Maura Murray

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you ask these questions on a forum where you know that no one can answer?

You know the answer to this. Anyone with room temp IQ knows the answer.

Wowzer the real one wrote:

<quoted text> why not go right to the source and get answers? Isn't that what a PI does, ask questions and get answers??

HAhaha, yes that's an excellent question isn't it? Rather than sit on a useless internet forum all day throwing out bullshit, WHY NOT ASK THESE QUESTIONS TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE THE ANSWERS?

columbo? Why not ask rather than post here where no one has a clue what the answers are?

Interesting.

WTH-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
Reasonable people can disagree. But, keep this in mind. I have seen his work on more than this forum and over a much greater time than you.
I have seen the trailer hitch bullshit which he won't even discuss anymore like he wasn't the originator of that turd. People wasted months on that. Now by the way, he is starting to float the turd about Maura's car being "pushed". I suspect by a police vehicle, but he hasn't thrown the second part of that turd out there yet. I am waiting. Just recently he talked about how Patric's body was moved around at the site where he was found. Why would a thinking human being, knowing the suffering that the mother is going through, even say something like that without rock solid proof? There have been many more. I have very little respect for his manner of "investigation" which seems to primarily consist of throwing bullshit out into a public forum and seeing how people react. Your experience with him may be different, but that is what I have witnessed for many years.
Bill

I don't agree with all of his methods or theories. But I don't think he has malicious intent. Do you think so? Your earlier statement of planting seeds as lawyers do in front of a jury, to me implies you think he is trying to manipulate the crowd for some greater purpose. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. If that is what you're saying, I would like to know what that purpose could possibly be. If not to find Maura, then what? It's an honest question. I'm not going to call you a twonker or anything. We can agree to disagree.

backspace4me wrote:

I have never heard that the witnesses in the homes ever saw or stated or admitted they saw this Bronco. Why?

In all fairness. I should have added, Maybe they did and were asked not to say anything or they really did not notice. Why does everything need to be such a mystery?

backspace4me wrote:

The strange thing is we now know Sgt. Smith was not driving the #1 Bronco.

who was driving it?Was it touching Mauras front end?Is this when her doors were seen open?And no one else saw this vehicle?Like it wasnt there long?

FrmLE wrote:

<quoted text>
You know the answer to this. Anyone with room temp IQ knows the answer.
<quoted text>
HAhaha, yes that's an excellent question isn't it? Rather than sit on a useless internet forum all day throwing out bullshit, WHY NOT ASK THESE QUESTIONS TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE THE ANSWERS?
columbo? Why not ask rather than post here where no one has a clue what the answers are?
Interesting.

I believe the people with the answers have buried,oops,covered things up.Maybe you could ask them?

Its defineately all dependant on timeline.when was #1 Le vehicle Bronco at Mauras car?i find it odd nobody in the area homes saw the #1...especially if he was seen with his lights flashing just prior.Was this the LE arrested for DUI???and I always wonder about the Westmans saying they heard an acceleration.To me it sound Like somebody was high tailing it out of there...all timeline..

findmaura wrote:

Its defineately all dependant on timeline.when was #1 Le vehicle Bronco at Mauras car?i find it odd nobody in the area homes saw the #1...especially if he was seen with his lights flashing just prior.Was this the LE arrested for DUI???and I always wonder about the Westmans saying they heard an acceleration.To me it sound Like somebody was high tailing it out of there...all timeline..

I believe that it is all timeline. I also know, that without finding forensic evidence, we will not know.

The whole thing about the 001 police truck being there is extremely interesting.
It's been shown that 001 was tw cheif's truck right?
So unless the cottage hospital witness is totally lying the cheif of police was on scene that night.
What's up with that?
Why would they lie?
This whole thing makes no sense, either the witness is lying, or the police r.

Another thing I notice is that it seems everyone that showed up at the accident scene, the ems guys, fire guys, the tow truck driver, everybody thought that the accident scene was really strange, everyone except the cops.
What's up with that?
U got the ems driver and the yow truck driver both saying the accident was really weird and have extremely accurate versions of what happened that r much more consistent w the damage and a few other things, but smith caught none of this?
How can everyone else thing it's so strange and them smith just write it up as a simple car that spun out, that's totally wrong?

