Where is MAURA MURRAY

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
But, really, it DOESN'T, necessarily, since it's not known for sure that Maura ever even wore the gloves. Obviously she likely touched them at some point, because they were in her car, but with something so new, who knows how many other people also touched them whose scent might be just as strong as Maura's on them?(ESPECIALLY if god forbid sometime during the first 48 hours someone else touched the gloves. Which, given the general circumstances surrounding all the other things left undone or done wrong in the first 48, is entirely possible.)
If the dog had gotten a decent scent object, a decent scent trail and followed it a fair distance, I might well believe that. At the risk of sounding like Clue, if the dog had scented Joseph the Monkey, trailed it for a mile, and then lost it, I'd believe almost without question that the dog was tracking Maura. A hundred yards really isn't far AT ALL.
I guess what I'm saying, in short, is there are too many variables in that particular equation for me to believe for certain that the dog was in fact tracking Maura.

This is a possibility. We don’t know for certain if the gloves were contaminated but it is interesting that the dogs did seem to act (by description) as though they were trailing someone based on the scent from the gloves. Whoever else touched the gloves it is unlikely that it would have been someone from the scene like one of the searchers because the dog likely would have walked right up to them so I don’t believe anyone from the search scene contaminated the gloves. Someone prior to that time possibly could have contaminated the article but the search organizer should have known what the integrity of the scent article was. The Search organizer and the dog handler together should have been able to determine the suitability of the article.

Bill

WTF wrote:

<quoted text>
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

This post re foot tracks made me wonder if ANOTHER car was pulled in to Old Peter's Road and the driver of the Saturn walked east away from the Saturn to get into THAT car! Weeper thought that the Saturn pulled into Old Peter's Road and then backed out onto 112 into the snowbank.(Sorry, but my bro would say that that back-up job was a "woman driver" --- even though there are many of us who are aces.) Well... maybe a second car
pulled into Old Peter's Rd. too. I think this is a great idea. What (uh-oh) do you all think?

sophie bean wrote:

Advocator wrote:
"Well, now I am wondering ... given that this is National Forest, would the FBI have some proper jurisdiction? Was the claimed sighting by CW of a young person along SR 112 some 8 miles further east, in the National Forest? If so, and if the FBI has jurisdiction there, seems to me they would not have to be invited by local police force in order to investigate on a missing person who went missing very near the National Forest and may have been sighted IN the National Forest or may have been sighted heading FOR the National Forest.
Any thoughts on this?"

I believe, just my understanding, that the FBI might be a possibility in the forest proper but the national forests are different than the national parks. From what I have been able to tell the National forests basically use the local laws to govern them along with additional regulations as to the use of the forest. This is just the simple way my brain has got it figured but this is different than National parks which are wholly federal property and subject to federal laws and I believe local police need not apply. Also the roads through the national forest are state or town roads unlike the national parks. As such they would be under the jurisdiction of the state or local police. I don’t know if the rangers even have police powers on the state roads through the forest. As I already said I have talked to two rangers with law enforcement powers and both have told me that any crime requiring investigation they hand over to the local or usually it sounds like the state police. Neither of them mentioned the FBI as a possibility but I also didn’t prompt them. At the time my interest was unrelated to Maura as these inquiries happened long before her accident.

This is NOT guaranteed information. It is things I have found out over time. The people could have been wrong or I could have misinterpreted the information but I believe it to be accurate.

Bill

Shack wrote:

...
RE: McKay...cleared Littleton 7:27P ,,,then he's in Franconia.@Motel...9:40ish
Nothing weird...except in Log "in the area of motel, unknown reason"
I mean nothing other than it sounds odd for Sheriff's Log...unknown...?

Uhhh, haven't read anything past your post but...

McKay cleared Littleton (around 15 miles ENE of the intersection of 302 and 112?) at 7:27?

Call about Maura came in at 7:27?

Eurobserver wrote:

<quoted text>
Hello WTF/Bill,
As for Maura´s possible helper(s) my thought would be that he/she/they might well be so deeply loyal to Maura that he/she/they for whatever reason is/are keeping absolutely quiet about the whole thing.
Out of loyalty to Maura (because of a realisation that she for some reason needed to get away from Amherst) and perhaps also out of some self-interest in one way or other.

This makes more sense to me than an abductor with an accomplice but I still see nothing that makes me think there were others at the accident. Someone, especially a friend, who knew the kind of pain the family is going through, her moms illness, and the reward that was offered who still wouldn’t talk would be a very unusual person in my opinion. The odds for a pair of accomplices not talking would be astronomical.

As far as the rest goes Maura’s father has repeatedly sent messages through the media to Maura that IF there was some kind of problem whatever may have happened they can work it out. Again, I can’t be certain but I don’t think Maura had anything to do with Vasi.

