Where is MAURA MURRAY

Beagle wrote:

There has been a surprisingly high level of interest in Maura Murray's disappearance by Amherst area people who are in the pro-life movement and in the nutritional supplement business.
How come?

This is an interesting question, Beagle, and you've asked it a couple of times in the past as I recall. Unfortunately, I can't begin to assess it and consider an answer, because I don't have any personal awareness of these people having such interest in Maura's disappearance -- is there anywhere I could go to read any articles where one/some of them have made remarks about Maura ... or are any of them posting here on Topix about her ... or do you know of any letters one/some of them have written about her case? Anything like that?

Mason wrote:

I have great respect for Ben, but I do not agree with him. This is not the time to tremble and back down. Let's embrace the future and do it right. Frederick Leatherman

Humility and trepidation look the same, but taste different.

When confronted with two courses of action I jot down on a piece of paper all the arguments in favor of each one, then on the opposite side I write the arguments against each one. Then by weighing the arguments pro and con and cancelling them out, one against the other, I take the course indicated by what remains.

The difficulty with some of the theories posted last night is that they have no basis in fact. There are too many "if"s.

There is no evidence that Fred Murray abused Maura sexually, physically, or emotionally.

There is no evidence that they argued about her crashing his car.(in fact, the evidence points to the opposite--that he REASSURED her that crashing his car was in the grand scheme of things not a big deal.)

There is no evidence that he intended to go back on his word of buying Maura a new car.

There is no evidence that I am aware of that Fred Murray chose to stop drinking, or that such a choice was related to any sort of acoholism or alcohol abuse.

There is no evidence that Maura was about to be thrown out of UMass, for reasons related or unrelated to her transportation issues.

There is no evidence that shows Fred was aware of Maura's plans to travel to New Hampshire.

There is no evidence that shows Fred was not at work on Monday and Tuesday, 2/9 and 2/10.

There is no evidence that he had anything at all to do with her disappearance.

In short, this logical fallacy is built upon a series of suppositions that have absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever. There is apparent logic in the theory, IF one is willing to suspend one's disbelief and accept all of these suppositions as fact, but it's an IF that is not supported by the reality of the facts.

To whomever was asking why Maura and her dad didn't purchase the car that weekend, I don't know the answer, but I can only presume from my own personal experiences car shopping that it was a matter of timing. Sometimes I've found the car that suits my needs before I've quite gotten all the other parts in alignment (having the title on my person if I'm trading in the old car, gotten that last paycheck I'll need to cover the entire cost, etc etc.) Also if her dad had more time one weekend than the other.....

That is to say that, while they were shopping for a new car that weekend, they might not have necessarily been prepared to actually FIND one and complete the transaction.

These are all just my suppositions based on what it was like for me buying used cars with my folks' help when I was Maura's age. I don't know the actual reason in Maura's case. Just theorizin'.

FireCat wrote:

The difficulty with some of the theories posted last night is that they have no basis in fact. There are too many "if"s.
There is no evidence that Fred Murray abused Maura sexually, physically, or emotionally.
There is no evidence that they argued about her crashing his car.(in fact, the evidence points to the opposite--that he REASSURED her that crashing his car was in the grand scheme of things not a big deal.)
There is no evidence that he intended to go back on his word of buying Maura a new car.
There is no evidence that I am aware of that Fred Murray chose to stop drinking, or that such a choice was related to any sort of acoholism or alcohol abuse.
There is no evidence that Maura was about to be thrown out of UMass, for reasons related or unrelated to her transportation issues.
There is no evidence that shows Fred was aware of Maura's plans to travel to New Hampshire.
There is no evidence that shows Fred was not at work on Monday and Tuesday, 2/9 and 2/10.
There is no evidence that he had anything at all to do with her disappearance.
In short, this logical fallacy is built upon a series of suppositions that have absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever. There is apparent logic in the theory, IF one is willing to suspend one's disbelief and accept all of these suppositions as fact, but it's an IF that is not supported by the reality of the facts.

There are only 2 people who know the truth.

One probably is dead.

The other has more credibility problems than all of the other witnesses put together.

Your absence of evidence argument sounds more like smugness.

Beagle wrote:

<quoted text>Mason?

I don't know how to answer your question.

