Maura Murray

Frostman wrote:

If Red Truck and passengers were lurking around for Maura with evil intentions, they must have told her or known (overheard? at a gas station) that she was planning to take Route 112 as opposed to Route 302 which would have been the obvious choice if she was en route to Bartlett.
It's too big a coincidence, IMO, that the Red Truck was there and she went missing in a matter of minutes. They had to have known her driving plan in advance if they were waiting at the store (SSS).

I think so too. We don't have a witness willing to write on a forum talk about the truck on BHR. But rather here we have RO and it DOES make sense. I mean come on, let's close the case by finding anybody Maura knew who had access to or owned a red truck! Investigate that somebody! Columbo! Police! Of all people brought under suspicion, even if it was a partnership beginning in Amherst or thereabouts, Get the names, bring them in, find the red hot, red truck, pretty little people eaters......

The timing is there. We have RO's word on it. It was 7. Then it was 7:45. Red truck here, red truck there and then no Maura. Seems too simple but it might just be.

mcsmom wrote:

If EMS (the first call) went to Bunga Rd, at about the time RO was leaving for the SSS, and the red truck passed RO at that time, perhaps the red truck had an interest in this EMS call as well. Perhaps they were expecting a crash, if in fact they were responsible for the rag in the tailpipe.

Makes sense to me. There was an elderly person in duress, but as posted, the lines of communication were so compromised at the time, cops had to wave to each other, for lack of a good system..

Frostman wrote:

<quoted text>
If you look at the older pictures of the damaged Saturn (further out in the middle of the field) it appears that the car hit something with square corners. Probably the bumper had some give and popped back out, but the hood was indented. There also seems to be white residue on the front bumper and on the driver's side panel (which Det. Columbo says is the lighting). Later pictures of the Saturn and the ones taken by Mr. Renner show an ostensibly more damaged front end.

Speaking of "squared corners".
Think of a solid, square belt buckle. Deck of cards size....they sell these to go OVER trailer hitches.

IMO judging from the timeline, based on the earliest witnesses, H1, " at 7pm" etc. etc there must have been another call to report the accident, besides the W's and SBD.

per RO
Bunga Road is the road where I lived....corner of Bunga and 112 was my property back then. I know the ambulance pulled in there when I was walking - but that wasn't at 10:00. My mother-in-law lived in the trailer on Bunga Road on my property and would called an ambulance every 5 minutes back then. Could have been one of her many calls.

Please note: The ambulance was not enroute to Bunga road as RO was walking to the SSS, only when she was returning. Her quote "returning ambulance" must have meant prior calls.

just me wrote:

The timing is there. We have RO's word on it. It was 7. Then it was 7:45. Red truck here, red truck there and then no Maura. Seems too simple but it might just be.

Could someone reach into their knowledge bank and clarify where this originated and whether it has any validity?:

"Feb. 9th. between 7:15 and 8 PM: Red p/u truck observed parked on the side of the road going up BHR w/ operator out of vehicle and on passengers side w/ door open."

Did this come from a local who talked to PIs or family? Could this be a ruse or intended as a red herring? Or is it a legitimate account?

just me wrote:

<quoted text>ok, this is what I was referring too also but thinking of simple things like,~ my brother did this, my sister did that, the guys that make snow never showed up for work, the guys who plowed never did after that night and then MS Smith gets picked on by the town for saying as much. See what I mean? AND:
noun a person who perpetrates , or commits, an illegal, criminal, or evil act..........
NOBODY KNOWS THIS, it's all hearsay and who-done-it, mixed with gossip, speculation, personal observations based on ones own fears and that can be dangerous when you have so little, to accuse, then be exposed in the "blaim game", your protection and anonimity taken away. This is what all this Giberish sounds like to me.
Honestly and with a level of humilty I share my thoughts is all.

We can agree to disagree on this one.:-) I'm curious what your theories are though. Do you think she killed herself? I think I've seen you mention that before, but can't remember why you think that.

I believe annes own ccount is on Advocates old forum.

sorry RO account

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a126/MauraM...

Thank you.

Jenkins wrote:

Maybe they didnt miss the evidence at the scene.
Maybe that's one of the reasons they were on scene so long, they had to b doing something they weren't interviewing people the whole time. They also weren't filling out the accident report bc they did that several days later.
I wonder if the wine stains in the car could've been interpreted as a sign of a struggle. There was wine in the ceiling, doors and seats. If it spilled during the accident then theoretically it should've splashed in one direction, not 2 or 3. We know for a fact the box of wine didnt exude bc it was sitting on the back seat and there is no report of the whole entire back seat being completely soaked with over a gallon of wine.
So it had to have come from the Cole bottlle that smelled like alcohol that was near the pink stain in the snow. I think she was drinking wine mixed with vodka, which was said to b her favorite drink. That'll make a nice pink stain and smell wicked alcoholic.
The car was also a mess.
Is it possible it looked like there was some sort of fight in the car when they showed up?

