Where is MAURA MURRAY

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
John,
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.
Fred

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
John,
The biggest problem with the Vasi theory is how did the Saturn get from Amherst to the accident site on the 112? The headlights were askew and could not have adequately illuminated the road, assuming that it was driveable. Most of the trip would have been after dark.
You need to look at the photos.
Fred

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
John,
The other site was started for the purpose you've identified and you're way behind the curve here.
Check the other site that's organized by theory and then you'll be up to speed. All of the information available to us is there and it's searchable.
Fred
Fred

Dawn wrote:

Good luck John - Snowy and I have been trying to do that... I know some of the items on the chart - says only one airbag - there were two and of course - the londonderry incoming call.. I work for the phone company so that one really bugs because i know its not accurate.. Also the search warrant/affidavit .. whatever its titled - I showed that to the legal dept at work and they said it is NOT a legal document - the standard boiler plate stuff isn't there and the legal requirements on how the date is entered in the body of doc so it can't be altered.. they said plain and simple - it was made up. I do not put ill will to anyone who posted these - i think they did with good intentions. the affidavit and call came from the court house - I think they got tired ( court house) of people snooping around and wanted to keep people quiet.

Benjamin Franklyne wrote:

<quoted text>
I doubt that's Beagle - Beagle ain't playing goalie like our friend from Tampa - defending his favored approach to the case.
NABBY! NABBY! NABBY! NABBY!
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

elsewherebriefly wrote:

<quoted text>
Dawn,
There are (2) types of Law in the United States, there's traditional and modern. Maybe John, Lady Gray, or Mason can explain this.
The state of NH is very different compared to other states and still maintain the old English (traditional)laws which are no longer existent in the majority of the United States. The state of NH is slow to set new precedents and the majority of traditional laws still remain on the books.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Murray set precedent with the Freedom of Information Act/Right to Know Law in NH and it has since been revised.
Although I may be totally clueless or in error I am not ready to out the affidavit as a bogus document until a NH attorney claims this to be the case.
In the meantime I am contented with the belief that is a legally binding document.

Dawn wrote:

I would like to hear from Lady Gray, John or Mason - to be held up in the court of law - all documents in all states need the date. I just IM'd legal. We do contracts in all 50 states on the QCC side of the business - the language is casual it would be even more wordy.
What laws were changed ? Do we have info on that ? Who else lives close and went to the court house
looking4 a moose? shack?
What else can one get from the court house? Who has tried? I am seriously considering calling dept of records and see what I can get copies of.

Eurobserver wrote:

<quoted text>
Hello Dawn,
Mr M-e and his wife lived/live in the house next to the junction of Rte 112 and Bradley Hill Road, in between the homes of Mr & Mrs W-n and the SBD but on the opposite side of Rte 112.
For privacy reasons I hesitate to mention the full name of the witness here, but I have seen it mentioned several times on this forum and the ex-MMM board.
What never ceases to surprise me is the lack of interest shown here regarding the witness statement of Mr M-e, which apparently makes it quite clear that the Saturn was deliberately reversed into the snowbank on Rte 112 where it was later found abandoned.
No real accident, but a faked, staged one,according to the witness statement of Mr M-e.
It would then seem likely that the frontal damage to the Saturn must surely have been caused by a previous impact, considering that the Saturn was apparently reversed into the snowbank.

Beagle wrote:

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?

John wrote:

<quoted text>
Do I interpret correctly that you suggest she meant to take the 302 direct route to Bartlett and simply made a wrong turn?

John wrote:

<quoted text>
Indeed, interesting thought. I must confess, I have yet to be able to figure out who LE is

Judged:

1

1

John wrote:

<quoted text>
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.

John wrote:

<quoted text>
Indeed, interesting thought. I must confess, I have yet to be able to figure out who LE is

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
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?

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
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?

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>No, not NH. Around 150 miles south.

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
John--
1. LE = "Law Enforcement."
2. Why have you posted from New York on occasion recently? Since you live near (though not in! lol) Arlandria.

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
......and you guys accuse ME of being a nerd. John sounds like he can probably quote entire PAGES of Sir William Blackstone!