|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
vanderhoven wrote: <quoted text>
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. i think it was recently recapped....but since you've asked so nicely, and because it's not easily searched....Mason, a defense lawyer for 30+ years, came to MM forums, considered all talking points, with evidence gleaned and available to the public, and concluded, at least in his opinion, that there was some involvement with MM's father in her disappearance; he was very specific. further, he documented his theory directly to law enforcement. he developed a list of "18 red herrings"... issues that were plugged into the conversations by supporters and sympathizers of FM to justify/excuse/explain factors that Mason believed to distract the public from what he believed to be an unhealthy relationship between Maura and her father. presumably, mcsmom disagrees with Mason's theory but to my recollection, never directly debated it with him, even though he made himself available by fully listing his contact information. instead, as a surrogate for FM, she and others have worked tirelessly to first attack Mason's professional credentials, and now, she links to his blog revelations in an attempt to attack his personal credibility. all of this, of course, is a spin-off of the history of this group of FM supporters and their steadfast dedication to portraying MM as "The All American Girl", and refusing to admit to any of her life choices that might have contributed to her disappearance.
|
|
whitenoise
Boston, MA
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
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. never apologize, never qualify .... not until you have been proven unequivocally wrong. Speaking of apologies we've yet to see any from Shack who now posts here and the TOT/lava lamp gang.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
vanderhoven wrote: <quoted text>
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. the challenge is greater than you can imagine; it's easy to judge his efforts, but more difficult to sort through the twisted mess of misinformation. roadblocks and red herrings have been set up to "protect" MM by a gaggle of attack fowl that are keen to protect a duckling they've never known and have never met. if they are not holding information closely about MM's life prior to her disappearance, then they have failed to convince the general public that Maura was a flawless human being. Renner's revelations, so far, are uncomfortable to them and have them at wit's end.
|
|
AcidHouseMartin
Milton Keynes, UK
|
Ireland is tiny, in economic meltdown, has one of the highest costs of living in Europe and unemployment is at critical levels. This is especially true of small (and I mean VERY small) tourist towns like Killarney. As in the US, jobs are closely protected by stringent immigration controls and visa proceedures. It is not the Utopia Americans like to think it and welcomes only those on short spending sprees where a misguided sense of ancestry has them dipping in their pockets and throwing more Euros than sense at cliched marketing tat. And golf. The notion that Maura could fly on in (even to Dublin) and find housing, sustainable employment or even live on the streets turning tricks without being deported is laughable. As is any notion of her living as a kept woman amid the rolling emerald hills. She'd be out on her ear pronto. Renner is either stupid or he is deliberately setting the cat among the pigeons either to sport with people here or to maintain interest in this very slow-coming book. Personally, I don't think he's stupid. I think he's playing a very elaborate game of cat and mouse. However, whether the mouse turns out to be as stupid as he thinks, and whether people on here are willing to be sucked in without questioning the man's motives, remains to be seen.
|
|
whitenoise
Boston, MA
|
Snowy wrote: on second thought, the FireKitty/John The Lawyer/Mason Saturday Nite Shit Show was equally entertaining, in case anyone missed it. LOL. So true.
|
|
AcidHouseMartin
Milton Keynes, UK
|
Judged:
3
2
Snowy, No rational person could entirely discount Mason's theory which is not to say I accept it as 100% accurate, just that it holds as much validity as any other theory. Even family members have atested that alcohol was a problem for Maura's mother and that Maura and Kurt latterly 'ran the family home'. Despite this, Fred did not insist the children live with him. Alone, I think these two issues are sufficient grounds for assuming Maura was not the most settled, secure or 'all American' of girls and, therefore, agree that a failure to acknowledge the lIkelihood of her past having any input into her fate is remiss of Maura's family and detrimental to finding her. However, would you agree that these factors alone don't entirely rule out the possibility that she was the victime of foul play at the hands of a stranger and that, in fact, her fragility as a result of a dysfunctional existence, may well have made her more vulnerable to that?
