NH NH - Maura Murray, 21, Haverhill, 9 Feb 2004 - #13

[Fireweed]

But he isn't the only one who is saying it. The guys on the podcast, Tim and Lance, also believe at the very least that the police are covering up for a botched investigation and I believe that's also the angle Smith is taking. I don't understand why people are so quick to judge him and doubt his credibility when he has proven to be a far more credible source than some of the other dogmatic experts we have seen so far in this case.

Well what exactly has Smith said that is credible and material to this case? I think people are drawn to people like Smith because this case has so little information to go by, which frustrates us. Thus, when someone like Smith comes along who claims he has something figured out, when desperately cling to him.

A closer analysis, however, shows that Smith does not know anything of real value. I wish he did, but he doesn't.

 

[Fireweed]

When he was on the podcast, he started out with some interesting info. I had no idea the car was sitting in the shop. But all it lead me to was some sloppiness on LE part due to them assuming it was a drunk driver who crashed and ran.

I do now agree with Fred that it is odd that they didn't drive up the road in both directions to see if she was on foot, running away. That is what I believe I would have done, just as a routine procedure due to possible injury and a crime commited.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

It was definitely sloppy on the part of the police, but to me that is the beginning and end of it - it was sloppy on the part of the police.

How many times have we seen sloppy police work here on WS? A lot. We have seen it a lot. It seems to me that any time a parent or friend calls the police and says that someone is being erratic or acting crazy, that the police talk to them for two minutes and say they seemed okay and that person goes missing/starts a mass shooting.

The police are good at a lot of things but they are not good at a lot of things too. Also, we are picking on their decisions in retrospect. Obviously, in retrospect it was really, really stupid not to drive up and down the road that night with the spotlight on looking for Maura. At the time, however, the cops probably thought it was a drunk driver fleeing the scene and hitching a ride with a friend. I bet that happens all the time. I bet a young woman vanishing into thin air happens almost never.

 

[Ava Adore]

It was definitely sloppy on the part of the police, but to me that is the beginning and end of it - it was sloppy on the part of the police.

How many times have we seen sloppy police work here on WS? A lot. We have seen it a lot. It seems to me that any time a parent or friend calls the police and says that someone is being erratic or acting crazy, that the police talk to them for two minutes and say they seemed okay and that person goes missing/starts a mass shooting.

The police are good at a lot of things but they are not good at a lot of things too. Also, we are picking on their decisions in retrospect. Obviously, in retrospect it was really, really stupid not to drive up and down the road that night with the spotlight on looking for Maura. At the time, however, the cops probably thought it was a drunk driver fleeing the scene and hitching a ride with a friend. I bet that happens all the time. I bet a young woman vanishing into thin air happens almost never.

I agree. It's like I understand WHY they acted they way they did, but I understand Fred's frustration.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Tarik]

I wouldn't use Tim and Lance as a yardstick by which to measure anything other than gullibility.

If you look around the case, John Smith and the podcast guys aren't the only ones who are suggesting that. ^^

 

[Pettibon Junction]

If you look around the case, John Smith and the podcast guys aren't the only ones who are suggesting that. ^^

On a long enough timeline, the specter of police involvement/corruption arises in virtually all murder/missing persons cases. Typically, this is not based on the evidence but rather reflects a growing lack of faith in public institutions when such cases remain unresolved. IMHO the Murray disappearance is no exception.

 

[Pettibon Junction]

To be clear, it goes without saying that the initial investigation was botched in the sense that Maura was not immediately classified as "endangered missing" given that she was probably intoxicated, possibly injured, and almost certainly on foot in the middle of winter in rural New Hampshire.

 

[Fireweed]

I am fine with people suggesting police corruption/conspiracies. There is nothing wrong with exploring that and I do not discount any suggestion of it on its face. However, if you're going to go down that road, then eventually you're going to have to offer some evidence beyond "car actually hit a snowbank, not a tree!"

I have not seen any solid evidence of corruption or a conspiracy. I have seen some evidence that the initial actions of LE after the crash were sloppy; however, the investigation after everyone realized how serious the situation was seems pretty reasonable. They were even on top of it to the point of searching Forcier's trailer at the one time in was mobile (and thus a vehicle).

