Where is MAURA MURRAY

Snowy --- you're right. One of the pivotal events in Maura's disappearance DOES seem to be that phone call!(You didn't say this) but even if it WASN'T a real phone call, that's important too since it shows some kind of planning, as well as a facility for acting. Snowy, i want you and others to know i'm not dissing Maura, just trying to figure out how all this pieces together! Something really seemed to be brewing. And I'm hoping it did not end with a ride from the wrong person in NH.

At the risk of re-stating the obvious (thanks for stating it, Anne) - it's pretty silly to say that there's no EVIDENCE that Maura left Amherst. Her car being found in Haverhill and a witness, however dubious he may be, having claimed to have seen her there are EVIDENCE (rather obviously) that she was there in NH. It could conceivably be argued that there isn't concrete PROOF that she left Amherst, since we do not know for a fact that she was in the car in Haverhill, nor was she identified by a witness who knew her personally before the fact. Given the evidence that she was in Haverhill, and the lack of proof that she did NOT leave Amherst, I think it is more likely that she was in Haverhill. I am not rejecting the possibility that she wasn't, but to me, the physical evidence says that she was.

Hello all,

While I remain open to all sorts of reasonable scenarios, I still consider it quite possible that Maura might well have been suffering from stress-induced amnesia/fugue at the time of her sudden flight north.
Alternatively a friend of hers might have been responsible for the Vasi hit-and-run in Amherst,thus necessitating the disposal of the Saturn.
And yet, as Whiston has pointed out so many times, there is no real proof that Maura ever left Amherst for NH, except the wavering witness statements of the SBD (Mr A-d). Perhaps he did speak with Maura, perhaps with a girl bearing a passing resemblance to her.
Who knows

...just noticing the obvious, still.

And the urban legend of "canine cloning" is supposed to bear on Maura being missing for FIVE YEARS next Monday in precisely what way? Or perhaps THAT wasn't merely intended as a meaningless distraction, despite the fact that there is nothing in that post to explain its so-called relevance?

I'm really curious to see anyone try to defend THIS nonsense, but thanks, multiple personality bot, for proving my point again.

I'm curious how someone would drive that distance while in the midst of a so-called "fugue state." I say so-called because it is not a clinically recognized or defined state, and even anecdotal "evidence" that it exists and can be identified is almost nonexistant.

Perhaps more far-fetched than the X-Files scenario is the accusation that someone borrowed Maura's car with her knowledge, struck Vasi with her knowledge (although there is absolutely no evidence that that happened) and Maura willingly, knowing it to be a criminal act for that person,drove the Saturn to NH to ditch it?

At the risk of pointing out the remarkably obvious, a lack of "proof" that Maura left Amherst is not "proof" that she stayed there.
"We don't have absolute proof that she left Amherst, and that proves that she didn['t leave Amherst."
Basic cognition, folks. Try it out sometime.

After five years next Monday, I think the excitement about blaming someone who isn't here to defend herself might have worn off. No such luck, I see,

sophie bean wrote:

I'm curious how someone would drive that distance while in the midst of a so-called "fugue state." I say so-called because it is not a clinically recognized or defined state, and even anecdotal "evidence" that it exists and can be identified is almost nonexistant.
Perhaps more far-fetched than the X-Files scenario is the accusation that someone borrowed Maura's car with her knowledge, struck Vasi with her knowledge (although there is absolutely no evidence that that happened) and Maura willingly, knowing it to be a criminal act for that person,drove the Saturn to NH to ditch it?
At the risk of pointing out the remarkably obvious, a lack of "proof" that Maura left Amherst is not "proof" that she stayed there.
"We don't have absolute proof that she left Amherst, and that proves that she didn['t leave Amherst."
Basic cognition, folks. Try it out sometime.
After five years next Monday, I think the excitement about blaming someone who isn't here to defend herself might have worn off. No such luck, I see,

While some of these theories do seem far fetched as you say, I don't think her never leaving Amherst is that far fetched with the knowledge the public has been given. If you want us all to just take your word that she was in Haverville, then give us the evidence that shows she was there because right now we don't have any. You can't ask for help and knowledge from the public and then criticize them for making logical theories with what we have been given. And furthermore, no one on this website is bashing Maura. The reason people are on this forum is because they are trying to help:)

Gee, DSM lists "fugue state" - of course, it also used to list lack of heterosexuality as a mental disorder, which tells us plenty about the "science" of psychiatry.

