Maura Murray

Dear Jesus wrote:

Help these people realize that if it were humanly possible to solve this tragic mystery, it would have already happened by now. Help them to get a clue and realize that calling people at home is inappropriate, in light of that fact. Amen.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
Amen

Judged:

2

2

2

Tyler in Pittsburgh wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Snowy,
Did you already know Suzanne wrote the Geocities letter before Sam figured it out?

Judged:

1

1

1

Tyler in Pittsburgh wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Snowy,
Did you already know Suzanne wrote the Geocities letter before Sam figured it out?

Judged:

1

1

1

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
i don't see proof that "Suzanne" is the author....

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
the answer is no.
the appearance of an accusation is unwelcome, and the suggestion is insulting.
that each or any of you continue to target topix posters, one after another, is at once, pompous and pathetic.
clearly, the boys are all out of original ideas, clues, and leads; old topix posts are the only remaining resources to beef up a paucity of facts and information.

Judged:

1

Tyler in Pittsburgh wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Snowy,
Did you already know Suzanne wrote the Geocities letter before Sam figured it out?

Judged:

1

1

1

James Renner wrote:

Going through my notes. Guess who else was from Taunton? Butch Atwood. Very strange.

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
the answer is no.
the appearance of an accusation is unwelcome, and the suggestion is insulting.
that each or any of you continue to target topix posters, one after another, is at once, pompous and pathetic.
clearly, the boys are all out of original ideas, clues, and leads; old topix posts are the only remaining resources to beef up a paucity of facts and information.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
I think it was a fair question. There were some obvious indicators that Suzanne was observer, so it's reasonable to think that you might have known that she was (or at least suspected it). For the record, I believe you.
No one's targeting Topix posters. Suzanne was targeted because she intentionally spread false information about Maura. Recall Mason's response; what observer did may be criminal. Assuming that it is, we have targeted possible criminal conduct; not posting on Topix.
Putting aside observer's identity for a moment, do you condone observer's behavior? How do you feel about what observer did?

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
James, whoever Suzanne was, her conduct went way beyond mere trolling. Why spend time and planning to spread false information about a missing person?
Identifying her and investigating her motive will be very interesting.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know. My first thought is to watch idiots run all over the continent pretending that they are going to solve this case based upon information they found on the internet.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
I think it was a fair question. There were some obvious indicators that Suzanne was observer, so it's reasonable to think that you might have known that she was (or at least suspected it). For the record, I believe you.
No one's targeting Topix posters. Suzanne was targeted because she intentionally spread false information about Maura. Recall Mason's response; what observer did may be criminal. Assuming that it is, we have targeted possible criminal conduct; not posting on Topix.
Putting aside observer's identity for a moment, do you condone observer's behavior? How do you feel about what observer did?

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
-- Both observer and Susan posed from Taunton.
-- Both had Verizon IP addresses.
-- Observer's email address was "objectiveobserver2009 " -- Suzanne referred to herself as "objective observer."
-- Suzanne posted for the final time two days before the Canada posts. In her final post, she stated that she she believes Maura is "alive and well" -- words stated, again, in the Canada posts.
-- Suzanne claimed that she wrote an article on Pam Smart for the Globe. No one named Suzanne wrote an article about Pam Smart for the Globe.
-- When Suzanne started posting again, she used a different moniker (adagio).
This is proof. Suzanne was created by someone and posted for two months five years ago.In light of that, I honestly don't understand your blind loyalty.

Dear Jesus wrote:

<quoted text>
You thought asking if White Wash had photographs from the night of the accident was a fair question after she had repeatedly said she didn't. Your "fair question" was derived apparently from a convoluted interpretation of White Wash's post.

Dear Jesus wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't seem capable of considering that someone could have constructed the Geocities page to make it look like Suzanne from the Boston Globe.

Dear Jesus wrote:

<quoted text>
You both act like proxy servers don't exist.

Dear Jesus wrote:

<quoted text>
I welcome all you idiots that go snooping around collecting names and emails to go ahead and call me so I can tell you personally just how wrong you are.

Tyler in Pittsburgh wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Snowy,
Thank you for your detailed response to my question.

Sam Ledyard wrote:

<quoted text>
I think it was a fair question. There were some obvious indicators that Suzanne was observer, so it's reasonable to think that you might have known that she was (or at least suspected it). For the record, I believe you.
No one's targeting Topix posters. Suzanne was targeted because she intentionally spread false information about Maura. Recall Mason's response; what observer did may be criminal. Assuming that it is, we have targeted possible criminal conduct; not posting on Topix.
Putting aside observer's identity for a moment, do you condone observer's behavior? How do you feel about what observer did?

Dear Jesus wrote:

<quoted text>
Look Sam, your so wrong in so many ways here, its ridiculous. Yes you are targeting Topix posters. Yes you called White Wash at home. Yes you actually considered that Snowy knew who the Geocities creator was, yes you asked her if she condones the behavior hidden behind an insincere I believe you.
Snowy doesn't need a facts lecture from you about Mason's opinion.
I've lost my confidence in your ability to judge what a fair question is. You thought asking if White Wash had photographs from the night of the accident was a fair question after she had repeatedly said she didn't. Your "fair question" was derived apparently from a convoluted interpretation of White Wash's post.
You don't seem capable of considering that someone could have constructed the Geocities page to make it look like Suzanne from the Boston Globe. Copy paste comes to mind.
Meanwhile Renner here didn't stress the fact that Citigirl may have been purposely targeted. You both act like proxy servers don't exist. Sam acts like he has a definite answer. Truth is we don't have acdefinite answer.
This whole exercise has really become a subject to satire. Its a joke. Its been years. Everybody here has put huge amiunts of time into this. And what has this all become? Nothing positive.
What is really sad is that some judgement calls have been made exposing certain personal information about Maura's family. None of our damn business. Did it cause Maura to be found? No. So only damage was done.
I welcome all you idiots that go snooping around collecting names and emails to go ahead and call me so I can tell you personally just how wrong you are.
IN PLAIN ENGLISH NONE OF THE VOLUNTEERS HERE ARE KEEPING CRITICAL INFORMATION FROM YOU.