Again, I am completely open to reading/hearing someone's detailed and logical explanation of corruption/conspiracy here. That means the the proponent of the theory will have to do an "if A, then B, thus C" analysis and not just puke out random stuff and say "don't you think that's strange?" They're going to have to actually show their work in a detailed and logical fashion.

So far, not one of them has.

 

[TessDeco]

I think the officer probably thought he knew what he was talking about. Though I agree that small details can matter, at the end of the day there was a certain amount of damage done to the car as a result of Maura hitting an inanimate object. If someone would like to share the big difference it makes to our analysis that Maura hit a snowbank vs. a tree, then I am open to reading it.

Until then, I think that Smith is all over this because it is his big "gotcha" moment with local LE, and let's face it, it's the only card he holds. He is holding a 2 here instead of an ace. There is not much to this at all, other than some moderately sloppy police work over a fact that just does not matter that much in the grander scheme of things.

And I have one other question to ask: if this was a conspiracy, then what benefit does it serve the conspiracy to say that Maura hit a tree instead of a snowbank?

BBM Yes! That's the impression I have too. It's also curious why John tries to paint Haverhill as a community with dark secrets. I feel like John has gathered some random info and tried to make it appear suspicious. There were a lot of trees where Maura crashed her car. It's not an absurd conclusion that she hit a tree. We've had years to analyze the crash scene. The officer had that night. Maybe he just made a mistake. Honestly, people are free to discuss what John Smith presents. I found a few things interesting and at least he doesn't make Fred Murray the side show. But, in my experience, there's no having a real discussion with John. He's right and that's that. We shouldn't shut any doors in this case yet but I guess the real question for me is ..how convoluted are we willing to allow Maura's story to become? How does it help find her?

This case, after almost 12 years, really needs LE to relax their seal on the information they've gathered and let the public help ..if possible. New eyes just might reveal a new clue or discover a new place to search. IDK why they continue to keep it sealed but it doesn't help to have bloggers and podcasters pointing the finger at LE. That's why I'm not that interested in expanding rumors of LE wrong doing ..at least not based on what we've heard from John Smith so far.

All just MHO..

 

[Caffeine]

Although I don't necessarily agree with him, I don't mind hearing different viewpoints from people like John Smith. He certainly is taking a bold path with this.

However, with that said, there is very little that he has offered to make me think police is involved. Sure, the radio silence from the officer at the scene after the crash and the differing accounts of which cruiser was where that night are important points to consider. Other than that he hasn't offered much else to point to police involvement, unless I missed something or he has other information he hasn't shared yet.

I won't say a scenario like that isn't possible. If I recall, there was a few tidbits over the years that sort of pointed in that direction, and situations of police doing things like that have happened before but there's nothing really definitive yet.

But it's refreshing to see another opinion and different ideas. If everyone followed the same lead here, we'd be content with the notion that she's living under the radar in Canada...thankfully not all of us feel that is the answer here.

 

[Fireweed]

I too like seeing other people's opinions and points of view as well. My main concern, however, is that we are careful to take a close look at the credibility of the people who scream the loudest about how their theory is correct.

To me, John Smith, Clint Harding (scoops), James Renner and the podcast guys have very little credibility.

Just because someone sounds really confident does not mean they have credibility. I think that because this case is so frustrating that it is easy to fall for a person with confidence has to say. It's a trap.

 

[lace123]

I too like seeing other people's opinions and points of view as well. My main concern, however, is that we are careful to take a close look at the credibility of the people who scream the loudest about how their theory is correct.

To me, John Smith, Clint Harding (scoops), James Renner and the podcast guys have very little credibility.

Just because someone sounds really confident does not mean they have credibility. I think that because this case is so frustrating that it is easy to fall for a person with confidence has to say. It's a trap.

Additionally, some, if not all of these people, have an agenda. I'm unsure if anyone who is in the spotlight of this case is able to approach it objectively anymore. Add the disinformation, misinformation, things we've read and internalized in spite of them not being true, and it's tough to know which way to go with it.

