|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
whitenoise wrote: <quoted text>
She "met" Maura once. And it was at a group function. got it. so why present as "family"? and reference "family"? while claiming to have little first-hand knowledge to share, and taking no responsibility for interactions between "family" and the public?
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
whitenoise wrote: <quoted text>
Mason is not founder of the Innocence project. Barry Scheck is. Mason is founder of the Innocence project North West. And maybe he was fed some information that was NOT misleading! more importantly, Mason made his contact information available to everyone on this forum. mcsmom, or anyone, was welcome to go to the source to question him directly, then, as now.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Advocate wrote: With respect to Citigirl -- is she (as a family member) supposed to police everything any member of the family may say? Is she somehow expected to force other family members -- possibly distant family members at that -- to go with her rules about what to say and how to say it regarding the locals et al.? Who made Citigirl the Murray Family Police? I think it is really unfair to expect her to make a point of disagreeing with other family members even though she may. They are adults, they can speak for themselves and take the flowers or the flak. I see her as speaking only for herself, which frankly is all any of us should be expected to do. perhaps we view integrity differently, then. when she witnessed a campaign to malign and accuse strangers in the name of MM, she, as self-identified "family" might have spoken up as a decent human being to advocate for innocents against vindictive "family" members and their representatives.
|
|
whitenoise
Mashpee, MA
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
got it.
so why present as "family"? and reference "family"? while claiming to have little first-hand knowledge to share, and taking no responsibility for interactions between "family" and the public? Possibly because she doesn't have a democratic mind set, doesn't believe all posters are created equal, a poster who claims to be a family member will garner more respect, more adulation, more attention, more sympathy. Pathetic yes, but attention seekers do what they can when they don't get the attention they feel they are worthy of in their own personal lives.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Holy shit. You go away for 12 hours and the whole forum becomes a cross between a estrogen toxic dump site and a Oprah support group. It appears that jwb is still on his hunt for the creep. What he intends to do if he finds out who it is, I have no idea. How this little coffee clutch is furthering the Maura investigation I have no idea. But, it is entertaining. I'll give it another 12 hours. It is just currently too rife with weirdness and nothing of value. Bill
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
whitenoise wrote: <quoted text>
Possibly because she doesn't have a democratic mind set, doesn't believe all posters are created equal, a poster who claims to be a family member will garner more respect, more adulation, more attention, more sympathy. Pathetic yes, but attention seekers do what they can when they don't get the attention they feel they are worthy of in their own personal lives. and, sadly, whitenoise, there is no accounting for anyone's age, social and intellectual experiences, and, yes, fundamental ideologies to carry the burden of accountability. this, in turn, relates to the willingness of James Renner and Fred Leatherman, as Mason, to commit to what they say by attaching their names to their statements. one has the option, then, of challenging those statements. and, Tom...for what it matters....don't bring yourself to your knees with apologies for what you first must have honestly believed, or you wouldn't have said it. say what you mean, and mean what you say. qualify it, if necessary, by stating it is your opinion. you apologized sufficiently before being further bullied into retracting your ideas. JMO.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
WTH-the-original wrote: Holy shit.
You go away for 12 hours and the whole forum becomes a cross between a estrogen toxic dump site and a Oprah support group.
It appears that jwb is still on his hunt for the creep. What he intends to do if he finds out who it is, I have no idea. How this little coffee clutch is furthering the Maura investigation I have no idea. But, it is entertaining.
I'll give it another 12 hours. It is just currently too rife with weirdness and nothing of value.
Bill we take a different approach....you're more direct....but arrive at the same conclusion. the circus is in town.
|
|
Since: Nov 08
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
we take a different approach....you're more direct....but arrive at the same conclusion.
the circus is in town. Christ yes. I see them piling out of the clown cars as we speak. They must be resting up for their matinee performance later tonight. If nothing else, I give jwb high marks for endurance. Unless its some form of chemical imbalance. Bill
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Judged:
1
1
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
i am asking for clarification about his policies to maintain the privacy of individuals who may contact him to provide information.
in addition, an overview and/or clarification regarding his policies for revealing the specific "sources" he accesses in the course of his research/investigation will also be helpful.
for example, he did not reveal the name of the person who tipped him off about possible bank account activity, while a name associated with a CPA was mentioned. Fair enough. I don't disagree. I think more clarification and further attention paid to how information is obtained would be tremendously helpful to strengthening Mr. Renner's work.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
WTH-the-original wrote: Holy shit.
You go away for 12 hours and the whole forum becomes a cross between a estrogen toxic dump site and a Oprah support group.
It appears that jwb is still on his hunt for the creep. What he intends to do if he finds out who it is, I have no idea. How this little coffee clutch is furthering the Maura investigation I have no idea. But, it is entertaining.
I'll give it another 12 hours. It is just currently too rife with weirdness and nothing of value.
Bill And what would you consider of value? Nothing you've posted recently has been. I'm not suggesting you're incapable of adding something constructive to the dialogue... I'd just like to see it. I don't object to criticisms of what shape the discussion is taking it's just I've posed the question, what would or could be beneficial and not one of those criticizing has been able to provide an answer. I find that to be fairly revealing. Personally, I don't feel tremendously confident in my knowledge of the case to really theorize, but I have been asking questions and asking for further information/clarification, and reading what little information has been made public in order to strengthen my base-knowledge of this case. I consider that to be of use, perhaps you disagree. I don't really care either way, because I'm still going to contribute, but I'd prefer to not get into a contentious fuss over it, and would just like to stress that when you do come back if you could at least make a suggestion as to what would be your ideal use of this forum that might serve to do more than just offend/alienate/annoy others.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Judged:
2
1
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>
Christ yes. I see them piling out of the clown cars as we speak. They must be resting up for their matinee performance later tonight. If nothing else, I give jwb high marks for endurance. Unless its some form of chemical imbalance.
