Maura Murray

Jack Vert wrote:

Maybe you guys should stop worrying about YOURSELVES and start worrying about MAURA. I hve tried to make a positive impact but in the end it was IMPOSSIBLE. like using white paint on a white canvas no matter how exponential the effort the misinformants and trolls wont allow a REAL community to form around this case. Maybe THAT'S why so many talented people abandon their efforts to look into it. Of course, with no one intelligent around, the conversation is bound to go south... the flaming (obviously of premeditation) will never stop

Karma police
I've given all I can
It's not enough
I've given all I can
But we're still on the payroll

This is what you get
This is what you get
This is what you get when you mess with us

For a minute there, I lost myself, I lost myself
Phew, for a minute there, I lost myself, I lost myself

For a minute there, I lost myself, I lost myself
Phew, for a minute there, I lost myself, I lost myself

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>Hahaha!!!!
Renner's character David Neff has it right. You'll see it everywhere. And some will think they see it even when it doesn't exist at all.
Sorry to disappoint, but no.
Peek again.

(Amherst College?)

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
FW implied that she could hear the cars passing. She heard Smith arrive; that's why she returned to the window.
I find Atwood to have been extremely unreliable. His story changed. He had an incentive to lie. If he was the last person to see her, and no cars passed, then he looks like a better suspect. Unfortunately, he will never be able to set the record straight.

You're right. SBD's identification, honest and well intended though it might have been, is, as far as the public knows, utterly unreliable. So other than the presence of the Saturn, why should one strongly believe that Maura Murray was ever at the WB curve?

Rock Opera Phantom wrote:

<quoted text>
(Amherst College?)

(Don't tell anyone, okay?)

Sam Ledyard wrote:

FW implied that she could hear the cars passing. She heard Smith arrive; that's why she returned to the window.
I find Atwood to have been extremely unreliable. His story changed. He had an incentive to lie. If he was the last person to see her, and no cars passed, then he looks like a better suspect. Unfortunately, he will never be able to set the record straight.

sam, i am also aware – as are you and others – of inconsistencies in a number of butch's reported statements about exactly what he saw and did. however, in some of those same reports, he doesn't come across as shady or evasive, it's elsewhere reported that he was interviewed by law enforcement multiple times, and it is also reported that maura was still moving around the vehicle at the scene after butch drove away. in my reading of the available information, i see butch as a very well meaning, concerned individual.

so, what to make of the inconsistent statements? since he was the last known witness to see maura living and breathing at the scene, my thought is that he what he saw or experienced at the scene was of such importance to law enforcement that perhaps they asked him not to divulge specific information to the press. perhaps this is why some of his statements began to shift and change upon subsequent reporting. in that situation, i personally look to the earliest reports containing his statements as those would seem to be the most accurate as they are closer in time to the actual event.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>
(Don't tell anyone, okay?)

(Okay. Secret like Skull & Bones. Got it. Back to my rock opera.)

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>
You're right. SBD's identification, honest and well intended though it might have been, is, as far as the public knows, utterly unreliable. So other than the presence of the Saturn, why should one strongly believe that Maura Murray was ever at the WB curve?

ha! correct. it is only proven, as fact, that her car arrived in NH.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>
(Don't tell anyone, okay?)

(the smart people attend UMASS,right?)
(Amherst College? oh, that's for dummies)
wink wink

I like Aldon's cool basement apartment. It looks like a place a creepy freak would inhabit.

whatif wrote:

<quoted text>
sam, i am also aware – as are you and others – of inconsistencies in a number of butch's reported statements about exactly what he saw and did. however, in some of those same reports, he doesn't come across as shady or evasive, it's elsewhere reported that he was interviewed by law enforcement multiple times, and it is also reported that maura was still moving around the vehicle at the scene after butch drove away. in my reading of the available information, i see butch as a very well meaning, concerned individual.
so, what to make of the inconsistent statements? since he was the last known witness to see maura living and breathing at the scene, my thought is that he what he saw or experienced at the scene was of such importance to law enforcement that perhaps they asked him not to divulge specific information to the press. perhaps this is why some of his statements began to shift and change upon subsequent reporting. in that situation, i personally look to the earliest reports containing his statements as those would seem to be the most accurate as they are closer in time to the actual event.

