Found Deceased MA - Michael Doherty, 20, Franklin, 14 May 2017

Dionysia said:

<modsnip>

****

Once again, I'll remind folks that this is likely what it appears to be: a young man who was cold, disoriented, and possibly intoxicated/under the influence.

I doubt very much that foul play was involved. I suspect Michael was under the mistaken impression that he could find his way home.

See also: Zachary Marr

Click to expand...

Let's say it wasn't foul play per se though, what if something accidental occurred that partygoers panicked etc etc? It may be truly what it appears to be, but what if not.

LvsAMystry said:

Let's say it wasn't foul play per se though, what if something accidental occurred that partygoers panicked etc etc? It may be truly what it appears to be, but what if not.

Click to expand...

I think it's reasonable to "what if".

It's also reasonable to think a disoriented/hypothermic perhaps intoxicated man lost his way.

I still don't get why Michael -supposedly ...- went into the marsh. Even if he accidentally fell into it initially, why wouldn't he try to get out right there, right then?

"Doherty's friends told investigators that they believed he was going to cut through the woods to head home. It’s something his friends said he has done before.

The path he took, it’s like a discombobulated path,” friend Shawn Hanley told Boston 25 News on Tuesday. “It’s not a real path. But him and his brother, they said they took it one time and I guess he thought he could do it again.” (BBM)
http://www.fox25boston.com/news/body-of-missing-college-student-found-near-rt-495/524778566

Surely, the one time Michael and his brother took the path, it didn't involve any swimming, did it?

And once on the other side of the brook, he walks across the country club property and even makes it to a paved road (Maple Street - where the dogs tracked his scent to). Yet, he turns around, and once again, walks across the golf course, only to go back into the water.

From Dakota James to Zachary Marr to Shane Montgomery and -sadly- many more, in cases where a young man has been drinking heavily, gets separated from friends, goes missing only to be found in water days, weeks or even months later, I'm almost always -unless there is evidence suggesting otherwise- of the opinion that the person fell in accidentally. I don't subscribe to the Smiley Face Killer theory, and like my dad's one-time student, people do some really inexplicable things when they are drunk. And in Michael's case, while hoping against hope that he would turn up alive somewhere, after his shirt and shoes were found where they were, I suspected he would be found in the marsh (even though I must say I found it somewhat odd that none of these items were found in the water).

Or maybe he was just really, really drunk, and perhaps the only thing his friends aren't being quite truthful about is that "(h)e was coherent."
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2017/05/15/franklin-police-search-michael-doherty-duke/

Or maybe Michael really was OK, but things quickly turned deadly once hypothermia set in.

I also wonder if Michael was caught on security camera somewhere.

Curiosity7 said:

We all extend many thanks to those in LE and otherwise who searched for days for Michael.
One can only imagine how difficult it was and how incredibly disheartening to not have found him and saved him.

Does it make sense to you, though, that Michael didn't live? If he was so close to the house, one would assume he was the very next morning with daylight.
Why wasn't he able to find his way to the house, or a neighborhood or 495 in the morning, just a few hours after he left?
It doesn't make sense to me.

What would cause a young man we assume was in good health given that he was an athlete pass away only after a few hours?

I was lost in a heavily wooded reservation a few years ago with ravines and ponds for a few hours in the dead of night.
It was terrifying.
I couldn't see my hand in front of my face.
I could hear coyotes howling what seemed feet away.
I had managed to reach someone who knew the trails minutes before my cell died and I read a sign by the light of my cell to him before it went dead.
By the grace of God, he knew the trail and my location - he often hiked this reservation.
It took him 2 1/2 hours to reach me...I was in deep.
I didn't die.
It was cold...maybe 45...but cold to me since I had on only a tee-shirt and shorts.
I was shivering and terrified.
And I'm twice Michael's age.

This is why I can't wrap my head around what happened to Michael...so close...why wasn't he able to make it to safety once the sun came up?

Click to expand...

