Maura Murray

Judged:

3

3

2

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Habs - You never play into a hoax you let the hoax come to you. When the hoax finally plays out then you ask for the critical details as to why such and such a question wasn't addressed. What your doing by entertaining Sam is your now letting the hoax modify their story according to your questions. It shouldn't be this way, they should be able to speak the truth and let the "truth" stand up to the scrutiny.
The hoax if it is a good hoax should be able to slip right into the puzzle. Since the story doesn't slip into the puzzle; questions shouldn't be asked; let them change and modify the story around to make it fit and then if any integrity is left in the story then the questions should be asked.

Judged:

2

2

2

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
Two inconsistent conclusions follow from your premises:
"[A] good hoax should be able to slip right into the puzzle. Since th[is] story doesn't slip into the puzzle" --(1) it is a bad hoax, or (2) it is not a hoax.
Do you have a reason to draw one conclusion over the other?

Judged:

1

1

1

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
I would think you should be able to answer that question before me.

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
I didn't ... call a missing[] girl[']s family (spokes person) and friends over [the information].

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
Two inconsistent conclusions follow from your premises:
"[A] good hoax should be able to slip right into the puzzle. Since th[is] story doesn't slip into the puzzle" --(1) it is a bad hoax, or (2) it is not a hoax.
Do you have a reason to draw one conclusion over the other?

Judged:

1

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
The answer is 1.[...] The premises were not set to prove whether or not something was actually a hoax. The premises were set to say what would make a good hoax.[...]

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks for the well-reasoned response.
I tend to agree: a good hoax is like a puzzle where all the pieces fit together.
Reality, on the other hand, is far more complicated. Take, for example, the disappearance of Maura Murray.

Judged:

1

Lighthouse 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Thank you Sam. I also want you to know that I don't mean to come off rude in my posts. Sometimes its hard to judge tone in responses.

Hans Strudle wrote:

I had no idea that philosophical argumentation worked in missing person cases. I wonder if detectives set around discussing cases like their debating evolution or if God exists?

someuser wrote:

<quoted text>
I totaly don't believe in evolution. God painted all the pics in the bible himself and Eve looked just like me. Hehe.

Judged:

3

2

2

Silly Humans wrote:

You people just never give. LOL

Judged:

1

Silly Humans wrote:

You people just never give. LOL

Judged:

1

1

1

trollsRus wrote:

<quoted text>
Nope, we never give up.
Could someone do a timeline of the recent backpack saga?

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
http://pastehtml.com/view/dn9w9a3bv.html

Nut patrol wrote:

<quoted text>
Has it been verified that a backpack was found years ago and reported and now the same backpack has been found again and turned in to LE or CCU? After several years of harsh NH weather I'm sure it could be determined if it was a newer backpack or a weathered one. Have you called anyone to verify any of this Sam?

Nut patrol wrote:

<quoted text>
Has it been verified that a backpack was found years ago and reported and now the same backpack has been found again and turned in to LE or CCU? After several years of harsh NH weather I'm sure it could be determined if it was a newer backpack or a weathered one. Have you called anyone to verify any of this Sam?

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
The CCU has acknowledged that it had "been made aware of" the backpack when NHRider called it in. The CCU further acknowledged that, hypothetically, given the facts at hand, it "very likely" would have responded by going to the scene and collecting the backpack. The backpack has, in fact, been collected.
The CCU will not otherwise confirm anything about the bag. Which is to be expected.
In my mind, the easiest way for us to determine whether it's her bag is to speak to people who might recall her actual bag.
Unfortunately, Kate M. lacks adequate knowledge in that respect. The family has no pictures of her bag; they rely on Sharon R.'s recollection of it.
The other person I contacted is Karen Mayotte (she has said that she has vivid memories of that Thursday; she packed presumably the same backpack as the one Maura had in N.H. and carried it for Maura from one building to the other, so I thought she might recall some of its features). I haven't heard back from her.