Maura Murray

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
Please stop with this. Beagle is not John Green. There is plenty of information online that proves this, including photographs and video of both of them. I have researched and read enough to know that Beagle is not posting anywhere as Green.
I'm really surprised that a person who has worked with the Murray family on this case spends so much time playing games like this - it is disrespectful to them and to Maura.

Do you think Tang really cares about respect at this point? He only cares about how much he can control the conversation, just like beagle. He is constantly encouraging him by paying him more and more attention. They have their own thing going. Would anyone on this forum be shocked if you found out that Tang was beagles best friend?

I wonder what a top psychiatrist would say about some of the nutjobs and trolls who post on this section of the forum. A young woman goes missing under tragic circumstances and yet the posts seem to be more concerned about personal attacks on other posters. While Renner's website invades Maura Murray's privacy in an unacceptable way at least it stays on topic. Here, on the other hand, we find a bastion for trolling lunacy where even the few posts that stay on topic are almost exclusively repetitive speculation from autism-propelled conspiracy theorists.

Face The Truth wrote:

I wonder what a top psychiatrist would say about some of the nutjobs and trolls who post on this section of the forum. A young woman goes missing under tragic circumstances and yet the posts seem to be more concerned about personal attacks on other posters. While Renner's website invades Maura Murray's privacy in an unacceptable way at least it stays on topic. Here, on the other hand, we find a bastion for trolling lunacy where even the few posts that stay on topic are almost exclusively repetitive speculation from autism-propelled conspiracy theorists.

So in an attempt to mock us, you choose to attack the posters here for attacking the posters here? Um, good job?

Face The Truth wrote:

... the posts seem to be more concerned about personal attacks on other posters.

Face The Truth wrote:

... nutjobs and trolls ... bastion for trolling lunacy ... repetitive speculation from autism-propelled conspiracy theorists.

Oh, how sad, your comments aren't being posted on Renner's blog, and you are so bored that you have lowered yourself to post here in our little bastion just to insult us.

And you are different how?

I pray to God in the hopes that we will one day find Maura. She is sadly missed and loved by many.

Face The Truth wrote:

I wonder what a top psychiatrist would say about some of the nutjobs and trolls who post on this section of the forum. A young woman goes missing under tragic circumstances and yet the posts seem to be more concerned about personal attacks on other posters. While Renner's website invades Maura Murray's privacy in an unacceptable way at least it stays on topic. Here, on the other hand, we find a bastion for trolling lunacy where even the few posts that stay on topic are almost exclusively repetitive speculation from autism-propelled conspiracy theorists.

Invading her privacy? For posting the name of the art gallery, maybe? I don´t think he ever posted a word about where she was in her menstrual cycle? The ones that did that was...hmmm, wait... her family, the very same ones complaining about posters invading her and their privacy...

So, like Bill said, you come her to attack us for attacking each others?

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
Mythbusters the tv show could not get anything to stay in the pipe when the car was started. Those guys are pretty thorough. They did it on video and we know they actually tried it. I have a feeling most of the mechanics who offer an opinion on it, never tested the theory...why would they?

Actually those mecahnics probably have done this in the past, back in the day before there wee computers in cars and cars were diagnosed with their computer mechanics needed ways to diagnose the problems with a car.

Putting a rag in a muffler is an old school method of troubleshooting engine troubles. Anybody who's been a mechanic for 25 years most likely used this method 25 years ago. My friend who's in his 30's said he did this several different times on his GTO that he had in high school in the 90's. And a GTO from the 60's has MUCH higher compression than a saturn with it's 4-cyl engine. This is why WTH/bill's statement of a 'modern high compression engine' is so misleading. IMO he throws that in every time he ever talks about this topic to make it sound like he knows what he's talking about, it obviously worked considering what Hannah said the other day. But the statement is clearly misleading bc most cars today actually have lower compression than cars in the 50's, 60's and 70's where big V8's were very popular..

It's definitely possible, you just have to know how to do it correctly, my friend said there's a specific way to fold the rag to make it stay, you can't just shove it in there, you need to know how to do it. I would venture to say both of the mechanics that were interviewed on the record regarding this case did this many times back before they had computers to diagnose engine trouble.

Back in the 2005 MMM Forum, it was posted that Smith went the door of FW and asked words to the effect, where's the girl..?

AND, the words..there was/is a rag in the tailpipe,...
"something they do in Massachusetts"....

This is something that I, and other Massachusetts Posters have never understood.

