|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Judged:
1
NHwoodshome wrote: <quoted text>
Sadly if friends and family were selective in what they revealed to authorities they could well have impeded the investigation. Perhaps they felt it had no relevance but they are not trained investigators and even they get it wrong. Sometimes the most innocuous detail turns out to be a case breaker.
I can't imagine what could be worth hiding verses finding a loved one in harms way. Though I have seen people so private they seem to fear anyone knowing anything about them or their family. I don't see Maura as some nutcase or monster I see her as one of many college students going through early adulthood making mistakes as many do and perhaps overreacting as some do.
I think the family wanted to portray Maura as the squeaky clean all American girl and perhaps they felt if any negative PR came out it would influence some not to work as hard toward finding her and impact public opinion. I see Maura as an overachiever, and when overachievers fail most fall HARD! She had problems at west point, she seemed to have relationship problems, she seemed to drink in excess, she wrecked Dads car and finally wrecked hers.
Sometimes we judge our selves the harshest, and perhaps that where Maura's state of mind was when she left Amherst Mass. I don't see suicide as her motive for leaving Amherst, trying to get her head straight perhaps. The final accident could have had a profound effect on her psyche. Initially I think she just wanted to distance herself from the scene, but after having time to reflect who knows what her state of mind was.
AS I previously stated, Butch Atwood said she was cold and shivering. If that was Maura seen miles down the road running she was in extreme danger of hypothermia. I have experienced hypothermia more than once and it can catch even trained and experienced hikers and survivalist off guard. Sometimes you have VERY limited time to react properly and that's if your equipped and knowledgeable.
I am leary of Renner, especially the whole bank account story. He is writing a book and many authors take liberty with so called facts and unnamed sources. Profit and ego can be ugly, sometimes the truth or lack of details isn't as interesting as embellishment, and as I previously stated dull, boring books don't sell, soap operas do. well stated; i agree.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
All that hatred, garbage and libel that Helena allowed, other monitors delete and then ban the poster. i know that you, Wowzer and others were first hand witnesses. what i saw was the aftermath of a train wreck, and i don't deny your recollection. it was very damaging for individuals to be named as suspects. why do you believe Helena behaved/behaves this way?
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Wowzer the real one wrote: <quoted text>
While I hold no grudges toward Helena I do think that she could have prevented a lot of the hard feelings, bashing and name calling that went on in the first MMM forum that I believe she started and was moderator of.
When the bashing got way out of hand she would send the offender to a time out corner in a fantasy "time out tent". And when the bashing got real bad she would tell them that she liked her home and didn't want to lose it which tells me that she knew exactly how wrong it was. She chose to be a part of the bashing and encouraged it by not trying to stop it so it continued on.
While some that dared to stand up to the "group" and ones that didn't agree were removed from the forum, the biggest bashers of all were allowed to stay.
Get rid of all the locals and others that had some good ideas and keep a group of people that were only concerned with showing their hatred and bashing people to death. Not very smart if you ask me.
I cannot forget Helena's part in the MMM forum and the harm it caused. i can't defend that kind of behavior.
|
|
Lauren
Concord, MA
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
i know that you, Wowzer and others were first hand witnesses. what i saw was the aftermath of a train wreck, and i don't deny your recollection.
it was very damaging for individuals to be named as suspects.
why do you believe Helena behaved/behaves this way? Good question. All I know is that she was working under the direction of Fred. It is important to remember, without Helena there would be no Shack. Every post by Shack was approved by Helena, nothing slipped past her. She was ever vigilant, people were deleted so fast their little heads spun.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
Good question. All I know is that she was working under the direction of Fred. It is important to remember, without Helena there would be no Shack. Every post by Shack was approved by Helena, nothing slipped past her. She was ever vigilant, people were deleted so fast their little heads spun. well, the unfortunate appearance was that she was protecting/hiding something about Maura. citigirl says Maura's family is not hiding info about her. i don't know what Shack was selling, but it couldn't be good for Helena if she bought it.
|
|
Lauren
Concord, MA
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
well, the unfortunate appearance was that she was protecting/hiding something about Maura. citigirl says Maura's family is not hiding info about her.
i don't know what Shack was selling, but it couldn't be good for Helena if she bought it. protecting/hiding for sure, but it went way beyond that, she was attacking by proxy. Of course the family is hiding info about Maura. An example: Amherst as a subject on MMM was always verboten. There had to be a reason Maura left Amherst on a Monday at the beginning of a school week packed with classes and clinicals at the beginning of a semester. MMM really pushed the "just needed a break theory". I never bought that, not for a second. And the textbooks in her car are supposed to be proof of that? They are forgotten and left in cars all the time by students and prove nothing. As for Renner, I'll judge his book after i read it. So far he has turned up some new information (Baghdadi: she said she wanted to disappear). I am appalled that people rae judging a book before it is written. Good Night.
|
|
Lauren
Concord, MA
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
i don't know what Shack was selling PS Shack was selling payback, revenge, getting even. Settling old scores that some of them dated back 50 years.
|
|
yellow snowy
Noida, India
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
PS
Shack was selling payback, revenge, getting even. Settling old scores that some of them dated back 50 years. ho do you know?
