Maura Murray

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Maruchan - when I watched the Id show, and they were talking about the case being closed. The Officer sitting at the desk stated "there may be a piece of evidence that shows that MM was a victim of foul play, and we would need to build a case" That pretty much tells me that as of the date of the interview there was no evidence of foul play.
http://www.youtube.com/watch... go to minute 37 and watch the next 3 minutes.

The same officer from the video said this in 2012:

"I take into consideration the family's thought that she was coming up to kill herself. But what was the initial catalyst to make her want to do that? And what happened when she got here? My sense is that she is not still alive."

Doesn't sound to me like someone that thinks foul play took place

That RED TRUCK on BHR keeps coming back into the picture.

The owner lived on BHR at time of MM disappearance.

John

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
The same officer from the video said this in 2012:
"I take into consideration the family's thought that she was coming up to kill herself. But what was the initial catalyst to make her want to do that? And what happened when she got here? My sense is that she is not still alive."
Doesn't sound to me like someone that thinks foul play took place

98% of LE cases of this sort as well as others are always put out with the statement......"No foul play is suspected and there is no danger to the public."

REPUTATION is everything......Bad PUBLICITY is NOT GOOD..!

John

Det Columbo wrote:

<quoted text>
98% of LE cases of this sort as well as others are always put out with the statement......"No foul play is suspected and there is no danger to the public."
REPUTATION is everything......Bad PUBLICITY is NOT GOOD..!
John

I'm trying to recall any missing person's case in which the police didn't orchestrate some sort of press conference reaching out to the public on behalf of the family or to mention a suspicious car's model and make asking for anyone to help ID the owner.

That doesn't sound like hiding to protect a reputation.

I guess any day now (some nine years later) the police are going to hold a press conference asking us all to look for this red truck you keep obsessing about.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm trying to recall any missing person's case in which the police didn't orchestrate some sort of press conference reaching out to the public on behalf of the family or to mention a suspicious car's model and make asking for anyone to help ID the owner.
That doesn't sound like hiding to protect a reputation.
I guess any day now (some nine years later) the police are going to hold a press conference asking us all to look for this red truck you keep obsessing about.

IF it is part of the investigation, they are not going to ask You to look for the truck.

"BOL.....Red truck w/ NH temp plate 367543, big tires, small nickel size dent on right front fender, 2 DD cups on pass. side floorboard, napkins in glove compartment, With strange guy driving. May or may not be wearing glasses and have a slight scar on his forehead. Answers to "HEY YOU"

Use caution as this person is UNKNOWN. Approach using low voices and call to Him as IF He is scared of You."

Det Columbo wrote:

<quoted text>
98% of LE cases of this sort as well as others are always put out with the statement......"No foul play is suspected and there is no danger to the public."
REPUTATION is everything......Bad PUBLICITY is NOT GOOD..!
John

You may be correct Tang. 98% of missing persons cases with no evidence of foul play should have that statement attached to them because it's true to the best of anyone's knowledge.

Pippi Longstocking wrote:

<quoted text>
I do wonder how closely James keeps an eye on the blog now. He has posted today so it may be he has just seen the developments within the 'sister' posting and has taken immediate action to remove it. I hope this is the case and it wasn't threat of official action by the family that prompted the decision. I really want to respect James and his search but I feel like each one of these incidents (mostly caused by Green) damage his reputation further.

at the very least, one would choose to delegate oversight of one's blog to someone who reflects semi-professional methodologies, a degree of personal responsibility, and a similar intellectual capacity as oneself for reason, and appropriate emotional restraint.
JR's professional rep has been put at risk, if not compromised by the liberties JG has taken, imo.

Orko Kringer wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm trying to recall any missing person's case in which the police didn't orchestrate some sort of press conference reaching out to the public on behalf of the family or to mention a suspicious car's model and make asking for anyone to help ID the owner.
That doesn't sound like hiding to protect a reputation.
I guess any day now (some nine years later) the police are going to hold a press conference asking us all to look for this red truck you keep obsessing about.