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
There are only 2 people here who know the truth.
One probably is dead.
The other has more credibility problems than all of the other witnesses put together.
Your absence of evidence argument sounds more like smugness.

Again, these are all suppositions, not facts.

There is no evidence that points to Fred Murray having any credibility problem. None.

Then stop making them.

If you think you have such a great case
then by all means stop talking about it and
do something about it so THE REST OF US WHO
ARE HERE CAUSE OF MAURA CAN GET ON WITH IT!

You people spend 50% tellings us how your here for Maura and the other 50% telling how you are
right!

AND ZERO % about MAURA

Take this crap over to the PM on the other
site!

If it's not about MAURA don't post it how hard
is that?

sophie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
Dawn, my comment was directed to Ben Franklin because of his gracious and wise post, and because I had been needlessly and wrongly short-tempered with Ben Franklin. This should not be assumed to mean that I have ignored and am not pursuing appropriate legal action against someone for threatening me with physical violence in a public forum.
It does mean that I agree that vicious personal attacks will not ever help to find Maura.

Sorry FireCat how many newspaper articles did
Fred Murray say that LE never notified him?

Please review the Hanson Express Article where
Fred Murray swears "he received one phone call
from LE at 3:20" Tuesday.

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
Again, these are all suppositions, not facts.
There is no evidence that points to Fred Murray having any credibility problem. None.

I would like to add how many times
he said he did not say she was depressed?

Then all of sudden the LE are taking that statement out of context.

How can they take something out of context he didn't say?

So with this statement I am off to find quoted sources of said newspapers!

I'LL BE BACK!

FireCat wrote:

<quoted text>
Again, these are all suppositions, not facts.
There is no evidence that points to Fred Murray having any credibility problem. None.

"I don't know what you think is wrong?"
Like always we will work this out!

Anyone in the Mental Health field
what to give us any thoughts about this
statement by Fred Murray.

FireCat wrote:

The difficulty with some of the theories posted last night is that they have no basis in fact. There are too many "if"s.
There is no evidence that Fred Murray abused Maura sexually, physically, or emotionally.
There is no evidence that they argued about her crashing his car.(in fact, the evidence points to the opposite--that he REASSURED her that crashing his car was in the grand scheme of things not a big deal.)
There is no evidence that he intended to go back on his word of buying Maura a new car.
There is no evidence that I am aware of that Fred Murray chose to stop drinking, or that such a choice was related to any sort of acoholism or alcohol abuse.
There is no evidence that Maura was about to be thrown out of UMass, for reasons related or unrelated to her transportation issues.
There is no evidence that shows Fred was aware of Maura's plans to travel to New Hampshire.
There is no evidence that shows Fred was not at work on Monday and Tuesday, 2/9 and 2/10.
There is no evidence that he had anything at all to do with her disappearance.
In short, this logical fallacy is built upon a series of suppositions that have absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever. There is apparent logic in the theory, IF one is willing to suspend one's disbelief and accept all of these suppositions as fact, but it's an IF that is not supported by the reality of the facts.

Dawn,
The car was locked up inside until the search
warrant was obtained once given
to Lavoies.
They then are not longer the car's guard.
It becomes a legal issue with the LE/Owner.
The Car search was completed on Tuesday 11 AM.
Items logged w/LE.
Said items returned to the family who had
arrived Tues.
We know that Fred and Billy started the car
what Wed I think with a spare key?

Just wonder why someone would risk being arrested for treapassing and breaking and entering cause if
THOUGHT THAT CAR had been BROKEN IN Lavoies would have called LE and filed a report but wondering
WHAT SOMEONE COULD STEAL FROM AN ALL READY CLEANED
OUT CAR?

Dawn wrote:

WW ~
While the car was left at Lavoie's? Did they notice anyone trying to break in - get items out of the car? Maybe something that would be valuable to a person but not valuable in a monitary way? Did this take place?- feel like beagle asking like that.. lol

I'm not sure what FireCat is calling facts.
But this statement was given to NHSP when
it occured.

Which means this person would testify in a court of law it was made.

Also will be looking for statements that Fred
said he didn't know how the rag got there but
think he always just avoided answering this
question when asked by the media.

