Where is MAURA MURRAY

BF: Obviously - we'll keep in mind that the system could work differently in other places.

Obviously. Small town, big city, county, state, federal, rural. However, regardless of how the system works with regard to the manner in which a report is SUBMITTED (computer, hand written, typewriter), the manner in which the info was obtained, what info was or was not obtained, and what is detailed (or not) in the report should never vary. Thorough, accurate, detailed.

You take notes while victims/witnesses are talking. You are writing as they speak. You make sketches (take photos). Before you clear the scene, go back over your notes, in front of them, to clarify sequence of events, names, times, dates, etc. Your report should have DETAIL DETAIL DETAIL (did I mention detail?). No hearsay.

Typos in a report? I can see this as far as spelling and punctuation. Typos though that change facts, omissions of information or portray an inaccurate reflection of what happened. No. Poor memory and errors? If that’s the case, then that officer is not credible and should not be on the street.

BF: I could imagine several ways it could work. It could be as simple as filling out a paper report based on memory. Perhaps it involves some access to computerized records - dispatch communications, GPS, etc.

Already addressed above. Might have to refer back to dispatch to clarify times with respect to when dispatched/when arrived/when cleared/when departed and that of course would be if there isn‘t a PC in their patrol car and it‘s just dispatched via radio. Dispatch would also have name, phone # and address of who called it in.

BF: Tell us what is typical.
The officer is to be the eyes and ears of whatever scene he responds to. He/She is to recreate in their report what occurred and they’re to do it by supplying in their report credible, accurate info that will stand up to the test of any law enforcement agency that has higher jurisdiction or a court of law. The officer who juggles facts, details, times, evidence, witness statements.....well, let's just say that officer should be able to sit on the chair in a courtroom and not squirm while answering questions from a Judge or any higher authority.

Hope that answers the very basic, obvious questions of Report Writing 101.

WTF wrote:

<quoted text>
It always made sense to give the BOLO to fire and ems and just as always too much has been made of this. The police in the area already knew about Maura likely from their briefings and radio traffic if nothing else. The most likely thing that could have happened and something that would have to be watched out for would be a medical call coming in considering her accident and police would not be aware that Maura had been located. Don’t forget, the worst case scenario in most of these situations is that she would have been on foot. That would have only involved the local area. If she had gotten a ride as was suspected since she wasn’t located in the initial search the most likely occurrence was she made it to someplace and was warm and happy. The first thing that goes through rescues mind is not, oh no another one kidnapped. And I promise you it never will be.
It is almost certainly a volunteer service. The only question is if it is 24/7/365 volunteer or if there is a full time paid day staff and volunteer for nights and weekends? I suspect that it is 24/7/365 volunteer but don’t know that for sure. It may also be a split service for ambulance and fire. Fire may be certified first responders though as well as the police and dispatched for medicals also. There are many ways this can work.
Bill

Correct me if I am wrong and just don't understand the ways of NH but what is most bothersome about the 2-9-04 BOLO was not alerting the police nor broadcasting to any public servents to the East of where Maura's car ended up. Lt. Scarinza stated that the SP (with the exception of Monaghan) knew nothing of Maura until 2-11-04.

WTF, you state, "Don't forget the worst case scenario in most of these situations is that she would've been on foot." If Maura ran there is a 50/50 chance she headed East. The possibility of a medical call, as you mention, makes this all the more important.

It appears both Mr. Atwood and Sgt. Smith searched toward the West. Fire went in an East direction only to the bottom of Bradley Hill Road.

One of the saddest thoughts for Maura's family is that if Maura did head East on foot ... had Woodstock, Lincoln, Easton, etc. been notified she may've been intercepted and be with us today.

What if CW was correct and he really did see Maura near Route 116 ... to the East.

This brings us to why?

If the BOLO had been sent out to Police and Public Servents to the East would that have brought in local Police (Woodstock, Lincoln, Easton, Franconia, etc.)?

What about Fish and Game?

Are there any federal implications because of the White Mountain National Forest?

Could this all relate back to the jurisdiction thing again?

What is most bothersome thing about the 2-10-04 BOLO is that the description didn't fit Maura. Who to look for?

Lightnin wrote:

If Maura ran there is a 50/50 chance she headed East.

If she stayed on the road, yes.

What about Fish and Game?
Are there any federal implications because of the White Mountain National Forest?

You bet there are. It's Federal property.

Advocator wrote:

<quoted text>
Could someone local talk to the area fire department and verify if there was some kind of meeting that night? Hopefully they keep some kind of record. Would help to nail down source and would sure answer this particular question.

