Where is MAURA MURRAY

Just a reminder..

http://www.mauramurraymissing.com/

Tips to NHSP
OR
Post Office Box

Anne wrote:

Yes, it is interesting that most of the beginning articles and news spoke of the accident occurring at 7pm.

I believe we were discussing early printed articles and news reports. Why on earth must you always take it personally? I have read all of the later logs and reports.

ooops I double clicked..sorry

Anne you are quoting yourself.
I want to be very very clear on
the fact I am not taking the fact
the 7 PM call you seem to have heard doesn't appear in the
Grafton County Dispatch Log.
I don't take it personally that I haven't seen
it in the Hanover Log or Twins MT log.
I don't take it personally that the beginning stories have printed appox or around times!
I personally believe the log and the police report!

Anne wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe we were discussing early printed articles and news reports. Why on earth must you always take it personally? I have read all of the later logs and reports.

Anne wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe we were discussing early printed articles and news reports. Why on earth must you always take it personally? I have read all of the later logs and reports.

Why are you responding to yourself?

Lady Gray wrote:
<quoted text>
It's been answered already in a posting by Firecat. See below:
White Wash wrote:
Lady Gray since you are the family spokes person and seem to have so much information.
My question is this was the inventory listed as
sports bra? Or UNDERWEAR? UNDERGARMENS?
What exactly was the termnology used on the inventory list?
Firecat wrote:
If you read the post after that closely, you'll see she corrected herself immediately, and that sports bras for running and regular bras were both found, but not drawers.
I can't seem to find that post.

In fact, all of the posts by Lady Gray after that have nothing at all to do with that question.

Interesting, won't or can't answer a question, and then lie about it.

Why would two people do that?

Lady Gray wrote:
<quoted text>
It's been answered already in a posting by Firecat. See below:
White Wash wrote:
Lady Gray since you are the family spokes person and seem to have so much information.
My question is this was the inventory listed as
sports bra? Or UNDERWEAR? UNDERGARMENS?
What exactly was the termnology used on the inventory list?
Firecat wrote:
If you read the post after that closely, you'll see she corrected herself immediately, and that sports bras for running and regular bras were both found, but not drawers. Quote

I can't seem to find that post.

In fact, all of the posts by Lady Gray after that have nothing at all to do with that question.

Interesting, won't or can't answer a question, and then lie about it.

Why would two people do that?

OK White Wash

Hi Lady Gray,

I know you are not questioning the phrase but 'telling someone where the dog is buried' is a saying that is as old as dirt. It means the same as telling someone to go hell, go screw yourself, eat you know what and die, etc, etc.

Interestingly, I've yet to meet a dog I didn't genuinely like but I can't say that about people, especially a few on this forum.

When I began posting on this forum Alden called me Elsie and I let him know that I didn't appreciate the endearment, I didn't like him, and I didn't trust him. That's what I was referencing in that particular post you were quoting.

Maybe this is purely my opinion but I deemed the below paragraph a verbal attack against Helena considering she was the moderator of MMM. A lot was being said about MMM by Alden and others that was not kind and I openly told Helena how sorry I was while the MMM forum was still up and running. She replied by letting me know she appreciated how I felt.

The particular post below was one that I couldn't help but take personally as well.

Like I said, I've yet to meet a dog I didn't genuinely like. Can't say that for people though.

"It is well known that many people who might have information about a crime hesitate to go to the police. However, they often will develop confidence in coming forward by viewing and testing the tone and conduct of a forum like the MMM board. There is no other board on the internet officially endorsed and operated by the Murray family. The MMM board occupies a unique position in the flow of public discourse and therefore assumes a public responsibility.

Because the MMM board and the Murray family’s private investigator, Frank Kelly, are so inter-related and virtually indistinguishable to the public, his recent post on the MMM board (“and I have gun”) can be viewed as an attempt to intimidate the general public and therefore to disrupt the normal flow of assistance from the public to law enforcement.

The MMM board does not appear to be merely lazy, uninformed, unorganized, or intolerant. Its behavior in discouraging public discourse appears to have been sufficiently concerted and uniform over such a length of time that a reasonable case can be made that they are trying to interfere with an official investigation by law enforcement.