Bill

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
But, really, it DOESN'T, necessarily, since it's not known for sure that Maura ever even wore the gloves. Obviously she likely touched them at some point, because they were in her car, but with something so new, who knows how many other people also touched them whose scent might be just as strong as Maura's on them?(ESPECIALLY if god forbid sometime during the first 48 hours someone else touched the gloves. Which, given the general circumstances surrounding all the other things left undone or done wrong in the first 48, is entirely possible.)
If the dog had gotten a decent scent object, a decent scent trail and followed it a fair distance, I might well believe that. At the risk of sounding like Clue, if the dog had scented Joseph the Monkey, trailed it for a mile, and then lost it, I'd believe almost without question that the dog was tracking Maura. A hundred yards really isn't far AT ALL.
I guess what I'm saying, in short, is there are too many variables in that particular equation for me to believe for certain that the dog was in fact tracking Maura.

I agree. If ANYthing at the snowbank scene was handled before it was realized to be a crime scene, then... contamination is possible...

This could be way off but what the heck:

Could CS have arrived, immediately gone to talk to FW; after listening to the family he came back to the road to the Saturn and tried the door handles before walking over to Atwood's driveway? I don't have a clue how sensitive dogs are. Don't know if scent can be picked up by trying door handles that Maura had touched... Didn't someone have to try them all to determine the car was locked?

Or did CS pick up a random item of Maura's by the car (not the container with an alcoholic odor yet) and, again, not knowing it was gonna be a crime scene, spread the scent down the road to near Atwood's driveway on his way to interview him?

What if after the Saturn was towed to Lavoie's, CS picked up the odorous container, and it HAD been held by Maura for 3+ hours as she drove, and he walked up the road holding it toward Atwood's for a last look around for tracks or whatever before leaving?

I stink at logistics, but I get a lot of ideas so hit me with your best shot! At this moment, this idea doesn't seem that bad.

sophie bean wrote:

I just read that when a police officer writes a report (as LG and others correctly point out, a binding legal document), "style" to the extent of omissions, crossings-out, rewritings, "corrections" after the fact are to be EXPECTED and don't need to be explained???
I'm sorry, what???
How would you feel if, God forbid, you or someone you love were a victim of a crime which was unsolved because of "inconsistencies" in the police report?
Well, I know for a fact that I would be beyond furious. Would I take every legal option available to me? You bet.
Was Pamela Webb's family "wrong" to sue the state of Maine and MSP?
Apparently my understanding of law and order / "protect and serve" is a bit different than some here.

I am not sure if you are talking about my post?

If you are you have missed the part where I said that changes can be made LEGALLY to the document.

You may make additions or changes to the document marking them as such or write an amended document. Should you not include information in a document if it comes in after you finish the form? Should you just disregard that information? Or do you add it and initial and date it? If after you have written a document you discover there is an error of some type. I have seen people accidently check the wrong box among dozens of boxes. We are human aren't we? Do you pretend that there isn't an error or do you correct it, and take the shit for it? I have always opted to correct it and take the ass chewing. I do try to keep the ass chewing down to a minimum though so I am very careful about my documentation as are most that I know. The other thing to remember for those that don't do this is that you may be required to defend in court a document that was written years ago among hundreds if not thousands of other documents that you have written. That is why hints and the consistent use of form and terminology, which may be undecipherable or even unnoticeable to others is so important to the writer. Not just the question mark but even the position of the question mark in the box may have meaning to him. Only CS can answer that.

Bill

WTF wrote:

<quoted text>
Again, I can’t be certain but I don’t think Maura had anything to do with Vasi.
Bill

WTF/Bill,

No, I don´t think that Maura personally hit Vasi, but another, "temporary" driver of her Saturn (a friend or acquaintance) just may have done so.
Remember that Maura´s sudden crying attack while working at the security desk at Melville Dorm happened at more or less the same time that Petrit Vasi was hit by a hit-and-run driver in Amherst.
A co-incidence? May be, may be not.

Hello all,

Excerpt from Moses´ post (# 4316) yesterday:
__________
A group of northern NH people were planning to offer Maura's family man power and ATV's to search a place called Glencliff on Route 118.
I don't know if any search ever occurred.

Because there was mention of Glencliff my assumption would be that they were supposed to have taken Maura there. This is only my assumption.
__________

This is complete news for me.
Anybody here heard this rumour before???
Is there some foundation behind this suggestion?
I´m actually slightly surprised that I haven´t as yet seen any comments here about what may be just a rumour, but at least to me a new rumour...

I looked up Glencliff,NH, on Google Maps. Apparently this small place is on NH State Route 25 between Haverhill and Warren, a few miles north of the intersection between NH State Routes 25 and 118, in the Mount Moosilauke area.

Any ideas about all this?`
Thanks!