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
protecting/hiding for sure, but it went way beyond that, she was attacking by proxy. Of course the family is hiding info about Maura. An example: Amherst as a subject on MMM was always verboten. There had to be a reason Maura left Amherst on a Monday at the beginning of a school week packed with classes and clinicals at the beginning of a semester. MMM really pushed the "just needed a break theory". I never bought that, not for a second. And the textbooks in her car are supposed to be proof of that? They are forgotten and left in cars all the time by students and prove nothing. As for Renner, I'll judge his book after i read it. So far he has turned up some new information (Baghdadi: she said she wanted to disappear). I am appalled that people rae judging a book before it is written. Good Night. i have good, common sense....so i often haven't believed the reasons supplied and excuses made during the time i've been here. Renner's info is new to us, but may not be new to M's family. will Renner be able to collect enough info, and is it the right time for him to tell the story about M's disappearance? after all, the story, so far, can be contained in the form of a magazine article. i have no need to defend or criticize Renner. he'll do what he needs to do; and M's family will respond.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
PS
Shack was selling payback, revenge, getting even. Settling old scores that some of them dated back 50 years. ah, yes. correct. bad idea. Helena drank some toxic kool-aid.
|
|
citigirl
Brockton, MA
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
protecting/hiding for sure, but it went way beyond that, she was attacking by proxy. Of course the family is hiding info about Maura. An example: Amherst as a subject on MMM was always verboten. There had to be a reason Maura left Amherst on a Monday at the beginning of a school week packed with classes and clinicals at the beginning of a semester. MMM really pushed the "just needed a break theory". I never bought that, not for a second. And the textbooks in her car are supposed to be proof of that? They are forgotten and left in cars all the time by students and prove nothing. As for Renner, I'll judge his book after i read it. So far he has turned up some new information (Baghdadi: she said she wanted to disappear). I am appalled that people rae judging a book before it is written. Good Night. We dont know why Maura left Amherst. How can you hide something that you have no knowledge about? Trust me I wish I knew why she left Amherst. But I dont.
|
|
sophie bean
Woodstock, VT
|
Kitten, thank you for graciously accepting my apology about Renner being banned from the MM FB page. Oh. Wait. Never mind. It is indeed a fact that Renner was banned and his posts removed. Very disappointing at best. Perhaps I should repeat that, lest any misunderstand: I think it is baffling and unfortunate that Renner's posts were removed and he was banned from the MM FB page. I totally understand and respect how Maura's family doesn't want to see things about her in public that are unflattering. If they are just plain mean and untrue, that's libel or slander depending on the medium, and legally actionable. However, to ask for assistance from the public about a missing person's case AND to not want anything made public which is merely unflattering does not make much sense to me. I am not in the least interested in Maura's personal life except as it directly relates to her disappearance. It is POSSIBLE that Maura's life prior to her disappearance has very little to do with her dsappearance. It is POSSIBLE that her life before her disappearance has something to do with her disappearance. It is also POSSIBLE that something in her life before her disappearance is critical to the fact that she is missing. It seems to me that it is futile to attemot to find answers in such a case while refusing to consider any possibilities.
|
|
Lauren
United States
|
citigirl wrote: <quoted text>We dont know why Maura left Amherst. How can you hide something that you have no knowledge about? Trust me I wish I knew why she left Amherst. But I dont. Fred was adamant that Maura's reason for leaving Amherst not be discussed on MMM. Helena actually banned people for being too persistent about the subject of Amherst. This leads some of us naturally to wonder: what was he trying to hide? Maura had a reason to start out on a long road trip into the approaching darkness at the beginning of a class and clinical filled school week, at the beginning of a semester. She did not just do this on a whim. And her reason sure as hell was not "because she needed a break", the reason that was crammed down our throats on MMM.
|
|
sophie bean
Woodstock, VT
|
The fact that Maura had "a reason" for leaving Amherst is by no means evidence that the reason is necessarily relevant to her disappearance. I'm pretty uncomfortable, to put it mildly, with demonizing the family of a missing person. That's not what you're doing, is it, Lauren?
