Since: Dec 11
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
NHwoodsman52 wrote: Det. Columbo, what's your take on the windshield being spider webbed? Is it possible Maura wasn't wearing a seat belt and got torpedoed over the airbag? Something cracked the windshield, and had the windshield been cracked previously someone would have known and I doubt she would have driven all those miles without it spreading side to side. Good observation. If it was a nasty bump wouldn't she be rubbing her head when BA (SBD) stopped? Or could the impact have caused a slight bruise (that was yet to form) or a small gash? Maybe in that situation one might be slightly numbed by a few pops of vino and not realize they'd been injured? Hopefully LE swabbed the inside of the windshield for a "forehead print".
|
Looking4amoose
Barre, VT
|
Judged:
1
1
NHwoodsman52 wrote: <quoted text> Exactly what I felt also, the other problem was the scent sample was a glove that Maura got for Christmas and Fred wasn't even sure she even used it. Despite all that Dogs are not infallible, there are many factors that can create tracking issues. As I sated earlier the air rises in the morning hours and pools in the afternoon, also was there a strong wind that day. Then you get all the traffic both auto and human searching in the days before. How do the scent dogs know which direction to go? I mean, if they pick it up in the middle of a scent, how do they know which way to go forward instread of backward? Also, were the dogs air trackers or ground trackers?
|
Since: Dec 11
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Judged:
2
1
A link regarding search dogs was posted elsewhere: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmenta... FM stated on camera that he would have preferred that the canine search team that tracked MM's scent to just before BHR had used some of MM's running gear not a newly gifted glove. That makes me think that the team used "ground trackers" not "air scenting" canines. Makes you wonder though if an "air-scenting" dog had been utilized -- would the SAR team been led up BHR? Sometimes air-scenting canines can pick up an air trail even if a vehicle's windows were shut. Although (it's been written) there was no precipitation fro 2 days after the crash, the successfulness of such a search, as someone here pointed out, is dependant on a number of environmental factors.
|
NHwoodsman52
Weare, NH
|
Frostman wrote: A link regarding search dogs was posted elsewhere: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmenta... FM stated on camera that he would have preferred that the canine search team that tracked MM's scent to just before BHR had used some of MM's running gear not a newly gifted glove. That makes me think that the team used "ground trackers" not "air scenting" canines. Makes you wonder though if an "air-scenting" dog had been utilized -- would the SAR team been led up BHR? Sometimes air-scenting canines can pick up an air trail even if a vehicle's windows were shut. Although (it's been written) there was no precipitation fro 2 days after the crash, the successfulness of such a search, as someone here pointed out, is dependant on a number of environmental factors. I read they were Air scent dogs, which maybe was all that was available at the time. Not being an expert on tracking dogs it doesn't seem like the best choice. If she was in a vehicle it would then make sense, but on foot a ground scent tracker would seem more logical. I watched a program once where a air scent hound tracked someone in a car for miles, I believe the person was in the trunk. It was on a busy highway, the dog did loose the scent a couple times so they went further down the road and the dog picked it up again. That my friends is why I never shower or use deodorant, guaranteed the dog will find me.
|
Det Columbo
Bangor, ME
|
NHwoodsman52 wrote: Det. Columbo, what's your take on the windshield being spider webbed? Is it possible Maura wasn't wearing a seat belt and got torpedoed over the airbag? It can happen, it happened just recently in a double fatality just down the road from my house. No seat belts used and despite airbags deployed, massive head trama. I know its a long shot but, I think its worth consideration. Slight concussion that worsened in the hours following, slow brain bleed anything is possible. Something cracked the windshield, and had the windshield been cracked previously someone would have known and I doubt she would have driven all those miles without it spreading side to side. I have a few different thoughts on the windshield, but they are theories that I choose not to discuss.
|
Advocate
Phoenix, AZ
|
Beagle wrote: <quoted text>....Do you think NHSP have drawn a solid, reliable bead on a suspect? Has a life insurance policy on Maura been paid out? Don't know anything about life insurance on Maura one way or the other, but as of this past Feb 2011 it HAS been 7 years since her disappearance. In at least some jurisdictions, a person has to be "disappeared" for at least 7 years before he/she can be declared dead for various legal procedures. This is just food for thought, nothing more.