 

[Ricochet]

I'm not sure that I'd agree there was sloppy/careless police work, at least on the night of the accident. If anyone is guilty of being careless it's Maura. I think the question that needs to be asked did the police do what is reasonable the night of the accident, and I think they did.
1. Maura was offered help by Butch Atwood which she refused. I can see how she'd be hesitant if he was driving along in a pickup truck, but he was in a school bus.
2. Maura could've walked to the Westman's and she chose not to.
3. Cecil Smith's notes matches dispatch logs from the best I can tell. His notes stated he arrived at the scene approximately 7:46 PM noted the accident and interviewed witnesses. He radioed in to dispatch and at 7:54 PM Rhonda Marsh advised per Cecil Smith that all fire units bol for a female about 5'7" on foot, victim of a crash.
4. According to the police report Cecil assisted by Fire, EMS and a local resident searched the area of the accident without success.
5. Road conditions were dry (not icy or slippery or wet) there's noway to determine how far she could've made it on foot and no real way of knowing for certain whether or not she saw the police and chose to evade them which is rational considering her past history. People may choose to see Maura as a damsel in distress, but she's far from it!

I think what was done is reasonable considering she refused help, could've gone to the Westman's, could've stayed at the accident site, Cecil, fire, ems and local resident conducted a search of the area.

People want to criticize police by saying they should've/could've done this or that but Maura should've accepted help or could've stayed at the site or could've gone to the Westman's. I can't think of anything the police would want to cover up or hide. It seems to me what they did the night of the accident was reasonable.

 

[Tarik]

I too like seeing other people's opinions and points of view as well. My main concern, however, is that we are careful to take a close look at the credibility of the people who scream the loudest about how their theory is correct.

To me, John Smith, Clint Harding (scoops), James Renner and the podcast guys have very little credibility.

Just because someone sounds really confident does not mean they have credibility. I think that because this case is so frustrating that it is easy to fall for a person with confidence has to say. It's a trap.

The problem if you say that is that you then have to start considering who has NOT "very little credibility". And I personally can't think of anybody, at least not anybody who we know of and who is public about this case. Other than the NH state police, these guys (Harding, Renner etc.) are the only ones that have been actively working on the case and trying to keep Maura's story out there. We can question their methods and motives and I certainly do question them but at the same time we have to acknowledge that they are the only ones who are trying to keep this case alive other than the Murray family even if it's been over a decade now since Maura went missing.

 

[Tarik]

I too believe she killed herself accidentally or on purpose but just because I can't prove it doesn't mean it shouldn't be looked at or mentioned at all just because some people have a hard time accepting that we can disagree. Thanks for your insight scoops or rather Mr. Harding.

I'm still asking the question : if we assume that all these people we've named have done more harm than good and have mostly spread misinformation, who can we actually trust at this point to provide us with good and credible information about this case going forward?

 

[scoops]

Here is just one small example in which both Fred Murray and Sharon Rausch are specifically wanting a certain narrative to come out as opposed to reality (all dealing with a defense against suicide, which was never prompted for them to have to defend)


VTSP/NHSP Dual Press Conference Case information release of Maura Murray and Brianna Maitland
Tuesday June 8, 2004
Police response to how they found Maura’s dorm room ---- “By Monday Morning, Feb 9th Maura had packed up all her belongings in her dorm room at UMASS, putting everything neatly in boxes and putting the boxes on her bed along with a personal note she head recently received from her boyfriend.”

My notes: Along with the UMASS police the day Maura’s dorm was searched was Billy Rausch and a fellow nursing student of Maura’s who had the exact same schedule as she did. The fellow nursing student which is referenced in an older Daily Collegian stated that to her the room looked like Maura was never planning to return.


Sharon responding about the dorm room. Pay special attention to the fact she doesn’t at all dispute the manner in which the dorm room was found (Fully packed, boxes stacked on a bed with a personal note on top of the boxes) Instead Sharon disputes the notion that there were no RECENT NOTES found. A complete side-track from the main issue to try and discredit police and distract from anyone concluding that Maura left her room like that because she was leaving for good BY HER OWN CHOICE.

Daily Collegian
Jan 26, 2005
“Her son arrived at Maura’s dorm room with police just two days after she went missing. He said there was no recent letters to him from Maura that were found.
“There is no note,” Sharon Raush said

MY NOTES: the full history is that LT. John Scarinza the lead investigator of the disappearance of Maura Murray at one point early on was quoted as saying “Maura left a personal note to her boyfriend”

The family (Sharon Rausch) immediately jumped on that to try and discredit him by saying aha, the note that was found was not written by maura so therefore Lt. Scarinza saying maura left a note to billy is wrong and it proves he is lying.

