Maura Murray

Frostman wrote:

Does anyone have a copy of RO's posts (30+ IIRC) from Helena's forum regarding THE Red Truck?

Judged:

2

1

1

hannah_b wrote:

Someone else already posted about RO´s posts, sorry.
A thought on Renner´s latest blog post: according to Maura´s boss at the art gallery, she received an email about a "family emergency", it did not mention a "death in the family" as we´ve been led to believe. I wonder where that incorrect report of the contents of that email came from and why. There has been a lot of speculation on that email on various forums ever since the beginning, family never cared to issue a correction, directly via Helena or indirectly via media.

hannah_b wrote:

Someone else already posted about RO´s posts, sorry.
A thought on Renner´s latest blog post: according to Maura´s boss at the art gallery, she received an email about a "family emergency", it did not mention a "death in the family" as we´ve been led to believe. I wonder where that incorrect report of the contents of that email came from and why. There has been a lot of speculation on that email on various forums ever since the beginning, family never cared to issue a correction, directly via Helena or indirectly via media.

Judged:

1

1

hannah_b wrote:

Someone else already posted about RO´s posts, sorry.
A thought on Renner´s latest blog post: according to Maura´s boss at the art gallery, she received an email about a "family emergency", it did not mention a "death in the family" as we´ve been led to believe. I wonder where that incorrect report of the contents of that email came from and why. There has been a lot of speculation on that email on various forums ever since the beginning, family never cared to issue a correction, directly via Helena or indirectly via media.

Judged:

2

2

2

James Renner wrote:

Orko/Clint/Scoops/Peter,
I actually told Karen to talk to you if she wanted.
I believe she decided not to because you were using different names on Facebook and because there seems to be little to verify your experience as a journalist online.
I don't care if other reporters look into the case. The more info, the better. But you have to be honest with your sources.
Also, the coffeeshop has never been verified.
-James

Judged:

3

3

1

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
the short answer is I was trying to separate fact from fiction, because this case has a lot more fiction than it does fact.
I have no illusions about solving this case.
But had I gotten some momentum going with the interviews (earned some people's trust and showcased an abilty to provide something of substance and not something that belongs in a fiction book) I believe it would've opened some doors as far as getting interviews with actual family members.
I was always honest and upfront with the people I Interviewed. I let them know that I am a professional journalist of 12 years, but also make sure to point out that I am not working this case in an official capacity, but rather as someone that (in their spare time) wants to tackle the mess that this story has become over the years.
And everyone (All 3) I have interviewed have been very helpful at first.
Then someone gets a hold of them (failed journalist turned successful fiction book writer) and they quit cooperating with me all of a sudden, just randomly.

Judged:

2

1

1

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
i just saw this statement, and don't understand why this individual's privacy and safety needs to be compromised by mention here.
subsequent, ignorant comments anticipated by the usual posters to the contrary, here is an example of the extreme consequences of internet sleuthing:
http://www.wcvb.com/news/local/metro/Teen-stu...

Judged:

2

2

2

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
While I would love to know the truth without all the BS I wouldn't go to the extent of using my time and strangers time to interview them just to satisfy my need to separate facts from fiction.
So if you aren't writing a book or an article then what will you do with all these facts that you are collecting?
Will you share them all with Topix, throw out a tidbit once in awhile or just sit on all the information you've collected?

Judged:

3

2

1

James Renner wrote:

Orko/Clint/Scoops/Peter,
I actually told Karen to talk to you if she wanted.
I believe she decided not to because you were using different names on Facebook and because there seems to be little to verify your experience as a journalist online.
I don't care if other reporters look into the case. The more info, the better. But you have to be honest with your sources.
Also, the coffeeshop has never been verified.
-James

Judged:

2

2

2

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
that would be all well and good except for the fact that in Jame's most recent blog post her name is mentioned. She has been on message boards in the past and used her real name as well.
A blog post is somehow "safer" than a message board post?
I don't understand your logic.

Judged:

2

2

1

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
It's what I do.
I write stories daily and interview people daily.
Away from work, when I encountered this story, I was immediately interested in the case, but also quickly frustrated with it at the same time as I would read something and think it was fact or think it would lead to a conclusion, only to run into the very next thing I read which would contradict or be completely opposite of what I had interpretated previously.
I made a personal decision (on my own and with no one's help) to try and clear up information and really for my own personal benefit. For several years, I never made a single comment about the case on any of the message boards.
Over the years, I have decided to step it up and try and do interviews myself, because there is not much else left to do (going over old articles).
If I didn't interview people for a living, the idea to randomly call and reach out to people would never have crossed my mind or even interested me.

Judged:

2

2

2

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks for answering. But you still didn't say what you're going to do with the information.
We know that Renner is interviewing people because he is writing a book. That's what he is doing with the information while sharing some of what he is learning on his blog.
But where is your information going? Are you going to share any new information that we haven't heard about yet or just tuck it away to look at on a rainy day? It just seems like lots of work and time to do nothing with the information you may get. But it's your time and effort and if you can really separate the facts from fiction then hats off to you. I think though that you will at least need a small army to help you and a fleet of dump trucks to clean up all the BS.

Judged:

2

2

2

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
No I am stopping.
I had other interview requests out, but I am no longer going to pursue them.
I can release the full four pages of quotes from maura's supervisor if that is what is wanted, but I am going to throw it (along with my maura murray folder ... yes I have one of those) away and move onto other interests.
I am confident that this case will not be solved.

Judged:

2

2

2

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
do you have a take on / or can explain the steady effort to feed MISinformation to the public all these years about MM's background prior to her disappearance?
do you believe there is more protected info that is relevant to her disappearance?

Judged:

2

1

1

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
I have a take (which does not make it fact, but also not something just randomly dreamed up for entertainment or story-telling purposes)
But it all comes down to the intial meeting between fred and NH Law Enforcement.
Suicide was the prevailing thought of Fred about why his daughter was randomly in NH.
But once fred did not feel like a "Sense of urgency" was being done and all stops were being made to locate his daughter, he grew frustrated and personally changed strategy (introduced boogeyman theory) in an attempt to force the investigation's hands.
Since, both sides have stuck to their guns sort of speak.
Fred hasn't backed off about a possible boogey man and police failing
Police have used every trick in the book to withold having to release (their process of investigation) to fred.
We are where we are and unless a body or remains are stumbled upon, this case is going nowhere fast.

BillNH wrote:

Well done Boston!!

Judged:

1

1

1

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
What makes you think what the art gallery boss says is the fact and the others are wrong? There's numerous Statements in those initial news articles that we know now are incorrect. Why latch onto that one as being accurate?