|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Sam wrote: <quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
You must be referring to Suzanne. I do not apologize for my past efforts to prove that Suzanne was a work of fiction. I firmly believe that she was. I know that others, Ben is an example, believe that Suzanne was a real person. There is no sense in arguing about it. At this point, it is beating a dead horse. I think that she's fictional; others disagree.
That aside, I never threatened Suzanne. Your attempt to equate my behavior with pomkik's is insulting.
<quoted text>
I do not see it that way. Focusing strictly on Maruchan, I wish for her to confirm that she is not Les because Les is quite understandably annoyed by the situation. I defend and protect friends and colleagues. I will not apologize for that.
<quoted text>
The safety of those close to me is more important than "being picked for your team" (whatever that means). If your name was published, and "pomkik" threatened you and someone else (by name, mind you), I think that you would comply with pomkik's request.
It's a blog. It's not more important than a person. As I stated before Sam, I have children and I have no interest in them getting exposed to anything here on the internet. I choose to post at this site anonymously out of respect to their privacy. I will say this; you absolutely do not deserve to have your person or any of your friends or family threatened. I will assume, especially considering your occupation, that you have taken legal steps to deal with this. My team Sammy; I don't have a team. It's a sports metaphor. Back bone....That would be letting pomkik know that the best thing that could happen in this situation is for it to be handled legally. The alternative resolution, would be much worse and anyone who sincerely threatens someone you care for stands a very good chance of discovering what it's like to have to gum their food!
|
|
Since: Jan 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Sam, your retraction is a poor substitute for the professionalism you apparently lack. better not to have revealed your profession than to have tainted it by your words. i can't respect. that.
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
It is being handled through the proper legal channels. As I said, neither Ben nor Renner's contact believe that a proxy was used. So, pomkik will be identified by his or her ip address. An application for complaint will follow. That's all I can say at the moment.
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Sam wrote: <quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
You must be referring to Suzanne. I do not apologize for my past efforts to prove that Suzanne was a work of fiction. I firmly believe that she was. I know that others, Ben is an example, believe that Suzanne was a real person. There is no sense in arguing about it. At this point, it is beating a dead horse. I think that she's fictional; others disagree.
That aside, I never threatened Suzanne. Your attempt to equate my behavior with pomkik's is insulting.
<quoted text>
I do not see it that way. Focusing strictly on Maruchan, I wish for her to confirm that she is not Les because Les is quite understandably annoyed by the situation. I defend and protect friends and colleagues. I will not apologize for that.
<quoted text>
The safety of those close to me is more important than "being picked for your team" (whatever that means). If your name was published, and "pomkik" threatened you and someone else (by name, mind you), I think that you would comply with pomkik's request.
It's a blog. It's not more important than a person. I didn't equate your behavior with pomkiks. I didn't say that your attempt at exposing anyone was malicious. You have made insinuations concerning other posters identities Sam. I don't have the time to dig them up, maybe later. I don't believe those insinuations were intended maliciously either, but, I do believe, much like Renner's, they were meant to control.
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
SnowyB wrote: Sam, your retraction is a poor substitute for the professionalism you apparently lack. better not to have revealed your profession than to have tainted it by your words. i can't respect. that. I'm sorry that you feel that way. I know that you admired (and, perhaps, continue to admire) certain traits of Suzanne. I can only say that I firmly believe that she is fictional. I never intended to expose a real person's identity (only to expose a fake identity for what it is). As I said, I am not looking for her at the moment. I am learning and I am evolving. If I had to do it over again, I would behave differently. But I am not going to say that I think my actions were wrong. I still believe that she was fictional. And I think that she created a destructive red herring. Didn't James publish something in a Sherbrooke publication? Who first placed Maura in Sherbrooke? Without Suzanne, James might be focusing his resources towards a viable resolution of this case.
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
Ridiculous wrote: <quoted text>
I didn't equate your behavior with pomkiks. I didn't say that your attempt at exposing anyone was malicious. You have made insinuations concerning other posters identities Sam. I don't have the time to dig them up, maybe later. I don't believe those insinuations were intended maliciously either, but, I do believe, much like Renner's, they were meant to control. I created a way for people to post anonymously on the blog. I believe that people are more likely to engage in meaningful dialogue and to provide information if they need not worry that their identities will be exposed. Having said that, if ever I begin to engage in the conduct that you have described, by all means, hold me accountable. I would not fault you for that.