The reality: What Scarinza said originally was correct. Although, Maura didn’t write the note herself (it was an old note by billy to her talking about relationship issues) she did leave it on top of her packed boxes to whom Lt. Scarinza believed was meant for Billy to find. Therefore it is factual based that Maura left a personal note for Billy. And it is just word-splicing done by Sharon to once again deflect from the notion that maura was voluntarily running away for good and possibly suicidal.

The spin that Maura maybe just left her room that way because she hadn’t had time to unpack from winter break is complete and utter BS and completey introduced by family. Why? There can't be gray area here. Maura may have not had time to unpack and had several boxes filled with her stuff in her dorm room at the point it was found, however she is not going to have everything packed up and stacked on her bed with a personal note laying specifically on top of the boxes. So someone is not being honest here.

And IMO In order to deflect folks for thinking maura was suicidal it's not the police that are being dishonest. And there are many more examples of this.
Billy (remember) was right there when they searched her room. Why has he never addressed the fact that the room was packed up fully? He has only said publically that there was no RECENT note found. Such Spin IMO.

As a little extra for you all:

Onto Fred Murray:
July 3, 2004
By Gary Lindsley
The first mention of Maura being suicidal was in a press release issued by Haverhill Police Chief Jeff Williams two days after Maura's car accident and disappearance.
Murray says he never told police his daughter was suicidal.
"I want to set the record straight," he said. "Scarinza is using (Howe's book) to reinforce his suicide theory. It's nothing like that.
"Maura liked the book," he said. "She was making her way through it. The reason she liked the book was because she likes several different areas in the White Mountains. There are all kinds of landmarks. That's all it was."
Although he is upset about Scarinza's comments, Murray isn't surprised.
"If he goes with the suicide theory, that means nothing happened on his turf and during his watch," Murray said. "However, when you have a bad guy (involved), it's in (Scarinza's) back yard and he can't solve it."

Now pay attention to the following:

Actual 911 log:
Feb 10, 2004 (one day after maura went missing)

“Fred Murray calling back and said that officer has not gotten back to him. Told him that he (the officer) had the message, but sure he would be calling. (Fred) stated it is URGENT that officer calls him back, he has some very important information to give him. Caller asked if officer had a cell phone. Negative sir. But I will give him the message. (Fred responded) “Please do, it is very urgent that he calls me.”

Lt. John Scarinza talking to James Renner in 2012 specifically about that 911 call:
Around mid-afternoon Tuesday, Fred Murray called Haverhill P.D. "What I was told was that the first thing out of Fred's mouth was, 'She's gone to the North Country to commit suicide, to go off and die like an old squaw."
"Then, the scenario changed," says Scarinza. "Now we have a missing girl."

So either the police are flat-out lying (about the dorm room being packed neatly and completely up with boxes stacked on a bed with a personal note on top and they are lying about fred claiming maura was suicidal or family/family spokespeople have not been honest when talking to the media.

It has to be one or the other. There should be no gray area here.

And the sad thing is, there are tons of more examples just like this.

 

[Lolacat]

If the *note* contained stuff about Billy cheating on Maura then of course Sharon would want to cover that up or dismiss it as unimportant. She's his mum, and probably wants to protect her son's reputation and doesnt want him to be portrayed in a negative light. OR, for anyone to point the finger at him as a reason for Maura leaving. You saw in the disappeared programme how invested she was in portraying Billy and Maura's relationship as wonderful and perfect. Maura could have packed up her room because she intended to kill herself and never return, OR, maybe she was intending to leave college for good and wasn't suicidal at all.

Maybe in public, the family didn't want anyone to think of Maura as suicidal because it might encourage the public to "write her off" and stop looking for her. Or, maybe suicide is a *taboo* or embarrassing subject for them due to religious or other reasons. Maybe if the public think Maura killed herself, questions will be asked about why the family did not support her or help her more. It certainly ruins the idea that Maura was the all American golden girl. Maybe Fred is wracked with guilt, so he has a motive to convince himself she did not kill herself. Maybe Fred told the police in private that she was suicidal in an attempt to hasten them to look for her. There is far more urgency to find someone who has gone missing who is suicidal (and is therefore, not *responsible* for their actions due to mental state- this would also help if she was ever charged with a DUI) than to find someone simply escaping a DUI for their own selfish benefit.

