Where is MAURA MURRAY

Fred could even PAY for a copy. Why not let him have that? Who can we call? Quija, Whitson, heck WEEPER, DET COLUMBO, would it be so hard to see to it this gets done? What would the reason be to deny a copy to Fred?
I'd appreciate a repl...
......(:=*
........@.
Also, Advocator, are you able to put a link to that report on your page?
Quija, you know where I am, will you please send a copy to me. Email me, either place, Call if you'd rather....you must be getting close to finished by now with all your home projects, hope all is well

Hello paris & all,

I´m not saying that this is what happened, but what IF Maura actually left on her own volition with a secret boyfriend in a romantic ruse?

What if it was actually Maura who was seen as the mysterious "Raykel" in the Barton, VT, church in June 2005 and who suddenly ran away when the minister started mentioning fathers in his sermon, because the mere word "father" uttered on a Father´s Day was just too painful to hear....

I know that some of you here, with all due and sincere respect, will never agree with me about this, but I´m trying to keep all options open and I just cannot say that this could not have happened.

Perhaps Maura´s life in Amherst did contain one big secret after all, just as Whiston/Philip has been saying here all the time?

Hi Eurobserver, I agree that anything is possible but the part that stops me is how hard it is to leave someone you Love. Maura Loved so many people. It's not like she shyed away from them. She was actively involved in cooking, get togethers and close to her Nana, not to mention Mom and her two sisters who swear to that. I think whatever this is, she would have become emotional at some point early on and try to at least call someone. Mt sister was taken against her will to FL and after a few months, the guy let her walk away for brief periods.....She had been out of the hospital with a head injury and was confused half the time. She thought this man was protecting her but one day she called her son and the wife called FBI. That's how we got her home after the first round.
Police think it was not Maura who mouthed "help me", but gvmeabrk thinks so to this day.
If there's any truth to this, she may have decided she couldn't go on like she was but was told she could not go back. I know that's far out
but if this is the subject, that's what I would think.
Or the woman who seemed to be Maura on Fathers day, it makes sense too. But also, to really pull this off, that could have been arranged by someone to keep the idea that she was alive, out there.

Which brings me to wonder *again*, why did LE come back for the personal belongings that were left behind in the Saturn? What good could those items possibly be after all that time of being kept/touched and looked through....?
The timing of that was close to the alleged sighting of Maura, was it not?
What could this mean? JWOL

I just walked out to the mailbox, decided to walk straight to it. That means walking over uneven ground and the ditch. I know it is there and yet it's so dark I still drop a foot down low...then the other and finally cross the road. I can't imagine how hard all this running away from the car, just to never be found again could be.
I walked on a dare into a cave once and was able to make it pretty far (one, two blocks maybe), but we're talking miles here. How on earth could anyone have done that without a flashlight or something?

hi all.great to see this mystery back on track.i really worry that new people with new ideas will come to this site and roll right on by because page after page Maura Murray is MISSING is not mentioned.the Murrays had Mauras computer for months.did it just sit there collecting dust.speaking of that why have we never seen a list of the contents of the car.why are we not alllowed to know about Mauras life before she vanished.Euro ,Weeper did post here that the posible sighting of Maura in the Barton church was not Maura.i was in vt last week those vt temporary license plates really do look like Mass plates to me.on a dark road i would have a very hard time telling them apart.Robinson Ordway do you remember if the truck had a light on the license plate and was it diesel.take care philip

Hello Whiston & all,

Yes, I know that Weeper did post that conclusion regarding the purported Barton, VT, sighting.

Still, and with all due respect to Weeper and his colleagues, how would it really be humanly possible to conclusively rule that sighting out?
Quite impossible, I should say.

Presumably, no picture was taken of the mysterious "Raykel".
Any investigators - LE, PI´s, whatever - would only have the descriptions of the witness to go by, and the witness was probably not interviewed until after some considerable time had passed.

No, this sighting continues to haunt me.

Tight curls, unmistakable runners legs, a bit sad, a bit shy, a bit nervous, suddenly "fleeing" at the mention of fathers, hair colour slightly changed and foundation cream applied on her face to alter the appearance...

Call me crazy, but I´m almost certain that this young lady was indeed Maura.

sophie bean wrote:

Let's see if I've got this straight - WTF aka Bill is offended, outraged, pissed off at some of us here because we have dared to criticize some elements of the NH local area.
By this, I mean specifically drug dealers, whatever else was going on at the previous incarnation of the Barge "restaurant" AND people who delight in others' misfortune. I have indeed criticized local residents who - while complete within their rights to do so - have been infuriated at Fred's desire to search their property.
So...WTF/Bill now says...
"If you think I will prompt locals to contribute here think again. As soon as I'm done with this reply it will be copied along with your article and I will be sure that all my friends and neighbors receive it. I might even go to Shaw's or WalMart and pass it out.
Just LOOK at the article you posted and tell me if it was about you would YOU want to help the out of staters that think that about you????"
You really intend to try your "best" to hamper the search for Maura out of spite toward those who aren't even related to her, Bill?
What, exactly, does that say about you?

