Maura Murray

Det Columbo wrote:

<quoted text>
Buddha Thank You.....

I only thank gods such as yourself.

Fooouwndeeer.

Det Columbo wrote:

<quoted text>

Who was driving the black truck that night that was parked at the Weathered Barn w/ a red flashing light on the dash. All FD went in the Fire engine.
Who was the possible off duty FD personnel there that night.????
John

Well Detective...it's a Volunteer Fire Department, they are all off duty until they show up for a call. And although they are supposed to go to the station first, they all don't since some of them live closer to the scene than they do to the station.

Maybe you should investigate John Greens moose, he was probably in the area too. Maybe he hooked MM's hoody with his Antler is keeping her captive in his meese. Maybe you should set up some surveillance with JWB's game camera and see if he is collecting extra twigs and bark. I may be onto something here. A moose near the forest...hmmm...almost as suspicious as a fireman at the scene of an accident.

meese = herd

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Detective...it's a Volunteer Fire Department, they are all off duty until they show up for a call. And although they are supposed to go to the station first, they all don't since some of them live closer to the scene than they do to the station.
Maybe you should investigate John Greens moose, he was probably in the area too. Maybe he hooked MM's hoody with his Antler is keeping her captive in his meese. Maybe you should set up some surveillance with JWB's game camera and see if he is collecting extra twigs and bark. I may be onto something here. A moose near the forest...hmmm...almost as suspicious as a fireman at the scene of an accident.

Oh yeah. Crap, I was going to mention this one also. How is it a policeman has never been on a scene were volunteer fire/ems showed up in privately owned vehicles with red lights? We run blue but non the less. Is he just wasting our time screwing with us or does he really have no clue which again, brings up, was he ever really a cop. The question is just so stupid as to strain credulity.

We do that all the time DetC because a POV is much easier to maneuver than tankers and even ambulances and can get to the scene faster, with less risk to everyone on the road. Usually it is officers but any full member can "go direct" and evaluate the scene to determine if they should be running "lights and sirens", throttle everyone back or even return some equipment. SOP. Let me know if you need that acronym deciphered DetC. Don't want to overload you with too much jargon and information.

Bill

If Maura had had a microchip implanted she wouldn´t have gone missing. Just saying.

hannah_b wrote:

If Maura had had a microchip implanted she wouldn´t have gone missing. Just saying.

Maybe, maybe not... depends on who implanted the chip.

Ever see Dark Skies?

Give Betty and Barney a call over in Lincoln.

ALL FD rode to the scene on the fire engine. This was confirmed by Fire Chief Brad Kennedy.

NHSP were on Rte 302 in Lisbon at the time of the call. JM of NHSP was the officer who responded that way.

NO NHSP OR LE CAME FROM THE EAST. NONE, NOTTA, ZERO, Zip.

That's the direction that RF also saw someone running down the road.

SO MAYBE THEY SHOULD HAVE GONE THAT WAY.

THEY SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST PUT THE BOL OUT TO FRANCONIA, N. WOODSTOCK AND LINCOLN.

Poor search and procedure. Sent EMS away in 6 minutes.

John

Det Columbo wrote:

ALL FD rode to the scene on the fire engine. This was confirmed by Fire Chief Brad Kennedy.
NHSP were on Rte 302 in Lisbon at the time of the call. JM of NHSP was the officer who responded that way.
NO NHSP OR LE CAME FROM THE EAST. NONE, NOTTA, ZERO, Zip.
That's the direction that RF also saw someone running down the road.
SO MAYBE THEY SHOULD HAVE GONE THAT WAY.
THEY SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST PUT THE BOL OUT TO FRANCONIA, N. WOODSTOCK AND LINCOLN.
Poor search and procedure. Sent EMS away in 6 minutes.
John

Makes no difference. They were under no obligation to put out a BOL anywhere and they only did so to responding FD personnel which means they did not expect her to go anywhere but to the hospital or back to town. They were under no obligation to look east any further than the reach of their lights. There was no indication that the scene was anything more than what it appeared to be. A one car, alcohol related crash with no apparent serious injury. They acted accordingly under those circumstances and had no indication that more action was required. You can use caps and claim you know they did the wrong thing but until you produce an official SOP for the situation and can show that they didn't follow it, your comments are completely off base opinion driven by emotion and flawed thinking.

SnowyB wrote:

Ridiculous...it flew right over his wee little head. no clue at all.

I just realized that he's way out of sync with the moon. Seems the mania started quite early this month...Maybe some traumatic life event has thrown off his cycle. Hope he's not having problems with his moped..I know how much those snokin hot rides mean to him.. ; )

Mr Green again......What a loser.!

"
Topic Post
Tuesday - June 18, 2013

When I started off helping Renner, I did not anticipate that it would consume so much of my time. I also did not really have in mind how the process would work, beyond just writing and posting concepts similar to those that I had sent directly to him. But a specific process has emerged after all, and it is working well. I want to comment on it in the hopes of encouraging even more people to participate in it.