Bill If it is a sort of chemical imbalance then you should soon see a complete reversal of positions, i.e. a textual embrace of tom.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Judged:
1
1
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>
Christ yes. I see them piling out of the clown cars as we speak. They must be resting up for their matinee performance later tonight. If nothing else, I give jwb high marks for endurance. Unless its some form of chemical imbalance.
Bill too funny, and spot on. last night was an unprecedented show.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
on second thought, the FireKitty/John The Lawyer/Mason Saturday Nite Shit Show was equally entertaining, in case anyone missed it.
|
|
Looking4AMoose
Barre, VT
|
citigirl wrote: <quoted text>Snowy I have never claimed to have inside information about Maura. I have always stated and it is fact that Amherst is unknown to me. Citi, earlier this week you did state that you saw the bloody/rusty knife. I'd consider that inside knowledge.
|
|
AcidHouseMartin
Milton Keynes, UK
|
A night time matinee? What next; a morning soiree? Seriously, I think 'puppets' might suffice better than 'clowns' but who's really having their strings jerked here?
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Snowy wrote: on second thought, the FireKitty/John The Lawyer/Mason Saturday Nite Shit Show was equally entertaining, in case anyone missed it. Snowy, I did miss it. Can you please explain the whole Mason thing. I've asked like three people to clarify, and nobody has gotten back to me. If anyone is reluctant to re-hash whatever it is, would I be able to figure out what's being referred to by reading back-archived posts? If you could save me the trouble, at least this time, I'd appreciate it.
|
|
jwb
Lincoln, NH
|
vanderhoven wrote: And regarding Renner I don't doubt that he has done some things to further the case, but there is also a lot of SERIOUSLY speculative and unsubstantiated information that he has posted. This troubles me because some people interpret his word as gospel. I think that the whole Curves Toronto debacle, the Ireland connection, these serve as examples of flawed reporting at best. I think he has a tendency to draw connections between two unconnected things and correlates them to form an erroneous conclusion, making for some seriously convoluted reading. Now that's not a personal attack. I'm sure he cares deeply about the case and has put a lot of time into it, but it's sloppy "detective work" and it can lead to a seriously unsympathetic and confused/misinformed public. I take issue with that, and I don't think I'm alone. I do not fault him, and I give him credit for the work he has done to further the MM case or whatever myths he has helped dispel but I'm not about to ignore the fact that there are some troubling leaps made in his "reporting". And in bringing them up, should enough people do so, I think it would help to keep the public from just immediately taking his work as fact, and perhaps even lead him to put more effort into allowing his research to draw its own linear correlations, as oppose to playing connect-the-dots with unrelated data. How could some additional caution exercised both by him and the public be a bad thing?
(**Additionally, I'd like to add that I don't think that the public should be automatically sympathetic, but it troubles me when flawed conclusions result in the lack of sympathy.) I hear what you are saying about some things that are not substantiated ,however the jury is still out on the Toronto and Ireland posts. We don't know the outcome yet nor do we know what prompted the postings. I say give things more time as Mr Renner will not show all his cards till his Book comes out. Hey, he is an author and has to make a living. I don't know for certain, but I think this has become a bigger challenge than Renner anticipated and I have to believe he is hooked in to finding the truth as we all are.
|
|
jwb
Lincoln, NH
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
i am asking for clarification about his policies to maintain the privacy of individuals who may contact him to provide information.
in addition, an overview and/or clarification regarding his policies for revealing the specific "sources" he accesses in the course of his research/investigation will also be helpful.
for example, he did not reveal the name of the person who tipped him off about possible bank account activity, while a name associated with a CPA was mentioned. go back to the start of his Blog when he spelled it out there. Look under "methodology".
|
|
jwb
Lincoln, NH
|
WTH-the-original wrote: <quoted text>
Christ yes. I see them piling out of the clown cars as we speak. They must be resting up for their matinee performance later tonight. If nothing else, I give jwb high marks for endurance. Unless its some form of chemical imbalance.
Bill what do you have to offer today but name calling and insults Bill?Shall we show the world what an ass you are? Oh wait you do it every post.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
jwb wrote: <quoted text>
I hear what you are saying about some things that are not substantiated ,however the jury is still out on the Toronto and Ireland posts. We don't know the outcome yet nor do we know what prompted the postings. I say give things more time as Mr Renner will not show all his cards till his Book comes out. Hey, he is an author and has to make a living. I don't know for certain, but I think this has become a bigger challenge than Renner anticipated and I have to believe he is hooked in to finding the truth as we all are. I think that even if the Toronto or Ireland scenarios by some miracle were accurate, and proven to be so, his means of having arrived at those conclusions (both of which are completely contrary) leave a lot to be desired in terms of investigative work. I mean, I could say Maura was killed. Maura is alive and living in Columbus, Ohio. Maura is in Norway. Maura went to france. Maura died of hypothermia. One of these scenarios could be accurate, but had I called it accurately it would be of little more than luck. Now, granted, I literally just pulled scenarios out of thin air but I don't honestly think that the means in which Mr. Renner arrived at the possibilities he listed were much more sophisticated and fact-based. He may well want to solve the mystery but I think he could stand to do a little more leg-work, fact-checking, and follow a more linear pattern when trying to flush out a theory. That's just my opinion, and it doesn't make him a bad person. As for the thesis that he is presenting sloppily investigated theories because he wants to keep something for his book, I think that's absurd. He may well be keeping some cards tight to his chest to reveal in the book, but he's not uncomfortable with making regular journalistic leaps, and I think that's not something that will change with the book.
|
|
|
Dating