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
the challenge is greater than you can imagine; it's easy to judge his efforts, but more difficult to sort through the twisted mess of misinformation. roadblocks and red herrings have been set up to "protect" MM by a gaggle of attack fowl that are keen to protect a duckling they've never known and have never met.
if they are not holding information closely about MM's life prior to her disappearance, then they have failed to convince the general public that Maura was a flawless human being. Renner's revelations, so far, are uncomfortable to them and have them at wit's end. They are not one and the same. I'm not suggesting it isn't difficult to navigate the facts of this case, and to generate new information. What I am suggesting is that he could, if he wanted to, and it would be valuable both to him and to efforts to solving this case, if he put more of an effort into verifying the information which he posts. This isn't as difficult a task as you are making it out to be. It's also not a completely outrageous standard to ask him to adhere to. Especially not considering he himself has volunteered to try and find out what happened to her. I'm not sure how to approach the comment about Maura's family. I am particularly hesitant to respond to this part of your comment because I don't think that I had come anywhere close to addressing this in my first post, and I don't think it's entirely relevant. It might make sorting out fictitious leads for Mr. Renner a more complex task, it may even make gathering factual information more difficult, but it doesn't particularly impact how you handle verifying information which has already been obtained. Second, you can imagine how hard it would be to measure whether releasing some information would prove helpful to finding her versus tar her reputation so much that people are reluctant to help find her- and that this decision would be especially difficult for them to make because of the emotions involved. I'm not suggesting they've made the right call, I'm also not suggesting that is wrong to ask more of them. I can merely empathize with them but in general I agree a higher standard of information all around would be beneficial. I was however, and continue to be speaking of the standard steps any journalist would ideally take to verify leads/information they put out, which does not drastically change regardless of the subject they cover and whatever particular obstacles they face. Furthermore, the argument that it is a difficult task for him to accomplish therefore I have no place to advocate for higher standards is absurd. Everyone here has no problem advocating for particular standards for this forum's content and being critical of the theories and opinions contained within and how they came about (granted different users have completely different sets of standards, some higher than others) and yet so many of you are so reluctant to ask anything of Mr. Renner. Forgive me, but I find that exceptionally weird. You are more comfortable being critical of the topix users that stray from facts, but shy away from/have a problem with asking for reliable information from a journalist of sorts covering the case.. It's baffling to me.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
AcidHouseMartin wrote: Snowy,
No rational person could entirely discount Mason's theory which is not to say I accept it as 100% accurate, just that it holds as much validity as any other theory.
Even family members have atested that alcohol was a problem for Maura's mother and that Maura and Kurt latterly 'ran the family home'. Despite this, Fred did not insist the children live with him.
Alone, I think these two issues are sufficient grounds for assuming Maura was not the most settled, secure or 'all American' of girls and, therefore, agree that a failure to acknowledge the lIkelihood of her past having any input into her fate is remiss of Maura's family and detrimental to finding her.
However, would you agree that these factors alone don't entirely rule out the possibility that she was the victime of foul play at the hands of a stranger and that, in fact, her fragility as a result of a dysfunctional existence, may well have made her more vulnerable to that? well stated. i wholly agree with you. there are only two certainties: that she is missing, and that the definitive reason for her disappearance is unknown.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
AcidHouseMartin wrote: The notion that Maura...is laughable. As is any notion of her living as a kept woman amid the rolling emerald hills. She'd be out on her ear pronto.
