Where is MAURA MURRAY

Dawn wrote:

I am as well - coming from a blue state - we are very liberal in WA. Straight - pro life and out spoken :-) As you mentioned before sure glad I wasn't in Florida in 2000 voting for Nader.

Well, you're very liberal over there on THAT side of the mountains. Over on the high and dry side, they're not quite so much with the blueness.

Snowy White wrote:

<quoted text>
unless a zebra can change its stripes...i somehow doubt a DEpendent, full-time college student, even if highly motivated to start a life anew, could transition to INdependence...both emotionally and financially on a whim.
this is buoyed by her academic achievement, which seemed to be a consistent measure of her high standards, and very likely, her self-worth. giving that up would be a deficit, and not easily duplicated elsewhere.
at the very least, running away would be a helluva inconvenience and immediate lifestyle nosedive away from a comfort zone.
no, i believe there was foul play perpetrated against Maura.

The problem is we don't know anything about the nature or degree of her motivation.

I can hear the dissenters already, but I'll forge ahead anyway! Maura was on the deans list, attending difficult clinicals and working. Seems to me she was motivated and directed!

Anne wrote:

I can hear the dissenters already, but I'll forge ahead anyway! Maura was on the deans list, attending difficult clinicals and working. Seems to me she was motivated and directed!

So, if her disappearance was at all voluntary, it had to be something pretty big for her leave it all behind.

Why would Maura have assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit if she had merely loaned the car to someone else who hit Vasi and left the scene? Why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?

There is nothing that says that Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. This is a tiring, draning accusation. For those new here, this is a speculation.

hi Anne and all ,Maura maybe sent emails to her teachers and jobs that saying that someone had died in her family.Whether she made it to N.H. I don't know ,but based on what has been said by the Murrays and the press she did not want anyone to know about her time away from school.Whether she was leaving umass amherst by choice and for good i dont' know.Who has seen the emails or the videos from Amherst.Amherst has lots to tell.Maura only maybe made a trip without telling anybody .take care philip

Anne wrote:

There is nothing that says that Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. This is a tiring, draning accusation. For those new here, this is a speculation.

Of course there is nothing that SAYS Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. You're distorting the question. Just read the question as it is written. It does NOT say Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit as if it were an established fact. And that's very obvious.

Anne wrote:

There is nothing that says that Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. This is a tiring, draning accusation. For those new here, this is a speculation.

Beagle wrote: Why would Maura have assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit if she had merely loaned the car to someone else who hit Vasi and left the scene? Why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?

Anne wrote in response: There is nothing that says that Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. This is a tiring, draning accusation. For those new here, this is a speculation.

Beagle re-phrases question: IF someone other than Maura had hit Vasi and left the scene, why would Maura have assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit if she had merely LOANED the car to someone else who hit Vasi and left the scene? Why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?

You can always go way out on a limb and actually think about the above question because believe it or not it's a damn important question. Is Maura worth your taking the time to think about something beside that tiny spot on Rt. 112 in Haverhill? Is it really going to ruin anyone's life to give honest consideration to alternate theories?

You're bashing an honest theory, Anne, and you know it. If you're bashing an honest theory, you're cheating Maura and her family.

If an obsessive preoccupation with a short section of road in Haverhill, New Hampshire and with a few local residents FOR FIVE YEARS is not a sign of mental fatigue or illness, I don't know what is.

The Vasi hit is a very reasonable theory or scenario. It is OBVIOUSLY speculative. It has to be at this point. No speculation, no progress. It's that simple.

But why all the nasty resistance to a Vasi hit?

Bashing a reasonable theory instead of honestly considering it is nothing less than an attempt to cheat Maura's family and loved ones out of a possible solution.

Anne wrote:

There is nothing that says that Maura assumed responsibility for a Vasi hit. This is a tiring, draning accusation. For those new here, this is a speculation.

Absolutely, Anne. Speculation. Conjecture.

I may have used that unfortunate phrasing..."assumed responsibility" as a catchall for Maura's POSSIBLY helping someone, or being helped by someone...as in acting to resolve a problem alone or with another...WHO KNOWS?!? if we knew, we wouldn't be here.

Nitpicking is a favorite sport. And yet wild and crazy theories are put forth without severe scrutiny every day. Arrgghh!

Beagle, Let me be very clear here, I am quite interested in what happened in Amherst. To even suggest otherwise is a diversion you only are perpetuating with many posters here.

IF someone other than Maura stole her car and hit Vasi, I see no bearing on Maura. IMHO I do not believe this happened. Your question, "why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?" is simply more unsubstantiated diversion.

I have always been honest and direct here, Beagle, and Mauras family and friends clearly know that.

Mason, I don't understand your expressed anger toward Fred Murray. How exactly has he disappointed you?

If there were a reasonable chance that Maura would be discovered in a large field and you were looking for her in that field, would you say that because you believe she must be on the right half of the field that you will therefore NEVER look for her on the left side of the field?