Interesting article Orko.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sunday-revi...

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Maruchan - when I watched the Id show, and they were talking about the case being closed. The Officer sitting at the desk stated "there may be a piece of evidence that shows that MM was a victim of foul play, and we would need to build a case" That pretty much tells me that as of the date of the interview there was no evidence of foul play.
http://www.youtube.com/watch... go to minute 37 and watch the next 3 minutes.

Lighthouse, I like and respect you - please don't be offended. I did go watch that part of the Disappeared show, and the words you have put into quotations above is not the exact quote made by Scarinza. It is not exactly what he said, and therefore should not be in quotes. If I hadn't watched the clip, I would assume that what you wrote is an exact quote. This then ends up in the "record" as a word-for-word quote and will get re-quoted forevermore as if it were true.

This is the exact quote: "At some point, we may get that piece of evidence which says that she was the victim of a crime and, in solving that case, we want to be able to have everything that you've done from the beginning to that point forward admissible in court if you have to go to trial."

Even though your paraphrased language is similar, it is not the same, and I think that it is important to keep what little facts we have as straight as possible, whether it seems minor or not.

This whole not using quotes, using quotes incorrectly thing is starting to drive me a bit mad.:)

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
Very simply, because the person that made that call could be a "person of interest" in her disappearance, which could be a missing person or a homicide, nobody knows which.

My opinion on this comes mainly from the court documents in Fred's FOIA case and particularly from Strelzin's affidavit:

"... Some of the cases I have worked on have begun as missing person's cases and subsequently became homicide cases. I have also worked on other missing person's cases which have turned out not to be homicide cases.
...
5. The Maura Murray investigation is open and ongoing. I am familiar with the State Police files related to Maura Murray and her disappearance. Based on my experience with criminal investigations and prosecutions and the information in this case in particular, I have a reasonable belief that it is possible that this investigation may lead to criminal charges. However, at this stage of the investigation, it would be detrimental to our ability to continue this investigation and any subsequent prosecution if we are required to make public whether or not there is a person or persons of interest and the information on which those beliefs are based. In my experience in this case and in other cases, our investigation would be hindered in the following ways:
If there is or may be a person of interest, revealing that information publicly would
A.) alert that person to our interest and make it harder to gain her or his cooperation; B.) enable that person to use what other witnesses have said to potentially cover their tracks by changing her or his story and/or destroying evidence; C.) potentially
endanger witnesses that have provided information concerning that person; D.) possibly result in witnesses being reluctant to talk to us if they believe that what they tell us would be available to the person of interest; E.) likely result in public speculation which could lead to false leads including everything from sightings in
unlikely locations to reports from psychics, that must be followed up on but that consume time and resources; F.) potentially result in the sources that have provided information being pursued by outside, non-law enforcement sources so that they feel harassed and simply refuse to have anything further to do with the investigation; and
G.) reveal what other witnesses have said, thereby possibly tainting the credibility of witnesses that become aware of the other witness statements by bringing into question whether what they recall is their own recollection or has been tainted by what they have heard that someone else reported."

If the Londonderry call has identified a person of interest, it makes sense to me, especially considering the quotes above, that the identity of that person would be withheld.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Maruchan - when I watched the Id show, and they were talking about the case being closed. The Officer sitting at the desk stated "there may be a piece of evidence that shows that MM was a victim of foul play, and we would need to build a case" That pretty much tells me that as of the date of the interview there was no evidence of foul play.
http://www.youtube.com/watch... go to minute 37 and watch the next 3 minutes.

Misused quotes or not, I believe your conclusion is correct based on the misquoted and the properly quoted statement.

Where did PIKE go.....?