I don't understand the tailpipe rag..who does really?

Something else about the rag in the muffler s that there are indications that her car did stall outbefore the curve, likely causing the crash.

First thing is where the daage to her car is, its entirely n the front left driver's corner. That makes no sense if she spun out after the curve like Smith assumed in his report. If you spin out on a left hand curve that means that your ass end slides out to the right, that's simple physcs. That means that the right side of the car is the side to get hit first, the front lettt corner should actually be the LAST corner to get hit If she spun out on a left curve like she's supposed to have done then it makes absolutely no sense that there only be damage to the front left corner,, none.

Second is we have a wtness statement from the EMS guy, iirc, that says that she lost control BEFORE the curvve and clipped the snow bank on the inside(left sde) of the curve. It's funny bc this fits with the damage to her car MUCH better than what Smith said.

There is also a witness statement that said that her car ended up ass end into the snowbank. How could she smash the front left corner AND end up ass end in? Sounds impossible to me

What it sounds like really happened in this crash is she was coming down the straightaway before the WB curve hen her car lost power. 2 main things happen when your motor stalls; your dashboard lights up like a xmas tree and you lose power steering, you can still steer but it's much more difficult to recover from a problem.
It sounds to me like he car probably started stalling causing her dash to light up like a xmas tree which would probably make her look down at the dash and then by the time she looked up she was headed right towards the bank on the inside of the cruve. She clipped the bank, causing the damage to the front left corner and causing her to spin around and end up ass end in on the side of the road where her car ended up. FW's rport of hearng a motor rev before the thump is consistent wth her car stallng. What do you do when your car starts to stall out? You hit the gas and often times you can get it to rev again.

So there are some pretty strong indications that are supported with evidence that her car did in fact stall before it reached the corner and that's what actually caused the crash. If you consider the damage to the car and wwhat the witnesses who were on the scene said then it makes a lot more sense that her car stalled and that's what caused the accdent rather than her spinnng out after the curve on dry pavement.

Now keep in mind that her car was supposedly a piece of shit, this doesn't necessarily mean that the rag was used to stall her car out, and that's not what I'm saying. But what I am saying is when you have 2 seperate car experts independent of each other say that a rag can be a good way to make an engine stall, then you must consider it a possibility that the rag was used to stall her motor out. You just have to, if you just write that off then you're not considering all the possibilities.

It seems like there are actually people that seem to think that Renner is going to solve this case. I don't wanna sound iike an asshole but anyone who actually thinks that needs to have their head examined, that's just crazy talk.

He's brought some info to light, I'll give him that. He's confirmed things that were just rumors an has gotten some other info that's been interesting.

He's also spoken to a lot of people, although unfortunately it sounds like most of those people wouldn't really sit down for formal interviews and he's gotten a few sentancs out many of them.
Letely he's been doing a really good job at digging up dirt on the Murrays.

But can someone plese explain to me how they think he's going to be able to solve this case? Just think about what he's doing. It's 9 years later and he's doing the same thing that the FBI and the NHSP did in the first weeks and months and he's doing a much worse job at it.
Does anyoe tthink that he's even got a fraction of the documents that LE have? They literally have thousands of pages in their case file, he's got like what 5-10 relative documents? Maybe more but he ain''t got shit in reality.
What else is he doing? Oh yea he's interviewing te same people that the FBI invterviewed 9 years ago when the case was stil fresh and he's getting a few sentances out of them. These people all sat down for interviews with the FBI 9 years ago, real inteerviews, not some 2 minute talk where half the words are about how they don't wanna talk to him.

Does anyone actually think that all the questions that he, and now JG, are asking haven't been asked by LE 9 years ago/ Does anyone think that he's talking to someone that hasn't spoke to LE 9 years ago?

It's just hilarious that he makes a post about someone in her family doing something stupid and his cheerleader squad aka the comments section of his blog goes on about how close he is to solving the case!!

Sorry but dgging up old family gossip ain't solving this case, ain't happening.

Honestly IMO one of the biggest arguments against her running away and her family knowng where she is or what happened is the fact that you can be damn sure that the first thing that LE did was make sure this isn't some sort of missing person hoax, or something like that. Make sure that they're not going to look like total fools for searchng for a girl that's not even really missing. I just find it VERY hard to believe that any of her family or friends knows where she went and the FBI wasn' able to figure that out. They aint magic investigators but they're pretty damn good, I like to think they'd be on top of that and considered all of these possibilities when it first happened..