Why r there so many inconsistencies in everything Haverhill pd says they know and everything the witnesses say?

I still feel like they knew way more that night then they r telling.
I think that early on they realized that if she did get abducted by the red truck and they had no id of the guy it was gonna b next to impossible to locate the perp. So they decided to pretend that they didnt know anything that night. That gives them a much better excuse if they don't ever solve it.
Think about how bad it would look for them if they knew de got abducted, knew within the hour of arriving, and then never caught the guy.
They'd look so bad. I think they thought it would look better if they didn't find out she was there until the next day when her family arrived.
Somebody between the time her car was found and the family arrived told smith that he should lie and pretend that he thought it was Fred driving that night. This much we know.
Who told smith he should lie about that?
Could it have been the chief? The same cheif who's car was witnessed at the scene?
Something is wrong w this picture if u think about it

Jenkins wrote:

The whole thing about the 001 police truck being there is extremely interesting.
It's been shown that 001 was tw cheif's truck right?
So unless the cottage hospital witness is totally lying the cheif of police was on scene that night.
What's up with that?
Why would they lie?
This whole thing makes no sense, either the witness is lying, or the police r.
Another thing I notice is that it seems everyone that showed up at the accident scene, the ems guys, fire guys, the tow truck driver, everybody thought that the accident scene was really strange, everyone except the cops.
What's up with that?
U got the ems driver and the yow truck driver both saying the accident was really weird and have extremely accurate versions of what happened that r much more consistent w the damage and a few other things, but smith caught none of this?
How can everyone else thing it's so strange and them smith just write it up as a simple car that spun out, that's totally wrong?
Why r there so many inconsistencies in everything Haverhill pd says they know and everything the witnesses say?
I still feel like they knew way more that night then they r telling.
I think that early on they realized that if she did get abducted by the red truck and they had no id of the guy it was gonna b next to impossible to locate the perp. So they decided to pretend that they didnt know anything that night. That gives them a much better excuse if they don't ever solve it.
Think about how bad it would look for them if they knew de got abducted, knew within the hour of arriving, and then never caught the guy.
They'd look so bad. I think they thought it would look better if they didn't find out she was there until the next day when her family arrived.
Somebody between the time her car was found and the family arrived told smith that he should lie and pretend that he thought it was Fred driving that night. This much we know.
Who told smith he should lie about that?
Could it have been the chief? The same cheif who's car was witnessed at the scene?
Something is wrong w this picture if u think about it

With respect, this is turning out to be little more than an LE witch hunt. Can I remind you, these are just people doing their jobs?

On a daily basis, I can think of things I might have done better, changed or improved. Thankfully, neither me nor my family have to face hinly-veiled accusations from the public when I do make proffessional mistakes or react as well I might in an alien situation.

I think what's going on here is dire, TBH. The notion that the normal, well intentioned and hard-working men and women in LE would go about an intricate 8 year cover up simply. Because they worked in the same place as someone is as absurd as it's insulting.

Whatever issue certain posters might have with LE, can we get away from this paranoid stuff? Clowns freak me out but I'm not about to accuse some guy called Coco of murder just because of the way he parked his car one time in 2004.

Crazy.

Bumping for Maura wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe it was the same witness who reported an empty red truck up on BHR who also reported seeing a Haverhill PD SUV cruiser (#1) nose to nose with Maura´s Saturn (not driven by Officer Smith) and with no people visible around.
Another (?) witness is also supposed to have driven past Maura´s car and seeing LE there with the doors of the Saturn open, despite these being said to have been locked when the car was found.
I´ve been following the MM case since at least 2008-2009 and I´m still confused regarding all these seeming inconsistencies of various kinds.

These are two seperate witnesses ...

Poster (Mason) said that although CS was H2 that he drove the H1 vehicle.

