister is still number one priority." HER SISTER HAS BEEN MISSING FOR A LITTLE OVER 9 YEARS. The choice of words mean nothing except she wants her sister found. Nowhwere in her statement does she imply that Maura is still alive. I believe you are Renner or JWB. You claimed that you moved up into the area a year after Maura disappeared. Also stated that you are friends with the new owner that bought RFS house in 2009.In one of your posting you say the last search for Maura was done in 2012 with the cadaver dogs and in another posting you state the last search with cadaver dogs was done in 2010. You have also stated that 1 search was done with equipment and the next search was done with different equipment. When you claimed these people were your friends I asked what equipment was used you stated you did not know. Then in another posting when I asked a question you stated that you only traveled that road 5 times a year. Your full of crap.

I'm done with this fool. Good luck fellow posters!

FrmLE wrote:

I'm done with this fool. Good luck fellow posters!

Could you please answer one more question? Where you actively involved in investigating Mauras case? Thank you.

I can easily tell by quoting the codes that simple & quick that frmLE has a background in law enforcement..

People have brought up my past, so I know a thing or two about cops.. & if he wasnt one or have some intense knowledge (which shows) than ill give you all a wooden nickle!

I was brought up to respect authority figures, Hypothetically speaking even IF I done bad things, I always showed utmost respect for authority.. Being honest with them goes a long ways! I got out of much in my youth by just being 100% honest with said officers..

I would have waited about 25-30 minutes, put a white rag in my window, tried to move it if it were blocking traffic, & left my insurance card in the windshield wipers..

I havent drank since college & never drove with an open container (bad offense in VA) But, I would have probably ran in the same situation.. Just being honest.. If I were on probation, turning 22 in a month, its been a horrible 48-72 hours,(idk everything else), but had I been drinking, I would have ran..

FrmLE wrote:

I'm done with this fool. Good luck fellow posters!

I would have to say that's game-set-match to FrmLE.

Bill

anyone ever stay at a hotel for a couple days and NOT engage the additional security on the doors at night (deadbolt and/or door latch) before going to sleep? the ones that cannot be bypassed with the standard hotel key or key card? if maura returned to her dad's hotel room in the middle of the night and was able to let herself in with a second key without disturbing fred, he would have to have not engaged any of the secondary security locks on the door. he was expecting her to come back that night, i think.

for the record, i don't believe anything inappropriate happened that night when maura went to her dad's hotel room. i too am a parent and wouldn't have any issue sharing a room, even half my bed, with one of my kids.

i recently had an extended stay at a hotel. every night, i latched the deadbolt and the swinging latch. i just crossed post #25000 and the topic was maura at her dad's hotel. i just realized that in all the discussion about the hotel room that night, i've never read the observation i just posted above. maybe it has been mentioned before, but if so, i have yet to read it.

re Maura being "a child of the child of a cousin" of Citigirl's. To put this in perhaps a more clear perspective, I have a cousin we'll call Joy. I know Joy well, her mother and mine are sisters and Joy and I saw a lot of each other growing up. Joy now has a daughter we'll call Amy. I have not met Amy as years and distance have intervened. Amy has been married and has a daughter we'll call Ann -- I heard about the birth and that's all I really know of Ann.

But if Ann disappeared, I'd care. Not per se because I personally know Ann or even know Ann's mother Amy. But my dear first cousin Joy is Ann's grandmother and Joy is beside herself with fear and grief, for herself and her daughter Amy over Amy's missing child.

Yes, I'd care. Some families are closer than others. I'd do whatever I could to help, and I'd consider myself Family even though I've not personally met Amy or Ann.

whatif wrote:

anyone ever stay at a hotel for a couple days and NOT engage the additional security on the doors at night (deadbolt and/or door latch) before going to sleep? the ones that cannot be bypassed with the standard hotel key or key card? if maura returned to her dad's hotel room in the middle of the night and was able to let herself in with a second key without disturbing fred, he would have to have not engaged any of the secondary security locks on the door. he was expecting her to come back that night, i think.
for the record, i don't believe anything inappropriate happened that night when maura went to her dad's hotel room. i too am a parent and wouldn't have any issue sharing a room, even half my bed, with one of my kids.
i recently had an extended stay at a hotel. every night, i latched the deadbolt and the swinging latch. i just crossed post #25000 and the topic was maura at her dad's hotel. i just realized that in all the discussion about the hotel room that night, i've never read the observation i just posted above. maybe it has been mentioned before, but if so, i have yet to read it.

great point. good, common sense re hotel door latches.
still, i/we have never offered to share a hotel/motel room to our kids while they were in college, nor would they have accepted, given they had preferred places to stay on or off campus with friends.
any number of exceptions are possible, to include gathering with family at an inn for an occasion, but that MM disappeared shortly thereafter, and her father does not put forward a possible reason why she packed up her belongings and used an untruth to excuse herself from academics at UMASS, seems oddly unexplained, even by car shopping.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>not if tou are being abducted.

her leaving is not evidenced by abduction...that is, being forcibly taken against her will...as by sounds of a struggle or items strewn or left behind in or around the road.
and if she accepted a ride, it has not been proven she was abducted.
her immaculate disappearance, except for the splashed alcohol, must be considered in the light of her personal relationships and activities at the time of her disappearance, imho.