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Looking4amoose wrote: <quoted text>How do the scent dogs know which direction to go? I mean, if they pick it up in the middle of a scent, how do they know which way to go forward instread of backward? Also, were the dogs air trackers or ground trackers? Air scent dogs always go..........wait for it..........into the wind. Bill
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Det Columbo wrote: <quoted text> I have a few different thoughts on the windshield, but they are theories that I choose not to discuss. There is no mystery about the cracking in the windshield. I have seen it hundreds of times in accidents. That was likely caused by nothing more than the airbag. It absolutely does not match any head-strike I have ever seen. Bill
|
Since: Dec 11
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text> That was likely caused by nothing more than the airbag. Bill Agreed! Here's a YouTube video of a manual deployment of older style (1990s) airbag. http://youtu.be/ehs4TmQuHk0 Cracked windshield with spider web pattern.
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text> There is no mystery about the cracking in the windshield. I have seen it hundreds of times in accidents. That was likely caused by nothing more than the airbag. It absolutely does not match any head-strike I have ever seen. Bill how many times? how MANY TIMES does this need to be discussed?! aren't there facebook pages where folks can wax eloquent, rewind and regurgitate? anyway, thank YOU for definitive, fact-based information.
|
Det Columbo
Bangor, ME
|
To see the car in person, up front one on one might give people a different opinion.
|
Det Columbo
Bangor, ME
|
How many people on this forum have seen the car face to face...so to speak? I think the answer will be (One) 1 and that will be a Former LE.
|
Since: Dec 11
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Let’s face it; the participants on this forum do not have the same background information so it’s not exactly a level playing field here. For example, several active posters have read the HPD police logs from February 9, 2004 while others have seen a newspaper’s truncated version of the events. All of this has lead to a wide spectrum of notions, postulations and personal observations (suspect timelines, missing data, accident site manipulations, unaccounted LE time and more…). Some have viewed MM’s Saturn at Troop F in Twin Mountain. A few live locally and are able to drive the terrain nearby while the rest rely solely on Google maps. The “old hats” have seemingly rehashed it all with their own recollection of the facts while “newbies” may have a fresh, unbiased outlook (albeit sometimes wildly imaginative) without tenure and knowledge of all the previously posted details from the last 8 years. So as to NOT run afoul of the historian’s preserve and to stay within the legal and ethical guidelines of this forum why don’t we all simply back up our statements (wherever possible) with a photo, a link, third party factual data or even a reference to a previously posted “generally accepted theory”? Maybe if we gently nudge each other toward the truth then something might fall from the tree? Just saying.
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Frostman wrote: Let’s face it; the participants on this forum do not have the same background information so it’s not exactly a level playing field here. For example, several active posters have read the HPD police logs from February 9, 2004 while others have seen a newspaper’s truncated version of the events. All of this has lead to a wide spectrum of notions, postulations and personal observations (suspect timelines, missing data, accident site manipulations, unaccounted LE time and more…). Some have viewed MM’s Saturn at Troop F in Twin Mountain. A few live locally and are able to drive the terrain nearby while the rest rely solely on Google maps. The “old hats” have seemingly rehashed it all with their own recollection of the facts while “newbies” may have a fresh, unbiased outlook (albeit sometimes wildly imaginative) without tenure and knowledge of all the previously posted details from the last 8 years. So as to NOT run afoul of the historian’s preserve and to stay within the legal and ethical guidelines of this forum why don’t we all simply back up our statements (wherever possible) with a photo, a link, third party factual data or even a reference to a previously posted “generally accepted theory”? Maybe if we gently nudge each other toward the truth then something might fall from the tree? Just saying. eloquently and intelligently stated. still...why here, why now, again and again, on Topix?... where theories, speculation, half-truths and outright lies and defenses have been exhausted, and where everyone has become exhausted by the swirl? few facts are in the public purview; facts remain in the safe possession of authorities acting on the official investigation, and with family members. it is doubtful, imo, something will come of more rewind on Topix; never has, never will. harm has actually come to innocents by the liberty to smear with anonymity. currently, Renner has the potential to add verified info to the pile. again, you are an especially gifted writer, and it's delightful to read your compositions. redundancy, to me, however, is like nails on a chalkboard. i'll be waiting out word from Renner and/or any public information from authorities.
