Much appreciate the info and thoughtful response.<quoted text>
The PIs believe there were two accidents that night. They believe the first one occurred within 1 to 3 miles of the second one. I used to believe in this previous accident theory until Bill, whose moniker is WTF, convinced me that all of the damage sustained by the Saturn occurred at the accident site where the Saturn was discovered. The issue of a possible previous accident arose because there is a prominent dent in the hood of the Saturn on the driver's side that appears to have been caused by an impact with an overhanging object, possibly a tow hitch.
Depending on the various theories one might conjure up to explain the circumstances of two accidents, one might theorize that Maura intended to take Rte 302, which is the recommended route to take to Bartlett, but she may have turned off on Rte 112 in an effort to elude someone pursuing her after that previous accident.
For this theory to be viable, one must suppose that Maura had managed to separate herself from a pursuing vehicle far enough to have turned off on the 112 without being seen by the person or persons in the pursuing vehicle. It continues on the 302 until the driver realizes that the Saturn turned off. The driver backtracks and turns down the 112 and arrives at the scene of the accident just after the SBD leaves the scene and the rest as some like to say is history.
This theory and other permutations and combinations of it are posted on the other site along with pictures of the damaged Saturn.
The PIs also consulted an accident reconstruction expert who has concluded that the Saturn could not have sustained all of the visible damage at the crash site.
Go check out the other site and judge for yourself.
- Posted in the Franconia Forum
Comments (Page 697)
Yes, Fred, I understand your point and I will seek out the photos. Because, if I follow, the only way to work it out under my theory, given the damage to the car at 112 and OPR, is to then say that there were THREE accidents involving Maura in the Saturn and one more involving her in her dad's car.
Sweet. Much appreciated!
Thanks Dawn. I appreciate you and others taking the time to catch me up and point me to the right sources.
Ummmmm .... huh? Sorry, I am lost on this one? Are you saying there is more than one Beagle? Who is the friend from Tampa? Is that a hockey reference? Sorry, dude, I am not up to speed.
Sounds like you are talking about the distinction between common law (derived from English law, slowly evolved through precedents established courts who, in general, are bound by the legal interpretations of previous courts in the same jurisdiction) and codified statutory law (the legislature decrees the law). It may be the case that NH relies more on common law than statutory law. That certainly would be consistent with the relatively "leave the public alone/government should let the people be" political tradition of the state. When it comes to what constitutes a legally admissable affadavit from an evidentiary point of view, this could be relevant. However, larger picture, for a lawyer to dismiss an affadavit as bogus (as opposed to defective), it would have to be something that was obviously out of kilter. If a lawyer indeed advised of this to (I forget who posted that), then it may be the case. This could be true regardless of the state, because regardless of whether the state's evidence rules are more statutory or commmon law, bogus misses either by a wide margin. My question is what kind of lawyer made this call. Most trained in our professoin don't render off the cuff judgments outside of their practice area and jurisdiction. Lawyers don't tend to guess.
Hey Dawn, I did not quite follow the post after the first line. Apologies. As to the concept that all legal documents - from an evidentiary perspecive - would need a date, that is not universally true, but it would be in termss of an affadavit. But even with that defect (no date) it would not necessarily be bogus. That, under some circumstances, can be fixed by calling witnesses and offering other evidence to authenticate the document, depending on how important it is and how much the defect impacts its authenticity. But for an affadavit to be "bogus" and "not a legal document" (which is a pretty muddy concept), it would have to be pretty defective.
That's not fact, just my opinion based on my training. I am lawyer, but not a litigator, so another might have a better take than me.
Just a question: did not two of the neighbors who called the police say they heard a thump? One, upon looking out, saw the car being reversed. Does this not imply both a collision and then the car being moved. In other words, does the car being deliberately reversed into the snow bank necessarily imply no collision of any kind? Just asking.
Is it something as simple as Maura felt responsible because she might have lent (loaned, whatever Snowy! LOL) the car to someone who had no business driving it? Impaired, no license, no insurance, what have you? Wouldn't necessarily make Maura legally culpable, but morally responsible?
No, not NH. Around 150 miles south.
1. LE = "Law Enforcement."
2. Why have you posted from New York on occasion recently? Since you live near (though not in! lol) Arlandria.
......and you guys accuse ME of being a nerd. John sounds like he can probably quote entire PAGES of Sir William Blackstone!
Law enforcement. The cops, feds, prosecutors.
Is it possible that...
if the Saturn hit Vasi while being driven by someone other than Maura (and Maura was not in the car at the time)...
Is it possible Maura feared that if she identified the Saturn's driver to police that the actual driver would then simply turn around and tell the police that it was Maura who was driving the Saturn when Vasi was hit?
Maura definitely could, in a Vasi scenario, have permitted an unlicensed or impaired person to drive the Saturn and she may have felt terrible about it. And kept her mouth shut.
But if Maura had loaned the car to someone else and, after thinking it over, decided to tell LE, truthfully enough, that someone else was driving the Saturn, could that merely unlicensed/impaired driver have turned around and successfully have accused Maura of having driven the car when Vasi was hit?
If the Saturn hit Vasi and if Maura was not the driver, was Maura TRAPPED by the the actual driver's return accusation?
Was Maura legitimately concerned that the police would not believe her (Maura), but would believe the Saturn's real driver, that Maura was driving the car when Vasi was hit?
John did you read it here on the site? And what it was in regards to? This all goes back to a phone call issue that I don't want to go over again. I am the aka phone expert - here. i work for the phone company and wireless prior for 18 years. I do not see how they could say a call was placed to her from the sprint londonderry site - we first need to know who called her - what carrier - subpeona that carrier - see where the hand off etc etc.. I have written alot on this topic.......One thing I do alot about.
And maybe scared, confuse, conflicted and prone to poor decision making. Maybe all the more depending on her relationship with said person.
Okay. I am a little confused, but I will figure it out. Clearly you are talking about Amherst.
When I join from my office, I show as NY as our eastern region HQ and servers are in NY.
I am kind of a nerd. But I have my points.
|NH Residents Move On From Murray Case
|King bash here (Jul '08)
|Doing the Ri...
|Swiss Didier Cuche reacted with amusement rathe...
|Maura Murray is Missing 5 years
|New attempt to name road in honor of Corporal B...
|Judge gets stern after latest Floyd delay
|2 held in Haverhill death