If the MMM board, masquerading as a public forum, actually represents a true attempt to undermine or discourage the genuine assistance normally provided by the public to law enforcement, then those responsible for maintaining the site, including its moderators, come dangerously close to obstructing justice.

The New Hampshire Attorney General should review the MMM board’s public postings and private message archives in order to determine whether or not their conduct is either illegal or meets the standard for a civil action.

If the Murray family’s private investigators have, for past three years now, relentlessly harassed and interfered with, for no good reason, the private life of an utterly innocent individual, if they have engaged in “covert alteration” of his environment, if they have sacked his business, if they have spread the most malicious and false rumors imaginable about him, then there can be no complaint about any scrutiny given the MMM discussion board."

Just wondering this question for either Lady Gray
or FireCat and just what date was this amazing
fact discovered that there where no DRAWERS?
What date did you each review the inventory list
and what was the DATE ON IT?

Lady Gray wrote:

<quoted text>
It's been answered already in a posting by Firecat. See below:
White Wash wrote:
Lady Gray since you are the family spokes person and seem to have so much information.
My question is this was the inventory listed as
sports bra? Or UNDERWEAR? UNDERGARMENS?
What exactly was the termnology used on the inventory list?
Firecat wrote:
If you read the post after that closely, you'll see she corrected herself immediately, and that sports bras for running and regular bras were both found, but not drawers.

Anne I keep looking for confirmation that!
Trust me if that happens I'll be more than
happy to say I was wrong but until I have something else comfirming it going with the two
sources out there.

Anne wrote:

OK White Wash

Wow guess I'm not old as dirt first time for me!
Interesting and appreciate you clearing up things!

elsewherebriefly wrote:

Hi Lady Gray,
I know you are not questioning the phrase but 'telling someone where the dog is buried' is a saying that is as old as dirt. It means the same as telling someone to go hell, go screw yourself, eat you know what and die, etc, etc.
Interestingly, I've yet to meet a dog I didn't genuinely like but I can't say that about people, especially a few on this forum.
When I began posting on this forum Alden called me Elsie and I let him know that I didn't appreciate the endearment, I didn't like him, and I didn't trust him. That's what I was referencing in that particular post you were quoting.
Maybe this is purely my opinion but I deemed the below paragraph a verbal attack against Helena considering she was the moderator of MMM. A lot was being said about MMM by Alden and others that was not kind and I openly told Helena how sorry I was while the MMM forum was still up and running. She replied by letting me know she appreciated how I felt.
The particular post below was one that I couldn't help but take personally as well.
Like I said, I've yet to meet a dog I didn't genuinely like. Can't say that for people though.
"It is well known that many people who might have information about a crime hesitate to go to the police. However, they often will develop confidence in coming forward by viewing and testing the tone and conduct of a forum like the MMM board. There is no other board on the internet officially endorsed and operated by the Murray family. The MMM board occupies a unique position in the flow of public discourse and therefore assumes a public responsibility.
Because the MMM board and the Murray family’s private investigator, Frank Kelly, are so inter-related and virtually indistinguishable to the public, his recent post on the MMM board (“and I have gun”) can be viewed as an attempt to intimidate the general public and therefore to disrupt the normal flow of assistance from the public to law enforcement.
The MMM board does not appear to be merely lazy, uninformed, unorganized, or intolerant. Its behavior in discouraging public discourse appears to have been sufficiently concerted and uniform over such a length of time that a reasonable case can be made that they are trying to interfere with an official investigation by law enforcement.
If the MMM board, masquerading as a public forum, actually represents a true attempt to undermine or discourage the genuine assistance normally provided by the public to law enforcement, then those responsible for maintaining the site, including its moderators, come dangerously close to obstructing justice.
The New Hampshire Attorney General should review the MMM board’s public postings and private message archives in order to determine whether or not their conduct is either illegal or meets the standard for a civil action.
If the Murray family’s private investigators have, for past three years now, relentlessly harassed and interfered with, for no good reason, the private life of an utterly innocent individual, if they have engaged in “covert alteration” of his environment, if they have sacked his business, if they have spread the most malicious and false rumors imaginable about him, then there can be no complaint about any scrutiny given the MMM discussion board."