RBBM

One scenario I can think of if Michael did make it back to where he was found (200' from where the party took place) on his own and was alive for a period of time, is maybe he became ill from alcohol consumption and overexertion due to everything that happened after he left the party, he threw up, and suffocated on his own vomit ... ....

inmyhumbleopinion said:

RBBM

One scenario I can think of if Michael did make it back to where he was found (200' from where the party took place) on his own and was alive for a period of time, is maybe he became ill from alcohol consumption and overexertion due to everything that happened after he left the party, he threw up, and suffocated on his own vomit ... ....

Click to expand...

Or at this point total exhaustion and hypothermia set in. He may have well known where he was at this point, lets say, yet his body just gave out? idk.

I joined this forum because I have read through this thread about the sad events involving the passing of Michael Doherty and cannot find any substantiated reports about his shoes being "clean" as is repeatedly stated throughout this thread. Was it verbally reported because the only text backup (from reports) I can find is that in the case of one of his shoes it appears to be "not washed up". Could someone please give a link to where it is indicated his shoes (or shoe) was clean? Thank you.

The statement made by Shawn, in regard to the path, proves he knows the 2017 condition of the path and that he also knew Michael and his brother took that path (in a different condition) years prior. Now one has to wonder, did Shawn tell Michael just how discombobulated that path had become?

Edited to add more questions in regard to this case. Michael was under drinking age. It has been stated (in reports by someone 21 years old) that Michael was drinking, but "coherent". Does an at-age-to-drink 21 year-old have accountability for an underage drinker (Michael) in any aspect of their safety or in regard to serving said 20-year-old any alcoholic beverage?

Also, on this thread or from a link from this thread (a map with astrology), there is the Phyllis address being stated as number 63 Phyliis (as party location). Is this the correct address, # 63?

Thank you very much.

Has anyone explored the real possibility that Michael may have been given a ride. Hear me out. Michael's favorite television program (according to his Facebook it is the only one listed) is a survivalist-type reality program about families living in the swampy areas in the South. It is a reality show, on the History channel, life-documentary style, called "Swamp People". It's about how they endure and survive and live and thrive in the swamp areas of the South.

Could it be, perhaps, that Michael was either pranked or dared (more on this later), to "survive" crossing the swampy area from Maple Street area back to the party location? That Michael was driven there, on a dare or a prank, and had to make his way back to where he was found? Michael may have actually made it to his destination, unfortunately, not in time.

If the tracking dogs got to Maple Street and not inward, deeper into Bellingham, then maybe they should follow the path from Bellingham into Franklin and not the other way around.

Also, in regard to that "last ping". It was reported by one reporter that the Oak Street extension was where the last ping happened at 1:08AM--however that is just an assumption if you read that they said his last ping was in the "marsh area" at 1:08AM and they were searching, at that time, a 1-mile radius from that last "marsh area" ping. The reporter should not have even said that the entry point at Oak Street was the place of the last ping and also the entrance Michael took--because it is reported as it is "believed" to be the entrance point. Not factually so.

In regard to pranking. At Duke, there was a prank-type show they state is one of their favorites. Perhaps, if this was known, on top of the swamp survivalist show Michael liked, he was dared or was pranked to "do it" in Franklin's marshes and swamps?

Links: Michael's Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mike.doherty.18
Swamp People Facebook (from Michael's liked television): https://www.facebook.com/SwampPeople/

In regard to "pranks", links:

"Michael Doherty was someone who had the ability to light up any room merely with his presence. There were so many times over the year and a half I knew him, and especially in what would become the final weeks of our friendship, where I would be having a miserable day and walk into the common room of our fraternity, searching for something. Without fail, Mike was there, doing work, sleeping on the couch, or just hanging out watching that show Impractical Jokers that the guys in his class love."

https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2017/05/23/duke-students-pay-tribute-to-sophomore-from-franklin-who-went-to-a-party-and-never-came-home

Link to Impractical Jokers: http://www.trutv.com/shows/impractical-jokers/index.html

<mod snip>

Back to an earlier comment about underage drinking, clearly that was going on and there may be some future litigation / culpability laid at the feet of whoever served Michael at the party.

