Maura Murray

Judged:

3

3

2

Ridiculous wrote:

Wow,
Sam, you took down your blog because your anonymity was exposed and you and someone close to you were threatened? Here you are doing your very best to crawl right up Maruchans butt, just like Tyler has with you. Where's the apology for trying to expose other people?

Judged:

2

2

1

DIY Detective wrote:

<quoted text>
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...

Judged:

2

2

1

Spam I Am wrote:

<quoted text>
In the interest of speaking to the truth, such as to clear up any misconceptions, I will speak to this. I hope to also comment of what seems to be a trait of ***human beings*** in general.
I am not here to admonish. I feel I have a much more important point to make.
The summary is that he didn't take the blog down because his identity was exposed.
So, what happened? A few weeks ago Sam and I had a big argument here. On or near the day that the argument ended - someone sent a threat to Sam.
It was shortly thereafter that he contacted me. And it is a very good thing that he did. It showed courage and character and the ability to think out of the box. Because even though **I did not send him the threat***- he should have had reason to suspect I did.***Which by the way is the way someone likes to operate around here - throw free punches at people and take advantage of the fact that no one will assume he or she has done so.****
I can also verify that the threat was made against people other than just Sam. The threat demanded that he remove his blog, and if not, it implied that harm would come to Sam *and someone else.*
So Sam was literally in a position in which he had to consider someone else's well being.
There were other aspects of the threat as a whole that fit a pattern. I'll just say this - I think that Sam has been framed in such a way that makes it appear that he has called people at home. I don't think so. I think the person who sent the threat did.
So, if anyone has any question as to if Sam has "backbone" at this point - the above should put that to rest.
As soon as I found out that he was threatened and that threat crossed over into real life - I didn't hesitate to help. I won't hesitate to help anyone, even people that I have had heated disputes with in the past.
My second and most important point is this: I have become convinced that ***human beings*** as a whole tend to try to explain the unknown and the drive to reach that explanation makes no apologies for the damage it does to arrive at it.
I have become convinced, not only by my observations here, but in other circumstances in my life, that speculating about other people's character is one of the most prolific and unrecognized evils that plagues human kind.
It is very dangerous and irresponsible to imagine what other people's motives are or what their character is based upon speculative profiles, even loose evidence.
What is really sad, is that people actually believe that they are being advocates for a cause and are being good people. But in reality, only destruction follows.
Resolution never comes. Only a path of destruction paved by the speculated deficiencies people project upon each other, in their quest, as ***human beings*** to explain the unexplainable.
For the most part, if we, as ***human beings*** didn't have this drive to solve puzzles we would still be living in the caves. But there is an aspect to our character that we should recognize and deal with - that there are times when this drive does not serve us well.

Judged:

1

Insanity rules wrote:

<quoted text>
We can now assume the dog tracking was simply a CONFUSED dog not tracking any scent but merely walking the road. 3 days later with dogs TRYING TO TRACK A SCENT on a main road that is actually quite busy would be a feat. Especially using the gloves which were NEW.

Judged:

3

2

2

Ridiculous wrote:

<quoted text> I'm trying very hard to maintain my dislike of Sam.

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam wrote:

<quoted text>
I understand.

Sam wrote:

By the way, there is no connection.

Sam wrote:

Les says she's never posted on Topix (I believe her).
I made a suggestion: post on a random thread as proof that your location differs from Maruchan's.
Her location displayed as Merrimack, NH. http://www.topix.com/forum/city/merrimack-nh/... .
Maruchan's does not.

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Good, I'm glad. I hope you also understand that there probably are other eyes that espied what I did.
<quoted text>
Thanks for clarifying this, Sam. I just went and posted under Leslie's "no no" post - it shows my "new" Rutland VT location. I probably shouldn't have, though, as it might confuse people. Oh well.

Judged:

1

1

1

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
You can assume anything you want. I have stated, repeatedly, that I knew the dog and handler used during at least one of those searches. And that the only person qualified to make a determination as to what the dog did or didn't do or knew or didn't know is the handler. I have also stated repeatedly through the years that I have never heard what her interpretation of what the dog did was. So people continue to speculate and make wild assumptions about things they know nothing about. As it has been since the beginning.
Bill

Spam I Am wrote:

<quoted text>
In the interest of speaking to the truth, such as to clear up any misconceptions, I will speak to this. I hope to also comment of what seems to be a trait of ***human beings*** in general.
I am not here to admonish. I feel I have a much more important point to make.
The summary is that he didn't take the blog down because his identity was exposed.
So, what happened? A few weeks ago Sam and I had a big argument here. On or near the day that the argument ended - someone sent a threat to Sam.
It was shortly thereafter that he contacted me. And it is a very good thing that he did. It showed courage and character and the ability to think out of the box. Because even though **I did not send him the threat***- he should have had reason to suspect I did.***Which by the way is the way someone likes to operate around here - throw free punches at people and take advantage of the fact that no one will assume he or she has done so.****
I can also verify that the threat was made against people other than just Sam. The threat demanded that he remove his blog, and if not, it implied that harm would come to Sam *and someone else.*
So Sam was literally in a position in which he had to consider someone else's well being.
There were other aspects of the threat as a whole that fit a pattern. I'll just say this - I think that Sam has been framed in such a way that makes it appear that he has called people at home. I don't think so. I think the person who sent the threat did.
So, if anyone has any question as to if Sam has "backbone" at this point - the above should put that to rest.
As soon as I found out that he was threatened and that threat crossed over into real life - I didn't hesitate to help. I won't hesitate to help anyone, even people that I have had heated disputes with in the past.
My second and most important point is this: I have become convinced that ***human beings*** as a whole tend to try to explain the unknown and the drive to reach that explanation makes no apologies for the damage it does to arrive at it.
I have become convinced, not only by my observations here, but in other circumstances in my life, that speculating about other people's character is one of the most prolific and unrecognized evils that plagues human kind.
It is very dangerous and irresponsible to imagine what other people's motives are or what their character is based upon speculative profiles, even loose evidence.
What is really sad, is that people actually believe that they are being advocates for a cause and are being good people. But in reality, only destruction follows.
Resolution never comes. Only a path of destruction paved by the speculated deficiencies people project upon each other, in their quest, as ***human beings*** to explain the unexplainable.
For the most part, if we, as ***human beings*** didn't have this drive to solve puzzles we would still be living in the caves. But there is an aspect to our character that we should recognize and deal with - that there are times when this drive does not serve us well.

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam wrote:

<quoted text>
The walrus is Maruchan.

Insanity rules wrote:

<quoted text>
Knowing the dog and handler does not give you the upper hand in this situation.

Judged:

2

2

1

James Renner wrote:

Very convincing.
I think this is the link you were after: http://www.reactiongifs.com/i-dont-believe-yo...

Maruchan wrote:

<quoted text>
... The beginning of the video starts with the search dog, and what appears to be Nancy Lyon taking it around the area (I have seen her picture elsewhere on the net and believe it is her, although I could be wrong). The dog could be a Belgian Malinois or really any type of German Shepherd, it's hard to tell. The dog in the video doesn't look like the other dogs she had in the photos I saw of her.

Judged:

1

1

1

SnowyB wrote:

<quoted text>
with each violation of trust you hurt your credibility and undermine your relevance, but you don't care.
her words speak her thoughts, apart from whom she may be or not be. she is, consistently, Maruchan, not a deceptive Maruchan who deserves to be revealed if she chooses not to introduce herself further. i'm ok with her just being...Maruchan.