Below, in two posts, excerpted from the New York Times, October 3, 2004:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...

THE incident has emerged as an emblem of the tension between the office of the United States attorney in Connecticut and lawyers for defendants and those under scrutiny in the high-profile investigation of the state's highest office.

Private investigators working for the Tomasso family say, amid threats of jail, that their surveillance equipment, address books and notes were seized by federal agents. One agent is said to have pulled one of the investigators out of his car, thrown him to the ground and shoved him across the hood of his vehicle.

That is one side of the story, a version of a hotly contested episode that occurred on Sept. 3 in downtown New Hartford, between F.B.I. agents working on the federal investigation into state contract-steering in the Rowland administration and lawyers for one of the defendants.

Federal authorities tell a different story. They claim the private investigators were harassing Lawrence Alibozek, a man who is expected to be a key witness in its case. And although they admit the equipment was confiscated, no one, they say, was ''mistreated or abused.''

Since last December, when former Gov. John G. Rowland disclosed that his lakeside cottage had been refurbished with the help of state contractors. The intervening months brought the legislative impeachment inquiry of Mr. Rowland, his subsequent resignation on July 1 and the various meetings of a grand jury, which convened more than a year ago.

The answer to what has become a favorite parlor game (if and when federal prosecutors would strike) came on Sept. 23, when a federal grand jury returned an indictment of Peter N. Ellef, Mr. Rowland's former co-chief of staff, his son, Peter N. Ellef II, who owns a landscaping business, and William A. Tomasso, a prominent state contractor, on charges of racketeering, bribery and money laundering. All three men pleaded not guilty.

Prosecutors say Mr. Tomasso provided money, gold and benefits from Champagne to airline tickets to Mr. Ellef and his son, to Lawrence Alibozek, Mr. Rowland's former deputy chief of staff who has been cooperating with the government since March 2003, and to ''others'' in exchange for lucrative state contracts. Prosecutors are seeking criminal convictions and the return of at least $11 million.

News of the incident in New Hartford was first reported by The Associated Press on Sept. 20. On Sept. 24, at the arraignment of the three indicted men, Nora Dannehy, the lead prosecutor on the case, made an oblique reference to it as an ongoing issue before United States Magistrate Donna F. Martinez.''It is the government's position that there has been harassment of a witness by private investigators,'' Ms. Dannehy said.

On Sept. 3, private investigators were working for Murzin-Thibault Investigative Group, a Litchfield firm founded last spring by a retired Hartford police detective, Richard Murzin and Andy Thibault, a 51-year-old journalist and adjunct professor of journalism at the University of Hartford. The firm was retained by Jack Fornaciari, a lawyer from Washington, D.C., who is representing Mr. Tomasso.

PART 2:

On the advice of his lawyer, Mr. Thibault, who had arrived on the scene to find his two investigators stripped to the waist, declined to be interviewed for this article on the advice of his lawyer, Philip Russell of Greenwich.

Mr. Fornaciari said on Sept. 3, the investigators had Mr. Alibozek, a New Hartford resident, under surveillance.''I'm trying to establish that he's unstable,'' Mr. Fornaciari said.

One investigator, in a parked car, was recording Mr. Alibozek and his wife, Leah, while the two were inside Chatterly's, a restaurant and bar, on the town's main street. A second investigator sat in another parked car.

Two or three unmarked cars approached the private investigators' cars, blocking in one of them. Two men and a woman emerged, one that Mr. Fornaciari said was identified by one of the investigators as Michael J. Clark, a veteran F.B.I. agent and the man who is supervising the corruption investigation. Yet the men did not identify themselves, Mr. Fornaciari said.

A male agent, who has not been identified, pulled one of the investigators out of his car, threw him to the ground and then pushed him on the hood of the vehicle, according to Mr. Fornaciari, who read from the statements of the investigators during a telephone interview. He a male agent rifled through the cars, pulling out notebooks and equipment, while the female agent took notes.