Renner is either stupid or he is deliberately setting the cat among the pigeons either to sport with people here or to maintain interest in this very slow-coming book. I could not agree more, and I appreciate you coming out and saying it. I feel like all often any criticism of Mr. Renner is immediately hushed. Which is preposterous. That said, I don't know that I agree with the idea that this is some masterful manipulation on his end. It seems far more likely he just doesn't put much weight on thoroughly fact-checking and investigating a lead prior to publishing, or doesn't have the training to do so. I think he has a tendency, which I've seen in more than a few of his posts, to link things together because they both share some secondary connection. He tends to six degree of kevin bacon A LOT of the things he posts, and I highly doubt that this is entirely some ploy. He may well be manipulating things here, but I think there's a much simpler explanation to some of his bizarre and unfounded posts than him being this Machiavellian genius.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
vanderhoven wrote: <quoted text>
They are not one and the same. I'm not suggesting it isn't difficult to navigate the facts of this case, and to generate new information. What I am suggesting is that he could, if he wanted to, and it would be valuable both to him and to efforts to solving this case, if he put more of an effort into verifying the information which he posts. This isn't as difficult a task as you are making it out to be. It's also not a completely outrageous standard to ask him to adhere to. Especially not considering he himself has volunteered to try and find out what happened to her.
I'm not sure how to approach the comment about Maura's family. I am particularly hesitant to respond to this part of your comment because I don't think that I had come anywhere close to addressing this in my first post, and I don't think it's entirely relevant. It might make sorting out fictitious leads for Mr. Renner a more complex task, it may even make gathering factual information more difficult, but it doesn't particularly impact how you handle verifying information which has already been obtained.
Second, you can imagine how hard it would be to measure whether releasing some information would prove helpful to finding her versus tar her reputation so much that people are reluctant to help find her- and that this decision would be especially difficult for them to make because of the emotions involved. I'm not suggesting they've made the right call, I'm also not suggesting that is wrong to ask more of them. I can merely empathize with them but in general I agree a higher standard of information all around would be beneficial.
I was however, and continue to be speaking of the standard steps any journalist would ideally take to verify leads/information they put out, which does not drastically change regardless of the subject they cover and whatever particular obstacles they face. Furthermore, the argument that it is a difficult task for him to accomplish therefore I have no place to advocate for higher standards is absurd. Everyone here has no problem advocating for particular standards for this forum's content and being critical of the theories and opinions contained within and how they came about (granted different users have completely different sets of standards, some higher than others) and yet so many of you are so reluctant to ask anything of Mr. Renner.
Forgive me, but I find that exceptionally weird. You are more comfortable being critical of the topix users that stray from facts, but shy away from/have a problem with asking for reliable information from a journalist of sorts covering the case.. It's baffling to me. 1) i agree that he was more conscientious a few months ago about fully verifying info before posting 2) of course it was a difficult decision to make about revealing vs withholding what would ordinarily be 'personal' information about MM. it was downright silly to conduct a PR campaign in an online party-like atmosphere, however, complete with childish concepts about inclusion/exclusion, exile for crossing the "party-line", and rather than denial or silence, misleading the public with false information or misinformation by omission. think of it this way....1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 years into it....what else is left to lose? MM is gone. 3) the history here is well known and discussion takes place within that frame of reference; JRenner's blog is his alone to negotiate standards and boundaries for discussion. 4) i've shied away from nothing; i've spent more time here today than i can afford, given the projects i am attempting to finish by a due date. i've given my best.
|
|
Snowy
Gloucester, MA
|
Looking4AMoose wrote: <quoted text>Citi, earlier this week you did state that you saw the bloody/rusty knife. I'd consider that inside knowledge. excellent point.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Judged:
1
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>**Re-cap of Mason**/MM's family trying to portray Maura as All-American Girl Thank you so much for posting the re-cap. I am still in the midst of reading through the older posts in the thread, and there's a lot of material there so I apologize in advance if I miss something or if I ask for a reference to something. And, feel free to tell me if my asking for a re-cap or whatever new member behaviours I may have become a nuisance. Obviously I'm pretty vocal myself, and generally thick-skinned, and I'd hate to put anyone out. So I'll try to rely on my own abilities to read the back-logs as a rule, but might have to ask for info in the meantime. Yeah, I think that whatever their reasoning MM's family has done a real disservice to their cause by leaving out as much as they did. I can understand the reasoning behind doing so, but I think in leaving things out and as you've said, by trying to portray her as the all-american girl has only strengthened people's convictions that she merely ran away, or was somehow responsible for her own disappearance. I agree with Acid House though, in thinking that the difficulties she had do not exclude her and could have made her more vulnerable. Not that they did, merely that they could have. I wonder if her family had just come out and been straight-forward about her history how much of a difference that would have made in terms of having accurate information with which to use to locate her, and in keeping members of the public from becoming frustrated or disillusioned and disinterest with the case. Would you say that many people are no longer as intent on finding her, or have less compassion, or would be less likely to come forward if they knew anything because of the family's missteps? I ask because you've been here for a while, and I'm certain you have more insight into how the general public feels about this case than I do at this time. Again, a big thank you for going over that old information for me! I really appreciate it.
