Maura Murray

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Tell me something that would make me know that it wasn't Maura because without proof it wasn't her, it was.
Bill

Wow.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, the accident report says she was driving. This is excellent indication that Maura was at the scene of the Corolla crash when the responding officer showed up. But it doesn't mean she was driving. Maura may have been a passenger. Maura may have been up the street at SW and someone else may have crashed the Corolla and then called Maura to come down and cover for him/her.
There has also been reported - only reported - that thee was difference of about an hour from time Maura left the little party at SW to the time of the Corolla crash. The driving time from SW to the Corolla crash scene is maybe two minutes.

Your saying:
Maura lent her car to a friend.(Maura was reported to want to leave the dorm visit her father around 2:30 AM) She was drinking, and so was her friend. Her friend crashes the car, Maura who is close to the scene tells the officer that she was driving? She wanted to jump on the grenade and risk a DUI for her friend?

Then a couple days later the big culprit to her vanishing is to avoid the LE from getting a DUI. We all pretty much have her fleeing the scene in NH or jumping in a car to flee, but in this case she wanted to get caught in an accident?

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>
That there was a woman standing in the dark who looked like Maura, next to the car she usually drove, does indeed indicate that she probably was there. But it's too iffy. It's not really solid. And if you really like things to be solid, you cannot responsibly commit yourself to this view. Even if it's probable, that does not mean that reasonable alternatives should not be considered, especially after 8 years.
I agree with you that she probably left the Saturn and died in the woods, but if she was my daughter I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket. I would, for the sake of finding out what happened, look at the big picture, which includes something having gone wrong in Amherst MA or between Amherst and Haverhill NH.
Saying that she probably walked into the woods and died - for whatever reason - is nice, it's conservative, it's intuitive. But it doesn't do justice to finding her or finding out what happened. It closes off consideration of other possibilities that also merit consideration. Is that what you recommend?
Remember, possibility turns into probability at only one point on the continuum of possibility.

i agree. excellent post.
it is one of several major categories of consideration. what happened in amherst? regardless of whether she arrived in haverhill or not.
i know WTH/Bill is stating the obvious, and it may likely be so....but there are a myriad of other possibilities....and i don't mean some of the theories, Beagle, that you've posted over the years, even if you truly believe them.

All I can say is that a good number of posters - which does not necessarily imply an equal number of corresponding real people - are desperate to insist that Maura was - no ifs, ands, or buts about it - at the WB curve.

In fact, if you summed up everything posted on this thread and the ones before it, the single most expressed opinion is that Maura was at the WB curve.

There are disagreements about why she was there, how she got there, why she disappeared, but the over-arching STATEMENT is that Maura WAS at the WB curve.

Someone or some group is devoted to placing Maura at the WB curve. Meanwhile, the MA PI originally engaged by the Murray family, the PI whose office is in Hadley MA, asked me, also from the Hadley area, if I killed Maura. How can these two things be reconciled? The PI, for what it's worth, was also assigned to the Molly Bish case. He founded and retired from MSP as head of its Behavioral Sciences Unit. He, with all his qualifications, obviously thinks that if it's possible I killed Maura, then obviously she was not at the WB curve. There's no way around this.

If you want to disagree with a highly intelligent, well-educated, very experienced, thoroughly professional detective with a unique closeness to the very beginning of this case, then there's nothing your closed mind will ever listen to.

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
... there are a myriad of other possibilities....and i don't mean some of the theories, Beagle, that you've posted over the years, even if you truly believe them.

Gee, what makes you think I don't believe them?

:)

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Your saying:
Maura lent her car to a friend.(Maura was reported to want to leave the dorm visit her father around 2:30 AM) She was drinking, and so was her friend. Her friend crashes the car, Maura who is close to the scene tells the officer that she was driving? She wanted to jump on the grenade and risk a DUI for her friend?
Then a couple days later the big culprit to her vanishing is to avoid the LE from getting a DUI. We all pretty much have her fleeing the scene in NH or jumping in a car to flee, but in this case she wanted to get caught in an accident?

And not get arrested.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>So now you think Sara Smith was with the Saturn at the WB curve? Is she safe or did she fatally cut herself on the Occam's Razor behind the blue ribbon?

No my friend. I'm sorry to say but you don't use Occam's Razor. You allow any theory that you think is possible. Occam wouldn't create more theories, but narrow the ones down that seem the most plausable. Which is why today you have us discussing Maura crashing a car she didn't crash.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Your saying:
Maura lent her car to a friend.(Maura was reported to want to leave the dorm visit her father around 2:30 AM) She was drinking, and so was her friend. Her friend crashes the car, Maura who is close to the scene tells the officer that she was driving? She wanted to jump on the grenade and risk a DUI for her friend?
Then a couple days later the big culprit to her vanishing is to avoid the LE from getting a DUI. We all pretty much have her fleeing the scene in NH or jumping in a car to flee, but in this case she wanted to get caught in an accident?

The other alternative - as I have previously said several times - is that she was in fact driving the Corolla when it crashed, but that she was likely operating under.