Try this on, in case you haven't:
"The state is usually short-lived (hours to days), but can last months or longer. Dissociative fugue usually involves unplanned travel or wandering, and is sometimes accompanied by the establishment of a new identity. After recovery from fugue, previous memories usually return intact, however there is complete amnesia for the fugue episode. Importantly, an episode is not characterized as a fugue if it can be related to the ingestion of psychotropic substances, to trauma, to a general medical condition, or to psychiatric conditions such as delerium or dementia, bipolar disorder or depression."

SO...assuming that it could be established that Maura had a non-stress-related "fugue state" - how would you explain the fact that when it ended, she didn't contact family or friends but stayed missing? Also, as I've said a few dozen times previously, the "fugue state" is a RARE, poorly understood phenomena (if indeed it does exist)- anyone care to guess at the statistical likelihood that a specific (not random) young woman who vanishes does so as a result of a fugue state?
And there are people here who say that it's unlikely that she was a victim of a crime directed at a young, attractive woman. Wow.

Hello Sophie Bean,

Your obvious anger and narrowmindedness totally precludes any kind of reasonable and open-minded discussion on this forum.
Nothing else but a scenario involving an evil perpetrator will ever suffice for you.
Please, just continue to clobber all the rest of us for daring to suggest anything else.
And kindly notice that I am in no way whatsover blaming Maura in my previous post!!!
Please, stop twisting things and kindly refrain from accusing posters of non-existens ill will.
Thank you.

In my opinion the only thing that happend was that she got into a automobile.Know would she have got into a car or truck with someone she didnt know.I really doubt it and like i said b4 that road at night is pitch black and in the middle of the national forest.And on the night she went missing the temp was below zero.Im an outdoorsman myself and have came out on that rd after dark and had to walk home from hunting as i listend to coyotes howling in the woods not fun.So why on earth would she choose to head that way.At first I thought she might have been afraid to get caught again for dui and ran into the woods and possibly froze but after seaching with friends dogs and LE nothing.Its a shame that people dont look at all the options and get upset when im shure we all want the same thing to bring her home to her family.Also its my belief that she was here due to dogs finding her scent could someone have worn her cloths and her shoes yes but i dont think that was the case and again thats just my opinion.The one true and sad fact is that shes been gone for 5 years and still not found.

Right, EO, you're not "accusing" Maura of anything:

"Alternatively a friend of hers might have been responsible for the Vasi hit-and-run in Amherst,thus necessitating the disposal of the Saturn."

Sara, you have misread what I wrote. No one should "take my word" that she was in Haverhill. What I wrote was that her car was found there and a witness identified her at the vehicle. That is MORE evidence, and actual proof, than anythign that suggests that she stayed in Amherst. I did not at all say that she COULDN'T have stayed in Amherst.
Again, cognition.
Saying that there is not proof that she stayed in Amherst is not at all the same as saying "I say that she was in Haverhill, period."

What part of this is confusing? It shouldn't be.

I believe that a majority of people on this forum are here because they want to help Maura or think that they can. To say that "no one in this discussion is bashing Maura" is absolutely incorrect. Read the whole thing. On this page, she was accused by a self-righteous poster of having taken the car to NH for the purpose of ditching it after a friend of hers supposedly hit Vasi. That is bashing (at best, but more likely slander).

In the past several years, I have seen accusations that she was having an illicit affair with the underage son of a local sociopath, that she was involved in some sort of drug purcahse or God knows what, that she staged her own disappearance to evade something that has never really been defined, that she was drunk and left the scene of the accident rather than face the music - please don't tell me that she and her family haven't been bashed. It's not true.

So Eo thinks that I am "angry" - gosh, how would anyone get THAT impression? And why on earth should I be angry that a young woman - who I didn't even know personally!- is still missing after five years to the agony of her family? What an amount of nerve I've got! How DARE I?

How dare I, as well, inquire about the likelihood of someone else's scenario? Why actually address the questions I raised - about how that would work, exactly, for a victim of fugue state to defy all recorded history of the condition and remain missing AFTER the state had passed? It is so much easier and more self-righteous to whine about being picked upon than to actually address the points of the case.
"Oh yes, I'm very concerned about Maura. Here I am - again - to pose the 'fugue state' scenario with no rationale."

I'm not narrow-minded, I am perfectly open to a discussion of possibilities. You, EO, are by no means interested in a discussion of possibilities. Merely saying that you are and then refusing to engage in an actual discussion because someone disagrees with you tells me something quite different.
But by all means, pluck an irrelevant science-fiction scenario only slightly less absurd than the X-Files theory out of the atmospehere and fit Maura into it. Go right ahead and be outraged when anyone asks you "why exactly do you think that happened here?" as I have previously done in a more polite way (or was that with "someone else" who proposed this nonsense as a "theory"?). How very melodramatic.
Sadly, this is not a "reality" TV show - this is a real person's life, a real family's pain. If I seem angry, it's because I AM angry.

sophie bean wrote:

Right, EO, you're not "accusing" Maura of anything:
"Alternatively a friend of hers might have been responsible for the Vasi hit-and-run in Amherst,thus necessitating the disposal of the Saturn."