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Det Columbo wrote: How many people on this forum have seen the car face to face...so to speak? I think the answer will be (One) 1 and that will be a Former LE. If you have seen, and by seen I mean actually inspected more windshields from crashes than me, I'd be surprised. Bill
|
Lady Gray
Austin, TX
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text> how many times? how MANY TIMES does this need to be discussed?! aren't there facebook pages where folks can wax eloquent, rewind and regurgitate? anyway, thank YOU for definitive, fact-based information. Oh good Lord Snowy....you should be talking about how MANY TIMES do things needs to be repeated? I periodically "check in" and every time I look just to see what's being said, you are saying what you just said above. So, aren't you a fine one to be talking about being repetitious?:o) Not everyone reading has been here - since 2004 - so information will be repeated, rehashed, rewound and regurgitated as you say. I for one am glad to see some discussions other than bashing. If you don't like it, go away. No one is keeping you here except for your own reasons which I've never fully understood. Here's to a brand new 2012!
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Det Columbo wrote: <quoted text> I have a few different thoughts on the windshield, but they are theories that I choose not to discuss. Det Columbo, would you be willing to discuss the trailer hitch theory of damage to the front of the Saturn or was that not you? It has been so long I actually can't remember which P.I. threw that red herring out there. I do recognize that no one seems to want to touch that turd with a ten foot pole now. Inquiring minds and all that. Bill
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Snowy wrote: <quoted text> how many times? how MANY TIMES does this need to be discussed?! aren't there facebook pages where folks can wax eloquent, rewind and regurgitate? anyway, thank YOU for definitive, fact-based information. It is funny you mention facebook Snowy. I read Shack's "contributions" on the facebook pages and little has changed there either. I would never mention her facebook name but I am 99% certain it is her. A courtesy of course, that she never gave to anyone else in the area of the accident. We wouldn't want people hounding and harassing her like happened to SBD and others in the area. Nope that wouldn't be civilized. It wouldn't be within the bounds of decent, acceptable, human behavior. So no, I won't do that. Bill
|
“"CONFUSION CENTRAL"”
Since: Dec 11
Franconia NH
|
Please wait...
Gonna have to FLIP A COIN on this one Beagle and Aftermath. If Ya know what I mean????
|
batman
Lincoln, NH
|
Frostman wrote: Let’s face it; the participants on this forum do not have the same background information so it’s not exactly a level playing field here. For example, several active posters have read the HPD police logs from February 9, 2004 while others have seen a newspaper’s truncated version of the events. All of this has lead to a wide spectrum of notions, postulations and personal observations (suspect timelines, missing data, accident site manipulations, unaccounted LE time and more…). Some have viewed MM’s Saturn at Troop F in Twin Mountain. A few live locally and are able to drive the terrain nearby while the rest rely solely on Google maps. The “old hats” have seemingly rehashed it all with their own recollection of the facts while “newbies” may have a fresh, unbiased outlook (albeit sometimes wildly imaginative) without tenure and knowledge of all the previously posted details from the last 8 years. So as to NOT run afoul of the historian’s preserve and to stay within the legal and ethical guidelines of this forum why don’t we all simply back up our statements (wherever possible) with a photo, a link, third party factual data or even a reference to a previously posted “generally accepted theory”? Maybe if we gently nudge each other toward the truth then something might fall from the tree? Just saying. I think everyone needs to take this forum for what it is, and that is a place to talk and share ideas. Some ideas might have facts to back them up and others speculation. There is nothing wrong with either. The only thing wrong I see is the bashshing that a selective few make towards others. Snowey says we don't have the answers and that is true to a point,But Snowey seems to think that only her view has merit and that only makes sense if she has the answers, and by her own words she does not.
|
|