Not a local but I can tell you that there was a meeting at the Fire Station on 2-9-04. Chief Kennedy was there. His wife Abbey was dispatch that night. There was a sign out sheet with the names of the firemen that attended if I remember correctly.
Also from memory, I believe there were around nine firemen that went to the scene.

hi all .there have been many cases where the video was out the next day.the reasoning as to why it is released i dont know.As for sgt Smith filling out the accident report 6 days later when it was a missing persons case 2 days before thats odd.were state police told bolo at the same time Maura was assumed missing. take care philip

Ben Franklin wrote:

<quoted text>
That's a North Carolina case.
I find the many odd reactions - yours included - very telling.

No it's not. HB 1499 & Norman Bruce McKay both pertain to the state of New Hampshire.

My family has owned property in NH for many generations and will continue to own property for many generations to come.

Agenda?! You can call it anything you want.

Shack,

Yes, we are on the same page.

By the way, what's your agenda?(wink)

Part 1

Jerry, you asked for specific discrepancies in the accident report (AR), so here's what I found, some of it checked against Grafton County Sheriff's Dept. log (DL).

AR: TOTAL INJURED 0
[how did he know this]

AR: POLICE NOTIFIED 7:35pm
DL: Cecil Smith dispatched 7:29:31PM

[dispatched before the police were notified]

AR: POLICE ARRIVED 7:45PM
DL: ARRIVED: 7:46:20PM

[just off by a minute or two, but if it's supposed to stand up in a court of law...]

DL:(approx. 2-inch BLANK SECTION above the 7:27PM call from Faith W. regarding the Saturn.[I didn't see this kind of blank space anywhere else on the DL, or in other jurisdictions.] Below this blank section are the final few lines of a snowmobile-related dispatch, the log of which is repeated out of order (call came in at 6:08PM) on the following page.)

AR: Front page summary brings forward from block 26 "VEHICLE OCCUPIED" that there was ONE person.

[thought the officer saw no person]

AR: Front page summary brings forward from block 27 "OCCUPANT CONDITION" as unknown.

[contradicts AR TOTAL INJURED 0 at top of AR page 1]

AR: Front page summary brings forward from block 28 "SAFETY EQUIPMENT USAGE" that the airbags were deployed.

[I only include this because I heard on this board that the airbags weren't deployed until the Saturn got to Lavoie's???? Someone smarter than me can straighten this out.]

Part 2 in a few minutes.

Jerry, here's Part 2

AR: Block 30 states there was only the driver in the Saturn.

[how did the policeman know that since no-one was there when he arrived? If he filled this out depending on witness statements, how did he make this guess, seeing as he'd been told variously that there was a shaken-up girl and a cigarette-smoking man?]

NOTE: Most or all these "block" inconsistencies are repeated TWICE. Once on the handwritten back-up pages, and again on the typed front page summary.

AR: LOCATION OF MOST SEVERE PHYSICAL COMPLAINT, BLOCK 32: unknown.

[thought there WERE no injured, as stated at top of AR form]

AR: BLOCK 33: Sex F

[hearsay, your honor]

AR: LOCATION OF FIRST HARMFUL EVENT: OFF ROADWAY BEYOND SHOULDER.

[this is pushing it in terms of inconsistencies, but didn't the snowbank prevent the Saturn from getting past the shoulder? Plus, did the police officer know that there wasn't a previous "harmful event" that caused the damage to the Saturn?]

AR: ADDITIONAL ROADWAY FEATURES. Left blank with a handwritten "?". Choices were road maintenance, road construction, railway crossing or none of the above.

[who filled out this part of the report, anyway? if they were there they'd know what the road was like. and if they didn't pass it every day anyway patrolling, in the 6 days it took to date this AR, they could've gone by and looked to see if any of the above had been in process on 2/9]

Part 3 in process...

Easton doesn't have a police department, i believe if police are needed they use franconia or state police. Did BOLO come from the Grafton County Dispatch? If so, any local police that receives their 911 from Grafton County which I think includes Franconia, Sugar Hill I beleive would have received that BOLO. A lot of little towns here share a common dispatch after regular work hours. My town's 911 does not go to local police it goes to carroll cty dispatch the next town over. Also alot of regular people in NH have police scanners (it is almost a form of entertainment) so that BOLO would have been heard by lots of people not just police and volunteer fireman.

Part 3 Accident Report inconsistencies (IMO) NOT FACT. Sorry about the editorializing.

AR: ROAD ALIGNMENT --- handwritten "?" was jotted.

{there were 8 possibilities, and i agree that can be confusing, but there was one "5. curve on grade" that came closest, but it did require giving it a little thought]

AR: ROAD CONDITION --- circled 'NORMAL"

[if they knew the road condition was normal and didn't have ruts, bumps, holes, was worn, loose gravel, etc. then why did they put a question mark under ADDITIONAL ROADWAY FEATURES above?]