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
sophie bean wrote: The fact that Maura had "a reason" for leaving Amherst is by no means evidence that the reason is necessarily relevant to her disappearance. I'm pretty uncomfortable, to put it mildly, with demonizing the family of a missing person. That's not what you're doing, is it, Lauren? key question. and here we are. if a family representative, such as Helena, has engaged in the behavior that Lauren describes, and this, as we know, has been witnessed and affirmed to be true by others, then there is a significant problem with how MM's "family" is perceived by the public. that perception is of no consequence, except that Helena's representatives have not discouraged conversation about Maura in the public view. they cannot have it both ways, unless they are engaged in telling and finding facts. the circus tent and systems devised to limit truth-seeking in the early years while "demonizing" local NH residents was hardly a suitable answer to the mystery; did Shack drive this effort? Lauren tells us that Helena's online voice and actions are still consistent with defining the boundaries and limits of the discussion. can she have public input, but limited discussion? what could be a solution to that disconnect?
|
|
Since: Oct 09
Rural N.H.
|
Please wait...
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
Fred was adamant that Maura's reason for leaving Amherst not be discussed on MMM. Helena actually banned people for being too persistent about the subject of Amherst. This leads some of us naturally to wonder: what was he trying to hide? Maura had a reason to start out on a long road trip into the approaching darkness at the beginning of a class and clinical filled school week, at the beginning of a semester. She did not just do this on a whim. And her reason sure as hell was not "because she needed a break", the reason that was crammed down our throats on MMM. Just curious, what statements in fact did Fred make to say or indicate he was adamant about not revealing why Maura left Amherst? I haven't followed the forum for a while so I missed a hundred or more pages. Perhaps he feels she may have left due to wrecking his car, and maybe he felt guilty about going up one side of her and down the other. It could be that simple or it could be much more as well as her own decision for R&R. I am not sold that she didn't need a break, having been in the Air Force 20 years we used to joke about taking mental health time off using our leave, but at times it was closer to the truth than not. She was a young adult and as I have posted many young adults in college are under tremendous pressure and on top of that she had relationship problems, drinking issues and just wrecked dads car. She also took the paperwork to file an accident report with her as well as her school books. I don't see someone that's going to disappear intentionally putting that much thought into the mix. I think her life was approaching the perfect storm for a emotional breakdown and she needed time and space. Its not uncommon for college students to take a hiatus, people do get burned out and every persons breaking point is different and how they react depends upon their personality. I think she intended to return but the second accident changed everything. As far as saying she wanted to run or disappear, I can't tell you how many people I have heard make the same statement, how many times have people said I could kill you to someone else but only as a figure of speech in anger, if everyone that said it did it we wouldn't have an unemployment problem.
|
|
Bean Pole
Noida, India
|
I think she fell in a uncovered septic tank.
|
|
IMO
UK
|
sophie bean wrote: The fact that Maura had "a reason" for leaving Amherst is by no means evidence that the reason is necessarily relevant to her disappearance. I'm pretty uncomfortable, to put it mildly, with demonizing the family of a missing person. That's not what you're doing, is it, Lauren? The above shows Sophie Bean to be baiting Lauren. I hope Lauren knows this and has the sense to not respond. This is the same SB who accused Lauren of saying something and asking for her to be banned for saying it, when Lauren actually said the very opposite of what Sophie Bean said she said. Sophie Bean never had the human decency to retract or apologize for this. Most posters would. And this is the supposed better "new" Sophie Bean, not the "old" Sophie Bean who marched shoulder to shoulder, hip to hip with Shack for so long. Sophie Bean was one of the worst on MMM. SB uses the word demonize, she is one of the chief demonizers of the innocent people of New Hampshire. She knows all about demonizing because she did it for a very, very long time. It's ironic that she's now accusing others of what she herself did. And no, Lauren did not demonize anyone in my opinion, just Wowzer's post alone backs that up.
|
|
just me
Plymouth, MN
|
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
<snip> Maura had a reason to start out on a long road trip into the approaching darkness at the beginning of a class and clinical filled school week, at the beginning of a semester. She did not just do this on a whim. And her reason sure as hell was not "because she needed a break", the reason that was crammed down our throats on MMM. Very well put for once. Good job, Lauren!
|
|
“"Dancing with wolves"”
Since: Oct 10
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Lauren wrote: <quoted text>
PS
Shack was selling payback, revenge, getting even. Settling old scores that some of them dated back 50 years. Only problem is that she was taking out her revenge on the wrong people. So filled with such hate and rage against people that she didn't even know and never harmed her in any way.
|
|
|
Dating