Many of these *clues* can be interpreted in multiple ways which is why it baffles me a little when people insist upon one theory at the exclusion of all others. FTR: I'm not saying she didn't commit suicide- she may have done. But these family statements dont *prove* suicide to me to the point that we can exclude all other possibilities and conclude that this case is pretty much solved, bar the finding of a body. JMO.

 

[scoops]

If the *note* contained stuff about Billy cheating on Maura then of course Sharon would want to cover that up or dismiss it as unimportant. She's his mum, and probably wants to protect her son's reputation and doesnt want him to be portrayed in a negative light. OR, for anyone to point the finger at him as a reason for Maura leaving. You saw in the disappeared programme how invested she was in portraying Billy and Maura's relationship as wonderful and perfect. Maura could have packed up her room because she intended to kill herself and never return, OR, maybe she was intending to leave college for good and wasn't suicidal at all.

Maybe in public, the family didn't want anyone to think of Maura as suicidal because it might encourage the public to "write her off" and stop looking for her. Or, maybe suicide is a *taboo* or embarrassing subject for them due to religious or other reasons. Maybe if the public think Maura killed herself, questions will be asked about why the family did not support her or help her more. It certainly ruins the idea that Maura was the all American golden girl. Maybe Fred is wracked with guilt, so he has a motive to convince himself she did not kill herself. Maybe Fred told the police in private that she was suicidal in an attempt to hasten them to look for her. There is far more urgency to find someone who has gone missing who is suicidal (and is therefore, not *responsible* for their actions due to mental state- this would also help if she was ever charged with a DUI) than to find someone simply escaping a DUI for their own selfish benefit.

Many of these *clues* can be interpreted in multiple ways which is why it baffles me a little when people insist upon one theory at the exclusion of all others. FTR: I'm not saying she didn't commit suicide- she may have done. But these family statements dont *prove* suicide to me to the point that we can exclude all other possibilities and conclude that this case is pretty much solved, bar the finding of a body. JMO.

I never said these statements prove suicide. that is a false argument.

There are tons of other statements, tidbits etc. that point towards the suicide angle. The biggest thing I learned after doing my research into this case and trying to find out why there is so much mis-information out there, is that the public has literally been played by the family.

The family was literally coached very early on (talking just weeks after maura went missing) on how to come off more optimistic when talking about maura in the press, because they were consistently referring to her in the past tense.

This is not a family that has ever truly believed Maura was abducted and while that is my opinion, I have been following their statements both in media form and in message board form over the years and it's amazing how many times they have taken basic information and IMO spun it to mean something it really doesn't.

Back to the above statements they made, there is no other legitimate way to interpret the following facts:

Maura's dorm room was completely packed up, art taken off the walls, all her drawers emptied boxes packed and stacked on her bed with a note on top of the boxes.

Fred's first thought when informed about his daughter going missing was not 'what in the heck, why would Maura be in New Hampshire' it was 'oh my god, maura has gone to the White Mountains to do personal harm to herself.'


The only way one could even begin to argue that those two facts are wrong is if you say the police are out-right lying.

I have also been monitoring everything they (in particular Lt. John Scarinza) have said publically looking for holes in their stories.

The police version has always remained very consistent and it has always included (no matter if you are talking UMASS Police or New Hampshire police) that there have never been any signs of foul play concerning Maura's disappearance.

 

[Ricochet]

Don't pay attention to Fireweed.

She makes false arguments all the time.

I am suppose to provide Maura's body with a suicide note taped to it, otherwise i must be making up my belief that she took her own life according to fireweed.

I have ample reason to believe Maura took her own life. And only 20 percent of my belief comes from Maura's actions (because I have never tried to get into her head, it would be a senseless way to try and figure out what happened to her since I don't know her.

Most of her family's reactions and over-blown/unneccessary defense against suicide, their manipulations of basic facts when speaking to the public (spin) has led me to the suicide theory. The inactivity by police has only helped support my theory as well.

I knew very early on when I researched the case that the best way to get to the truth and sort out facts was not going to be by trying to read someone's mind and it also wasn't going to be by taking every one's word at face value.

I had to compile statements made by key people (family members) etc.. Look for inconsistencies in their statements, look hard at context for those statements and try to get to the bottom of the truth.

I have more than several reasons to believe Maura took her own life and her family (in particular) her father, knew she was dead within the first week of her going missing.