AR: APPARENT CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: UNKNOWN.
yet right below this in a box i can't read the title of (something like "driver condition") "2. HAD BEEN DRINKING" was circled.

[these two don't work together, plus the patrolman saw no-one so how could he know this for sure? He saw so little, maybe Butch could've filled out the AR more precisely.]

IMO although the handwriting, what little there is, looks pretty much the same it seems that in AR sketch where "Rt 112" is labelled has a handwritten "2" that's in a different style than the "2" in the box within a box at the end of the AR report that asks AGE {21 was written in].

DL: Narrative says UNKNOWN in person injured.
AR: at top (repeating this) says 0 INJURED, and later on says area of injury UNKNOWN.

DL: After his arrival at the Saturn "H2 REQ ALL FIRE UNITS BOL FOR A FEMALE ABT 507 ON FOOT...

DL: Next day at 12:04pm, Narrative: Needs BOL on Maura Murray...
Narrative: H6: black hair past shoulder length, wearing a dark coat, about 5'5", 120 pounds...

[don't understand the change in the BOL's stated height. There was some ID number on the DL that could've indicated they looked her up online, but then they'd have seen her real height? I don't understand this...]

There's probably more and I'll browse and I hope there're things I missed that's obvious to you all. Please post them.

Hello all,

Quija is doing a great job there, listing all the inconsitencies....

Another thing:

I´m almost certain that I read somewhere (either here or on the ex-MMM Forum) that Lincoln police actually sent out a patrol car looking for Maura on Rte 112 west of Lincoln and in the direction of Swiftwater.
I´m not sure of the timing, though.

Anybody else remembers having seen this?

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
You bet there are. It's Federal property.

Which as a practical matter means nothing. There are some Rangers with police powers but they will tell you that they defer investigation of any real crimes to local or usually the state police in the White mountain forest. They don't have any facilities for investigations. I understand it works differently with the National Parks but this is how it works within the National forest. This has been told to me by two different Forest service law enforcement personnel. I am also aware that state law is used to determine certain things in the National forest which is also unlike the National parks.

Bill

Eurobserver wrote:

Hello all,
Quija is doing a great job there, listing all the inconsitencies....
Another thing:
I´m almost certain that I read somewhere (either here or on the ex-MMM Forum) that Lincoln police actually sent out a patrol car looking for Maura on Rte 112 west of Lincoln and in the direction of Swiftwater.
I´m not sure of the timing, though.
Anybody else remembers having seen this?

It may've been RO on the MMM.com forum who said a car was sent out from Lincoln but this was never verified to my knowledge. Maybe someone else would remember.

Other than that there were 2 other possible rumors:
1. Monaghan came to scene from that direction.
2. Kathy Brunell and McKay came from that direction, supposedly in same car.

Lightnin wrote:

<quoted text>
WTF, you state, "Don't forget the worst case scenario in most of these situations is that she would've been on foot." If Maura ran there is a 50/50 chance she headed East. The possibility of a medical call, as you mention, makes this all the more important.
It appears both Mr. Atwood and Sgt. Smith searched toward the West. Fire went in an East direction only to the bottom of Bradley Hill Road.
One of the saddest thoughts for Maura's family is that if Maura did head East on foot ... had Woodstock, Lincoln, Easton, etc. been notified she may've been intercepted and be with us today.
What if CW was correct and he really did see Maura near Route 116 ... to the East.

Well at least some “outside” people are starting to realize that a search was done that night. That is a start. For years I would read no one did any search that night which is wrong. A hasty search was clearly done and CS apparently did look to make sure that she didn’t walk into the woods as best as he could. I would say again that the worst case scenario would be Maura leaving on foot. They believed that she left in a vehicle but even so they did a good faith search of the surrounding area to prove that she or someone else wasn’t still in the area hurt or dead. They found no evidence or anyone else in the area or anything to indicate that she went into the woods. If Maura was actually trying to not be found and actively hiding during the search phase who do you hold accountable for the outcome? She left school without telling anyone. I believe that she clearly didn’t want the police to come to the accident. I also think she left the car that night to not have to talk with police who she was probably pretty certain were on their way. How hard is it to believe that she actively tried to not be found when the searching was going on if she was still in the area? CS clearly established what he considered a direction of travel. Remember him saying one set of prints leaving the car? That established her direction of travel. Is that why most of the searchers went to the west to search and only a very cursory search in the eastern direction? I think it is very likely.

