Where is MAURA MURRAY

Nighty Night,

Fred

Mr. Leatherman, are you still awake? I'd like an answer to the question I posed earlier:

"Mr. Leatherman, I'd like to ask you a question for you to ponder....if your client was Fred Murray, how would you advise him, as an (inactive)attorney to respond to such a request in a public forum?"

LG..I am still awake...it is only 10:45P here in
Massachusetts...waiting for an answer from the
attorney, as to your question.
What would he advise a client who had a request
from Joe Blow as to his employment history..? hmmm..
Piffle!

"One more thing, you need to get with Ben Franklyn and discuss automated responses by email - Helena is having difficulty with her computer and she has her email set up to generate an automated response."

I'll just mention a bit more detail about a typical email setup situation - at least for the sake of clarity.

When an email is addressed to a specific user - it is addressed to be sent to a specific computer and routed to a specific user of that computer.

**However, this is a computer most users will actually never see or be walk up to or touch. For most users, this computer is stored in a secure place by an Internet Service Provider (ISP).**

Most recipients will use a program (such as Eudora or Outlook Express or Mutt) that is installed on their home computer - which will enable them retrieve their emails from the ISP's computer. This can be done from any computer from anyplace in the world that has a connection to the Internet.

In this particular situation - I strongly believe that the ISP's computer has been configured to send out an automated response to incoming emails addressed to a specific user.

One program that provides automated responses at the ISP server level is called "Vacation" and was made for that specific purpose.

There are other methods of sending automated responses to emails that include the use of programs such as Procmail, Sendmail, Postfix, Exim and others.

Although most email end users MYSELF INCLUDED! are not knowledgeable enough to configure these programs to do produce an automated response - nor would they usually have access to the server to do so. However - I anticipate that most ISP staff could, upon a customer's request, use any of these programs to send an automated response to all emails addressed to the customer.

I do not have enough knowledge to say if the ISP in question is still able to store auto responded to emails, nor can I speak to the possibility that these emails can or cannot be delivered to any computer in the world with an email client installed such as (Eudora, Outlook, Mutt or other programs) designed to retrieve email messages from ISP computers.

As to Mason being able to ultimately contact his intended recipient I gather there are individuals who are able to reach her, at least by what has been stated on this page.

Lady Gray wrote:

Mr. Leatherman, are you still awake? I'd like an answer to the question I posed earlier:
"Mr. Leatherman, I'd like to ask you a question for you to ponder....if your client was Fred Murray, how would you advise him, as an (inactive)attorney to respond to such a request in a public forum?"

If his work records established he was at work, I'd say turn them over.

Take a look at my letter and you'll see that I pointed out that he might want to consult with an attorney, which is the responsible thing for me to have done.

If that was an automated response to my email from Helena, how come my next message a few minutes later did not generate an automated response and why doesn't the automated response have a phone number?

Sorry, I'm not buying what you're selling.

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
If his work records established he was at work, I'd say turn them over.
Take a look at my letter and you'll see that I pointed out that he might want to consult with an attorney, which is the responsible thing for me to have done.
If that was an automated response to my email from Helena, how come my next message a few minutes later did not generate an automated response and why doesn't the automated response have a phone number?
Sorry, I'm not buying what you're selling.

1. Because an "away" message only responds the first time it gets a message from an email address. Am I seriously the only person on the planet who has ever emailed someone with an AOL account and an away message? Or someone at work? Seriously. This is NORMAL. This is NOT a conspiracy.
2. Think about that for a second. You set an away message. You have NO IDEA who (or what) might email you. Would you give out your personal phone number?
It's different at work; say a secretary goes away for a week. Or someone goes to a conference. "If you need immediate assistance please call Bob at 555-xxxx ext. 123" or whatever. That's fine. It's a business. Business give out their phone numbers.
When I go on vacation (or my computer breaks down) I do NOT want every bot selling viagra to have my phone number. Also, Helena's email address has been posted in some pretty public places, in situations that may deal with potentially unsavory people. Whereas she might not mind giving her phone number to *you* Mason, she would probably object strongly to giving it out to, say, a theoretical serial killer or psycho with a vendetta.
Does that make sense?
I assure you this is not a matter of Helena giving you the cold shoulder. It is exactly what it seems to be. A computer that is malfunctioning.

Mason wrote:

Next Question:
Are Mr Murray's actions consistent with those of an innocent father stricken with grief at the disappearance of his daughter?
You be the judge.

Is there a template for grief/sorrow/loss/anger by which to measure Fred Murray's initial responses and responses over time...especially when no personal contact with FM has been made?
Are these impressions made by hearsay?
Who is your source of information?

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
If that was an automated response to my email from Helena, how come my next message a few minutes later did not generate an automated response and why doesn't the automated response have a phone number?
Sorry, I'm not buying what you're selling.

I use Outlook, I can set up an away message. It only responds once to each sender. I do not put my phone number or any personal information in my away message because I don't know who will be emailing me. Just about any email provider has this feature as well. I also use Yahoo's "vacation response.

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
I did not say that and you know it.