Esteemed Sophie Bean,

The quote above does NOT, repeat NOT, mean that I´m in any way "accusing" Maura of anything.
If someone with or without Maura´s permission was using her car and happened to be responsible for the Vasi hit-and-run in Amherst, then that person could have put any kind of pressure on Maura.
Maura is a victim whatever may have happened!

I do agree with Sophie Bean - she and her family have had horrible things said about them. Sad.

Sophie
Would you feel comfortable emailing cnn/nancy grace to encourage Nancy Grace to air Maura's story on Monday - 5 year anniversary and it just so happens to fall on a Monday again..........

sophie bean wrote:

Sara, you have misread what I wrote. No one should "take my word" that she was in Haverhill. What I wrote was that her car was found there and a witness identified her at the vehicle. That is MORE evidence, and actual proof, than anythign that suggests that she stayed in Amherst. I did not at all say that she COULDN'T have stayed in Amherst.
Again, cognition.
Saying that there is not proof that she stayed in Amherst is not at all the same as saying "I say that she was in Haverhill, period."
What part of this is confusing? It shouldn't be.
I believe that a majority of people on this forum are here because they want to help Maura or think that they can. To say that "no one in this discussion is bashing Maura" is absolutely incorrect. Read the whole thing. On this page, she was accused by a self-righteous poster of having taken the car to NH for the purpose of ditching it after a friend of hers supposedly hit Vasi. That is bashing (at best, but more likely slander).
In the past several years, I have seen accusations that she was having an illicit affair with the underage son of a local sociopath, that she was involved in some sort of drug purcahse or God knows what, that she staged her own disappearance to evade something that has never really been defined, that she was drunk and left the scene of the accident rather than face the music - please don't tell me that she and her family haven't been bashed. It's not true.

Sophie Bean,

You cannot seriously mean that a witness identified Maura at the Weathered Barn.
The witness accounts by the SBD are to put it mildly extremely vague and wavering.
Surely you cannot dispute that?

I do believe it can be done at
Dartmouth Hitchcock Memorial Center checking into!
But the orginial directions that where in the
car where to Burlington so that's my new search!
Whiston where are you? What to help!

Advocator wrote:

<quoted text>
White Wash, I see where you're going with this, and it's a very interesting thought, but ... I'm sure the procedure would need to be done in a hospital or clinic, and is there a hospital or clinic in the White Mtns area where it could be done? Am thinking probably not.

She was a college student how many do not have
large credit card debt?
I bet given her back and forth to Ohio, NY, transferring ect she was at a pretty high CHA CHING amount!

FireCat wrote:

I'm also unsure what "a wrecked car or two" has to do with the equation. But indeed, you've at last framed Beagle's theory in a way that I can see it possibly having something to do with Maura.
How would it incur a large debt on a credit card, though? Don't they pay you?

Same place as Anne's is my guess!

Oh sorry it's a big cover up it was removed
as well!

Odd after 5 years Col drops the crumb of
the red truck driver out interesting!

Quija wrote:

<quoted text>
yes, i believe Columbo came out with this last week.
How come it wasn't in the log?

Considering the military watches your expenses and makes sure everything is paid on time. Your CO makes sure of this. I would doubt she had large credit card bills...... And where did this diversion come from ? Not one word has ever been said about her being in debt. Nearing the 5 year anniversary I think we should all try and be as respectful to the person we are here for - Maura Murray.

Yes, EO, I am saying that a witness - identified as a witness by LE, and claiming to be a witness widely in the media - said that he saw Maura at the car. As you surely know, I have often questioned SBDs account and have wondered loudly about the reasons for his "vagueness" and his reasons for lying about being "former LE."
Nonetheless, something which is in the official police record, however dubious that is in itself, is EVIDENCE. There is no corresponding EVIDENCE that she did not leave Amherst - ie, a witness stating on the record "I saw her in Amherst after people claimed she left."

AND please clarify - are you saying that SBD knowingly committed perjury in his statement to LE?
Or are you "merely" stating that his account was "vague and wavering" enough that it should not have been included in the official report?

If we are seriously going to get involved in a debate about what is and isn't "evidence" - I don't think that I want to go there - it's going to be pretty damned difficult to say that physical evidence isn't physical evidence or that an official statement to police is not "good enough" to go in the police report. I was unaware that witness accounts which can be seen by some as "vague and wavering" should be omitted from the official police report and disregarded as evidence. Silly me.