And I did my research free of speculation, free of just throwing out theories and trying to make them stick or even worse using statistics and probabilities (that don't consider everything such as day time vs. night time) when looking at the abduction angle (as an example of people like Fireweed)

I feel confident in my findings

I could be wrong but I think Fireweed's point of view is that your theory is no more relevant than anyone else's theory, because it's based off the same information, which is available to everyone, and can be interpreted in different ways all of which have pros and cons. She can speak for herself though.

The inactivity by the police though means nothing. The case is 12 years old and it's more common than not that the older a case gets the more inactive it becomes.

The information you provide is not newly discovered information. Their publicized articles that can be interpreted different ways. Maura's room being packed could mean a lot of things. The student said it "looked" like she was never coming back, she didn't say "Maura wasn't coming back" or "Maura was packed because she was leaving Amherst".

Sharon Rausch has stated Maura and Billy had previous relationship issues that had been resolved. A note written 6 months prior to Maura's disappearance doesn't carry the same impact as a more RECENT note written 2 days prior to her disappearance.

Fred Murray to the best of my knowledge early on believed she had been abducted and if that's the case it could explain referencing Maura in past tense.

In my opinion your spinning the Murray's into deceptive people by the way in which you've responded to some posts.

The information out there on Maura is all the same. You interpret it as suicide, I interpret it as she likely died from hypothermia, and James Renner interprets it as she ran off to start a new life. Every theory has pros and cons and the different theories are based off the same information. So your opinion is no more valid than anyone else's.

In regards to James Renner he was ridiculed and slammed quite hard in the previous thread for ridiculous blog posts, deleting blog posts, changing his theory only to go back to his original theory (I guess).

I have no clue what John Smith's theory is other than she hit a snowbank and not a tree and because of that something notorious happened.

Tim and Lance I believe have good intentions but they've gotten simple facts, easily verified in police documents wrong. I think their realizing how difficult this case is and how little there is to go on because they've decreased the amount of vlogs they do and they have silly people (not you) on their show.

Also it's not uncommon to read a post here in websleuths of someone who appeared on an episode of a show like Disappeared and be upset because their comments were taken out of context or portrayed inaccurately.

** Part 2 **

I had to go pick up my kid..

******

It's also in someways unfair to draw conclusions from comments made by the police and those of family members. A family member is going to speak in more of a conversational manner and will include opinions and the police are trained to stick to the facts and not draw conclusions that can't be supported or released to the public. They can also add to the confusion because sometimes their comments can be so vague they can be taken in different ways. For ie. Cecil Smith isn't going to state an opinion that she died of hypothermia, and Lt. Scarinza state his opinion of something completely opposite, and another officer making a comment of somewhere in between. Their narrative is going to be relatively consistent.

The other issue is because information can be interpreted in different ways people are going to make inferences based on their own experiences. For ie. I've seen it written all over the place, by people not in the know, that Maura had bulimia, when to the best of my knowledge there is no factual information that states she bulimic. These people will then project their experiences with bulimia onto Maura's actions.

For ie. I have generalized anxiety disorder and when it's gotten out of hand I've done some very impulsive things. I once impulsively cancelled my airline reservation only to re-book it a day later and pay a $200.00 penalty. So I could look at Maura's life and her actions draw a conclusion she had anxiety, like me, impulsively packed up her room in a huff and would've comeback later and unpack had she returned. Yet there is no factual information she had anxiety, but her actions appear to be related to anxiety therefore she must have anxiety or bulimia or whatever.

The other issue is logical vs illogical. It's not uncommon to see people refer to Maura as illogical, but then try to place logical thought into her actions. If people want to determine she was illogical then there is no way to determine when she's being logical or when she's being illogical and basing her actions on logical thought would.. well.. be illogical!

 

[scoops]

I could be wrong but I think Fireweed's point of view is that your theory is no more relevant than anyone else's theory, because it's based off the same information, which is available to everyone, and can be interpreted in different ways all of which have pros and cons. She can speak for themselves though.

The inactivity by the police though means nothing. The case is 12 years old and it's more common than not that the older a case gets the more inactive it becomes.

The information you provide is not newly discovered information. Their publicized articles that can be interpreted different ways. Maura's room being packed could mean a lot of things. The student said it "looked" like she was never coming back, she didn't say "Maura wasn't coming back" or "Maura was packed because she was leaving Amherst".