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
Judged:
1
I can give examples. To this day, I have not revealed Tom's location. I googled his email address and found plenty of information which shows him to be a real and respectable person. Despite all the attacks about the backpack find, many directed to me, I maintained his confidentiality. JWB -- I didn't reveal that NHRider was JWB. I respected his privacy and let him do so himself. One poster posted some very interesting information about a long time poster here. She was his neighbor. Tyler interviewed her; plenty of juicy info. She said that she that didn't want it posted. We respected her wish. I could go on. The point is, I never saw then Suzanne situation as identifying a poster. I still don't. But I can appreciate the fact that those who believe that she's real would see my actions in a different light.
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
Reading my above comment, it seems critical of James. I think that James truly does have the resources and intelligence to bring resolution to a case of this nature.
Let's face it; most cases are solved. Maura had a cellphone, keys and other items that will eventually be found. I have no doubt that a concentrated search would yield results.
If I had the resources, I would interview people familiar with the New Hampshire terrain. I would determine the probability of her passing away near the scene of the accident. If sufficiently probable, I would find a way to concentrate resources there and rule that out. Then I would work on the Fred Murray "dirtbag" theory. If, and only if, those two theories were debunked, would I begin looking into the third scenario -- that she's alive and well.
With unlimited resources, I suppose that the order wouldn't matter. But none of us have unlimited resources. And I think that Suzanne caused the focus to shift in a manner that diverted resources.
|
|
Ridiculous
Manchester, NH
|
Sam wrote: <quoted text>
I created a way for people to post anonymously on the blog. I believe that people are more likely to engage in meaningful dialogue and to provide information if they need not worry that their identities will be exposed.
Having said that, if ever I begin to engage in the conduct that you have described, by all means, hold me accountable. I would not fault you for that. I saw the article in which you were identified Sam. I got a chuckle out of the irony and then immediately forgot your name. Why? because even though you were foolish enough to let your ego get the best of you and give that interview, it's just not my business and it means nothing to me. Unlike your buddy Tyler and his hilarious statement about the internet being real life, I'm just not that naive. The guy I take shots at and disagree with here is named Sam Ledyard and unless he drags me into the real world, that's who he should be. Now get back to the exciting life of a Barrister Sammy, people need their coffee and they need it now! Oh, wiki just corrected me. I thought a barrister was a male coffee house employee..sorry, but hey, three sugars extra cream if you don't mind...
|
|
Sam
Rockland, MA
|
Ridiculous wrote: <quoted text>
I saw the article in which you were identified Sam. I got a chuckle out of the irony and then immediately forgot your name. Why? because even though you were foolish enough to let your ego get the best of you and give that interview, it's just not my business and it means nothing to me. Jensen really believes that online investigations can help solve cases. I agree with him; investigators need people's cooperation. Cases are not solved in a vacuum. And there are many intelligent people who have the time to look into aspects of a case. Jensen thought that my profession was a plus. I really do want to see this case solved. In retrospect, my decision might have been flawed, but it was not an ego-driven decision. I was somewhat naive. It turns out that there are some truly bad people watching these forums, and privacy concerns are legitimate.
|
|
mcsmom
Vernon Rockville, CT
|
Judged:
1
1
It was the timing and development of posters and what they brought to the table on Advocates site that was key. IMO. The content? Not so much. Bada bing. Bada boom.
|
|
“pomKik + pomKik + pomKik”
Since: Feb 14
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
|
|
Insanity rules
Concord, NH
|
Judged:
2
This forum is more about Renner, John Green and Sam ledyard than it is about Maura Murray. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER MAURA.......?
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Insanity rules wrote: This forum is more about Renner, John Green and Sam ledyard than it is about Maura Murray. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER MAURA.......? Not much to talk about regarding Maura. Unless you believe that those posters in Sherbrooke are going to locate her? renner will have this tied up with a bow in no time. Just ask him. He stated that months ago. WALOC Bill
|
|
Spam I Am
Santa Clara, CA
|
Judged:
1
As far as I know...I havent corresponded with John Green. Sam wrote: <quoted text>
That's a different thing entirely. If you recall there being no forum in light of the information we discussed, then I credit your recollection.
I see your point about Suzanne. Of course, I think that there was one Suzanne -- but there's no point in us discussing that anymore than we already have. I doubt either of other minds will change (at least in the absence of additional information).