If after five years of looking for Maura on the right side, why would the many looking for Maura on only the right side of the field, with no results at all, not help out a little by looking for her on the other side of the field, even if they felt she probably wasn't there? And why would they try to intimidate and bully anyone who advocates looking on both sides of the field?

If they are sitting on their rear ends, bashing anyone who looks on the left side of the field, then just how interested can they be in finding Maura?

Because that's what this thread reflects: an obsessive need to look for Maura in only one small place, over and over and over, with no results after five years. There are only two reasons for this. Collective mental illness or a fear that Maura's fate will be dicovered elsewhere.

Beagle wrote:

If there were a reasonable chance that Maura would be discovered in a large field and you were looking for her in that field, would you say that because you believe she must be on the right half of the field that you will therefore NEVER look for her on the left side of the field?
If after five years of looking for Maura on the right side, why would the many looking for Maura on only the right side of the field, with no results at all, not help out a little by looking for her on the other side of the field, even if they felt she probably wasn't there? And why would they try to intimidate and bully anyone who advocates looking on both sides of the field?
If they are sitting on their rear ends, bashing anyone who looks on the left side of the field, then just how interested can they be in finding Maura?
Because that's what this thread reflects: an obsessive need to look for Maura in only one small place, over and over and over, with no results after five years. There are only two reasons for this. Collective mental illness or a fear that Maura's fate will be dicovered elsewhere.

Beagle, I will continue as I have for all these years looking on both sides of the field. No results after 5 years simply means no results, not the conspiracy you project.

Anne wrote:

Beagle, Let me be very clear here, I am quite interested in what happened in Amherst. To even suggest otherwise is a diversion you only are perpetuating with many posters here.
IF someone other than Maura stole her car and hit Vasi, I see no bearing on Maura. IMHO I do not believe this happened. Your question, "why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?" is simply more unsubstantiated diversion.
I have always been honest and direct here, Beagle, and Mauras family and friends clearly know that.

You continue to distort, deliberately, I believe, every word I write.

I never wrote that someone STOLE Maura's car. Did I? No, I did not.

Did I say that Maura hit Vasi? Did I? No, I did not.

You write, "Your question,'why wouldn't Maura have reported that person?' is simply more unsubstantiated diversion."

Unsubstantiated diversion? It's a simple QUESTION.

This is a perfect example of twisting for your own ends the words I have written. If you don't think a Vasi hit is relevant, fine, disagree. If you really wanted to demonstrate a single strand of commitment to finding Maura, you might even try disagreeing logically.

Instead you say that a simple and potentially very revealing question is, as usual, a diversion. How can a very relevant question be an unsubstantiate diversion? This is the most absurd thing I have ever heard!

You know damn well what I'm getting at and you don't want it to gain any traction. Is this question something that will harm you? It's a simple question.

IF the Saturn, not stolen, but driven by someone other than Maura, hit Vasi, and if the driver told Maura about having hit Vasi, then why might Maura feel compelled to keep her mouth shut? What is the one scenario that is unlike all others?(If you want to try making it look like I'm talking about Fred, forget about it. I'm not.)

If you call thinking about this question a diversion, then that's shameless bashing and you are the one causing a diversion here.

Anne, go really wild. Really, if you're as committed to finding Maura as you say, then what is there to lose by an honest consideration of this quesion? Do you think you will get polio if you think about the question? Does the question have cooties? Think about this question. I promise the question will not hurt you. It is not a trick question and it is not a diversion. Yes, it eventually may lead nowhere, but that won't be any different from obsessing over a curve on Rt. 112 in Haverhill for five years with no results.

Are you committed to finding Maura? Or not? Because right now, it looks like you're committing to making sure she is not found. And I really would like to believe otherwise.

Snowy White wrote:

Mason, I don't understand your expressed anger toward Fred Murray. How exactly has he disappointed you?

Neither do I. I can only hope it is written for some back door helpful reason, because if it's not, what Mason is saying about Fred is beyond wrong.

Anne wrote:

<quoted text>Beagle, I will continue as I have for all these years looking on both sides of the field. No results after 5 years simply means no results, not the conspiracy you project.

Looking on both sides of the field means not calling a scenario based on a Vasi hit a diversion. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you think a Vasi theory doesn't hold water, then say why. But bashing it as a diversion is a stinging injustice to Maura and those who were close to her.

And while we're being frank with one another here, please tell me why you think I would create such a diversion. If you think I'm creating a diversion, then you must have some opinion why. What is it? Do you dare come out and state it? Or are you going to continue to make baseless accusations like so many others?

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>Neither do I. I can only hope it is written for some back door helpful reason, because if it's not, what Mason is saying about Fred is beyond wrong.

Thank you.

I will not go 'tit for tat' with you because you know damn well what I mean. I'll give it to you . you sure know how to twist things..goodnight, I sleep well, I don't know how you do.