I know absolutely no such thing. You may not have "said it" - but by posting what many of us have mentioned as "theories" - which we have derived from our own thoughtful consideration and NOT, as you suggest, thorugh some nefarious collusion with the Murray family - as "red herrings," you dismiss our thoughts, expertise such as it is, and desired to find Maura. You have, however, enthusisatically supported some completely alien "theories" as in the "Maura was abducted so that her eggs could be stolen" for which there is far less evidence than any theory that you have decried as a "red herring."
I find the idea that Fred owes you, personally, a detailed explanation of anything ludicrous and invasive. It would be nice if he felt that he could share information with you, but from what I've seen of your opinion of posters here, I can easily understand why someone would not find you trustworthy. Furthermore - assuming, and I doubt it' even true - THAT Fred is "Defamation," is it really so far-fetched for that person to ask for your credentials? No, I would not give my SSN, but surely you can provide your supposedly professional credentials. Have you shared those here? As in "I am a member of this professional society" - without ANY personal information? I don't recall.

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
Sophie,
Go back and read the introduction to my post entitled 18 Red Herrings. I said,
"I have identified what I believe are 18 red herrings that must be disregarded to solve this case. Some of them may have been planted to sow confusion and it's for each of you to decide if that's true and if the person's motive was to conceal his guilt."
What's your next objection?

Er, perhaps it's being accused with NO EVIDENCE of having willfully, knowingly provided "red herrings" to intentionally mislead the search. As this is an ongoing LE investigation, this is an accusation of interfering in an ongoing investigation - a crime. Yeah, that's an "objection."

my experiences with work email supports everything Firecat just explained.

OK, I'll accept the explanations about automatic messages. I've never used them. I apologize.

Is anyone willing to PM me on the other site and give me Fred Murray's telephone number, or Helena's. I'd prefer to speak directly to him.

bacon wrote:

my experiences with work email supports everything Firecat just explained.

Indeed. Fred, however, has left the scene. We won't hear Fred say "oh, sorry, I misunderstood, my mistake."
I expect tht he'll go missing until he figures that some of us have forgotten about it, then come back with more diatribe.
I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

I am not wrong about the fact that there won't be an apology, though.

sophie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
I know absolutely no such thing. You may not have "said it" - but by posting what many of us have mentioned as "theories" - which we have derived from our own thoughtful consideration and NOT, as you suggest, thorugh some nefarious collusion with the Murray family - as "red herrings," you dismiss our thoughts, expertise such as it is, and desired to find Maura. You have, however, enthusisatically supported some completely alien "theories" as in the "Maura was abducted so that her eggs could be stolen" for which there is far less evidence than any theory that you have decried as a "red herring."
I find the idea that Fred owes you, personally, a detailed explanation of anything ludicrous and invasive. It would be nice if he felt that he could share information with you, but from what I've seen of your opinion of posters here, I can easily understand why someone would not find you trustworthy. Furthermore - assuming, and I doubt it' even true - THAT Fred is "Defamation," is it really so far-fetched for that person to ask for your credentials? No, I would not give my SSN, but surely you can provide your supposedly professional credentials. Have you shared those here? As in "I am a member of this professional society" - without ANY personal information? I don't recall.

Yes, I have provided personal and professional information. I've been thoroughly checked out. There is no reason for anyone to doubt who I am.

can anyone provide contact information to Frederick D. Leatherman, Jr. so that he may be able to reach Fred Murray directly?
it would be the most efficient process, rather than through circumventing the process via Helene or any one of you anonymous posters.
indicators are that several of you have previously had directly contact with and/or a family members.

last sentence:

indicators are that several of you have previously had direct contact with Fred Murray as family members and/or as active participants in attempting to locate his missing daughter.

Sophie,

Apparently, you still think I'm Beagle. I'm not. The egg harvesting theory is his theory, not mine.

I've never said that I agree with it.

I'm not going to respond to anymore off topic swift boating efforts. I don't respect liars and dissemblers.

Stay on topic, or engage in conversations with yourselves.

Have a nice day.

Mason wrote:

OK, I'll accept the explanations about automatic messages. I've never used them. I apologize.
Is anyone willing to PM me on the other site and give me Fred Murray's telephone number, or Helena's. I'd prefer to speak directly to him.

I will not do so without Helena's and/or Fred's permission, no.

Snowy
very well said.......... thank you!

Peri-
You might want to catch a AMW or even law and order. You will see in the US of A. Every family member is questioned - you choose to use the word interrogated. That is par for the course and would be NEGLIGENT if they didn't. You might want to refresh yourself with the percentage of missing person cases that involve family.......... over 75%. So.. that is standard procedure regardless of an alibi.

Mason is simply trying to get a FACT for us. We can then move forward. A nationally known attorney could be the best chance this case ever got. You ever think about that ? Sorry, I get lost in your long mutliple posts - I barely get through one let alone 3 you type.

you can't throw stones at this theory - I think it is horrible and sad - but LE would have looked into it - that is a fact so we aren't looking at something that LE hasn't looked it. Just like stones aren't thrown at your visions. I came to this site right when you posting visions - that would be hurtful too. Not knowing your sincerity - you don't know - we are just posters and we didn't know maura.... when in question go back to one of Ben F or WTF posts - they are very sound and non judgemental......