Maura Murray

AppointedNH wrote:

<quoted text>
I have visited the area in the past, and have visited the site today. Nothing found today, I have contacted SP in the past about items on the poster. The timber landing is a site that is used for loading timber trucks from skidders in the National Forest Service's timber harvests in the area. It's better known as a big gravel hill that can be mistaken as a sandpit or a shooting hill. I live in NH and enjoy the outdoors. This case intrigues me, as I'm sure it does alot of you.

Bump

Thanks Sam for finding those posts. I was looking all morning till I gave up and then noticed your link.

I find it interesting that this poster targeted this particular area. I have spoken through email to a local who used to post on this forum a long long time ago (not Columbo) and he also had brought up this area.I don't feel that they are the same posters either.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

Is it the same person? I don't know.
I will say this: to post on the blog, you have to enter an email address. The email address that the blog poster provided corresponds to a business website, which lists the poster's name. We corresponded through email and it checks out. In other words, he is who he says he is.

Sounds like it might be legit.

The thing that sticks out to me is that the blog poster asks "what color was her backpack" One would think that if he thought the backpack was evidence of some sorts that he would have searched/inquired at that time as to what color her backpack was and not 9 years later.Just thinking out loud. He may be legit , who knows.

Hans Strudle wrote:

For one, the guy , if he really found a backpack, had ample time to post here, websleuths, or JR's blog.

This thread began over 5 years after he claims to have made the discovery; Renner's blog, more than a year after that.

Why do you find it reasonable to wait 6 years to disclose information but not 8? This seems rather arbitrary to me.

Hans Strudle wrote:

This red herring is an attempt by Green/Ledyard to get traffic to their blog.

I don't even have Green's contact info.

And I'm fine with that.

Maura Murray has had a thread on Topix since she went missing. Many threads have been deleted, but this discussion has been on here from the beginning.

oo00oo wrote:

Maura Murray has had a thread on Topix since she went missing. Many threads have been deleted, but this discussion has been on here from the beginning.

Yes, "here" could mean this thread or this site. But even under your interpretation, he still gave Renner's blog as a choice.

Renner's blog was created 6 years after the discovery. Why would it be reasonable to wait 6 years but not 8? Again, the distinction seems arbitrary.

JWB wrote:

The thing that sticks out to me is that the blog poster asks "what color was her backpack" One would think that if he thought the backpack was evidence of some sorts that he would have searched/inquired at that time as to what color her backpack was and not 9 years later.Just thinking out loud. He may be legit , who knows.

My thoughts exactly. I tend to believe that he is legit, but have some level of doubt for the same reason.

Sam, I don't mean to speak for that poster but my interpretation is why wait all these years to just now post something when there were several forums at earlier points in time to post on.

Sam,was the business a cement company?And no I am not referring to you know who.LOL

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, "here" could mean this thread or this site. But even under your interpretation, he still gave Renner's blog as a choice.
Renner's blog was created 6 years after the discovery. Why would it be reasonable to wait 6 years but not 8? Again, the distinction seems arbitrary.

When you bring your blog discussion to Topix, it is implied you are referring to this site. I have never gone to your blog, nor do I ever intend to. Just correcting you on your incorrect statement.

For one, if someone found something related to such a high profile case, they wouldn't wait 8 years or 6 or 2. Common sense says that a thoughtful, inquiring person would be looking into something that big immediately; especially in that area. Secondly, if this person is searching the web for places to talk about a potentially big find, other sites appear first in the google list. Third, a high profile book by a high profile crime writer is writing a book on this subject and is continually asking for all info related to the case. It would be in this persons best interest to run it by Renner who has connections to LE to see if it has any significance. Moreover, it's a red herring for two reasons: Maura -by all media accounts- was a non-smoker, and a can of beer would not last a year in a region like NH. Period.

You don't have Green's contact info, but he wrote a letter specifically for your blog. Sure, ok.

Hans Strudle wrote:

For one, if someone found something related to such a high profile case, they wouldn't wait 8 years or 6 or 2. Common sense says that a thoughtful, inquiring person would be looking into something that big immediately; especially in that area. Secondly, if this person is searching the web for places to talk about a potentially big find, other sites appear first in the google list. Third, a high profile book by a high profile crime writer is writing a book on this subject and is continually asking for all info related to the case. It would be in this persons best interest to run it by Renner who has connections to LE to see if it has any significance. Moreover, it's a red herring for two reasons: Maura -by all media accounts- was a non-smoker, and a can of beer would not last a year in a region like NH. Period.

Common sense is not always used in Maura's discussion. Appreciate your comments.

Hans Strudle wrote:

You don't have Green's contact info, but he wrote a letter specifically for your blog. Sure, ok.

He corresponded only with Tyler. That's the way that he wanted it.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>I don't even have Green's contact info ...

Hmmm. Just a few posts above that one, you said:

Sam Ledyard wrote:

... I will say this: to post on the blog, you have to enter an email address.

So, you actually DO have Green's contact info, right?

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmmm. Just a few posts above that one, you said:
<quoted text>
So, you actually DO have Green's contact info, right?

"[T]o post on the blog, you have to enter an email address.[...]. We corresponded through email and it checks out."

In theory, I could put ANY email address into the form to post on the blog. Email verification isn't required.

The point that I was making in the text that you quoted is that, not only was I provided AN email address by the poster, I actually emailed him and discussed his post.

John, in contrast, did not (to my knowledge) use an actual email address.

JWB wrote:

Sam,was the business a cement company?And no I am not referring to you know who.LOL

It's not you know who and it's not a cement company.

Hey everyone:

As James mentioned at the end of his post yesterday, I will be offering some posts over the coming months.

Later today, I will offer a very detailed time line/narrative of events with referenced sources. It will serve as a framework for posts about many other issues I recognized while creating the timeline.

But first, I wanted to introduce myself. I am a singer-songwriter in Asheville, North Carolina. Prior to giving up my career and moving here, I was an attorney and management consultant in the northeastern US. I first came across Maura's case a few years ago, during a long road trip through northern New England. One night at about 10 pm, I literally drove east on 112 right to the ribbon Fred had put on the tree. I stopped, and by flash light my interest in the case was born.

More recently, I have done much research and analysis around the case, sometimes using tools that I became familiar with in my career. For instance, I once tried to build a model in SAS to help search for connections in the case. Alas, it did not work. But it is good example of the way I tend to think about puzzling matters. To wit: I like to mush through details and string ideas together, testing explanations for smaller parts of a whole, then building those into larger narratives, until perhaps I recognize a pattern or connection that I missed before. In that context - beyond the basic matter of the human compassion, the utter sadness of the case and my poignant introduction to it on a dark New Hampshire night - part of what interests me about Maura's case is all the baffling details. In creating the timeline, it has been amazing to see the little connections I'd previously missed. Some are quite interesting.

Most important to me is this: as James said yesterday, the news out of Cleveland should have anyone with any connection to any missing person case looking today with keener eyes. While my connection is random at origin, it is what it is ... and today it exists. So today, my eyes are keener.

Practically speaking, I most often will be posting at least twice a week, typically on Monday and Thursday. Some weeks there will be some additional posts. I also will be active in responding to comments and engaging any conversation that emerges.

Regards,

John

Hans Strudle wrote:

You don't have Green's contact info, but he wrote a letter specifically for your blog. Sure, ok.

https://www.youtube.com/watch...

Puff Dragon wrote:

<quoted text>
https://www.youtube.com/watch...

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.