Interesting related news:

[h=1]Evans refutes serial killer theory for bodies found in waterways[/h]Boston police Commissioner William B. Evans said Tuesday that alcohol is often the main factor when bodies of young men turn up in city waterways -- not a serial killer.
&#8220;There&#8217;s no sinister plot out there,&#8221; Evans said during his monthly appearance on &#8220;Boston Public Radio&#8221; on WGBH. &#8220;There&#8217;s no one out there killing these kids.&#8221;

He spoke to WGBH days after the body of Michael Doherty, 20, was found in woods in Franklin near Interstate 495, bringing a tragic end to a nearly weeklong search for the Duke University student after he left a party in that town around 1:30 a.m. on May 14 and never returned home. Foul play is not suspected in his death.

Excerpts above from this link: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...d-waterways/51A35WMn4zHhOjcvJ3htXO/story.html

I agree with Evans.


What I'm saying is that Michael - who was NOT 21 - was served by someone who either was 21 or over OR by another minor.

If he was served by another minor, their parents would be liable. It remains to be seen who was hosting the party.


As for the marsh/swamp comment, yes, I was implying that in this geographic area, that it's not surprising that similar situations would come to a similar conclusion.

Dionysia said:

I agree with Evans.


What I'm saying is that Michael - who was NOT 21 - was served by someone who either was 21 or over OR by another minor.

If he was served by another minor, their parents would be liable. It remains to be seen who was hosting the party.


As for the marsh/swamp comment, yes, I was implying that in this geographic area, that it's not surprising that similar situations would come to a similar conclusion.

Click to expand...

Maybe you did not understand my question. I stated Michael was under age (20). I realize the parental connection, and did not ask about parents. My question was in regard to the statement made by someone who is 21 (they stated Michael was "coherent") and how responsible (legally) a 21-year-old would be in assessing the condition of an underage drinker--either serving or evaluating the underage drinker's "condition". I don't expect you to answer this--it is a question that should be investigated to the fullest extent of the law, imo.

As for the marsh/swamp/areas around here. I grew up here. It's unusual to have young kids drown/die in them after being missing for days. Maybe you're from this area too? If so, then I do not understand your statement. Perhaps you could clarify what you mean by "it's not surprising".

here's another weird thing about this case. He supposedly left party at 1:30am. and it starts getting light before 5am. its only 3.5hrs of complete darkness. not that long. Also, he was found 200yds from the party house. and there's houses all along the marsh... so if he had been getting desperate... wouldn't he have been screaming/yelling? I realize its the middle of the night but with such a densely populated neighborhood right there, it would be possible for someone to hear him. especially someone from the party. and furthermore, I-495 is only a couple hundred yards away and its raised up over the wetlands, he could easily hear trucks and perhaps see headlights. and looking the other way, wouldn't he see house lights? I'm just surprised, that unless he OD'd, that this was the sad result.

I am from the area, yes.

When a young person goes missing, the likely outcomes are:
- runaway
- abduction
- suicide
- accidental death

In this area, if we are considering suicide or accidental death, it seems more than likely a body of water or a swamp/marsh will be involved, especially if it's not the winter. If it were winter, I'd substitute exposure for drowning.

JMO. I feel it is possible for someone to navigate towards the swamp or open area of water in the dark because it may appear to have more lighting in that direction and one would think they are getting closer to a road. In both of these cases, Michael and Taylor.....I can see that as a possibility.

HRP said:

The statement made by Shawn, in regard to the path, proves he knows the 2017 condition of the path and that he also knew Michael and his brother took that path (in a different condition) years prior. Now one has to wonder, did Shawn tell Michael just how discombobulated that path had become?

Edited to add more questions in regard to this case. Michael was under drinking age. It has been stated (in reports by someone 21 years old) that Michael was drinking, but "coherent". Does an at-age-to-drink 21 year-old have accountability for an underage drinker (Michael) in any aspect of their safety or in regard to serving said 20-year-old any alcoholic beverage?