Can anyone else confirm or deny this? Did mason live in this area during that time period? How would he be privy to that info? Just thinking out loud. Mason is the only one that I am aware of that put that out there.

Captain Jack wrote:

<quoted text>
Amy ... just thought the article/video was interesting. There was a previous lawsuit against Topix in Texas which was interesting also.
You are correct, we should always be aware of how our words affect others ... in fact, words can be weapons. People's perspective's are interesting, for sure.
You ask if I am related to the Murray family. I've lived in the same area & know some of the family, as well as extended family. Some members are friends. It's with appreciation I read that you are sorry for our loss. It is a long journey. Maura is truly loved unconditionally by many people.

I truly am very sorry for your loss. Thank you for answering. I would always rather ask questions than wonder where the person is coming from. People's perspectives are definitely interesting. I'm a paralegal and kind of a nerd, so the legal aspects interest me as well. I'm frankly shocked there haven't been more topix lawsuits yet. The false cloak of anonymity provokes an unhealthy bravery in many cases. This place seems to bring out the worst in people, myself included at times. I wish there was more we could do besides banter endlessly here. I'm rambling. Anyway, my best wishes to you and your friends.

I believe that someone that night (LE, SBD or other witnesses), in addition to RobinsonOrdway's later reported sighting of an unknown, lurking Red Truck, saw something or someone that they initially thought was irrelevant and that LE was made aware of this at the time. It might have been a speeding vehicle, a vehicle turning around at BHR or a curious detail at the crash site. I think there was a reason that LE and SBD only searched west (NOT EAST) and that a BOLO was only put out to Haverhill, Lisbon and Littleton but NOT to Lincoln and North Woodstock -- someone observed suspicious activity on that very night which was only deemed relevant after-the-fact.

Perhaps this detail only became critical when the female driver of the car did not reappear and her family, friends and media showed up en masse to search for her and ask questions? If the police logs were "doctored" possibly it was because of scanty note-taking, or to keep the details of a possible suspect secret or even pursuant to directives from LE's legal eagles? If it was discovered that LE was aware of additional information from that fateful evening or that police protocol wasn't followed to the letter, I'm guessing that there would be many prestigious law firms willing to take on a civil suit pro bono.

Jwb wrote:

Poster (Mason) said that although CS was H2 that he drove the H1 vehicle.
Can anyone else confirm or deny this? Did mason live in this area during that time period? How would he be privy to that info? Just thinking out loud. Mason is the only one that I am aware of that put that out there.

That's interesting. I think I read on Advocate's forum that Mason lived in Kentucky? Maybe he called and asked somebody?

I hope someone can confirm or deny this. If it's true, it would simplify things.

Not being from a small town myself, I have found it strange that so many people could possibly be involved at the scene of one accident where they didn't even suspect foul play.

Several people watching, yet only one witness reports this or that. Witnesses are often wrong - not lying, just mistaken in what they see. Two people look out a window, one sees a man smoking a cigarette and another sees a woman on a cell phone, for example. It's dark, people don't know that what they see might be important at a later time, memories subconsciously change with time and with learning new information. Interview someone 8 years later, you get a whole different answer many times.

I've wondered who is the person that saw the car nose-to-nose with the Saturn, how soon did they come forward etc? Stuff like that does matter.

RO had a detailed memory of the red truck she saw. She reportedly came forward quickly. After reading her posts, I tend to believe her memory was accurate. I wonder who saw these other red trucks? Was it the same truck? Same truck stopped that night, or a different truck?

This is why I sympathize with Columbo's frustrations. It's impossible to get a straight answer on the most basic questions. I've never seen anything like this before, where even the most basic questions are unanswerable 8 years later.

