|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
Judged:
1
1
mcsmom wrote: I guess we can make some inferences from what we know.
If Maura were the subject or focus of the GJ it would seem that her case at some point would have risen to the federal level assuming they thought she had crossed a US border as most countries do not deal on a state level for extradition. No, this is not accurate. Having this case be the focus of a GJ Investigation does not in any way mean it has risen to the Federal Level. One thing has nothing to do with the other, there are Grand Juries at the Federal Level and there are Grand Juries at the State Level. What I infer from the GJ focus is that it is still an active investigation and the investigators wanted to ask questions of people who they believe may have information relevant to the case. Thats really all you can infer, pretty common for a case like this. :)
|
|
mcsmom
Hebron, CT
|
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
No, this is not accurate. Having this case be the focus of a GJ Investigation does not in any way mean it has risen to the Federal Level.
One thing has nothing to do with the other, there are Grand Juries at the Federal Level and there are Grand Juries at the State Level.
What I infer from the GJ focus is that it is still an active investigation and the investigators wanted to ask questions of people who they believe may have information relevant to the case.
Thats really all you can infer, pretty common for a case like this.
:) Got it thank you.:)
|
|
citigirl
New Bedford, MA
|
As the days have turned into weeks and months and almost eight years later who would of thougt we would still be searching for Maura. Not I. I lost all hope after the first year of searching for her. My thoughts were she was never going to be found. When heading home after a weekend of searching for her I always wondered could we have walked by her while searching or did we search in all the wrong places. I dont know but we continued on searching for her. I can never forget the pain and heartache in FM,s face as he comes out of the woods all scratced up searching for his daughter. Mauras Mom passed away several years ago on Mauras birthday not knowing where and what happened to her daughter. As a parent I cant even begin to imagine the feeling. I ask any one who may have any knowledge on a missing person to please be a voice for those whom can no longer speak. They are missed and loved by many and deserve to be brought home where they belong.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>if people would limit comments to those areas they have experience in and otherwise post opinions and ask questions. Boy, that would slow the hell out of the conversations on this site. Believe me. What, no blind, reckless speculation? No flights of fantasy? No talking about things that some here have not a clue? I don't know FrmLE. Pretty radical thinking. I mean, if no new evidence has showed up in six years, what would some of the people here drone on about? Bill
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
Judged:
1
1
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
No offense taken. However you should know that New Hampshire is unique in that although I am not an attorney I did in fact act as a prosecutor for the State. NH allows sworn police officers to prosecute cases up to District Court level and conduct all motions, hearings, pre trial hearings, as well as conduct all activities at Trial. I have done this thousands of times, many thousands of times.
Also understand that as a Criminal Investigator, I was often the person who conducted the questioning of witnesses at Investigative Grand Jury sessions. I also personally presented all evidence to Grand Jury members for indictment, in NH either the County Attorney or the Police Officer can seek a Grand Jury Indictment. I have done this hundreds of times.
So you are correct, I am not nor do I ever wish to be an attorney, however I would say I know more about the process than most 'attorneys' you will ever meet, anyone short of a County Attorney or Police Prosecutor.
NH is very unique in this way, Police perform many functions in the Prosecutorial realm.
FYI I stand corrected. I had no idea about this prosecutor-for-the-state business. I was under the impression, erroneously, that you simply answered the questions asked of you at the GJ and then left the room. While I can't go into details (they are boring anyway) I have also been present at a few grand juries, but never the prosecutor - haven't gotten that high up yet. I aspire to, though. Thanks for the information. I absolutely cannot put any stock in the "LE in NH didn't know what they were doing" mantra, especially now that you've explained this to me....obviously, LE is required to be not only informed as to the particularities of their own job, but to be informed on a prosecutorial front. That goes to show, IMO, at least, that NH has some learned LE. Thanks again for the explanation. Do you have any thoughts as to whether the GJ in question was investigatory in nature? If you can't comment, I understand. Just looking to expound upon this a bit.
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
Point taken. However imagine if you had to spend 3 pages of posts arguing points that you absolutely know to be true with people who have no idea what they are talking about, no background or experience other than what can be gleened from Google, yet they continue to argue inane points to a nauseating degree?
How much patience would YOU have?
As I have stated before many times, it is often best to ask questions and offer opinions on the discussion rather than argue points that you don't know to be true, simply because you think this or feel that. Especially when the person you are arguing with spent a career doing nothing but this very stuff. After 22 years, most of that as a Detective, I have some idea what I am talking about.