It's just amusing to say that some journalist writing a book is going to solve a case that 2 proffesional investigative agencies, with all their resources and experience, couldn't figure out. And he's gong to do it with a fraction of the information!!!

I'll be VERY impressed if he solves this case, I'd bet a thousand bucks he aint solving this case, shit i'd be 10. He'll cover the story if LE solves the ase, but he ain't solving shit, ain't happening

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
Westmans's say that they heard an engine rev as if someone stepped heavily on the gas just before they heard a "thump".(the car hitting the snowbank on the inside corner of the curve). If the engine was sputtering for whatever reason(the rag?)my instinct would be to stomp on the gas to get it going. If this happened the sudden acceleration could have caused her tires to spin and lose control of the vehicle. The road conditions were dry per the police report so I see this as less likely to be the case, but just the burst of speed on the curve could have been the culprit. I am not convinced the rag was in any way important in this case and this is pure speculation.
I think that if the rag was in there in a way that would possibly stall the vehicle, that would have been a red flag to any LE personnel at the scene or afterwards and the investigation into her disappearance would have taken an entirely different track. LE may have not done some things that some would have liked them to, rightly or wrongly, but that would not have been something anyone would have ignored. Fred himself would have been much more vehemently aggressive about making this an abduction investigation had the rag held any importance. I know if it was my daughter, I certainly would have.

Thanks, Bill

Personally I have always been satisfied with Fred’s explanation that he advised Maura to use the rag to stop the car from smoking. If the car was in poor condition it would make sense she might use this kind of temporary fix. Here in the UK a car that is badly smoking is liable to be pulled over by police.

The fact the engine was heard to rev just before the accident is interesting. It was reported there were splashes of wine found on the inside of the driver’s door and my immediate thought was that Maura was taking a sip of her drink, lost concentration for a moment and crashed. Without wanting to get too much into the territory of conspiracy theories, I suppose it is possible Maura was taking a sip of her drink, dropped the bottle top, reached down to quickly pick it up – taking her foot somewhat off the gas – the car started to stall out and she over-compensated causing the engine to rev and her to lose control.... It would be interesting to know whether the Coke bottle top was found inside the car.

hannah_b wrote:

<quoted text>
Invading her privacy? For posting the name of the art gallery, maybe? I don´t think he ever posted a word about where she was in her menstrual cycle? The ones that did that was...hmmm, wait... her family, the very same ones complaining about posters invading her and their privacy...
So, like Bill said, you come her to attack us for attacking each others?

that was memorably distasteful; too intimate and, frankly, i don't recall the point being made because i turned away from listening to the conversation. that she was / or wasn't pregnant, maybe, or as a reason for running away and/or eventually returning because she did / or didn't bring her BC pills with her?

i've said this before but in the very beginning and for some years thereafter, there were eager, intelligent people on discussion boards, all too willing to help, but kept at the perimeter of "the inner circle", and they actually believed, as gospel, and without ever questioning, every word typed or told by "the family" about Maura.
the result was speculation based on faulty information that was endlessly repeated. Maura's past, however, especially just prior to her disappearance, was tidy and sanitized. it was deemed to be "not relevant" by her closest relatives, including her father, presumed to be the most important person in her life.

but why? oh, but the public would lose interest, they said, if she wasn't presented as nearly perfect.
the story was tidy, sanitized. the All American Girl.
it is this element contained in a search for a missing person, any missing person, that casts suspicion on the presentation. there didn't need to be a presentation, just an honest appeal to the public.

and there really didn't need to be a circus. a party under the big top. it is all so bizarre.

does anyone know if paris/Linda is ok? haven't heard from her here forever. if she got frustrated or annoyed and left, that's one thing...but hoe she is doing well, otherwise.

So, Green takes over james' blog, comes over here and rents a stall for a few days,realizes, with the help of a few peasants that this is the land of draft horses not show ponies, gets his rented stall mucked, basically being tossed out into the barnyard with the rest of the cookies, goes crawling back to James' blog and apologizes to his potentates for slumming at the music halls...Oh James " Oscar Wilde" Green...Nothing has happened at the blog since your visit here, short of a few new posts by you. The apology, apparently rescinded quite quickly....I'm thinking James has realized that he needs a new minstrel. I boldly take creative license here with one of Bob Zimmerman's songs, and statethat James is no longer willing to be "Tangled Up In Green" ; )

one more thought....
this history ties into whiston's often repeated phrasing of "we are told"....a mantra because, in fact, the public "was told" and was encouraged to believe certain information as truth and facts, even though said information may not have been verified or proven; it was just put out there for spoon-feeding or to swallow whole.
this is why i chafe every time i read "we are told"; where is the citation? or reference?