Also, on this thread or from a link from this thread (a map with astrology), there is the Phyllis address being stated as number 63 Phyliis (as party location). Is this the correct address, # 63?

Thank you very much.

Click to expand...

Respectfully bolded by me for focus

From the official Franklin Police Department website:

RMS Incident #: 2017000011898

Received Date/Time: 05/14/2017 01:35 PM

Address: 20 CATHERINE AV, FRANKLIN MA, 02038

Incident Type: Missing Person

Action Taken: REPORT

Responding Officer(s):
Detective Michael W. Kenney
Detective Richard H. Grover
Detective/Sergeant Lee A. Drake
Lieutenant James M. West
Patrol Offficer John F. Flynn
Patrolman Conor P. Ashe
Patrolman Daniel S. McGlynn
Patrolman David W. Mellor
Patrolman Jovan J. Bielski
Patrolman Kevin McEniry
Patrolman Michael J. Gilboy
Patrolman Steven S. Hamilton
Sergeant Christopher J. Spillane
Sergeant Eric J. Zimmerman
Sergeant William P. Brigham

Incident Dispatcher Remarks: Date & Time: 05/14/2017 22:13

911 CALLER REPORTS SON MISSING, O8 RESP TO RES TO SPK WITH RP, S11 BRIGHAM CONTACT VERIZON ATTEMPT TO PING PHONE, O23 MCENIRY, S5 SPILLANE RESP TO AREA OF 63 PHYLLIS LN, O48 RESP TO 20 CATHERINE.GBC PUT OUT TO SURROUNDING TOWNS AT 1441. UNITS RESP TO PHYLLIS LN BEGIN CORDON AND SEARCH. L5 ADVISED AND RESP. FFD EN ROUTE TO OAK ST EXT. PER L5 SP AIR WING NOTIFIED, AIR WING UNABLE TO RESP DUE TO WEATHER, O29 TO REMAIN ON SCNENE FOR SECURITY, INVESTIGATION TO RESUME AT 0530, REPORT TO FOLLOW.
(BBM)
http://www.franklinma.gov/sites/franklinma/files/uploads/press05142017.pdf

On Facebook, Michael was friends with someone who lives at the address (the person's association with the address according to Intelius).

Dionysia said:

I meant parents. That's the law, that they are held responsible.


It's not unusual that a girl from a neighboring town died in a swamp. It's a swampy area.

That's like saying it's weird that people in Louisiana die in bayous.

Click to expand...

The random suburbs of Massachusetts are not known as "swampy areas", so let's be clear on that. Every town probably has swamp-like portions to it but your comment is way too general and off base. How much of Louisiana is a bayou? Like, 6%? 11%? I mean, how many people do you think die in Bayou's vs not? My guess is not too many.

Anyways. The swamp prank idea is a little out there for me, but I guess it's possible. On the liability of the over-21 people. The persons likely to be focused on if the parents decide to file lawsuits are likely to be the person(s) who physically acquired the alcohol and the homeowner. However, since the death cannot be confirmed to have happened on the property of the home owner, and the identity of the people who acquired the booze may never be known, it would be a pretty tough case to win. Not a hard case to BRING, but difficult to actually win in court.

Has anyone heard about any arrests connected to this case so far? I have not seen anything and I have been looking. Those reporters at the daily news and some of the smaller news outlets have a real story to cover and no one seems to be gathering any more information.

The Charles River watershed - of which Franklin and Bellingham are a part - are quite swampy.

http://www.crwa.org/charles-river-watershed

Dionysia said:

The Charles River watershed - of which Franklin and Bellingham are a part - are quite swampy.

http://www.crwa.org/charles-river-watershed

Click to expand...

Yea, that's a river that goes through the town. It's silly to get bogged in things like this though. The point is that the MAJORITY of the town is not a swamp. People who are reading and responding from other parts of the country need to have a good picture of the area, and saying it's just a giant swamp and totally normal for people to just fall in and not come back is a little silly.

But the area where the party was and where Michael was IS swampy.

So it's not surprising that the search would have focused there and that he expired there.


I'm not sure how more clear I can be.