As I said, your point is well taken, however this forum would be much more effective/enjoyable if there were a moderator or if people would limit comments to those areas they have experience in and otherwise post opinions and ask questions.
Thats my take. I went through the tedious process of becoming verified on another forum - they contacted the Registration and Disciplinary Board to verify my identity. It has yet to be worth the effort. I agree on the moderation points, but I do wish that we could all try to exhibit a little more patience - I'm not uneducated on these matters, but I am when it comes to NH, specifically - and I appreciated your information very much.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
Simply Caustic wrote: <quoted text>
Do you have any thoughts as to whether the GJ in question was investigatory in nature? There has not been an indictment sought in this case that I am aware of. Therefore any GJ inquiries would be Investigative in nature.
|
|
Simply caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
There has not been an indictment sought in this case that I am aware of. Therefore any GJ inquiries would be Investigative in nature. Thank you - that leads to my next question. Grand juries are notorious for leaks. I think it's interesting that none of Mauras extracurricular activities (of the fraudulent variety) leaked via a witness years ago.... Instead, we are only now hearing about it. How did her family/friends keep such a tight lid on things? I'm not inferring anything nefarious, just wondering how they kept it quiet. Then again, I don't know how Whiston and others discovered this information years ago - maybe it was via a leak.
|
|
mcsmom
Hebron, CT
|
Judged:
1
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
There has not been an indictment sought in this case that I am aware of. Therefore any GJ inquiries would be Investigative in nature. Apologies in advance for the nature of my questions. If a grand jury is a pre-emptive strike,(with regards to fifth amendment), might this stem from an inconclusive polygraph examination?
|
|
Tom
Chesterfield, MO
|
mcsmom wrote: <quoted text>
Apologies in advance for the nature of my questions.
If a grand jury is a pre-emptive strike,(with regards to fifth amendment), might this stem from an inconclusive polygraph examination? I'm going to go with FRMLE and agree with him that there isn't a POI for a pre-emptive strike, but was used for investigative purposes.
|
|
mcsmom
Hebron, CT
|
Tom wrote: <quoted text>
I'm going to go with FRMLE and agree with him that there isn't a POI for a pre-emptive strike, but was used for investigative purposes. I agree, not suggesting a POI, it's bit confusing.
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
Judged:
1
1
mcsmom wrote: <quoted text>
I agree, not suggesting a POI, it's bit confusing. I think what mcsmom is asking (correct me if I am wrong) is whether an investigative grand jury would be commenced due to someone involved (not a POI, just someone who LE believe has information) getting an inconclusive polygraph result....so to skirt the whole 5th amendment issue, would a GJ be commenced to circumvent that, and get them to answer the questions. I personally think that there were several people LE wanted more information out of, but I have no basis for this other than my personal opinion. FrmLE stated (and I'm paraphrasing here) something along the lines of investigative grand juries being rare or not common. That leads me to believe the instituted it for a particular reason in this case. I just am not informed enough about the workings of LE to speculate what made them institute it.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
Judged:
2
mcsmom wrote: <quoted text>
I agree, not suggesting a POI, it's bit confusing. Agreed, the system is not terribly easy to understand. I spent 20 plus years doing it and still was learning tricks and tips right til when I left. I received lots of training, years of training really, and 22 years of on the job training, learning every day something new. So to try to understand the criminal justice system and investigative process by reading info on a forum or from google is really impossible. My take is this. I believe there are people who Investigators wanted to question and for one reason or another they felt that a GJ was the best avenue to discover that information. There are a hundred reasons why they felt that way, so to speculate without knowing the details is like throwing darts in the dark. I do not believe that they have a suspect or even POI at this point, I don't think there is an Indictment pending and I don't think that any of the GJ information means much other than they are still working the case. Don't read too much into it, it is not that significant.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
mcsmom wrote: <quoted text>
Apologies in advance for the nature of my questions.
If a grand jury is a pre-emptive strike,(with regards to fifth amendment), might this stem from an inconclusive polygraph examination? I really don't even understand your question, not sure what a 'pre-emptive strike' means. I don't think this has anything to do with a polygraph. Sorry.