Bill

Quija,

There are several thing wrong with some of your assumptions. First and foremost is that CS needs to explain the document. Only he can defend it. What you are not being told is that the document does not stand alone. The writer is part of the document. Many people who write documents like this have specific ways they do it so that they can explain it on the stand. The only way they remember what might be considered inconsistencies is they always write it in a consistent manner so that it means very specific things when they need to re-read it. What might appear to be inconsistencies to you means something very specific to the writer. Human speech by its nature is open to interpretation and the written word is even more difficult to interpret. Think about how you use voice inflection, facial and body ques to determine what someone is actually saying. You are trying to do that type of interpretation with check boxes? Check boxes, especially with question marks can mean something very specific to the writer. Sometimes in the margins or in his notebook it is not uncommon to see codes to give the writer other prompts that mean nothing to the casual observer and may not have meaning in the actual report. It can be especially difficult to interpret documents if sentence construction or punctuation is missing or incorrect or god forbid someone makes a mistake. As far as some of what has been said as to the accuracy and changes to “legal documents”. It is done all the time and can be done legally. I have made changes to legal documents I have written after reading them and realizing a mistake was made. Sometimes a day or two later. Don’t believe some of the hype from some who apparently never make any type of errors in their “legal documents”. I suspect a lawyer would tear them a new one on the stand.

Bill

Lightnin wrote:

<quoted text>
It may've been RO on the MMM.com forum who said a car was sent out from Lincoln but this was never verified to my knowledge. Maybe someone else would remember.
Other than that there were 2 other possible rumors:
1. Monaghan came to scene from that direction.
2. Kathy Brunell and McKay came from that direction, supposedly in same car.

Rumor #1 is no surprise to me. Rumor #2.......why would a policeman from Franconia and a policewoman from Woodstock arrive in the same car?

Are you saying they responded to the scene (meaning they were there) or are you saying they approached (meaning they headed in that direction) the scene from that direction? A distinction between the two. This kind of thing is important in reporting writing.

WTF wrote:

Quija,
There are several thing wrong with some of your assumptions. First and foremost is that CS needs explain the document. Only he can defend it. What you are not being told is that the document does not stand alone. The writer is part of the document. Many people who write documents like this have specific ways they do it so that they can explain it on the stand. The only way they remember what might be considered inconsistencies is they always write it in a consistent manner so that it means very specific things when they need to re-read it. What might appear to be inconsistencies to you means something very specific to the writer. Human speech by its nature is open to interpretation and the written word is even more difficult to interpret. Think about how you use voice inflection, facial and body ques to determine what someone is actually saying. You are trying to do that type of interpretation with check boxes? Check boxes, especially with question marks can mean something very specific to the writer. Sometimes in the margins or in his notebook it is not uncommon to see codes to give the writer other prompts that mean nothing to the casual observer and may not have meaning in the actual report. It can be especially difficult to interpret documents if sentence construction or punctuation is missing or incorrect or god forbid someone makes a mistake. As far as some of what has been said as to the accuracy and changes to “legal documents”. It is done all the time and can be done legally. I have made changes to legal documents I have written after reading them and realizing a mistake was made. Sometimes a day or two later. Don’t believe some of the hype from some who apparently never make any type of errors in their “legal documents”. I suspect a lawyer would tear them a new one on the stand.
Bill

OK, Bill -- Very interesting what you said re a person's own codes in a box, etc. That never occurred to me.

After going over the few facts I think I know, I didn't see anything CS did that was criminal. Also, in terms of inconsistencies, "SO WHAT?" "What does this prove?" It was a minor incident at the time... maybe parts of the form(s) were done more casually than I'd hope. I would hope that some of the information was for things the officer actually saw rather than heard, tho.

Need to look at a map, but is there any chance the officer got a brief visual of Maura and the contents of her car briefly at the first accident scene?

WFT/Bill,

In your recent post (# 4286) you´re writing that...

"CS clearly established what he considered a direction of travel. Remember him saying one set of prints leaving the car? That established her direction of travel. Is that why most of the searchers went to the west to search and only a very cursory search in the eastern direction? I think it is very likely"

With all due respect, I believe that I´ve never seen any references to any footprints leading from the Saturn beyond the snowbank, neither west nor east.
Please, correct me if I´m wrong here.
IIRC the weather conditions at the time were such as to make it impossible for any footprints to be seen on the road surface.

The sniffer dog followed the trace of Maura (?) from the position of the Saturn to a point close to the intersection with Bradley Hill Road, where the trace stopped.
This would, in my mind, indicate that Maura (?) was likely picked up at this point by a vehicle with the red truck seen by witness RO as a possible candidate.

Lady Gray wrote:

<quoted text>
Rumor #2.......why would a policeman from Franconia and a policewoman from Woodstock arrive in the same car?

Clearly they must be dating.

And yes, that is a joke. As LG pointed out its RUMOR.