When Mr. Thibault arrived and began questioning the agents, he was ordered to go across the street, where he subsequently called Ms. Dannehy, the lead prosecutor.

After several hours, the agents suspended their search and left the scene with the investigators' equipment.

Although ''no comment'' is the de rigeur response of federal prosecutors during pending investigations, the office of the United States attorney released a statement about the incident last week:''When there are reports of intimidation of harassment of witnesses in any criminal case, federal law enforcement acts expeditiously and professionally. If anyone involved in this incident or their attorneys are claiming that individuals were mistreated or abused in any way, they are not being truthful.''

In reply to elsewhere.
Thanks for posting this elsewhere. Much of it is what I have been saying for some time.
Quote: "The MMM board does not appear to be merely lazy, uninformed, unorganized, or intolerant. Its behavior in discouraging public discourse appears to have been sufficiently concerted and uniform over such a length of time that a reasonable case can be made that they are trying to interfere with an official investigation by law enforcement.
If the MMM board, masquerading as a public forum, actually represents a true attempt to undermine or discourage the genuine assistance normally provided by the public to law enforcement, then those responsible for maintaining the site, including its moderators, come dangerously close to obstructing justice.
The New Hampshire Attorney General should review the MMM board’s public postings and private message archives in order to determine whether or not their conduct is either illegal or meets the standard for a civil action."Quote"
Hmm, I remember Helena stating that she liked her home and wanted to keep it. Must be the words "civil action" scared her. Indermine and discourage are also two imortant words.
I fail to see a verbal attack against Helena here. Instead I see someone giving her a warning.

White Wash wrote:

Wow guess I'm not old as dirt first time for me!
Interesting and appreciate you clearing up things!
<quoted text>

"Ike Jesus Booey!", you've probably never heard that one before either but it's a phrase that can heard in NH from time to time and is as old as dirt as well.

I haven't quite figured out what it means but I'm guessing it is an expression of surprise or excitement.

Wowzer wrote:

In reply to elsewhere.
Thanks for posting this elsewhere. Much of it is what I have been saying for some time.
Quote: "The MMM board does not appear to be merely lazy, uninformed, unorganized, or intolerant. Its behavior in discouraging public discourse appears to have been sufficiently concerted and uniform over such a length of time that a reasonable case can be made that they are trying to interfere with an official investigation by law enforcement.
If the MMM board, masquerading as a public forum, actually represents a true attempt to undermine or discourage the genuine assistance normally provided by the public to law enforcement, then those responsible for maintaining the site, including its moderators, come dangerously close to obstructing justice.
The New Hampshire Attorney General should review the MMM board’s public postings and private message archives in order to determine whether or not their conduct is either illegal or meets the standard for a civil action."Quote"
Hmm, I remember Helena stating that she liked her home and wanted to keep it. Must be the words "civil action" scared her. Indermine and discourage are also two imortant words.
I fail to see a verbal attack against Helena here. Instead I see someone giving her a warning.

I don't know about you but I've been in the position, in a certain career path I chose, where such threats as civil lawsuits and complaints made to the Attorey General caused quite a bit of stress in my life.

Especially when I knew I was doing the right thing.

Two people who have investigated (and who probably still are investigating) the Bish and Murray cases have worked for those who, in ordinary terms, bribed former Gov. Rowland. It would appear that the purpose of the bribes was to set Rowland up for resignation and prison time.

2 new ones for me today!
My friends will love you!
Always looking for new material!
Thanks!

elsewherebriefly wrote:

<quoted text>
"Ike Jesus Booey!", you've probably never heard that one before either but it's a phrase that can heard in NH from time to time and is as old as dirt as well.
I haven't quite figured out what it means but I'm guessing it is an expression of surprise or excitement.

elsewherebriefly wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know about you but I've been in the position, in a certain career path I chose, where such threats as civil lawsuits and complaints made to the Attorey General caused quite a bit of stress in my life.
Especially when I knew I was doing the right thing.

And I would imagine if someone knew the wrong thing was being done then it would cause double the amount of stress which could be the true reason why the old forum was shut down.
Not to say that Helena's illness had nothing to do with it but I think this also played a big part as well.