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
There has not been an indictment sought in this case that I am aware of. Therefore any GJ inquiries would be Investigative in nature. I just wanted to quote this because I think it's a very important post. I don't want to ask too many questions of you FrmLE, because you usually offer up the information you want to share, and I hate to be pushy. But, do you have any take on the statement from Strezlin regarding a 75% chance of bringing charges in this case? I guess more specifically, what I'm asking is: Do you think he necessarily meant charges via a crime being perpetrated upon Maura, and criminal charges stemming from that? Or do you think it could have had a broader meaning (i.e., charges against Maura, or someone in the family, etc.) although I do realize there's every possibility a potential POI could be a friend/family member). I really thought Maura succumbed to the elements, after walking away from the accident. I don't know how charges could stem from that.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
Simply caustic wrote: <quoted text>
Thank you - that leads to my next question. Grand juries are notorious for leaks. I think it's interesting that none of Mauras extracurricular activities (of the fraudulent variety) leaked via a witness years ago.... Instead, we are only now hearing about it.
How did her family/friends keep such a tight lid on things? I'm not inferring anything nefarious, just wondering how they kept it quiet.
Then again, I don't know how Whiston and others discovered this information years ago - maybe it was via a leak. You will find that lots of the info coming out now is not really new news, I think it's just new to this forum. Also consider that the Grand Jury members in Grafton County for example really couldn't give 2 shits about this case. Nothing personal but this matters to Mauras family and friends, and the cops working the case, but to the average Grafton County citizen who works 2 jobs to support their family, put food on the table and keep oil in the furnace, this isn't that much of a deal to them. You overestimate the significance of this case to most people outside the world of Maura Murray. I know that comes across as mean, it is however the truth.
|
|
FrmLE
Vero Beach, FL
|
Simply Caustic wrote: <quoted text>
I just wanted to quote this because I think it's a very important post.
I don't want to ask too many questions of you FrmLE, because you usually offer up the information you want to share, and I hate to be pushy. But, do you have any take on the statement from Strezlin regarding a 75% chance of bringing charges in this case? I guess more specifically, what I'm asking is: Do you think he necessarily meant charges via a crime being perpetrated upon Maura, and criminal charges stemming from that? Or do you think it could have had a broader meaning (i.e., charges against Maura, or someone in the family, etc.) although I do realize there's every possibility a potential POI could be a friend/family member).
I really thought Maura succumbed to the elements, after walking away from the accident. I don't know how charges could stem from that. I can't comment on what Jeff Strezlin said. I can say that it would be good to consider when that statement was made, as well as the context in which that statement was made. Then consider the statement for what it's worth. Remember, no one knows what happened, everyone has an opinion but no one knows. As time goes on those opinions may change dimply sue to the passage of time and what that signifies. For instance, the night she went missing and even the next day everyone thought she just crached her car and split the scene to avoid the cops. It happens every day everywhere. As time passes the likelyhood of certain theories either increase or decrease, yes?
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
You will find that lots of the info coming out now is not really new news, I think it's just new to this forum.
Also consider that the Grand Jury members in Grafton County for example really couldn't give 2 shits about this case. Nothing personal but this matters to Mauras family and friends, and the cops working the case, but to the average Grafton County citizen who works 2 jobs to support their family, put food on the table and keep oil in the furnace, this isn't that much of a deal to them.
You overestimate the significance of this case to most people outside the world of Maura Murray.
I know that comes across as mean, it is however the truth. I should have specified: I meant witnesses at the GJ. I'm shocked that none of the friends/acquaintances/family members leaked out information they overheard, or told a friend who told a friend, etc. I don't doubt that the information about the credit card fraud was known to some, but I'm surprised it didn't come out earlier in a fashion similar to Renner's (a blog, or on a forum, etc.) Eight years seems quite a while to keep a lid on it.
|
|
Simply Caustic
Homer Glen, IL
|
Judged:
1
FrmLE wrote: <quoted text>
I can't comment on what Jeff Strezlin said. I can say that it would be good to consider when that statement was made, as well as the context in which that statement was made.
Then consider the statement for what it's worth. Remember, no one knows what happened, everyone has an opinion but no one knows. As time goes on those opinions may change dimply sue to the passage of time and what that signifies.
For instance, the night she went missing and even the next day everyone thought she just crached her car and split the scene to avoid the cops. It happens every day everywhere. As time passes the likelyhood of certain theories either increase or decrease, yes? I wonder if, in the interests of protecting the integrity of his case, he could have overestimated that number. I do agree the likelyhood of certain theories fluctuate. I just can't help but subscribe to the "ran away from the accident and died" theory.
|
|
|
Dating
