Maura Murray

Judged:

3

2

2

Shack wrote:

Citigirl, I know your heart...wish instead of digging around to destroy your kin's past life that there would be an answer to what happened to Maura.

Judged:

2

1

Advocate wrote:

The repetition does get tiring for those of us who have been around a long time. But even that may serve a purpose. I have said before and maintain, that the forums keep Maura's name and circumstances "out there" for the public. Over time, some factors have emerged that were not known years ago -- and I'm not talking just about things that Renner has learned and shared. Many speculations are valid to consider and it does not surprise me that LE paid attention to Websleuths and may pay attention to Topix as well for all we know. The forums are like a Think Tank ... many heads are better than one, and discussions on the forums may turn up ideas that LE has not thought of and might look into.

Judged:

2

2

2

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Shack I'm assuming when you say "digging around" you mean fact finding of what Maura did with her life? Forgive my Existentialism approach but wouldn't Maura be the one "Destroying" her life.
No one on this blog made Maura do anything. Whatever she did she did for herself. We just want the truth of what she did. If it happens to be things that destroy her character that is sad, but these are things that she did with her own free will.

Judged:

2

2

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Shack I'm assuming when you say "digging around" you mean fact finding of what Maura did with her life? Forgive my Existentialism approach but wouldn't Maura be the one "Destroying" her life.
No one on this blog made Maura do anything. Whatever she did she did for herself. We just want the truth of what she did. If it happens to be things that destroy her character that is sad, but these are things that she did with her own free will.

Judged:

1

1

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
You posted your opinion in a very respectful light. You also used the information gathered from James Renner's blog and used reasoning to write your post. You don't ever have to apologize to anyone for using your reasoning skills. Don't let anyone ever make you feel guilty for thinking. They are allowed to disagree but don't be guilted into thinking a certain way.
If people don't go back and use the inforamtion gathered to try and think what Maura was thinking ie:(who she wanted to see.) Then this case will never be solved.

Judged:

2

2

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree it starts at 50%, then you add the fact that she is spiraling out of control the secret may come out. How can you get help from being molested by your father without turning him in? She can't get help, and talking to her father about this problem really can't help because he is the culprit. If Maura gets busted by the law she will eventually break down and tell LE that she is like this because of her father. Thats a pretty strong motive to whack your daughter.

Judged:

2

2

1

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't know this as fact.

Judged:

2

2

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
I would just like to say that this previous post that I have made was wrong for me to post. There is no reason to point the finger or create a bigger problem in a complicated case. Had my duaghter gone missing and some one posted this crap in a post I'd be upset. This was uncalled for and it has been eating at me for a while.

Judged:

2

2

2

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
missed that one. your thoughts are decisive....but you might consider taking the opportunity to slow down and develop more precise, descriptive language. as you know, the effect of written language differs from spoken language.
speaking of someone who is insightful in his written expression....where is nhwoodshome?

Judged:

2

2

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Your right. What I was saying is: The post that I made was wrong and uncalled for. I shouldn't have posted that.

Judged:

2

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Your right noone knows what "this" is suppossed to mean in your post. There is 550 pages on this forum alone can you please help me by telling me what "this" is suppossed to be.
Is it just to deflect the power of my original post about MM being responisible for her own actions. That anything "dug up" is found through investagation, and not made up. I have said some choice words about her because of her actions, and I probably should have used a better choice of words, but that doesn't let her off the hook for actions.

Judged:

6

5

1

ross wrote:

new renner post up..interesting too.

Judged:

8

8

6

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>Take those sources, who spew catch phrases rather than actual facts with more than just a grain of salt.

Judged:

1

1

1

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you posted this, I'll repost this.
From Renners site:
"According to Lt. Landry, at the time of the court proceedings in early 2006, the file on Maura Murray consisted of 2,938 pages of info as well as evidence, tapes, and newspaper clippings. Also included in the files:
- Fred Murray's cell phone records
- phone records of family members and friends
- personnel records
- military records
- Grand Jury subpoenas
- search warrants
- credit card info
- criminal record checks
- witness interviews (including 19 written statements and 3 transcribed interviews)
- 2-page statement of Fred Murray
- lab reports
- unknown photographs
- copies of Websleuths forum conversations
- one-party intercept memoranda (possible wire taps)
And, most interestingly, 4 polygraph examinations."
So like Shack and Fred have maintained all this time. Those lazy shiftless bastards, the police, didn't do a damn thing while that sweet all American girl was stolen right out from under their noses.
I do need to laugh though. Webslueths? They would have been better off trying to use psychics to get useful information considering the level of intelligence of some of the members on that site. I hope they didn't really think the "killer" was going to post? I think some idiots actually put forward that theory so maybe the police had to check?
It's almost as interesting as reading the stale crap that Shack throws up on the Facebook account for Maura. Same lame shit, "someone knows something..." I couldn't even count how many times she repeated that stale line. We know. Maura knows, but she isn't telling.
Remember the catch phrase "somebody knows something" brought to you from the same idiots that told you "the cops didn't do anything." Take those sources, who spew catch phrases rather than actual facts with more than just a grain of salt.
Bill

Judged:

2

2

1

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, I am being too kind here. People that don't have the ability to examine a mildly complex subject in any depth and resort to catch phrases should be ignored completely because clearly they have nothing intellectually to offer. Listen to people like that at your peril.
Oh, and people who sputter out sentence fragments that are unfinished thoughts (if there was any thought there to begin with) marked by ..... and use pffft to try to get some unseen point across should be particularly suspect. I base this on first hand knowledge having seen those sentence constructs and knowing where they originated and the quality of the "thoughts".
Bill

Judged:

1

1

1

ross wrote:

<quoted text>
Bill, I was actually referring to this post by Renner:
"In Lt. Landry's affidavit to the court in 2006, he lists all the detectives and agencies that have investigated Maura's disappearance. There are some surprises here:
- Haverhill PD
- New Hampshire State Police
- New Hampshire Fish & Game
- Exeter Police
- Oxford County Sheriff's Dept.
- FBI
- Grafton County Sheriff's Dept.
- Vermont State Police
- UMass PD
- Amherst PD
- Hadley PD
- Rochester PD
- Sullivan County Department of Corrections"
I was only trying to bring attention to the post. I thought a couple of the listed agencies were interesting since (to my knowledge) they were not known to have been involved. It wasn't anything more than that.

Judged:

4

4

4

ross wrote:

<quoted text>
Bill, I was actually referring to this post by Renner:
"In Lt. Landry's affidavit to the court in 2006, he lists all the detectives and agencies that have investigated Maura's disappearance. There are some surprises here:
- Haverhill PD
- New Hampshire State Police
- New Hampshire Fish & Game
- Exeter Police
- Oxford County Sheriff's Dept.
- FBI
- Grafton County Sheriff's Dept.
- Vermont State Police
- UMass PD
- Amherst PD
- Hadley PD
- Rochester PD
- Sullivan County Department of Corrections"
I was only trying to bring attention to the post. I thought a couple of the listed agencies were interesting since (to my knowledge) they were not known to have been involved. It wasn't anything more than that.

Judged:

3

2

1

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Can someone tell me why Sullivan County's department of corrections would be involved? Isn't there juristiction only over the jail? And if so does that mean a prisoner cam forward with some information about the case perhaps from a cell mate?

Judged:

1

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
Perhaps this is the reason for the June 8,2004 press conference no Maitland/Murray connection.