I agree that SBD was well meaning and concerned. I never got a sense from his interviews that he was 'covering', no bad vibe from him so to speak. I personally feel that many people thought him suspicious just because of how he looked and him being the last known person to speak to MM. As for his shifting stories consider the fact that most eye witnesses make horrible witnesses. It is bad enough if a witness is questioned by LE and then seem to have things somewhat different months or years later in court. SBD suffered through a slew of interviews. I would be more suspicious if the story was exactly the same every time, nobody does that. Think about your own treatment of a story or anecdote. Your presentation of it changes from one telling to the next. As you recite, other details emerge, some are left behind only to be brought back into it later in a slightly different way. It is much like the 'whisper in the ear' experiment where by the time the whisper gets around the room, passed from one person to the next, it is changed from the original. Usually the initial statement is the most reliable one.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>Hahaha!!!!
Renner's character David Neff has it right. You'll see it everywhere. And some will think they see it even when it doesn't exist at all.
Sorry to disappoint, but no.
Peek again.

maybe we see pattern because they are there for us to see. To assert otherwise is an exercise is prejudicial conjecture. The universe is not random , because complex mathematics and physics, consciousness, and complex life forms are ordered and , it should logically follow that they arose from order. If you think otherwise, then your assertion that its all a big accident nulls your statement. You want an ordered, coherent statement to somehow transcend the randomness. Fail.

Bunch of idiots here. Bring some educated people on here for once.

whatif wrote:

<quoted text>
BillNH – unlike some folks who post, i don't take myself or my theories so seriously to take offense if others disagree or tear apart my arguments. i actually quite prefer it as a matter of intellectual exercise. it is truly a baffling case, and anyone who thinks they know more than anyone else is either ridiculously naive or arrogantly narcissistic.
i do hope that, even if no one else picks up on what your hinting at, you will still share your thoughts in the interest of challenging theories and ideas. i won't at all feel picked on and would welcome the opportunity to have my thinking on these theories broadened.

Whaitiff,

Clearly a thoughtful, respectful and bright person. I am happy to see you post here.
My thoughts on your theories; It just seems like all four points are based on subjective information. Forciers sighting. Statements made by individuals interpreted by other individuals and assumptions, though backed by some history and study of human behavior, about how a certain individual may react to a certain situation. There's no accounting for human behavior, and although much has been gleaned in the world of psychology, profiling, and behavioral profiling, at the end of the day people do the damndest things.
It seems that we always end up back at the windmill because there just doesn't seem to be enough to hang a hat on. As to your theory on abduction; although stranger abductions do happen, and on a global scale,quite often,the majority of abductions and murders are perpetrated by individuals with some sort of relationship to the victim. Even if this relationship is third party or as simple as having interacted with them only occassionaly. With that in mind, I did originally believe that this was a case of stranger abduction as well. Like some I felt that the odds were good that she jumped into the wrong car to hightail it out of a DWI and in all honesty, I still believe this could have been the case,but, after spending time here and doing some research, It is actually about third on my list now.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

Beagle -- here's my point. I think that you are putting yourself into the criminal's shoes in theorizing about this case. The real wrongdoer, most likely, would not think the way that you do.

what, specifically, is the crime committed?

CharlesDarwinlovedAnal wrote:

<quoted text>maybe we see pattern because they are there for us to see. To assert otherwise is an exercise is prejudicial conjecture. The universe is not random , because complex mathematics and physics, consciousness, and complex life forms are ordered and , it should logically follow that they arose from order. If you think otherwise, then your assertion that its all a big accident nulls your statement. You want an ordered, coherent statement to somehow transcend the randomness. Fail.

Now Johnny,

Why not keep this whole topic over at the Asheville forum? You've argued the Darwin thing to the max there..Listen, Sammy and I are going to be doing a Rock Opera. The dog may do a guest spot with his synthesizer.Would you like to do something with your four chords and monotone vocal stylings? Your more than welcome to do that ditty about shower curtains and the world economy.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
what, specifically, is the crime committed?

Aha, an excellent question! Sammy should trade that old wooden tub in for a Whaler. Those things are unsinkable you know....

Ridiculous wrote:

<quoted text>
Now Johnny,
Why not keep this whole topic over at the Asheville forum? You've argued the Darwin thing to the max there..Listen, Sammy and I are going to be doing a Rock Opera. The dog may do a guest spot with his synthesizer.Would you like to do something with your four chords and monotone vocal stylings? Your more than welcome to do that ditty about shower curtains and the world economy.

I'm doing the monotone vocal stylings, thank you.

Beagle is so smart, he gots him a job pushing in buggies at Wally-Mart.

There sho' is sum edumacated white folk here. Yous people spend a lot of time bickering. Try eatin' some poke.

Hiddy-ho primates!