Sophie Bean, please reread the things I wrote. You have attributed to me other peoples work. I would really appreciate you telling everyone that I didn't write what you are saying I wrote because I didn't write it. I understand in your fury you apparently made a mistake but I would really appreciate you stating that you made a mistake. No apology is required but a correction is needed. Thank you.

Bill

The computer.

I don't know why the police could not give an IMAGE of the computer hard drive. There may be a reason but I don't know what it would be. The computer drive would be something that MIGHT have some useful information on it but not necessarily anything we don't already know about the hard drive.

Capitals for emphasis only. No one yelling here.

Bill

Good morning all. From what I remember RO said she was turning down her street when Monahan drove up to her. Knowing her, he said "oh, it's you" and asked if she'd seen anyone out walking on foot.
Then it gets confusing because she implies she told them about the red truck she had seen at a later date and they just dismissed it. I remember this well, RO seemed...? I don't know what she seemed, but let down was my impression. She went on to say what all happened that night, seeing the ambulance, etc.......But some of the cars pulled over and checked that night were trucks and/or red. I wonder if she did tell them something that night after all or if it's just coincidence.
It still bothers me that Mr Monahan was out looking for someone on foot so close to Swiftwater and yet because it's another jurisdiction, he doesn't have to document his efforts.
Let me imagine here: Calling all cars, we have a person, possibly on foot, need help locating.
Or was his effort FIRST because something was reported on his turf and he had to give it up when it crossed the line?.......See what I mean, that Smith had to take it from there once the car was located, no person,(again)?

Yes, the computer supposedly sat and the family truly regrets that. If you don't know how to go in to a computer to "see" where someone has been, to "revive" all the activity, you won't see much without passwords. Even then, you have to know what you're doing. Best to bring it in and have the hard drive restored and presto, it's all there again, previously deleted or not.
There was a listing of things found in the car in "A family waits and wonders"
But at some point after all that speculating that it was she who wanted to vanish, they decided they had to have it back. To me this is key. Why? What did they finally see or learn that they needed these things back?

That last call made to the condo......let's say day 4 police give the couple a call. They say, oh yes, we remember that call, it was directed to a room. My husband was watching xxx so I know it was the same time as the call. OR Yes, I recall saying we had no rooms, simple as that. OR even more: like, well, there is a bed and breakfast available, I just called for you, here's the address.
Idea is who knows but point is, too bad they didn't call. Now with the hard drive, I say it's no different. If police looked at my computers, it's all laid out on two of them, a running list.
The one I use for ultra private reasons would take longer to see. They only went over the computer once that we know of. When NH police took possession of it some time later, I wonder how much time they spent on it. Did Maura only study and use the PC for school and a few emails, not much else? Or did she stay up late, go places, interact with someone online?
Still, Fred may not know who this or that person is, but the names, IPs, other ways to identify them could begin a new twist. My sister was at a payphone by the way and FBI watched the area for days until they were located and brought back, him to jail and her into hiding again.

JMO wrote:

<quoted text>
Enjoyed reading your smart stuff...and funny stuff. If, indeed, you are posting from CT...it's home...know it well. ;-) Carry on, and thanks for your positive energy and good sense.

I'm all tingly and blushing. ;) Seriously, I really appreciate that JMO. It is always nice to know that some are “getting it”. I probably should use more emoticons since maybe some didn’t realize some of it was tongue in cheek.

I will still contribute when I think I might have something to offer. It will probably not be as often though, if I can avoid it.

Bill

paris wrote:

Even then, you have to know what you're doing. Best to bring it in and have the hard drive restored and presto, it's all there again, previously deleted or not.

Well this is not entirely true. It is possible in several ways to destroy old data. Intentionally and unintentionally. A quick tutorial. If you mark something for deletion really the only thing that happens is that space where that data resides is marked so that data may be overwritten. Many times it isn’t overwritten though and it is very easy to recover. Even if the data is overwritten that data may be held in more than one spot and that data or parts can still be recovered. Also, the data is almost never in one big chunk so that sometimes snippets of the data is recoverable even though the entire document or file isn’t. There are utilities that will allow you to wipe a disk clean of all deleted information but that is usually only done with high security data by firms who need that type of security or really paranoid people. ;-)

Bill

Eurobserver wrote:

Hello Whiston & all,
Yes, I know that Weeper did post that conclusion regarding the purported Barton, VT, sighting.
Still, and with all due respect to Weeper and his colleagues, how would it really be humanly possible to conclusively rule that sighting out?
Quite impossible, I should say.