Sharon Rausch has stated Maura and Billy had previous relationship issues that had been resolved. A note written 6 months prior to Maura's disappearance doesn't carry the same impact as a more RECENT note written 2 days prior to her disappearance.

Fred Murray to the best of my knowledge early on believed she had been abducted and if that's the case it could explain referencing Maura in past tense.

In my opinion your spinning the Murray's into deceptive people by the way in which you've responded to some posts.

The information out there on Maura is all the same. You interpret it as suicide, I interpret it as she likely died from hypothermia, and James Renner interprets it as she ran off to start a new life. Every theory has pros and cons and the different theories are based off the same information. So your opinion is no more valid than anyone else's.

(modsnip)

I have no clue what John Smith's theory is other than she hit a snowbank and not a tree and because of that something notorious happened.

Tim and Lance I believe have good intentions but they've gotten simple facts, easily verified in police documents wrong. I think their realizing how difficult this case is and how little there is to go on because they've decreased the amount of vlogs they do.

Also it's not uncommon to read a post here in websleuths of someone who appeared on an episode of a show like Disappeared and be upset because their comments were taken out of context or portrayed inaccurately.

So ... A room that is packed completely up with boxes stacked on a bed and a note placed on top of the boxes can lead someone to the conclusion that Maura just didn't have time to unpack in the 14-plus days she had been back to campus. Please elaborate on that, I'm all ears.

Fred Murray saying he never told police is daughter was suicidal followed up by the lead investigator of the case saying on record that the first thing out of fred's mouth was that his daughter came up to the white mountains to do personal harm to herself ... is me spinning the family to make them look bad. Please again explain, I would love to hear a good defense for where I am going wrong. Keep in mind, there are countless other issues I have come across from statements from family members over the years, so it's not like I pot-shotted and took one example and am running with with as proof maura was suicidal.

Please explain this stuff in a rational way, I'm dying to be wrong about all of this.

 

[Ricochet]

So ... A room that is packed completely up with boxes stacked on a bed and a note placed on top of the boxes can lead someone to the conclusion that Maura just didn't have time to unpack in the 14-plus days she had been back to campus. Please elaborate on that, I'm all ears.

Fred Murray saying he never told police is daughter was suicidal followed up by the lead investigator of the case saying on record that the first thing out of fred's mouth was that his daughter came up to the white mountains to do personal harm to herself ... is me spinning the family to make them look bad. Please again explain, I would love to hear a good defense for where I am going wrong. Keep in mind, there are countless other issues I have come across from statements from family members over the years, so it's not like I pot-shotted and took one example and am running with with as proof maura was suicidal.

Please explain this stuff in a rational way, I'm dying to be wrong about all of this.

I'd be happy to although it may be illogical.

I'll agree with you that I think Fred has created some of his own problems. He did make the statement that you're referring to, but I do believe he made it so the police would be more proactive. My opinion of Fred is that he's very protective about the family name and image and won't allow himself to admit to being wrong or mistaken in some of his comments. I also think some of his comments portray Maura in an inaccurate way which hurts the case. So you're not wrong in this aspect. I do believe that Fred's "real" belief is that she was abducted.

In regards to the room. That's very easy to explain away. No one has said that Maura was quitting UMASS, running away to live a new life, or going off to commit suicide. All we know is Maura had boxes packed and that's all it means. Maybe she was a slow unpacker, maybe she was very neat and reorganizing her room, maybe she was packed because she was moving to a different location, maybe she was packed because she was leaving amherst and moving back home and her time away was to think how she'd explain this to family and what she'd want to do with her life, maybe Maura did have anxiety and she became stressed about something and impulsively packed everything as if she was going to leave and would've unpacked had she returned. We don't know. She had an excused absence, no one would've searched her room had she returned, maybe she was going off to commit suicide and wanted her room neat to make it easier on people, maybe packing was symbolic of leaving her old life behind because she was starting a new life somewhere in Canada (which is illogical. why not Mexico where it's warm and nice beaches), maybe Maura is SO illogical and her thought process SO out there no one is even close to knowing what her real intentions were.

I think my ultimate point is. I do not believe she was going to commit suicide or start a new life but I can't disprove it either. Each has an argument for and against. I believe she simply wanted to get away for a week and died of hypothermia but I can't prove that and it can't be disproven.