Shack wrote:

If "suicide" was intent.....bringing changes of clothing,shoes, deodorant, tooth whitener,
jewelry, birth control pills ..etc would not be necessary.
If "running away" was intent...the above items would not have been left behind.
Maura did not put the above items in her car with intent to abandon them.
This is not intrigue.....

I agree with part of this. After what may have been the second accident in 30 minutes and not being able to restart her car after the second crash because of the neutral safety switch Mr. Murray is indeed correct. "Everything changed at that point for Maura”. She abandoned her original plan which was probably to get away for a few days and the plan then became getting away from the car. The police were certainly on the way and she was probably going to have some explaining to do.

Bill

Don't forget she was in her last semester in nursing school...a DUI would not look good on her record. She may have a lot of trouble trying to get a job especially if she was arrested for driving under the influence...I know how it is I am a new RN and they ask all those questions about having a criminal record

WTF wrote:

<quoted text>

I agree with part of this. After what may have been the second accident in 30 minutes and not being able to restart her car after the second crash because of the neutral safety switch Mr. Murray is indeed correct. "Everything changed at that point for Maura”. She abandoned her original plan which was probably to get away for a few days and the plan then became getting away from the car. The police were certainly on the way and she was probably going to have some explaining to do.
Bill

I also believe "things" began changing for the worse for Maura, maybe as far back or further than Christmas vacation; Having no agenda except finding Maura, the ideas discussed here are circumstantially interesting and/or suspicious and sure worth pursuing.

"The last straw" theory for Maura unfortunately seems likely. Was she in the right "mood" to go off and start a new life? After dark in the middle of winter in a not-great car? That doesn't ring true. Family, timing, car, no money, etc.

IMO her intentions were still up in the air, plans vaguely formed, and there was a lot of critical, life-changing (from Not Without Peril) stuff bothering her. If she was rethinking what it would be like to be an Army wife without having become military herself, and she loved Billy as much as she did, she might've decided the right thing to do was to not tie him up anymore.

Maybe she felt she was a detriment to her dad after wrecking his car. She did NOT seem upbeat from what Fred, her friends and boss said. And maybe, although doing really well at school as always, nursing really wasn't her thing... You'd think she'd rather have an outdoor job in the mountains, in nature... This, however, leads back to the "runaway" theory which I can't believe because of family reasons, etc.

If Weeper says the sightings of Maura were checked out and didn't pan out, I have to believe him, unless they're putting out incorrect information while hunting down some cult. Unlikely. But the simplest thing is that those sightings sadly just weren't Maura.

If this is a search and recovery mission now I strongly hope that the evidence will show that Maura had a relatively peaceful end. After what Weeper has said, what else is there to hope for?

Some locals would know the fields, forest, and out-of-the-way woods Maura might've gone to herself like their back yards. Other locals would know about the dangerous areas, shady back roads, or abandoned property that a perp might have gone. I wish they would brainstorm here.

[QUOTE who="QuijaSome locals would know the fields, forest, and out-of-the-way woods Maura might've gone to herself like their back yards. Other locals would know about the dangerous areas, shady back roads, or abandoned property that a perp might have gone. I wish they would brainstorm here.
[/QUOTE]

We (my husband and I, and occasionally the dog) have hiked, ATV'd, snowmobiled up, around, through, across,.........just about everything but beneath) so very much of the area of the Weathered Barn, Mtn. Lakes, the river, the woods, the roads, the ponds, the streams.....and have not seen anything. As I said on the MM forum, Diesel did have a reaction at the A frame but that is the only place he's been skittish in the area (even when coming face to face with the black bear) There's an area at the top of Pinnacle that is interesting--a lot of abandoned stuff, but nothing sinister seemed to be there when we explored it. I don't claim to be a searcher by any means (though I am professionally trained in light search and rescue) but I have not seen anything that would be of use in Maura's disappearance.

I'm still stuck on the red truck from Mass. being in the area at the same time and looking suspicious.......

WTF wrote:
If you are you have missed the part where I said that changes can be made LEGALLY to the document.

You may make additions or changes to the document marking them as such or write an amended document. Should you not include information in a document if it comes in after you finish the form? Should you just disregard that information? Or do you add it and initial and date it? If after you have written a document you discover there is an error of some type. I have seen people accidently check the wrong box among dozens of boxes. We are human aren't we? Do you pretend that there isn't an error or do you correct it, and take the shit for it? I have always opted to correct it and take the ass chewing. I do try to keep the ass chewing down to a minimum though so I am very careful about my documentation as are most that I know.

Of course, not everyone is perfect. And maybe mistakes were made on that accident report. Do you see any additions/corrections that were done to the report that are initialed by the Sgt? Are you saying that a report was submitted and and it's possible it needed corrections but was never corrected?

The report that was given and made available to the media OUGHT to have been the final report. If there is another report out there that had revisions to it, then they didn't provide it. Why didn't they provide it?