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
Judged:
1
jwb wrote: <quoted text>
My opinion would be hoax if I just saw the laughing video but the ticket along with it brings pause to say WTF what are the odds. I again say i don't know who is on the video to be politically correct. Maybe this guy just knows who and wanted to scare that certain someone with having the ski lift ticket. Shouldn't be too hard to go back to the place and see who took lift 13. As for this man laughing, he starts out trying to, then makes it seem pretty realistic as the music progresses. Then he stops. Looks. Winks. Smiles and puts his face into a normal grin. I think it most definately was a taunt, but to someone else. Maybe this guy thoght he'd "scare" somebody out there with it. Or spook them, to say the least. If not some form of LE, I'll bet the laughing man wishes he could have taken the video down sooner. I also think it could be a stunt....for publicity. And funny that it was posted the DAY before as though the joke is on us. That Maura went captive or missing or just plain AWOL, on SUNDAY with someone elses help. Just thinking out loud, and still don't think it's beagle at all. I too think that it's not right to post where an innocent man works with no just cause. I mean after all, no where did it say 'hi, I'm Beagle and crazy and looky here, I think it's all funny, bet you wonder if I did it too.....
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
I'd like to offer my thoughts about the real MM. I must admit I was saddened to find that she would use someone elses credit card number(s). But true to my nature, I still feel for her and all her friends and family who seem to be left in the dark. Kurts poem speaks volumes to me though....what have we done to make you turn away. Wonder what came to mind in his 15 year old self at the time. Troubles at home, word getting back to the family? Calls coming in less and less often, maybe some distancing going on. Which would all be normal to a 15 year old who missed his sister enough already as it were. She had been gone for awhile and staying elsewhere. Maura had been such a leader to him, teaching him things and so on and suddenly he is left to care for his already ailing mom. Even IF not diagnosed, the mother would be showing signs and maybe even showing a shorter fuse. I read some of this, the rest is just speculation.
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
Oh, and that ticket we all saw on youtube likely has a ticket number and should be traceable as to where bought, for one thing. If it was reserved and/or paid for by cr3edit/debit card, it might be telling as to who wound up with it. See what I'm writing?
If Tom Jones bought it on his cc and also stayed at the lodge, more info could come out of just that alone. If it was MM who charged it (naturally, I have no clue), but if she did, that could help us figure out why this other person had the ticket....sinister or not.
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
Even RF wrote, sang and taped himself singing about the hardship he has had to endure just because he lived near the accident sight.
|
|
whitenoise
Boston, MA
|
Just me__Paris--- wrote: <quoted text>
Maybe this guy just knows who and wanted to scare that certain someone with having the ski lift ticket.
Shouldn't be too hard to go back to the place and see who took lift 13. As for this man laughing, he starts out trying to, then makes it seem pretty realistic as the music progresses. Then he stops. Looks. Winks. Smiles and puts his face into a normal grin. I think it most definately was a taunt, but to someone else. Maybe this guy thoght he'd "scare" somebody out there with it. Or spook them, to say the least.
If not some form of LE, I'll bet the laughing man wishes he could have taken the video down sooner.
I also think it could be a stunt....for publicity. And funny that it was posted the DAY before as though the joke is on us. That Maura went captive or missing or just plain AWOL, on SUNDAY with someone elses help. Just thinking out loud, and still don't think it's beagle at all.
