Where is MAURA MURRAY

Judged:

1

1

1

Lower Slower Delaware wrote:

<quoted text>At least I offered one up, if you think I'm going to grovel and kiss your ass, I will both be dead and buried before that ever happens. I don't grovel or kiss anyones ass.
I checked and verified my information with 3 different sources,(at the time whom I had absolutely no reason to doubt and whom I did in fact have contact with outside of these forums), that's 2 more than most of the bullshit (including yours) I see posted as "fact" in any of these forums.

peripeteia wrote:

<quoted text>
Never said they lied, not once. Obviously the Westman's have a difference of opinion of what they perceived, and there were three other people in the house as well as Tim and Faith.
They have not told untruths that I am aware of,
just eyesight and perceptional differences between two people.
Stating also the difference of what was reported to 911, and what the police report state, Faith say the car came to rest in the Westbound lane, Smith's report does not indicate this. Did the 911 operator make a mistake, or did Faith, re: Westbound vs. Eastbound lane where the car was found. Faith stated to 911 that the car was in the Westbound ditch.
So either the 911 operator made a mistake in notation, perception, or Faith made a mistake about the car being in the Westbound lane.
If the car was in the Westbound lane ditch and backed up to the Eastbound side, Smith's report is worthless as evidence.
Marotte stated the car backed up.
So just trying to figure if 911 operator made a mistake, Faith made a mistake, or if Smith witheld evidence and gave a faulty report (one for the public).
Can't make any sense out of the information. I do not believe that the Westman's lied. If I said something to this effect, never meant to, just to point out the confusion which is MOST relivant.
If the car was in the Westbound lane, when was it moved, obviously after Faith called. Smith report does not indicate the car ever being in the Westbound lane.

Judged:

2

1

peripeteia wrote:

<quoted text>
His lies make him the author of his own misfortune, let it be a byword to others who try to help to keep their stories straight. No one slandered him, he slandered himself. He refused to set matters straight with Healy who visited him in Florida, his chance to vindicate himself.
A good smaritan does not lie.
She was drunk, she wasn't drunk
he got off the bus
he did not get off the bus
he checked out the car for damage
he was no more than 15 feet near to the girl
we went straight home
witness says he stayed on his bus a long time
he called 911 at 1943
he was not in at 1943 when Haverhill called back
to confirm information
airbags deployed in face and could only see her from lips up
he got a real good look at her
other witness state man smoking a cigarette
he was a former police office, not true
any discerning person including a child would have trouble with his varying statements
police refuse to comment on his statements, therefore the problem of his veracity is pepetuated by the police. Also police are witholding the information from the 911 to Hanover.
Suzanne: If Maura was your daughter, how well would his statements sit with you, not too well I would venture. I'd have had his butt in court in a heart beat.
He is lucky not to be charged with obstruction of justice, it is a criminal offense to lie in an investigation.
Private investigators state that he has not been truthful. It is unlikely that he harmed Maura but as far as a reliable witnesses, he is not.
His stories can not all be put off to BAD reporting, which there is no lack of..

Judged:

1

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>She didn't take enough nutritional supplements? Or took too many? As advised by her physical "therapist?"

The Web Whisperer wrote:

Oh Mr Beagle you are so wrong

Judged:

3

3

2

peripeteia wrote:

<quoted text>
His lies make him the author of his own misfortune, let it be a byword to others who try to help to keep their stories straight. No one slandered him, he slandered himself. He refused to set matters straight with Healy who visited him in Florida, his chance to vindicate himself.
A good smaritan does not lie.
She was drunk, she wasn't drunk
he got off the bus
he did not get off the bus
he checked out the car for damage
he was no more than 15 feet near to the girl
we went straight home
witness says he stayed on his bus a long time
he called 911 at 1943
he was not in at 1943 when Haverhill called back
to confirm information
airbags deployed in face and could only see her from lips up
he got a real good look at her
other witness state man smoking a cigarette
he was a former police office, not true
any discerning person including a child would have trouble with his varying statements
police refuse to comment on his statements, therefore the problem of his veracity is pepetuated by the police. Also police are witholding the information from the 911 to Hanover.
Suzanne: If Maura was your daughter, how well would his statements sit with you, not too well I would venture. I'd have had his butt in court in a heart beat.
He is lucky not to be charged with obstruction of justice, it is a criminal offense to lie in an investigation.
Private investigators state that he has not been truthful. It is unlikely that he harmed Maura but as far as a reliable witnesses, he is not.
His stories can not all be put off to BAD reporting, which there is no lack of..

Judged:

2

1

1

peripeteia wrote:

<quoted text>
Suck with the information available, yupe will not let it go, and likely wrote the same words on all the forums about Maura. It is what it is.
Just don't read what I say, because you can already guess what it is, at least I'm not changing my story, or picking information from out in left field. It is what it is....

Judged:

2

2

White Wash wrote:

And you know Atwood changed these how?
I think if you actually go back and look carefully
you will MANY OF THIS INFORMATION NOT QUOTED IN THE ARTICLES!
Atwood stopped,called 911,and helped searched,spent how much time and effort w/the family?
Your words below clear up why people just drive on by..........
<quoted text>

White Wash wrote:

Odd the Westmans didn't mention the other 3 people when I interviewed them this is the first
I've hear of others at the Westmans where did you
get this information?
<quoted text>

Judged:

1

1

1

sophie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
And I repeat, this forum is about Maura Murray - heard of her?-so take your sorry ass back where it beloings, little tail between your legs and all.
You clearly are demanding that I post, right here in Topix, my real, full name, my home address, my home phone number, You are a psycho and a stalker.
I will tell you this much - I am not and have never been married, I have not ever lived in or near Grafton County, I have NO - repeat NO - relatives in Grafton County, and my siblings reside in Maine, and always have.
You are still a liar and a coward.
Frankly, I'd appreciate some others here telling this jackass to piss off.

Lower Slower Delaware wrote:

Just an observation the diehard members continue to persue this which is fine. You are so sure each time you throw names out and drag the people through the mud that you believe to be Maura's assailant. Let's review the list of suspects, as I recall since I began following this forum: the junkyard owner, the person in the A frame, the bus driver, Cpl McKay, Gregory W. Floyd, both of them together, Floyd junior.....and the list goes on.
With each name came a new fevor to crucify this person whether in a court of law or an Internet Kangaroo Court setting that you have created in here. When you find you have no concrete evidence to substantiate these wild claims you move on to your next suspect.