FrmLE wrote:

I think she definitely tried to use her cell phone, the witness reported seeing a red light in the car, I think she made commment about it being a possible cigarette or cell phone.
Since Maura did not smoke, it was most likely the red light on her cell phone indicating no service.
I have never seriously considered that she would have walked away to try to get cell service, though that certainly is a possibility.
I don't see any other likely possibility other than she was trying to avoid contact with the police, for whatever reason.
What her intent was after she left the car is hard to discern, but considering that she had plenty of assistance available to her in the immediate area tells me that she wanted to avoid contact with anyone for a time.

agree.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>Bill NH "FINDING my sister is still number one priority." HER SISTER HAS BEEN MISSING FOR A LITTLE OVER 9 YEARS. The choice of words mean nothing except she wants her sister found. Nowhwere in her statement does she imply that Maura is still alive. I believe you are Renner or JWB. You claimed that you moved up into the area a year after Maura disappeared. Also stated that you are friends with the new owner that bought RFS house in 2009.In one of your posting you say the last search for Maura was done in 2012 with the cadaver dogs and in another posting you state the last search with cadaver dogs was done in 2010. You have also stated that 1 search was done with equipment and the next search was done with different equipment. When you claimed these people were your friends I asked what equipment was used you stated you did not know. Then in another posting when I asked a question you stated that you only traveled that road 5 times a year. Your full of crap.

I can honestly say that I have never posted anything that was not truthful (unless it was speculation) I don't believe I made the error on the dates as you say but I am not going to run through the posts and find it. Yes I moved here in January of 2005, yes I have gotten to know the owners of Forcier's house, Yes I said investigators went to their house 3 times over 3 years, the second with different equipment than the first time...all per the owner and the same information was posted on the Maura Murray facebook group. You then had specific questions for them (the type of equipment), that I did speak to the owner about. I have those answers and even sent them to you via Topix messaging. You are not a registered user and cannot retrieve those answers. I did not post them at the request of the owner. Since their posting on the Facebook site they have been continually bothered by people wanting more information. I also discussed Renner and his book with the owner. They have since removed all the posts relating to the specific information they posted in order to not be pestered by members of that group, or Renner. And yes I only travel that road about 5 times a year. I buy my christmas tree out that way, and I do get to Lincoln/Woodstock occasionally. Less frequently these days since my kids no longer play sports against LinWood High School. If I have to go to Concord or other locales south of here I usually travel route 25 to Plymouth to pick up 93, I think it is a better road than 112 and the mileage is nearly identical. My son likes 112 better he commutes to college in Concord a couple days a week so he travels it much more than I do.

So, I do not see what is so suspicious about anything that I have said with the possible exception of mixing up a date in one posting out of several specific to the dates. I am sure you did not like my posting about the words Julie Murray used, I would expect that and it is understandable. I was actually trying to get some discussion started about that but I guess no one is game.

As I read here recently, we are all anonymous posters, and you take everything you read with a grain of salt. You or no one else has any reason to believe a word I say, but I can guaranty that I can prove I am who I say I am , or more specifically who I am not, in a heartbeat.

citigirl wrote:

<quoted text>Bill NH I believe you are Renner or JWB..

i don't honestly believe JR needs to masquerade around. he puts out there what he has to say.

i'd be totally duped if BillNH is JWB. will JWB certainly does masquerade around, his cognition and writing style are dissimilar to BillNH's.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
great point. good, common sense re hotel door latches.
still, i/we have never offered to share a hotel/motel room to our kids while they were in college, nor would they have accepted, given they had preferred places to stay on or off campus with friends.
any number of exceptions are possible, to include gathering with family at an inn for an occasion, but that MM disappeared shortly thereafter, and her father does not put forward a possible reason why she packed up her belongings and used an untruth to excuse herself from academics at UMASS, seems oddly unexplained, even by car shopping.

the coincidence of the timing of the first crash with her dad's car, showing up in the wee hours of Sunday morning at his hotel and her disappearance in new hampshire shortly thereafter cannot be overlooked. like others, i do think there is information about what happened at the hotel that has been held back from law enforcement and/or the public. i just don't believe whatever that info is, it has anything to do with an inappropriate father-daughter relationship. although it is certainly fair to say that not all parent-child relationships, as you've noted, would have the same family relational dynamics as those exhibited by the murrays, and specifically between fred and maura.