My primary role is to analyze evidence and develop, validate or debunk ideas connected to the case, with documentation. I do some research, but typically in context of analyzing a concept, unlike Renner who sifts though evidence and gathers the relevant without necessarily initially analyzing it much. The blog and community of discourse it enables gives him reference points and varied perspectives and cross-checks on his thinking as he writes. Lots of smart and intelligent people have helped him to develop new evidence and insights.

I was really surprised as I got to know through emails both how many people are following this blog as well as the diversity in perspectives, capabilities and backgrounds/experiences among them. Each time I have developed and documented an idea, a lot of new information has come in via the blog comments or in emails to me, refining or refuting it. That is the process at work.

A great example arose recently in terms of the "Lot 22" post, an update to which is forthcoming. A member of our discussion community named Mike - a journalist who was at UMASS when Maura disappeared and who has followed the case from day one - caught a detail I had misinterpreted/overlooked in one of the links. I then confirmed with UMASS parking services that he was right. Oddly, his contribution - while taking away one element of the analysis - also resulted in one of its key conclusions becoming even more pronounced.

That was the process at work. I writer the paper, everybody else "murder boards" it. The final conclusion is probably pretty sound.

So don't hesitate to take issue with matters in topic posts. It is true that I am not kind to people who spew personal criticisms inappropriately at me or others, and I will continue with that, with some even more persuasive methods to come. But for the majority of the intelligent and mature people out there interested in the case and willing to give time to thinking about it and researching it, your critical thought and either confirmation or refuting of points made in topic posts IS THE PROCESS and IS THE ENERGY behind which this blog has more than a few times developed new insights and leads for Renner. I welcome being told I am wrong, because I don't want to be out here on this limb having to be right all the time by myself. If I come up with a new insight that survives scrutiny here one in four times, that is a success, but in each instance we all will have learned, and Renner will have gotten those reference points that will help him to get the book done. You cannot explore ideas and theories genuinely and effectively if you have to worry too much about being right. The key is documenting and allowing others open access to your reasoning, so other bright people can show you where you erred and push you farther where you are on target.

So if a post is wrong, say so. Just be collegial and nice. We have a great community here. We are helping. We have developed new evidence and Law Enforcement watches this blog. So lets keep it going. "

Ridiculous wrote:

<quoted text>
I just realized that he's way out of sync with the moon. Seems the mania started quite early this month...Maybe some traumatic life event has thrown off his cycle. Hope he's not having problems with his moped..I know how much those snokin hot rides mean to him.. ; )

detail:

Most “super” supermoon of 2013 on June 22-23

Full moon falls on June 23, 2013 at 11:32 UTC (6:32 a.m. CDT in the U.S.). Thus, for many, the moon appears about as full in the June 22 evening sky as it does on the evening of June 23. This full moon is not only the closest and largest full moon of the year. It also presents the moon’s closest encounter with Earth for all of 2013. The moon will not be so close again until August, 2014. In other words, it’s not just a supermoon. It’s the closest supermoon of 2013.
****

beware. like PMS, the effect may be just before or during. the episode a few days ago may have passed, or may be a prelude of things to come.

i need to start dinner, but i'll be smiling at the vision of the night rider....on moped...everything flappin in the breeze.

Ridiculous wrote:

<quoted text>
I just realized that he's way out of sync with the moon. Seems the mania started quite early this month...Maybe some traumatic life event has thrown off his cycle. Hope he's not having problems with his moped..I know how much those snokin hot rides mean to him.. ; )

couldn't sleep so catching up with Topix during the night on my phone, as quietly as I can so as not to wake the bf, but this post tickled me so much that I laughed, tried to stop and ended up making a noise like a horse. A laughing horse.

lucky he's a heavy sleeper.

anyway, please don't stop :)

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
Well Detective...it's a Volunteer Fire Department, they are all off duty until they show up for a call. And although they are supposed to go to the station first, they all don't since some of them live closer to the scene than they do to the station.
Maybe you should investigate John Greens moose, he was probably in the area too. Maybe he hooked MM's hoody with his Antler is keeping her captive in his meese. Maybe you should set up some surveillance with JWB's game camera and see if he is collecting extra twigs and bark. I may be onto something here. A moose near the forest...hmmm...almost as suspicious as a fireman at the scene of an accident.

They were all @ the FD for a meeting. All 8 FD personnel went in the Engine. This was told to Me by Brad Kennedy, Fire Chief.

The moose has been cleared....LOL (That was for You especially Bill)

John

BillNH wrote:

<quoted text>
Makes no difference. They were under no obligation to put out a BOL anywhere and they only did so to responding FD personnel which means they did not expect her to go anywhere but to the hospital or back to town. They were under no obligation to look east any further than the reach of their lights. There was no indication that the scene was anything more than what it appeared to be. A one car, alcohol related crash with no apparent serious injury. They acted accordingly under those circumstances and had no indication that more action was required. You can use caps and claim you know they did the wrong thing but until you produce an official SOP for the situation and can show that they didn't follow it, your comments are completely off base opinion driven by emotion and flawed thinking.

