NH NH - Maura Murray, 21, Haverhill, 9 Feb 2004 - #10

[JamesRenner]

Jane,

The only member of the family I have not spoken to directly is Kathleen.

 

[BillNH]

Indeed, this angle was pursued by at least one sleuth about a year ago (on another prominent MM blog) — the speculation being that Maura (and the $4K) might have been part of some criminal or dangerous activity that weekend, possibly even tying back to her family — but I don't recall the discussion getting much beyond speculation.

I should qualify my statement about "personal danger". Fred was very intent that an immediate search was critical. To me that could mean that he thought she was in danger or that he did not like losing control of the situation by not knowing where she was. I think with his controlling personality it could be either and he would respond the same way. I am aware of what that sleuth postulated and he was looking for criminal activity. I don't rule that out but I also am not married to it. I still believe she was ready to abscond, and Fred had something to do with what went down that night and that whatever happened after that was out of Fred's control and he did not like it one bit.

 

[pokypuppy67]

Wow!! THAT's INSULTING!! It's a perfect example of the IGNORANT and ARROGANT attitude that makes law enforcement so unpopular in this country.

"DIY detectives" have solved cases more than once where law enforcement have failed to do so. In fact, a "DIY Detective" just this past month solved a 30-year-old missing persons case in TEN MINUTES that somehow managed to elude law enforcement for over three decades.

And while we are busy "not being fruitful" do you want us to "contact the authorities" with information? Or do you want us to "not interfere in the investigation?" PICK ONE!!!!





-------

Re: quote:

In Maura Murray’s case, Strelzin will not say how often law enforcement monitors online forums, but concedes that the police are “aware of things that are said.” He adds that “nothing fruitful” has ever come from the DIY detectives.

“All we ask is that they do not interfere in the investigations,” Strelzin continues. “You would expect that if people had information they would contact the authorities.”

 

[Lolacat]

Wow!! THAT's INSULTING!! It's a perfect example of the IGNORANT and ARROGANT attitude that makes law enforcement so unpopular in this country.

"DIY detectives" have solved cases more than once where law enforcement have failed to do so. In fact, a "DIY Detective" just this past month solved a 30-year-old missing persons case in TEN MINUTES that somehow managed to elude law enforcement for over three decades.

And while we are busy "not being fruitful" do you want us to "contact the authorities" with information? Or do you want us to "not interfere in the investigation?" PICK ONE!!!!


-------

Re: quote:

In Maura Murray’s case, Strelzin will not say how often law enforcement monitors online forums, but concedes that the police are “aware of things that are said.” He adds that “nothing fruitful” has ever come from the DIY detectives.

“All we ask is that they do not interfere in the investigations,” Strelzin continues. “You would expect that if people had information they would contact the authorities.”

Yeah, I agree. I dont think thats a very productive attitude for LE to foster. I mean, in criminal/missing cases the police pretty much always rely on tip offs from the general public to help them with their investigations. Would they prefer people keep this vital information to themselves? no? .....I thought not.

 

[pokypuppy67]

Undo. Undo. (Sigh)

Sorry. Too much caffeine.

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

You think? I mean that would explain a lot, but would go against the usual denial of death that parents have in cases of a missing child.

Right away, he said something about how he himself had always said when he got old, he was going to hike into the mountains and drink until he died. He's the reason LE were so quick to suspect suicide (or at least part of the reason), though I'm sure family would deny that. So even right after the accident, he had the idea of her being dead in her mind. People talk about how diligent he has been in his search for Maura, but I've always had the feeling he has never been looking for anything but her body.

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

I agree that he decided very early that she died. With his general evasion of the prior days it makes me think that he knew where she was going and why, knew it involved personal danger to her and that the moments after she disappeared were critical to her survival. His overreaction to the lack of an immediate search by LE supports this. I think the $4k was key to her reason for being in NH and had nothing to do with a new car.

Do we know what happened to the money? Who had it when she disappeared?

I don't believe it was for a car. I've already said I think her post accident behaviour and other evidence leads me to theorize she was considering an abortion. I looked up the cost of a late term abortion - $2,000. I don't know how much rooming is in the area she seemed to be heading, plus food, but that could be creeping towards $4,000.

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

Jane,

The only member of the family I have not spoken to directly is Kathleen.

The other part of the question was "what are you basing this information on?"

I get that you're busy and whatnot, but making statements as fact without anything to back them as such is really frustrating.

 

[dogperson]

Is there any proof Fred actually had $4000 on him or that he withdrew it from the bank?

Could Maura have been in some type of trouble that caused her to owe $4000 to someone?

Or could someone have been blackmailing her for money?

 

[pokypuppy67]

Yes, but I popped off at the mouth and displayed my own ignorance by not reading the article all the way through. Strelzin DID credit "citizen sleuths" with having helped solve other crimes and actually cited a specific example. I think he was saying that nothing fruitful had been offered in THIS particular case. The quote posted here was incomplete and quoted out of context. My apologies for misinterpreting it and "going off" about it.

I'm a little sensitive right now about the efforts that we put in, as Internet sleuths, and the lack of respect given to us by the "professionals". I just recently contacted the authorities about an old missing persons case that I had looked into, and I gave them the information they needed to finally solve the case.