WTF wrote:
The other thing to remember for those that don't do this is that you may be required to defend in court a document that was written years ago among hundreds if not thousands of other documents that you have written. That is why hints and the consistent use of form and terminology, which may be undecipherable or even unnoticeable to others is so important to the writer. Not just the question mark but even the position of the question mark in the box may have meaning to him. Only CS can answer that.

I strongly disagree with this. Your statement infers that reports are open to the interpretation of the writer. It "ought" to be mandatory for statements to be uniform so there isn't any MISinterpretation to it. Officers change forces, move out of state, pass away. Anyone reading that report should be able to decipher it without having to go to the writer for interpretation. Reports are consistently viewed by other officers, district/county attorneys, defense attorneys. It's absurd for you to say that they can't read a report and take it for face value.

You are blowing smoke, WTF.

You will never get me to believe that unless PROOF was submitted!

If Weeper says the sightings of Maura were checked out and didn't pan out, I have to believe him, unless they're putting out incorrect information while hunting down some cult. Unlikely. But the simplest thing is that those sightings sadly just weren't Maura.

People can ridicule me all they want. I was SAW her.

PIMF I saw her.

Hello gvmeabrk,

I do not for a moment doubt that you actually saw a young lady that you believed and still believe to be Maura. Perhaps it was actually Maura, perhaps not.

Just as in the case with the apparently highly esteemed gentleman in that Barton, VT, church who afterwards said that he was 99 percent certain that it was actually Maura that he had met and briefly spoken with back on Fathers´ Day in June 2005.

Despite the assurances of Weeper and with all sincere respect, I can not help asking myself how thoroughly anyone (be it PI´s, LE or whoever) can actually be expected to humanly follow up reported sighting such as these.

I mean, considering the substantial time lapse between the actual sightings and any kind of investigation, questioning of witnesses, etc, it must be almost impossible to dismiss a sighting with 100 percent certainty, especially in those cases when the witnesses are practically certain that they have actually seen Maura.

Personally, I do not consider your possible sighting of Maura and the equally possible sighting of her in Barton, VT, in June 2005 to be in any way discounted.

IMHO.

looking4amoose wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm still stuck on the red truck from Mass. being in the area at the same time and looking suspicious.......

Hello looking4amoose,

I absolutely agree with you regarding that red, highly mysterious and likely MA-reg tryck seen by witness RO in the Swiftwater area.

I refuse to believe that the red truck just happened to be there by chance at that time and being driven in a supsicious manner.

Whether as friend or foe, I feel rather certain that the red truck is probably deeply involved in Maura´s vanishing.

Also:
Is it just a rumour of a confirmed FACT that LE actually did stopped and checked out a number of red trucks in the area during the night of Maura´s disappearance?

If so, was this an operation mounted by Haverhill PD only or through the auspices of NH State Police or surrounding LE forces?

Hello all again,

Come on, esteemed fellow posters here...

Don´t you find it all curious, that reference by Moses in his post yesterday regarding a supposed search for Maura (whether a rumour or not) in the Glencliff,NH, area?

What gives me the creeps when I check out the Google maps of the Glencliff area is that I seem to remember that a fairly frequent poster on the ex-MMM board at some point indicated having some kind of "psychic" gifts.

This lady mentioned (IIRC) that she thought that something bad might have happened to Maura somewhere in the general area along NH State Route 25 between Warren/Glencliff in the east and Pike/The Oliverian Valley in the west.

I believe that this particular poster also mentioned something specifically about a house in the Oliverian Valley area in this context, but I may be mistaken.

Anyone else here remembers this???

gvmeabrk wrote:

You will never get me to believe that unless PROOF was submitted!
If Weeper says the sightings of Maura were checked out and didn't pan out, I have to believe him, unless they're putting out incorrect information while hunting down some cult. Unlikely. But the simplest thing is that those sightings sadly just weren't Maura.

People can ridicule me all they want. I was SAW her.

I'm not ridiculing anyone. Unless I do it by accident. I hate that kind of stuff. Sorry. I'd be pissed at what I said too. But I don't know what to think! IIRC no-one got back to you in a timely manner? It was all sort of discounted because they had already settled on one, and then another scenario?

What the heck (not yelling, just confused by all the conflicting info) are we all supposed to think?

I'm naive so if Weeper says his group with 150 years experience (hopefully it's not 150 guys) says these were checked out, should we buy it? I honestly don't know. I'm sorry if I "dissed" you. My family's done that to me my whole life and I didn't want to do it anyone else. How can your sighting be pursued? This is way-out, but do you have any sense they were dressed or seemed to be from a farm? Anything else you can remember?(This sounds kinky but I can smell people around me and know if they've been camping, working with cars, working in a garden, etc.... anything come to mind from what you sensed?)