Where is MAURA MURRAY

I actually have pictures taken recently of this SUV and beg to say other wise or let the paper work say other wise!

I see the DUCKS have done a very nice job over the weekend!

Yes some actually say they did more than just joined a website!

They dressed and step out into a bitter night to help a young lady there have always been those that do and just those who talk about what those who did should have did!

I see my time would be spend more wisely wandering the woods instead of this BS!

Happy Bashing!!

Reality Check wrote:

The LE suv was sold because...... it had been damaged in an acc. on FEB 9th 2004 , then repaired. LE getting rid of any evidence that would link them to Maura's disappearance. CS of Haverhill LE knows exactly what happened to Maura. Look up corruption in the dictionary and his picture will be there.

Did CS or another officer change vechicles during their shift on Feb. 9th.

OK - so this is interesting, to say the least. In many respects. Not really new however.

As for Elsewhere briefly - all I recall him saying was something to the effect that he doesn't always agree with White Wash - but he has found accuracy as to White Wash's statements about facts.

**There is no reason to condemn him for that.**

And yes - he and I have had our disagreements. Significant disagreements - but on his being condemned for this - well I stand with Elsewherebriefly on this one.

More interesting - is that while Elsewherebriefly was, in fact, speaking more in terms of evidence known to be relevant - I'm surprised that the apparent outrage was not greater about the multiple pages of content by which the relevance has yet to be ascertained.

Secondly - as far as I know - no one knows what happened to Maura. We are here to try to figure out what happened.

Given the facts - a whole variety of things could have happened. Some dad or mom could stomach reading - some mom or dad might not, and some in between.

Just because a scenario is stated as possible - or a person believes it most likely - doesn't make it an attack on Maura - they are simply possible explanations for the set of facts - and if anyone should be angry at anything - it should be at the lack of facts available.

Now - Eurobserver and I happen to disagree slightly on weather Maura had anything to do with Vasi. I just don't happen to think so - but I do see that it could be possible.

What I think is more possible - and very important possibility to consider - and that Eurobserver helped me come to realize - is that the Saturn could have received its prior damage on the drive up North. Prior damage does not involve Vasi in this situation. The math shows that if the Saturn was taken up the state roads - the car would have been driven at speeds higher then what the road is designed for - and this would lead to other earlier drive away accidents prior to the final one. By no means am I saying that Maura was in that car.

The theory I have for the secret boyfriend possibility ignores prior damage. But truth be told - I don't think there was prior damage. But truth also be told - I know I'm not qualified to asses this - but I do know who is - and three cops debating in a break room aren't qualified either - unless they were engineers - or they retained engineers. We don't know who helped with that.(Here's something Elsewherebriefly will disagree with - and I think he has the right to.)

My theory of a secret boyfriend involves two possibilities: a predator that was charming (Like the hillside strangler) or legitimate and that she started a new life.

I also think she could have been kidnapped or Murdered at Amhurst by two people - one that at least looked like Maura. This is what I think is most likely - ties in with earlier radio reports - pings - the family not seeing ATM Liquor store videos. Not checking for blood evidence (assumed) because Maura was believed to be in New Hampshire - Mr. Atwood's maybe. The family's belief that she wouldn't just take off. Someone that knew her well enough could have lied to her about the death in the family - your dad called while you were (somewhere) and he said uncle/Aunt (someone) died and he wants you to go (somewhere)- waits for phone calls and emails and strikes

(Part 1)

For what other reason is anybody here - but to take the facts and think about them and try to come up with an explanation.

Any other agenda - folks that don't really contribute to a solution - its all wasted space and time. Once it gets to the point that no clear line of thought can be followed -- its frankly obstruction.

Right now - I'm only interested in new valid information and the effects that they have on the possibilities.

To take anyone to task for exercising some imagination, regarding a case by which the available information cannot provide a solution - is a cheap shot - and counter to what the purpose of this thread is supposed to be - to think of possibilities and report them so someone can go out and test the possibilities and maybe find an answer.

JMO wrote:

It seems unfair, however, to attribute negative intentions to Maura, a victim, without corraboration of facts to support such a theory.

But it's not at all unfair to say that Maura may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time - in Amherst. Or somewhere else. It is not unfair to say that she may have been mixed up unwittingly with the wrong crowd. It is not unfair to say that she may have been forced into protecting someone or keeping her mouth shut for a few crucial days when she wished she could have done otherwise. It is not unfair to think she may have been doing something with the most honorable, even heroic intentions, but something so reckless and naive that might have jeopardized her safety.

Suppose someone parks his car in a bad neighborhood. He leaves an expensive camera on the front seat, the doors unlocked, and returns an hour later to find the camera stolen. Who is at fault? The driver, because he left the camera in plain view in an unlocked car? The thief who stole it? Or the fence who makes the theft financially worthwhile?