Mason wrote:

Here's the reference to the rag in the tailpipe.
"Rag in the tailpipe
Some have speculated the rag found stuffed in the tailpipe of the black 1996 Saturn Maura crashed in Haverhill indicated either a suicide try by carbon monoxide or a predator's ploy to make the car stall.
But Mike Lavoie of Lavoie's Auto Care Center in Haverhill, who towed the Saturn that night, said he later spoke with Maura's father, Fred Murray, about the rag. Lavoie said it couldn't have been used in that manner as part of a suicide attempt.
"Her father said he told her to put it in, that it would keep the car from smoking. It didn't run that well," Lavoie said."
Source: http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx...
Article by Nancy West, New Hampshire Sunday News.

looking4amoose wrote:

<quoted text>No wireless comes in good in that area at all. Te only thing I've found to work in that area is Onstar's technology.

Thank you for replying, I appreciate.

FireCat wrote:

To whomever was asking why Maura and her dad didn't purchase the car that weekend, I don't know the answer, but I can only presume from my own personal experiences car shopping that it was a matter of timing. Sometimes I've found the car that suits my needs before I've quite gotten all the other parts in alignment (having the title on my person if I'm trading in the old car, gotten that last paycheck I'll need to cover the entire cost, etc etc.) Also if her dad had more time one weekend than the other.....
That is to say that, while they were shopping for a new car that weekend, they might not have necessarily been prepared to actually FIND one and complete the transaction.
These are all just my suppositions based on what it was like for me buying used cars with my folks' help when I was Maura's age. I don't know the actual reason in Maura's case. Just theorizin'.

In my experience it can take days. Financing etc.

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
There are only 2 people who know the truth.
One probably is dead.
The other has more credibility problems than all of the other witnesses put together.
Your absence of evidence argument sounds more like smugness.

Mason,

I have to ask you this question. Hypothetically speaking, if FM had killed his daughter, why would he be so insistent that she did not commit suicide? LE was so convinced that she either ran away or committed suicide that all he would have to do is sit back and let them think she was depressed and upset and that would have been the end of story. Instead, from what I have read, he seems to defend Maura to no end that she would not have committed suicide or even ran away. He keeps saying that a perpetrator got to Maura and she was the victim of foul play. Now imo, that would be basically shooting yourself in the foot no? LE would have been happy to keep their theory on suicide or run away being that no evidence of foul play was found at the scene of the Saturn. How would you explain this?

Thoughts on the above. Maura took off in her car for parts and reasons unknown and has been missing ever since. Maybe Fred just wants her to be found, no matter what the reason is. He does keep going back, and he does seem to think that Maura will be found there. If he has more reason to think this than we currently know, I wish he would share that.
It would be good to hear more from Fred,~ maybe we could be of more assistance.

The stories about the bloodstained knife that Fred Murray collected from Claude Moulton's brother in Keene, NH who told him Claude killed Maura with the knife in the A-Frame and the story about the cadaver dogs going bonkers at the A-Frame during a search in October, 2006, should be dismissed as irrelevant and disregarded for the following reason.

On October 30, 2007, the New Hampshire Union Leader published an article written by reporter Nancy West in which she stated,

“Murray talks with people on the street, private investigators and psychics and goes to local bars to find any tidbit of information to lead him to a new search. Many have led nowhere -- like a stained knife someone turned over to Murray, and a search [that] volunteer private investigators conducted of a vacant A-frame.

‘That's been debunked,’ he said.”

Meanwhile, Mr. Murray's admission did not stop Columbo from posting two messages about the knife in General Discussion stressing how incompetent the police were for refusing to accept the knife from Fred, book it into evidence, and submit it to the crime lab for testing.

In case anyone still believes anything Columbo says or still believes that Claude Moulton and the A-Frame have any connection to Maura's disappearance, this information should forever put those beliefs to rest.

just me wrote:

Thoughts on the above. Maura took off in her car for parts and reasons unknown and has been missing ever since. Maybe Fred just wants her to be found, no matter what the reason is. He does keep going back, and he does seem to think that Maura will be found there. If he has more reason to think this than we currently know, I wish he would share that.
It would be good to hear more from Fred,~ maybe we could be of more assistance.

Tell me, when is the last time Fred went to the Weathered Barn area?