BH......WTHT..........WFD..... .....MM

John

Det Columbo wrote:

ALL FD rode to the scene on the fire engine. This was confirmed by Fire Chief Brad Kennedy.

So let me understand this. You expect me to believe that no one on the fire department noticed this vehicle and said "who the hell is that"? BULLSHIT! There is no way on a fire/ems scene that someone like that would just drive up and "become part of the scene" without another member(s) finding out who the hell it was. People don't just walk around in crime/fire/medical scenes. So my simple claim to you is I call bullshit.

Bill

Det Columbo wrote:

Mr Green again......What a loser.!
"
Topic Post
Tuesday - June 18, 2013
When I started off helping Renner, I did not anticipate that it would consume so much of my time. I also did not really have in mind how the process would work, beyond just writing and posting concepts similar to those that I had sent directly to him. But a specific process has emerged after all, and it is working well. I want to comment on it in the hopes of encouraging even more people to participate in it.
My primary role is to analyze evidence and develop, validate or debunk ideas connected to the case, with documentation. I do some research, but typically in context of analyzing a concept, unlike Renner who sifts though evidence and gathers the relevant without necessarily initially analyzing it much. The blog and community of discourse it enables gives him reference points and varied perspectives and cross-checks on his thinking as he writes. Lots of smart and intelligent people have helped him to develop new evidence and insights.
I was really surprised as I got to know through emails both how many people are following this blog as well as the diversity in perspectives, capabilities and backgrounds/experiences among them. Each time I have developed and documented an idea, a lot of new information has come in via the blog comments or in emails to me, refining or refuting it. That is the process at work.
A great example arose recently in terms of the "Lot 22" post, an update to which is forthcoming. A member of our discussion community named Mike - a journalist who was at UMASS when Maura disappeared and who has followed the case from day one - caught a detail I had misinterpreted/overlooked in one of the links. I then confirmed with UMASS parking services that he was right. Oddly, his contribution - while taking away one element of the analysis - also resulted in one of its key conclusions becoming even more pronounced.
That was the process at work. I writer the paper, everybody else "murder boards" it. The final conclusion is probably pretty sound.
So don't hesitate to take issue with matters in topic posts. It is true that I am not kind to people who spew personal criticisms inappropriately at me or others, and I will continue with that, with some even more persuasive methods to come. But for the majority of the intelligent and mature people out there interested in the case and willing to give time to thinking about it and researching it, your critical thought and either confirmation or refuting of points made in topic posts IS THE PROCESS and IS THE ENERGY behind which this blog has more than a few times developed new insights and leads for Renner. I welcome being told I am wrong, because I don't want to be out here on this limb having to be right all the time by myself. If I come up with a new insight that survives scrutiny here one in four times, that is a success, but in each instance we all will have learned, and Renner will have gotten those reference points that will help him to get the book done. You cannot explore ideas and theories genuinely and effectively if you have to worry too much about being right. The key is documenting and allowing others open access to your reasoning, so other bright people can show you where you erred and push you farther where you are on target.
So if a post is wrong, say so. Just be collegial and nice. We have a great community here. We are helping. We have developed new evidence and Law Enforcement watches this blog. So lets keep it going. "

OMG! Green has uncovered New Evidence! LE is paying close attention with jaws dropped in awe. Finally a REAL investigstor on the case, Maura will be found any day now!

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
detail:
Most “super” supermoon of 2013 on June 22-23
Full moon falls on June 23, 2013 at 11:32 UTC (6:32 a.m. CDT in the U.S.). Thus, for many, the moon appears about as full in the June 22 evening sky as it does on the evening of June 23. This full moon is not only the closest and largest full moon of the year. It also presents the moon’s closest encounter with Earth for all of 2013. The moon will not be so close again until August, 2014. In other words, it’s not just a supermoon. It’s the closest supermoon of 2013.
****
beware. like PMS, the effect may be just before or during. the episode a few days ago may have passed, or may be a prelude of things to come.
i need to start dinner, but i'll be smiling at the vision of the night rider....on moped...everything flappin in the breeze.

What Snowy, is it that time of the month already? Are you saying JWB is on his period again? Only days after the previous one?

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
So let me understand this. You expect me to believe that no one on the fire department noticed this vehicle and said "who the hell is that"? BULLSHIT! There is no way on a fire/ems scene that someone like that would just drive up and "become part of the scene" without another member(s) finding out who the hell it was. People don't just walk around in crime/fire/medical scenes. So my simple claim to you is I call bullshit.
Bill

I never said nobody who knew who it was.

Wrapped a little tight this evening Mr. Bill..?

John

BILLNH....

Were You on duty that night.?

John

Det Columbo wrote:

<quoted text>
I never said nobody who knew who it was.

Jesus, we need to buy you an English class. What the hell does that sentence even mean?

Bill