Maura Murray

FrmLE wrote:

<quoted text>
Or...... Could it perhaps be that this is an open, active investigation and to 'answer any questions' about that night would be against the written policies of the NHSP?
Could it be that if he answered any questions, he would be disciplined and perhaps fired?
How many times do I have to explain this simple fact to you? And how many times will you ignore it and continue to use this to support your ridiculous theories?
What an idiot you continue to be, you are consistent.

Damn dude, What are you an moron?? Obviously he would either need permission to answer any q's or the AG or maybe an nhsp spokesman would answer for him; I'm not saying that he should illegally answer any questions, obviously.

But we've heard from pretty much everyone else who was at that scene that night, everyone but JKM. Why is that?? What did he do, not do, or see, that night that makes him the only one who's unable to answer any questions?

The thing here is if ALL he did was drive past the scene on his way home & drive around for 5 minutes looking for her real quick then that could not possibly jeapordize the investigation in any way, that's impossible. If that's all he did then why NOT let him answer questions? If that's all he did then what possibly could be the reasoning behind him NEVER answering any q's about that night?

You must be able to understand that right FrmLE? He can't possibly harm an active investigation if all he did was drive around for a few mins & didn't see anything. So why not answer q's? Why won't they let him answer q's if that's what's holding him back? That would be the DECENT thing to do. Unless he saw something or knows something what's holding him back?

Don't give me that open investigation crap, that's just straight stupid. Everybody else there has spoken about it. Everybody else but him can answer questions; be it to the media or just to the family,except JKM?....why???

Maruchan wrote:

I just checked Renner's blog - comments for the last several blog entries by Green have finally been approved. Many of those comments are complaints about Green.
I noticed that Green's name at the end of his posts was no longer a clickable link to his Blogger profile. A Google search shows that his Blogger profile no longer exists.
Interesting ...

oops.

Alden H Olson wrote:

<quoted text>
The fact that much or all of the damage to the Saturn happened before the Saturn left Amherst might raise some questions, the below four among them.
1) The person(s) who drove and/or transported the Saturn to NH obviously knew the car was previously damaged. Who drove and/or transported the Saturn to NH?
2) Who showed the damaged Saturn to BSG? For what purpose?
3) How is it known that Maura Murray was the person SBD saw at the WB curve?
4) Were any parts of the Saturn missing before it was found at the WB curve?

1) Maura drove her undamaged car to the WB curve. That car wasn't gonna drive up 91N with it's hood like that and it's very hard to believe she wouldnn't have been pulled over with her headlight like that. It's obvious it WAS maura at the WBcurve and she drove herself there.

2) Nobody showed the saturn to BSG--- you are LYING. You already said who the BSG is a while ago,,, I spoke to him. Know what he said?'Someone is telling stories' and 'Don't believe everything you read on the internet'.

Why are you MAKING THIS UP???

Is it a coincidence that you stared saying this crap after it was learned that you were in NH when she went missing and you were driving a red truck with mass plates? I don't think so, how stupid do you think everyone is? Just like the 'vandalism' that took place afterwards. LOL, seriously how stupid do you think people are? That lawn mower in the picture you posted as 'evidence' isn't damaged AT ALL, it's perfecty fine, it just has a log that's been very carefuly placed on it to make it LOOK like it was damaged. LOL, soooo stupid. That pic is OBVIOUSLY staged, if someone smashed your mower with that log the mower would've been SMASHED, not in perfect condtion with a log carefuly balanced on it. LOL

Alden- you are a LIAR.

You are so full of shit,'BSG' wasn't shown the saturn before it left, there is NOTHING to indicate that there was any damage to her Saturn while still in Amherst, nothing except the lies of some psycho that likes to taunt the family of a missing girl. REALLY reliable source.

Weird thing is that last year you were going on about how the Vasi hit was a hate crime bc he was a musim and there was no investigation bc he was muslim. If you spoke to BSG then what was up with that story?

I see why you use soooooo many monikers, if you just used beagle then everyone would've been able to see how big of a liar you are and how many different stories you've told over the years.

So we know that you were in NH driving a red truck when she went missing, what were you doing in NH?? I find it VERY hard to believe that YOU were up here to go XC skiing lol, no offense but you don't exacty look like a XC skiier. Did you buy that ticket as an alibi of sorts, a reason that you could say you were in NH for? I think that's why it's a XC pass and not a downhill pass, bc downhill lift tickets are like twice the price of a XC pass, and you don't seem very rich.