You can BLAME any of them all you want, but that doesn't get the camera back. You can squabble and finger-point among yourselves even more, but that does not get the camera back.

What gets the camera back might include finding out whether the driver had a good reason to leave the camera so readily available for theft in the first place. Happens all the time. What else might get the camera back is finding out who was able to know the camera was in the car. Might have been someone walking by or it might not have been anyone at all from the neighborhood. Meanwhile, the camera has been sold to a fence and is on its way to a fourth party. But which fence? The one in the bad neighborhood, or the one in the nice suburb where the driver lives?

Ben,

I'm a girl, I'm 5'7", and for the majority of my life I've worn my hair just like Maura's.

The reason why I've been an active poster all of these years?

Becuase I traveled those highway corridors quite heavily from the coast to the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont until permanently moving down here in 2002.

My first reaction when I learned about Maura was, "It could have been me!" and I still believe it to this day.

Guess my family would have been told that I'd run away or committed suicide too.

elsewherebriefly wrote:

Ben,
I'm a girl

Ooops. That is - if I've stated otherwise - and I'll bet I have.

Sorry.

Harry wrote:

There are people in the "body drug" and body building business in the Amherst/Northampton area, and from Connecticut, who seem to have an unusually keen interest in the disappearance of Maura Murray. But it sure does not appear to be a healthy interest.[text deleted]

Please elaborate as to what you're basing this statement on......you must have firsthand knowledge of this? Links please.

hi all ,why would we be allowed to know about one of Maurs jobs before she vanished.Was it a mistake that her job at the Meliville security desk got out. Did she really work there.I am assuming she did because the story has not been rained on and denied denied by Mauras family.why that one fact was allowed out is curious to me.take care philip

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

<quoted text>
Ooops. That is - if I've stated otherwise - and I'll bet I have.
Sorry.

No problem, fortunately I've never been mistaken for anything but a female in person.

Lady Gray wrote:

<quoted text>
Please elaborate as to what you're basing this statement on......you must have firsthand knowledge of this? Links please.

There is no point in talking to the Taliban.

Harry wrote:

<quoted text>There is no point in talking to the Taliban.

Harry - just think about this. Maura could be alive and somebody's captive, living a nightmare. This is about her and no one else.

If you do have information you should divulge.

You also said that one of the private detectives was on Rowland's payroll. What is the private detectives name and what leads you to believe that there is a connection?

Harry wrote:

<quoted text>
But it's not at all unfair to say that Maura may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time - in Amherst. Or somewhere else. It is not unfair to say that she may have been mixed up unwittingly with the wrong crowd. It is not unfair to say that she may have been forced into protecting someone or keeping her mouth shut for a few crucial days when she wished she could have done otherwise. It is not unfair to think she may have been doing something with the most honorable, even heroic intentions, but something so reckless and naive that might have jeopardized her safety.
Suppose someone parks his car in a bad neighborhood. He leaves an expensive camera on the front seat, the doors unlocked, and returns an hour later to find the camera stolen. Who is at fault? The driver, because he left the camera in plain view in an unlocked car? The thief who stole it? Or the fence who makes the theft financially worthwhile?
You can BLAME any of them all you want, but that doesn't get the camera back. You can squabble and finger-point among yourselves even more, but that does not get the camera back.
What gets the camera back might include finding out whether the driver had a good reason to leave the camera so readily available for theft in the first place. Happens all the time. What else might get the camera back is finding out who was able to know the camera was in the car. Might have been someone walking by or it might not have been anyone at all from the neighborhood. Meanwhile, the camera has been sold to a fence and is on its way to a fourth party. But which fence? The one in the bad neighborhood, or the one in the nice suburb where the driver lives?

The camera is missing.
Who can be "blamed" for its disappearance with any certainty? Much has been surmised over this extended period of time, and everyone has a pet theory.

Surely, ANY chance or intended interaction may have caused Maura to become a victim of circumstance.

It seems unnecessary, and worse than unfair to taint Maura's character and reputation by suggesting, without substantiated fact, that she was a WILLING participant in her own disappearance.

After looking in the most obvious places, the search area, according to this forum, extends at least from CT to Canada...perhaps beyond.

Fact is, no one knows where to find her.

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

<quoted text>You also said that one of the private detectives was on Rowland's payroll.

I've never said that.

whiston wrote:

hi all ,why would we be allowed to know about one of Maurs jobs before she vanished.Was it a mistake that her job at the Meliville security desk got out. Did she really work there.I am assuming she did because the story has not been rained on and denied denied by Mauras family.why that one fact was allowed out is curious to me.take care philip

Philip, you're referring to this information as being "allowed out" infers that the life of Maura Murray was secretive. And, of course, she worked there. I believe your imagination is on overdrive.