Ridiculous wrote:

So, Green takes over james' blog, comes over here and rents a stall for a few days,realizes, with the help of a few peasants that this is the land of draft horses not show ponies, gets his rented stall mucked, basically being tossed out into the barnyard with the rest of the cookies, goes crawling back to James' blog and apologizes to his potentates for slumming at the music halls...Oh James " Oscar Wilde" Green...Nothing has happened at the blog since your visit here, short of a few new posts by you. The apology, apparently rescinded quite quickly....I'm thinking James has realized that he needs a new minstrel. I boldly take creative license here with one of Bob Zimmerman's songs, and statethat James is no longer willing to be "Tangled Up In Green" ; )

oops.
he wasn't a good choice. a little too arrogant for the peasants' tasteless tastes.

SnowyB wrote:

does anyone know if paris/Linda is ok? haven't heard from her here forever. if she got frustrated or annoyed and left, that's one thing...but hoe she is doing well, otherwise.

I haven't heard from her in months. I hope she is ok.

Pippi Longstocking wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks, Bill
Personally I have always been satisfied with Fred’s explanation that he advised Maura to use the rag to stop the car from smoking. If the car was in poor condition it would make sense she might use this kind of temporary fix. Here in the UK a car that is badly smoking is liable to be pulled over by police.
The fact the engine was heard to rev just before the accident is interesting. It was reported there were splashes of wine found on the inside of the driver’s door and my immediate thought was that Maura was taking a sip of her drink, lost concentration for a moment and crashed. Without wanting to get too much into the territory of conspiracy theories, I suppose it is possible Maura was taking a sip of her drink, dropped the bottle top, reached down to quickly pick it up – taking her foot somewhat off the gas – the car started to stall out and she over-compensated causing the engine to rev and her to lose control.... It would be interesting to know whether the Coke bottle top was found inside the car.

The explanation never made sense to me. If the engine is producing smoke, a rag in the tailpipe is not going to stop that and may have actually contributed to the troubles she was having. The rag would not stop it from smoking, it would stop it from coming out of the tailpipe to some extent, but the smoke is still being made by the engine. It has to go somewhere. It probably came out of any leaks in the exhaust system and/or backed up into the engine cylinders and made it run even worse than what it was. Every time the exhaust valve opened to expel the smoke, with the manifold full of old smoke it may not be able to push the new smoke out of the cylinder. This would result in poor combustion and a poorly running engine. Like a self fulfilling prophecy.

The fact that Fred was OK with it being there at the time of MM's accident just tells me 2 things for sure 1) it was not in any way related to a possible abduction 2)Fred knew nothing about cars but knew how to avoid drawing police attention.

Another reason for Fred's easy dismissal of the rag would imply his involvement and the rag being used as a means to disable her car purposely but I do not believe that to be the case so I won't go into it. I only mention it just so I can dismiss it as non viable, as someone else surely would bring it up.

Shack wrote:

Back in the 2005 MMM Forum, it was posted that Smith went the door of FW and asked words to the effect, where's the girl..?
AND, the words..there was/is a rag in the tailpipe,...
"something they do in Massachusetts"....
This is something that I, and other Massachusetts Posters have never understood.
I don't understand the tailpipe rag..who does really?

Smith did go to the Westmans door that night.

He asked them "Have You seen the girl driving the car, there is a rag in the tailpipe"

The 1st part of the statement is reasonable....

The 2cd is not....WHY WOULD HE SAY THAT TO THEM.?

Tang Zoi wrote:

<quoted text>
Smith did go to the Westmans door that night.
He asked them "Have You seen the girl driving the car, there is a rag in the tailpipe"
The 1st part of the statement is reasonable....
The 2cd is not....WHY WOULD HE SAY THAT TO THEM.?

That does seem like a strange comment to make but it could be that the officer was still mulling over the significance, if any, of the rag. Just by changing the way the sentence is punctuated it loses a lot of the strangeness:“Have you seen the girl driving the car? There’s a rag in the tailpipe...” here the second part is almost a personal observation. It becomes a sort of ‘that’s a bit weird isn’t it?’ afterthought said aloud.