So did you just come across Maura randomly at the WB curve or were you following her before she left Amherst? Was your red truck responsible to the damage to her hood that's above the bumper? Did you get into an earlier accident with her that happened right around 7? Did you cause this accident on purpose???

Is anyone else in the western mass area? Can someone else go talk to the 'BSG' and show what I'm saying to be true? This way we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Alden is completely making this whole 'BSG' crap up?

Anyone with the slightest common sense can tell it's BS anyways, all you have to do is read what he's written over the years and it's clear that this whole BSG thing is completely made up, it's a half-assed attempt at getting people to think that she was involved in the Vasi hit and run. What a scumbag this guy is huh?

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Another post from sir-post-a-lot
I like long posts and I cannot lie,
you other readers can't deny..........

Really lighthouse?? REALLY????

Sir post a lot?? You're one of the last people that can criticize anybody for posting a lot. You really need to go check on your glass house.
Anyone can go back through the last few months & see the sheer number of posts that you make. You make soooo many posts all day, every day. Talk about a hypocrite.

I've made a small fraction of the amount of posts you have. Sure I make some long posts, but there's only like 1 or 2 people who post more often than you do. But at least my posts I'm actually saying something about the topic. You make post after post that have nothing to do with anything, all you do is criticize others and make really stupid jokes that are rarely funny. When was the last time you contributed ANYTHING of any substance to this forum??

Jenkins wrote:

I've aways found it odd nobody ever made a biigger deal out of that fact.

Maybe the coke bottle was hit by the airbag and splashed all over.
Maybe Smith just had nothing else to do that night. He did leave when he got another call.
Maybe Smith felt a little more compassion for a younger female (he did not know her age at this point)traveling alone from out of state.
It really was a crime scene(DUI), nothing wrong with preserving the scene of a crime. And why did the responders need to go near the car anyways, no one was in it?(if he really kept them away)
If someone is missing who are the first suspects? Family. Isn't it standard questioning technique to throw an incorrect statement at a suspect to catch them off guard?
Maybe one of the cops wanted to leave and the jurisdiction argument (if it happened)was about who HAD to stay.
Maybe they backed off any foul play talk because they had no evidence to support it.

Why does it always have to be a conspiracy? Do you have any idea how difficult a conspiracy is to maintain...all the people involved remaining silent. Across 4 LE agencies...for 9 years now...it's nonsense.

Tang Zoi wrote:

<quoted text>
So nice to have You back....
BUT You don't need to be an a**hole to people.

it is.
he's not.

Orko Kringer wrote:

Jenky,
Standard procedure (IMO) would be not to formulate any sort of theory about the person who fled the scene of a minor accident without learning about that person first.
Police didn't start investigating until they heard from Fred (next day). All evidence/statements point to that. there was no need for an investigation that night. They got the car owner's information and figured they would hear from someone wanting the car back later that night or some time the next day.

Orky-- That is true, that is standard operating procedure. UNLESS the responding officer sees something that indicates foul play, that woud require an investigation to start that night would it not?

He could've come on the scene and saw wine splashed all over the car and thought that it looked like it was evidence of a struggle.. Combine that wth the rag found in her muffler and I can see him thinking something wasn't right about the scene.
We know he didn't follow normal operating procedures of a minor accident bc he was on the scene for 2 hours, that's an extremely long time for a simple accident, the same kind that happens every day in the north country.
He also didn't allow the other emergency responders near the car, that's not normal either, that sounds like he was thinking about protecting forensic evidence, but that's JMO obviously.

So it looks like he didn't follow the SOP like you outlined above.

Maybe that's what the argument someone overheard in their backyard was all about? Maybe Smith thought that it might be foul play and that the SP should come in and start an investigation immediately and JKM disagreed with him bc there was no definite evidence? Maybe this is why JKM, and the NHSP, have refused to answer any q's regardding what he did that night?
Since there's no such thing as geographical jurisdiction in NH the NHSP does have jurisdiction over all major crimes in nh(murder, kindapping, etc), I could see an argument getting pretty heated if one thinks that she got abducted and the NHSP should step in and the trooper disagrees. I can also see that being a damn good reason why JKM and the NHSP won't answer any q's about what he did that night.

And for the record, Smith DID do some investigation that night, that's why he was on scene for 2 hours. He went around and spoke to the neighbors which isn't something normally done when there's a minor one car accident. Normaly they get the car towed and wait for the driver to call the next day just like you said above. That's SOP and that's NOT what happened in this case.