In order to rule it out, wouldn't they have had to identify the "real" Raykel? Maybe they did.

Hey now, every situation is different. I know how much money it takes to have the overwritten hard drive restored so you can see again, the things you may have lost doing a system restore for example.
Paranoia is a heightened sense of awareness for those who have been there, done that.
Anyway Bill, thanks for speaking up about the image of Maura's hard drive, I appreciate it.
Also, it seems to me, we need someone here to bring a better balance. If you can stick around that would be good.

I'm waiting for Weeper to reply about JMO's post concerning the road conditions and how CS made his assessment.

paris wrote:

I'm waiting for Weeper to reply about JMO's post concerning the road conditions and how CS made his assessment.

oops, Paris...i didn't post about road conditions. slight error, perhaps?

and Wowzer, i'll look forward to any info or updates you may choose to share....whether online, or from shaw's, dammit. the community connection without the cheap and hysterical feature of the OHMY days is welcome.

oops is right JMO, I meant Jerry Fletcher was asking about the roads, etc.. Ben Franklin wrote a good post asking what anyone thought about Jerrys questions. Weeper read that post too and said he'd get back to us soon with his thoughts.
Glad you pointed that out.

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, darn, Bill, if I'd known you were trying to be funny so much of the time, I would have read so many posts differently....even if I may still have occasionally disagreed with you (or, ok, sometimes more than occasionally.)
It's REALLY hard to read moods on a message board, so knowing this information is just your general snarkitude helps me read your posts a lot better moving forward.

What I love best about this mystery judger is s/he thinks that it's incendiary and mean to say "thank you" to someone because of the person who chose to say it. Jeez.

To all, if I may,

Part 1 of 2

I would like to address the issues arising from you review of the Police Accident Report of record. I will be using all capital lettering to distinguish between Jerry Fletcher’s questions and my response. I am not yelling at anyone, fair enough?

Page 239, Post #4806

Part 2
Spent some time looking at the accident report…some observations:

*No indication that there were any tire marks in the street (only tire marks in the snow)

There are also not remarks about debris or yawing marks in the roadway or around any “trees” for that mater.

*No Traffic conrols…question for Weeper…wouldn’t a double yellow line qualify as a traffic control/no passing zone (probably neither here nor there, but a question)

Node # 4 does have a #6-visible road markings, this was not circled which would imply there were no yellow lines on the road.

ON “MOST” STATE HIGHWAYS IN NH, STATE ROADS DO HAVE “DOUBLE-YELLOW SOLID AND/OR BROKEN LINES” DOWN THE CENTER OF THE ROADWAY TO CONTROL LANE USE. ON THIS STRETCH OF ROUTE 112 THERE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SUCH LINES. IF THERE WERE SUCH MARKINGS ON THE ROADWAY, THEY MAY HAVE BEEN FADED TO THE POINT OF BEING USELESS. I CAN ONLY ASSUME THE ROADWAY HAD NO SUCH MARKINGS IN 2004.

*Additional Roadway Features…why a question mark…why not ‘none of the above’
Node #6 selection #4 should have been circled, you are correct here.

*Road Alignment…another question mark…this one does seem to me to be important

NODE # 7 SELECTION # 1-STRAIGHT AND LEVEL SHOULD HAVE BEEN CIRCLED. THE SATURN CAME TO REST WELL BEYOND THE CURVE IN THE ROAD. THE OFFICER’S 500 FOOT MEASUREMENT FROM THE INTERSECTION WITH BRADLEY HILL ROAD IS MORE ACCURATE THAN THE “BLUE-BOW” TREE.

*Road Surface Dry…seems this is also important since you would be more apt to have visible tire marks without snow or ice on the surface

IF THE ROADWAY WERE “OTHER THAN DRY”, HOW WOULD ONE EXPLAIN A “SPIN-OUT AND CRASH” WITHOUT IMPLYING DRIVER IMPAIRMENT, AS IS STATED IN NODE #20, SELECTION #2?

*Apparent Pre-Accident Vehicle Action…following the roadway?????? Doesn’t seem right to me

Node # 16 does have a #20-other vehicle action, which should have been circled if the officer believed the vehicle “skidded and then hit a tree”. There is no selection for “none of the above”

Weeper