Again, if she had taken the N. Hadley Road route before, she would almost certainly not have hit the guardrail unless she was operating under. If she was operating under, why did she not get arrested? Of course, maybe she was texting and completely spaced out the flashing red light that can be seen for at least a quarter mile ahead, straight down the road.

Two nerves seem to have been hit.

1. That she may not have been driving the Corolla when it crashed, or if she was driving it, then she was probably driving under but did not get arrested.

2. That she cannot be reliably placed at the WB curve.

There is a concerted effort - more than any other effort expressed on all these Topix threads - to oppose these two points.

Speaks volumes.

BTW, I'm not in Worcester. I'm in Hadley MA.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
How am I clueless? You just state the body is ripped up. Like what do the animals do rip it up into easy to carry pieces? There would be evidence of a body being ripped up. Someone just stated that they used dogs to smell for dead bodies. If an animal can smell her dead body then so should a trained dog. Where as this theory of "animals breaking her up into easy to carry pieces without leaving a trace" is plausable I think it is doubtful. I thought we were focusing on more likely scenarios.

Tom it takes about 3 weeks for an approximate 1000 lb moose to disappear after being killed by an automobile and left on the side of the road. Nothing left, not even one bone. That is a true fact.
F&G will push a carcass off the road if it isn't in view of the public or near homes and let nature take care of it. It will feed bobcats, bear, coyotes, fox, turkey vultures and several other species of wildlife. Just throwing this out for whatever it's worth.

Might run over to Amherst. If you're interested.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
No my friend. I'm sorry to say but you don't use Occam's Razor. You allow any theory that you think is possible. Occam wouldn't create more theories, but narrow the ones down that seem the most plausable. Which is why today you have us discussing Maura crashing a car she didn't crash.

This is correct. ALL theories don't follow Occam. The shortest/smallest working theory that EXPLAINS the evidence is the one that follows Occam and that Occam says is the most likely.

Bill

This accident the catalysis that starts her strange (if we can call it strange) behaivor. If this accident didn't take place then Maura probably wouldn't be missing. This is the part of the case that starts everything.

Beagle wrote:

Two nerves seem to have been hit.
1. That she may not have been driving the Corolla when it crashed, or if she was driving it, then she was probably driving under but did not get arrested.
2. That she cannot be reliably placed at the WB curve.
There is a concerted effort - more than any other effort expressed on all these Topix threads - to oppose these two points.
Speaks volumes.

No nerves. Just common sense and a liberal application of Occam.

Bill

Beagle wrote:

Two nerves seem to have been hit.
1. That she may not have been driving the Corolla when it crashed, or if she was driving it, then she was probably driving under but did not get arrested.
2. That she cannot be reliably placed at the WB curve.
There is a concerted effort - more than any other effort expressed on all these Topix threads - to oppose these two points.
Speaks volumes.

How does it speak volumes? If I start a thread saying the ocean isn't blue, and millions of people oppose my point does that change the color of the ocean?

Don't think because a lot of people disagree with your theory that it adds creditability to your theory.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>Tom it takes about 3 weeks for an approximate 1000 lb moose to disappear after being killed by an automobile and left on the side of the road. Nothing left, not even one bone. That is a true fact.
F&G will push a carcass off the road if it isn't in view of the public or near homes and let nature take care of it. It will feed bobcats, bear, coyotes, fox, turkey vultures and several other species of wildlife. Just throwing this out for whatever it's worth.

How many people are looking for that 1000lb moose? I'm not saying it couldn't happen but I think unlikely that the animals got her.

Beagle wrote:

Two nerves seem to have been hit.
1. That she may not have been driving the Corolla when it crashed, or if she was driving it, then she was probably driving under but did not get arrested.
2. That she cannot be reliably placed at the WB curve.
There is a concerted effort - more than any other effort expressed on all these Topix threads - to oppose these two points.
Speaks volumes.

while 1 + 2 are certainly possibilities, i wouldn't read anything into the opposition of that speculation. as you know, some here have pet theories....and some work those theories to the bone by repetition. others are more open-minded to a number of possibilities.

i trust that WTH/Bill is absolutely honest in his assessment, and he certainly may know much more than some of us as a professional in S+R, and in any number of areas of expertise he has shared.
he may be absolutely correct that the likelihood of MM's having arrived with her car in Haverhill is 100% correct.

i have always had a nagging thought that the events leading up to her disappearance have occurred on a continuum...which likely began in Amherst or thereabouts, and that the beginning and end of that journey cannot be isolated to two points in time without reaching back to before the starting point..

just a perception. just an opinion. and i know, they don't count in the official matter of her having gone missing.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
How many people are looking for that 1000lb moose? I'm not saying it couldn't happen but I think unlikely that the animals got her.

I'm confused. You are saying you don't believe this? I just told you I have personally witnessed a 120 pound deer disappear in 3 days. I think that the only reason that a 1000 pound moose would actually last three weeks is because of the skittishness of animals around the roadway.

Bill

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
How many people are looking for that 1000lb moose? I'm not saying it couldn't happen but I think unlikely that the animals got her.

as i trust WTH/Bill and his honest presentation, i have come to trust Wowzer, as well. she has explained over the years that she is an outdoors woman with a very deep and abiding respect for and knowledge of the forest and wildlife.
believe her.