You could be on to something except for the wine on the interior of the car. A coke bottle isn´t big enough to contain over a gallon of liquid, there´s got to be an additional source for the spilled wine.

The red truck that went by RO was the same truck She saw at the store. That was the same truck that went towards the scene just as RO went into the store before LE, FD or EMS went that way.

The truck that the witness saw on BHR in the same timeframe is more than likely the same red truck that RO saw considering the Area, timeframe and the time of night.

Odds are this IS the same Red Truck in both instances.

This still does not mean this red truck had anything to do with the disappearance of Maura Murray.

My own personal belief is that the Red truck DID have something to do with that evenings events.

John

Snowy wrote:

<quoted text>
The statement is both oddly broad and specific at the same time. It is specific as to say "the" perpetrator...singular, not "a" perp, as if, yet, unknown.
Since the father was seeking access, it's interesting that no one has been officially ruled out.
Further, it is possible 'everyone else in the world", in the broader context, suggests common knowledge in the public view, if revealed, could compromise the investigation.
Of course, they were looking for excuses not to release full info...this seems like a standard response.

Prefacing this with a very big bold JMO. What went on in supreme court was more lazy, standard response. What went on once it was remanded back to superior court got tougher. They were basically drilled to provide a good reason, because you can't just say "we don't wanna." It doesn't work that way. The standard response would be "we can't compromise the investigation" versus "I'm concerned about that, because, again, this is, to the extent this is a small community, the people know... the people, the identity of those people is fairly well known." That is very specific. People in the community does not include Mr. Murray.

Then we have this - I've added who said what so it doesn't get too confusing:

Renner: "In his affidavit, Detective Todd Landry is hesitant to speak about the criminal records checks his office conducted."

Official document: "Identification of specific individuals regarding whom records have been requested would pinpoint the focus of our investigation, thereby damaging it....I can address this item with further specificity by in camera affidavit or testimony."

Renner: "Also sealed is information about a "one-party intercept" which could mean a wiretap or a secret audio recording of some kind. Nancy Smith categorizes it as a:"

Official document: "one-of-a-kind type of item that the Supreme Court recognized cannot be described specifically without irreparably disclosing what it consists of. SAAG Strelzin can address this item with further specificity by in camera affidavit or testimony."
http://mauramurray.blogspot.com/2012/02/polic...

I could fill up a whole page on this board with examples to back up what I'm saying. This isn't me on a witch hunt. This is me trying to find out the truth, and I think you know that. If new evidence comes out to the contrary, I'll happily change my mind. If I turn out to be wrong, I have no problem admitting it.

We can agree to disagree as well. I just honestly don't see how anyone could read these court documents and think that that these authorities are working so hard to keep these docs from being released, and going through so much to investigate to this day with the CCU, if they don't think something bad happened to her. They can't just make stuff up. They have to be able to back up what they said in these statements to the judge. That is what the "in camera affidavit or testimony" is about.

Jwb wrote:

"7:46 PM First known officer arrives at scene (we have been contacted by some who passed the scene and saw a vehicle believed to be police vehicle with a number on it. These persons believe it was earlier than the arrival of Officer Smith and have stated that it was a different type of vehicle than the one known to have been driven by Officer Smith)– Fire Unit, EMS and State Trooper Monahan were also at scene."

Where does this quote come from????

mcsmom wrote:

<quoted text>
per RO
Also on 10.24 in her posting RO identifies Trooper Monaghan as the one who stopped behind the returning ambulance at Bunga Rd probably around 8pm as she was nearly home, and he "asked if I had seen anyone walking" on 112 which she had not.

This pretty much fits the 15 minutes time frame where they all went out looking for "the girl"

Det Columbo wrote:

The truck that the witness saw on BHR in the same timeframe is more than likely the same red truck that RO saw considering the Area, timeframe and the time of night.
Odds are this IS the same Red Truck in both instances.

Do you know who interviewed the witness who saw a Red Truck on BHR? Do you consider this to be a valid report?

mcsmom wrote:

IMO judging from the timeline, based on the earliest witnesses, H1, " at 7pm" etc. etc there must have been another call to report the accident, besides the W's and SBD.

Could it be due to the lack of a good scanner/system/that the normally accurate record taker seemed to leave so much out, or was it taken out due to the nature of this case?

mcsmom wrote:

per RO
Bunga Road is the road where I lived....corner of Bunga and 112 was my property back then. I know the ambulance pulled in there when I was walking - but that wasn't at 10:00. My mother-in-law lived in the trailer on Bunga Road on my property and would called an ambulance every 5 minutes back then. Could have been one of her many calls.
Please note: The ambulance was not enroute to Bunga road as RO was walking to the SSS, only when she was returning. Her quote "returning ambulance" must have meant prior calls.

Thank you, that's helpful information.

findmaura wrote:

<quoted text>
Where does this quote come from????

It came from Helenas forum under one of her posts. It was hard to determin if it came from the caledonian 4-2004 as she was quoting it throughout . If helpful let me know and I will post a larger version of it (not at home to do so now) or possibly frosty can do it. It was under (Timelines) I believe.