I too think that it's not right to post where an innocent man works with no just cause. I mean after all, no where did it say 'hi, I'm Beagle and crazy and looky here, I think it's all funny, bet you wonder if I did it too..... so u r paris! u r also linda and just me. Thank u for recommending to me "bottle rocket". About 100 yrs ago. The film maura watched over and over again, her favourite film in the whole world, according to her friends. Yes, it does reveal an interest in running away and starting over. We actually enjoyed this film, not great, but sort of cute.
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
Looking4AMoose wrote: <quoted text>Citi, earlier this week you did state that you saw the bloody/rusty knife. I'd consider that inside knowledge. Yes, and by that time, the time of the man giving the knife over to Fred, NOBODY should have touched it or even looked at it. If it were me, I'd have mailed it in,(if that's what police said to do) without a minute to spare. Maybe snap a picture of it, but that's about it.
|
|
vanderhoven
Ottawa, Canada
|
Snowy wrote: <quoted text>
1) i agree that he was more conscientious a few months ago about fully verifying info before posting
2) of course it was a difficult decision to make about revealing vs withholding what would ordinarily be 'personal' information about MM. it was downright silly to conduct a PR campaign in an online party-like atmosphere, however, complete with childish concepts about inclusion/exclusion, exile for crossing the "party-line", and rather than denial or silence, misleading the public with false information or misinformation by omission.
think of it this way....1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 years into it....what else is left to lose? MM is gone.
3) the history here is well known and discussion takes place within that frame of reference; JRenner's blog is his alone to negotiate standards and boundaries for discussion.
4) i've shied away from nothing; i've spent more time here today than i can afford, given the projects i am attempting to finish by a due date. i've given my best. Gah, I just lost the post I'd typed up in response to this so I apologize if this one makes less sense, but alas I'm rushing now. I'm sorry, I hope that my post did not come across as rude. I know you've spent a lot of time here today, especially to talk to me and clarify a number of things for me and I really appreciate that. I wasn't trying to particularly single you out. It's just something that I have noticed generally speaking, and not about you, that many people that discuss or follow the MM case are protective of Mr. Renner to a degree that I do not understand. I'm obviously not trying to just bash him, I simply take issue with some of his methods and I find it weird that a number of people do not. I did, however, interpret, or perhaps misinterpret, your post as being in defense of his methods, and I felt as though you were essentially saying: It would be hard for him to exclusively provide verifiable information and you're not in a position to ask him to do so. Which, I took issue with. Anyways, just want to clarify I meant absolutely nothing personal by it, and that a number of my statements in that post were just commenting on how many people in general seem to respond to Renner's info. Not you, specifically. I can understand how the two were conflated in my post. My apologies. I'd like to add, I have the vantage point of a new member, and I am new both to this site, the discussion, and Mr.Renner's site. So, yes, if Renner's posts have been especially dubious of late, and they weren't before it's a given we'll have conflicting opinions here. (Re: Party Lines... I find it really weird that they are so tightly drawn especially when there is so little information publicly available, I personally think as you stated, all that is guaranteed is that she disappeared, should, at least in theory, make it pretty hard for party lines to be drawn. But then loyalties are a funny thing.) Well Snowy, I'm not sure if you're headed off or not. I probably am, but who knows. If you are, my absolute best wishes and I really appreciate the discussion, and your efforts to help better inform me! A sincere thanks, and I hope you successfully manage to complete the tasks which need your attention- furthermore that you're able to do so quickly enough so that you have a little bit of time to do something especially leisurely tonight, if for nothing else you deserve it for reading through paragraphs and paragraphs of foruming. I look forward to speaking with you soon.
|
|
Just me__Paris---
Minneapolis, MN
|
Last though here, and others have said as much too. WHY would the family tell the tv viewers to just ignore this? Would it give something away? Was it a message of sorts to someone in the know, namely family? If it were my family, I'd think...let 'er rip, this will make people think about Maura and we have been praying for this. More interest and so on.
|
|
|
Dating