From Umass researchers forum by Beags

"Sep 8, 2009



Judged:

4

3

3

person wrote:

what is TOT? who are Bob the Bartender and Pike?
how they are connected with maura?
thank you
apparently, person, TOT was a punishment exacted by the leaders of a previous Maura Murray forum against anyone who spoke their minds, or had opinions differing from the party line.
the party line was and is any concept endorsed by Maura's father.

TOT has been defined as Time Out in a Tent, i believe. one would be remanded to a figurative tent, as punishment, where Bob the Bartender would serve up a cyber-beverage.

Pike, by all accounts, was a super-nice guy and an intelligent poster, by his stellar reputation from the same forum. he is remembered fondly by some for his daring to speak up often and disagree with the party line. a no-no. he either left the forum, or was summarily banished. it is unclear which occurred.

only Pike was connected to Maura's missing, as he apparently tried to assist in solving her disappearance."

John

Hey Det. Columbo,

I found a cool clip for you and the guy that's stalking your whereabouts.

http://movieclips.com/XSLvM-edge-of-darkness-...

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
BillNH -
Am I off base here? Does it say anywhere that a call originated in NH?

~Lighthouse 101, thanks for questioning my statement. It impelled me to double my efforts to find an answer. I have yet to find an answer about how it works if the phone you are calling is turned off, but this is a basic detail of how a call is routed if it is on. I am still trying to interpret this in reference to MM so I won't post a conclusion. Please note that info gleaned from my research shows that this basic detail has not changed over the years. The tech advances have been in how the data is broken down (analog vs digital)resulting in greater speed and volume.~

THE REGISTRATION CYCLE:

A registration cycle keeps track of a phone as it travels around the network. It begins when a wireless user powers on their phone. The general steps for this process are:

1. When the phone is powered on, it sends a data message to the cellsite. This data message contains the Mobile Identification Number (MIN or phone number) and the Electronic Serial Number (ESN). The cellsite forwards this information to the switch.

2. The switch compares the MIN with a table of all MINs in the network. It will determine if the MIN belongs to a home customer, or to a visiting customer. In either case, the switch will request the subscriber's feature profile from the Home Location Register (HLR). The HLR for home customers may be integrated into the same switch or stored on a separate platform.

3. If the HLR is a separate platform, or if the customer is visiting from another system, the switch then sends a data message to the HLR across the signaling network. Routing specifications stored at Signaling Transfer Points (STPs) provide the necessary information to direct the message to the home location register.

4. When the Home Location Register (HLR) receives the message, it checks the MIN & the ESN. If the numbers are valid, the HLR records the location of the phone and returns a message containing the subscriber's feature list and calling restrictions to the visited switch.

5. Once the visited switch receives the return message, it creates a Visitor Location Register (VLR) to store information about the roamer, including the MIN, ESN, features, etc... This register will be used by the roamer as long as they are registered in the visited system.
CALL DELIVERY

Call Delivery occurs when someone calls to a cellular phone. This example assumes that the person is roaming in a system away from their home system. The general steps for this process are:

1. Someone dials the phone number of the cellular phone.

2. The call is routed to the subscriber's home switch. The home switch sends a query to the Home Location Register (HLR) to determine the location of the phone. The HLR recorded the location of the phone when the phone registered in the visited system.

3. The HLR sends a data message across the signaling network to the visited system requesting a temporary local directory number (TLDN) for routing the call.

4. The visited switch returns a data message with a TLDN to the HLR. The HLR sends the TLDN to the home switch for routing across the public telephony network.

5. When the visited switch receives a call to that TLDN, it associates it to the phone, sends out a regular cellular page and delivers the call to the phone.

The TLDN is a regular telephone number that is routable through the public network. The visited switch usually assigns TLDNs on a per-call basis, when it receives the routing request from the home system. The visited switch uses a timer to determine how long it keeps the TLDN associated with that subscriber. The timer lasts long enough for the home switch to route a call to that number across the public network.