<quoted text>
I cannot explain Renner's post. It seems that he made an error and chose not to correct it, which, admittedly would tend to hurt his credibility. I really would like to give him the benefit of the doubt on this -- I just can't see how that's possible.
One other thing: James thinks that Maruchan is Les.
I have corresponded with Les via email for nearly a year as part of an email group. She, like Maruchan, is a very good researcher. But the similarities, in my opinion, stop there.
There is one thing that bothers me. I hope, Maruchan, that you will clear this up. I believe that your comment about John Green telling you my real name is what originally directed James' attention to Les. John Green asked Les and another person to look into me very early on (I had no idea that he did this until recently and, frankly, it creeps me out). Please, if possible, explain why you were in contact with John Green.
For the record, I never looked into Green and so I took his representations at face value. Only recently did I find out his real name (when he last posted on the blog, in fact; he accidentally posted using a different email address, one that revealed his name). I told him that his past is none of my business and that I have no interest in researching him. That was, and continues to be, how I feel.
|
|
James Renner
Akron, OH
|
We were aware of the links between Leslie Traniello and Maruchan for some time. And while I'm not a fan of anonymity on the internet, I don't out people without just cause. But over the course of the last few months, your posts have become increasingly alarming and personal. Where you stepped out of bounds was calling David's mother in an attempt to keep info from a fellow reporter. That's not contributing to the effort to find Maura. Whether you believe there's a link between David and Maura or not, what you did there was cut off info and muddy the waters. I have to wonder why. Is it just a weird jealousy? Did you know Fred Jr. in high school and feel the need to "protect" info about the family? Leslie posts using the same IP on my blog that Maruchan used to comment on Topix. Both from the Manchester area, within the Londonderry ping radius. And the connection to Hanson/Whitman that has been kept on the down low. I'm not saying there's any link to a crime. I should hope not. But there's a heavy amount of obfuscation come from your end. And I don't get that. I think the thing that gave it away, though, was Maruchan's comments on the prosaic specifics of dog breeds.
|
|
Sam
Needham Heights, MA
|
Maruchan wrote: <quoted text>
Renner, with malice aforethought, thought he was outing Leslie as Maruchan. He was wrong, but, again, does that matter? If Maruchan was really Leslie, wouldn't you find it disturbing that Renner would do such a thing? I keep seeing all this respect you have for Renner, do you still respect a guy who would reveal your friend's real name and make up "facts" to try to tie her to Maura's disappearance?
I actually find his attempts to tie Maruchan/me/Leslie to Maura's disappearance almost more disturbing than him revealing my alleged identity. Leslie should be pretty angry that Renner is accusing her (not Maruchan) of having a Whitman/Hanson connection and implying that she is involved in her disappearance.
<quoted text>
I have never been in contact with Green. I said that Green had outed you. I can't explain this fully without potentially revealing personal info about you and a friend of yours, info that Green revealed in another Internet forum in which he included a Facebook link to your friend. He was trying to find a connection between your friend and Maura. If you do a Google search for Maura Murray and the rather famous thing your friend is connected to, you should be able to find the forum thread and the link he posted that brought me there. I wasn't looking for you, I was just following the trail that Green deliberately provided that seemed to be just about Maura - I didn't know what it was about until I essentially stumbled onto you. If this doesn't make sense, sorry, it's the best I can do. I understand.
|
|
Sam
Needham Heights, MA
|
By the way, there is no connection.
|
|
Insanity rules
Concord, NH
|
I am who I am. Me thinks so anyway.
can someone confirm this for (ME)
|
Since: Jan 14
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
DIY Detective wrote: Bob Ward at Fox25 will be doing a story ("NE Unsolved: The Disappearance of Maura Murray. Ten Years Later.”) on the 10pm news tonight. Fred Murray: Thinks someone grabbed Maura and may have heard about it (accident) over a scanner. Was a Monday night, not much going, not a tourist area. Says he knows Maura would have called that Monday night if she was able to do so. PI Tom Shamshak: Believes Maura was taken from the scene. Thirty-nine hours after disappearance SAR dog tracked Maura’s scent from accident scene 600 feet (in the middle of road) toward SBD’s house. Says if Maura walked into woods, something would have been found by now. NH AAG J. Strelzin: All possibilities on the table. No credible sightings of Maura in 10 years. http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/24675892/201...
|
|
|
Dating