They also seemed very interested in trucks that night. Most of the vehicles they pulled over later that night were trucks, 3 of them being red. So it seems like they did do a lot more than what the SOP calls for.

Jenkins wrote:

<quoted text>
Is it a coincidence that you stared saying this crap after it was learned that you were in NH when she went missing and you were driving a red truck with mass plates?...
So we know that you were in NH driving a red truck when she went missing ... Was your red truck responsible to the damage to her hood that's above the bumper?

We don't "know" that Beagle has a red truck. We only "learned" this new "fact" from Tang in April, and I questioned him about it:

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not interested in what Beagle says. You stated that Beagle owned a red truck as fact. Do you know this is fact, and, if so, how do you know? Have you ever seen his red truck?

Tang's response:

Tang Zoi wrote:

<quoted text>
Through emails w/ Him I was told He had a red truck. He also mentions it on His blog.
I have not seen it in person.

I checked all of Beagle's blogs - there is NO mention of a red truck. The only word we have on this is Tang's from an alleged email from Beagle - that is it.

For you to continue to now incorporate this "fact" of Beagle owning a red truck into many of your arguments is just another example of how you simply don't read posts here and base much of your hypotheses on "facts" that don't exist.

And you wonder why you get insulted here?

Tang Zoi wrote:

<quoted text>
This was told to Me by Tim and Faith Westman.

i won't argue much further, except to say i hope the words are exact, and are interpreted in the correct context.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
i won't argue much further, except to say i hope the words are exact, and are interpreted in the correct context.

Exact...

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
i won't argue much further, except to say i hope the words are exact, and are interpreted in the correct context.

And interpreted correctly....

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe Citigirl can clairify (I am going off memory and not my notes) but the coke bottle was found underneath Maura's car. I am not sure if it was discovered before the car was towed away or after.

According to CSs accident report there was a coke bottle discovered after the vehicle was towed.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
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.

Oh yes, Snowy, you remeber correctly. All that talk about how many BC pills were used up, could she have missed taking one and become pregnant etc etc ad nauseum, and then the "clan", the self appointed Pointy Boots Brigade... A circus, to say the least. The official MMM story needs an extreme makeover. Oh, I know, shame on me, back to the Time Out Tent...

Tang Zoi wrote:

<quoted text>
Exact...

Why should anyone believe anything you say after you stated this...

Tang Zoi wrote:***You know everything I write is NOT the truth....BUT yet You continue to play My game.
Why do You Play the game..?***

hannah_b wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh yes, Snowy, you remeber correctly. All that talk about how many BC pills were used up, could she have missed taking one and become pregnant etc etc ad nauseum, and then the "clan", the self appointed Pointy Boots Brigade... A circus, to say the least. The official MMM story needs an extreme makeover. Oh, I know, shame on me, back to the Time Out Tent...

Hope you're hungry Hannah, Bob the bartender is giving out peanuts in the TOT.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Why should anyone believe anything you say after you stated this...
Tang Zoi wrote:***You know everything I write is NOT the truth....BUT yet You continue to play My game.
Why do You Play the game..?***

Because he´s only here for the entertainment. Just guessing...

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Why should anyone believe anything you say after you stated this...
Tang Zoi wrote:***You know everything I write is NOT the truth....BUT yet You continue to play My game.
Why do You Play the game..?***

Yes I did say that in reply to someone elses post..... but then I also posted again that I was being SARCASTIC.

Please...... Go back and read it again.

"I HAVE NOT SPENT THE LAST 9 YRS LYING"

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Hope you're hungry Hannah, Bob the bartender is giving out peanuts in the TOT.

Wow, gotta hurry!!

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
he probably didn't say that exactly the words as you've quoted him here, unless your quote was taken from an official document.
i am always wary about unverified second and third hand sources...quoted.

Very smart thinking snowy. Especially if it came from Tang. He admits he doesn't tell the truth.

Jenkins wrote:

<quoted text>

They also seemed very interested in trucks that night. Most of the vehicles they pulled over later that night were trucks, 3 of them being red. So it seems like they did do a lot more than what the SOP calls for.

4 trucks out of 6 vehicle stops. 3 "red" trucks (1 of the 3 was a maroon Ford Ranger) between 526 am and 636 am the following morning. The 4th truck was green. Just doesn't rise to the "very interested" level for me.