~in #1 of registration cycle cellsite = the tower.
~about 2 seconds elapse for both processes
~the registration process repeats about every 7 seconds and with each tower change

catch 22 wrote:

Hey Det. Columbo,
I found a cool clip for you and the guy that's stalking your whereabouts.
http://movieclips.com/XSLvM-edge-of-darkness-...

Thank You.....Perfect.!

Whoever He/They are......He/They is not too smart.

John

Another interesting bit I found today...

Cell calls do not work tower to tower.

Calling phone sends radio signal to tower. The radio signal is received by tower from calling phone, data is digitized and sent through land line system to tower closest to receiving phone. Tower converts back to radio frequency and delivers the call to receiving phone.

and one more thing...

the HLR and VLR data (tracking) that cell providers collect every seven seconds is only saved by most providers for no more than a year. So unless the affidavit was written within about a year of MM's disappearance, it was most likely requesting a phone number, not tracking data.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
at the very least, one would choose to delegate oversight of one's blog to someone who reflects semi-professional methodologies, a degree of personal responsibility, and a similar intellectual capacity as oneself for reason, and appropriate emotional restraint.
JR's professional rep has been put at risk, if not compromised by the liberties JG has taken, imo.

As of this evening, I notice that several of Green's posts are no longer accessible on the blog, including his welcome to himself entitled "Welcome John Green" (I always thought that was funny), "Who Are You" in which he asked people to identify themselves; "Things To Do, Things To Do" in which he asked for grunts to take on the messy work that he was much too busy to handle himself; "'That's Improbable'... Uhhh ... Is It?" in which he bolsters his abduction theory, and the one mentioned earlier, "My Sister" which he wasted thousands of words and a lot of commenter's time on a theory that the late phone call was to Julie when Renner already knew the phone call was to Billy. All of those posts are still cached, except for the "Things To Do" post - if you Google them, the link itself takes you to the blog where it says "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
As of this evening, I notice that several of Green's posts are no longer accessible on the blog, including his welcome to himself entitled "Welcome John Green" (I always thought that was funny), "Who Are You" in which he asked people to identify themselves; "Things To Do, Things To Do" in which he asked for grunts to take on the messy work that he was much too busy to handle himself; "'That's Improbable'... Uhhh ... Is It?" in which he bolsters his abduction theory, and the one mentioned earlier, "My Sister" which he wasted thousands of words and a lot of commenter's time on a theory that the late phone call was to Julie when Renner already knew the phone call was to Billy. All of those posts are still cached, except for the "Things To Do" post - if you Google them, the link itself takes you to the blog where it says "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."

James taking charge again. I would bet he won't take on a guest writer on the next book's blog.

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
As of this evening, I notice that several of Green's posts are no longer accessible on the blog, including his welcome to himself entitled "Welcome John Green" (I always thought that was funny), "Who Are You" in which he asked people to identify themselves; "Things To Do, Things To Do" in which he asked for grunts to take on the messy work that he was much too busy to handle himself; "'That's Improbable'... Uhhh ... Is It?" in which he bolsters his abduction theory, and the one mentioned earlier, "My Sister" which he wasted thousands of words and a lot of commenter's time on a theory that the late phone call was to Julie when Renner already knew the phone call was to Billy. All of those posts are still cached, except for the "Things To Do" post - if you Google them, the link itself takes you to the blog where it says "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."

i can depend not only your search skills, but your motivation to track historical information and documentation, and to accurately...precisely, in fact, reproduce content within the context. so, thank you. you are appointed!
i've skimmed a number of the posts you mention, but i found "My Sister" with associated 92 comments as of early this morning to be particularly offensive.
i keep sensing JRenner must be sold on JG's value, and wonder if his use lies in stirring up drama and gossip, which does not even rise to the level of controversy or debate.
Fred Leatherman/Mason owned his theories, and JRenner takes ownership of the information he shares, but Green's role is unclear. i am suspicious, however, of his attention-seeking and blurring of boundaries between himself and JRenner, who still retains him.