This information about her position at the security desk was public because of the situation that occurred the Thursday night prior to her disappearance.

I'm certainly not an expert, but when one disappears, all happenings that might have relevance, that occur prior to the disappearance, is looked at.

What junk mail she received, where she had her oil changed, info of this sort, in my opinion, is not deemed of significance in her disappearance.

However, having a crying meltdown at her job is indicative of something occuring in her life which could have been a catalyst in her disappearance; hence, the information being discussed publicly. Nothing more than that.

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

Right now - I'm only interested in new valid information...

So the "secret boyfriend" piece is new? and valid?

It's not a "cheap shot" to disbelieve.

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

<quoted text>

Harry - just think about this. Maura could be alive and somebody's captive, living a nightmare. This is about her and no one else.

I have thought about it a lot, actually, but I really doubt that Maura is being held captive. Anything's possible, but that seems very unlikely. However, I would never discourage anyone from following that idea.

To some, this may be all about Maura and no one else, but to others, it may not be limited to her. I don't mean to sound cold or insulting, but I don't take the perspective that Maura's disappearance is an isolated event. Nor do I necessarily believe that her disappearance is one of a very large number. But I do think it is connected to at least two other cases. Possibly a few others.

But a connection does not imply that a single person - some dirty old man or serial killer - is solely responsible. I see this as something like a small scale Erin Brockovich situation.

I believe that there is a very dangerous problem with a certain always-shifting group who prey on people's weaknesses about their bodies. Some sell harmless snake oil. But some snake oil is not so harmless. These products range from so-called energy drinks that are totally legal and nothing to get excited about to things like anabolic steroids, and dangerous drugs or useless concoctions that some think will cure cancer or improve fertility.

Let's say you're teaching science at UMass and you come up with an idea about some kind of "natural" immune system defense. Maybe the science part is lacking, maybe it started out as a good idea, but could never really get off the ground. You've told a few friends about your idea and they are really interested in investing in your product regardless of whether or not it really works. Plus, they know all the right people to make it happen. The opportunity to make a lot of money from basically nothing is right in front of you and hard to resist. The Ph.D. that you paid so much for and left you with some crummy apartment is now worth a lot of money.

So you just mix the stuff up at a factory in China and sell it in Amherst, or wherever, packaged in a nice amber bottle with a pretty label on it and some pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo. And maybe some people involved in this trade take a step or two further on their own and include something a little stronger when they approach the gym owner or the local health food store.

It's big business and a lot of people die from it. In a variety of ways. And I think Maura Murray was one of the victims.

White Wash...

If you are a reporter?????...PLEASE learn how to spell and put together a sentence that makes SENSE. Not NONSENSE..!!!!

JMO wrote:

<quoted text>
So the "secret boyfriend" piece is new? and valid?
It's not a "cheap shot" to disbelieve.

My post - which included many other possibilities are the only ones I see as possible given what I know.

Because there are several possibilities - I want new information to narow these possibilities down.

I wasn't saying it was anyone in particular that was taking cheap shots. I was saying that taking someone to task f=or using their imagination is a cheap shot.

From what I read in your later post - I don't see that you took a cheap shot.

Harry wrote:
There are people in the "body drug" and body building business in the Amherst/Northampton area, and from Connecticut, who seem to have an unusually keen interest in the disappearance of Maura Murray. But it sure does not appear to be a healthy interest.[text deleted]

Lady Gray wrote:
<quoted text>
Please elaborate as to what you're basing this statement on......you must have firsthand knowledge of this? Links please.

Harry wrote:
There is no point in talking to the Taliban.

What evidence do you have that "There are people in the "body drug" and body building business in the Amherst/Northampton area, and from Connecticut, who seem to have an unusually keen interest in the disappearance of Maura Murray."

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

"Harry - just think about this. Maura could be alive and somebody's captive, living a nightmare. This is about her and no one else."

Harry wrote:
"I have thought about it a lot, actually, but I really doubt that Maura is being held captive...

...

So you just mix the stuff up at a factory in China and sell it in Amherst, or wherever, packaged in a nice amber bottle with a pretty label on it and some pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo. And maybe some people involved in this trade take a step or two further on their own and include something a little stronger when they approach the gym owner or the local health food store.

It's big business and a lot of people die from it. In a variety of ways. And I think Maura Murray was one of the victims.

Harry Wrote:
"Just curious. Why would a detective investigate a disappearance when he has had close ties, prior to the disappearance, with those who may have made the disappearance possible? With some who were Key players in the Rowland corruption scandal?"

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:
"You also said that one of the private detectives was on Rowland's payroll."

Harry Wrote:
"I've never said that."

OK - you didn't say that exactly - but you didn't elaborate...