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
That's interesting. I think I read on Advocate's forum that Mason lived in Kentucky? Maybe he called and asked somebody?
I hope someone can confirm or deny this. If it's true, it would simplify things.
Not being from a small town myself, I have found it strange that so many people could possibly be involved at the scene of one accident where they didn't even suspect foul play.
Several people watching, yet only one witness reports this or that. Witnesses are often wrong - not lying, just mistaken in what they see. Two people look out a window, one sees a man smoking a cigarette and another sees a woman on a cell phone, for example. It's dark, people don't know that what they see might be important at a later time, memories subconsciously change with time and with learning new information. Interview someone 8 years later, you get a whole different answer many times.
I've wondered who is the person that saw the car nose-to-nose with the Saturn, how soon did they come forward etc? Stuff like that does matter.
RO had a detailed memory of the red truck she saw. She reportedly came forward quickly. After reading her posts, I tend to believe her memory was accurate. I wonder who saw these other red trucks? Was it the same truck? Same truck stopped that night, or a different truck?
This is why I sympathize with Columbo's frustrations. It's impossible to get a straight answer on the most basic questions. I've never seen anything like this before, where even the most basic questions are unanswerable 8 years later.

Weeper said it was a worker from Cottage hospital that saw the H1 nose to nose. I would be curious as to Susan Champys recollection of what she saw for LE as she drove by. If CS was in the H1 then that would answer that.

Weepers last sentence on the post refferring to the nose to nose:

"(it is assumed Sgt. Smith was at this point either speaking with the Westermans or down speaking with Mr. Atwood."

To me this is implying that CS was driving the H1 and he walked to the Westmans and Atwoods.

#001 cruiser is a Ford Explorer.

According to The interview with the Westman's Officer Smith was in the #002 Cruiser, A SEDAN.

Smith drove his vehicle down to SBD house from the scene, this leaving the vehicle on the wrong side of the road w/ no flashers and no way to warn oncoming motorist.

It was a short distance to SBD house to Acc. scene.

John

AcidHouseMartin wrote:

<quoted text>
With respect, this is turning out to be little more than an LE witch hunt. Can I remind you, these are just people doing their jobs?
On a daily basis, I can think of things I might have done better, changed or improved. Thankfully, neither me nor my family have to face hinly-veiled accusations from the public when I do make proffessional mistakes or react as well I might in an alien situation.
I think what's going on here is dire, TBH. The notion that the normal, well intentioned and hard-working men and women in LE would go about an intricate 8 year cover up simply. Because they worked in the same place as someone is as absurd as it's insulting.
Whatever issue certain posters might have with LE, can we get away from this paranoid stuff? Clowns freak me out but I'm not about to accuse some guy called Coco of murder just because of the way he parked his car one time in 2004.
Crazy.

Very, very well stated. These folks decided long ago to chase down a "perp", and therefore, everyone and anyone is suspect. 8 long years and counting. Sigh.

amy researches wrote:

<quoted text>
That's interesting. I think I read on Advocate's forum that Mason lived in Kentucky? Maybe he called and asked somebody?
I hope someone can confirm or deny this. If it's true, it would simplify things.
Not being from a small town myself, I have found it strange that so many people could possibly be involved at the scene of one accident where they didn't even suspect foul play.
Several people watching, yet only one witness reports this or that. Witnesses are often wrong - not lying, just mistaken in what they see. Two people look out a window, one sees a man smoking a cigarette and another sees a woman on a cell phone, for example. It's dark, people don't know that what they see might be important at a later time, memories subconsciously change with time and with learning new information. Interview someone 8 years later, you get a whole different answer many times.
I've wondered who is the person that saw the car nose-to-nose with the Saturn, how soon did they come forward etc? Stuff like that does matter.
RO had a detailed memory of the red truck she saw. She reportedly came forward quickly. After reading her posts, I tend to believe her memory was accurate. I wonder who saw these other red trucks? Was it the same truck? Same truck stopped that night, or a different truck?
This is why I sympathize with Columbo's frustrations. It's impossible to get a straight answer on the most basic questions. I've never seen anything like this before, where even the most basic questions are unanswerable 8 years later.

Too many fictional ideas have taken flight over the years, and are the sources of lore, not facts. DC is boots-on the-ground local, and I would think, knows better than to fly with nonfiction. No, Mason, to my knowledge, never lived in NH. Nutty stuff.

Correction: DC should know better than to fly with gossip or heresay-as-facts.