What we do matters! For 30 years that case went unsolved. The girl had been murdered and her family never knew what had happened to her. The authorities believed she had run away from home to somewhere on the East Coast. Her body was found exactly a month later on the other side of the country, in Texas. A photo was taken of her in the morgue. She was completely recognizable, but for some reason nobody ever made the connection. So she was buried, nameless, in a pauper's grave...relegated to the cold case archives. Then, in early 2013 someone added her to the Namus Missing Persons database, and in December, through part logic and I'm sure, part luck, I performed a database search that retrieved both her Missing and Unidentified case files, and, based on two photographs, one from each file, I was able to identify the body found in Texas as being the missing girl from Connecticut. That's the goal! That's what we're all working toward.

I called the Texas M.E. and discussed the ID on December 23rd, and per her request, emailed the information to her on the 26th. She said she would look into it. On January 7, concerned that it might be accidentally set aside or not seriously considered I called and reported it to the NCMEC. Three days later it was all over the news. But instead of even mentioning that a citizen had called in with the identification of that girl, they lied about the method used to solve it and gave all the credit to themselves. There was NO mention that a citizen had contributed in any way whatsoever.

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

Yes, but I popped off at the mouth and displayed my own ignorance by not reading the article all the way through. Strelzin DID credit "citizen sleuths" with having helped solve other crimes and actually cited a specific example. I think he was saying that nothing fruitful had been offered in THIS particular case. The quote posted here was incomplete and quoted out of context. My apologies for misinterpreting it and "going off" about it.

I'm a little sensitive right now about the efforts that we put in, as Internet sleuths, and the lack of respect given to us by the "professionals". I just recently contacted the authorities about an old missing persons case that I had looked into, and I gave them the information they needed to finally solve the case.

What we do matters! For 30 years that case went unsolved. The girl had been murdered and her family never knew what had happened to her. The authorities believed she had run away from home to somewhere on the East Coast. Her body was found exactly a month later on the other side of the country, in Texas. A photo was taken of her in the morgue. She was completely recognizable, but for some reason nobody ever made the connection. So she was buried, nameless, in a pauper's grave...relegated to the cold case archives. Then, in early 2013 someone added her to the Namus Missing Persons database, and in December, through part logic and I'm sure, part luck, I performed a database search that retrieved both her Missing and Unidentified case files, and, based on two photographs, one from each file, I was able to identify the body found in Texas as being the missing girl from Connecticut. That's the goal! That's what we're all working toward.

I called the Texas M.E. and discussed the ID on December 23rd, and per her request, emailed the information to her on the 26th. She said she would look into it. On January 7, concerned that it might be accidentally set aside or not seriously considered I called and reported it to the NCMEC. Three days later it was all over the news. But instead of even mentioning that a citizen had called in with the identification of that girl, they lied about the method used to solve it and gave all the credit to themselves. There was NO mention that a citizen had contributed in any way whatsoever.

First of all, thank you for your efforts, because without you, she would still be missing.

Secondly, this just makes me crazy. Not only do liars make me want to kill clowns, but their terrible behaviour may discourage a "nonprofessional" from helping in the future, for fear of being treated badly as well.

 

[snowleopard]

Sam L's site is down (not without peril/world press). It says its taken down by the author. Anyone know what's going on?

 

[neverletgo]

Sam L's site is down (not without peril/world press). It says its taken down by the author. Anyone know what's going on?

Oh no, I hope it didn't have anything to do with what was written about him in the new Boston Magazine article:

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2014/01/28/maura-murray/

I won't include a snip because it mentions his real name, occupation, and location . . . but I wonder if he gave permission to the author to write any of that stuff about him and his efforts in looking for Maura?

 

[KenShabby]

Is there any proof Fred actually had $4000 on him or that he withdrew it from the bank?

Could Maura have been in some type of trouble that caused her to owe $4000 to someone?

Or could someone have been blackmailing her for money?

Folks, please correct me if I'm wrong, but apparently the source of the famous $4,000 is Fred's early statement to LE (I think) that he had gone to Amherst to car shop with Maura that weekend, and that he had brought $4,000 with him. Some sleuths have been suspicious about why he bothered to mention the oddly specific dollar amount. And yes, some have speculated that the money (if it existed and if it was indeed given to Maura) might have been given to her to solve a serious problem of some kind.

 

[Fireweed]

The reason I find LE's quote about "DIY detectives" in this case so obnoxious, is because the real detectives have made absolutely no progress on this case in ten years.

Hey at least we are trying. LE has not made a single breakthrough or a smidgen of progress in this case. How dare anyone in that profession who is working this case feel free to denigrate us? They have not done a damn thing that has led to any sort of lead or resolution in this case. They ought to be hanging their heads, not insulting the people who at least care enough to actually work on the case. Seriously, LE is not further along in this case than the night Maura disappeared. And don't give me that crap that there are suspects, and potential criminal acts and so it is all a big secret and blah blah blah....They claimed all that years ago and not a single arrest has been made. Not a single piece of new information has been made public. They don't know jack sheet and they are never going to solve this case. I cannot believe that these "professionals" have the chutzpah to insult us "amateurs."

They should be embarrassed, not cocky.

P.S. Keep this in mind - back in 2006 (in Fred's court case) - LE claimed that there was a 75% chance of criminal charges in this case. It has been eight years since they said that. Eight years and not a single criminal charge; not even an arrest. Eight years of absolutely nothing. If I were a New Hampshire taxpayer, I would be livid right now. Either LE there is incredibly incompetent, or they are 100% lying about progress in this case. Either way, they are not doing their jobs with any sort of competence. Oh yeah, and by lying about making an arrest, they could have potentially done some serious harm to Maura. Since we do not know what happened to her, giving any sort of information that might prevent efforts to find her, is, IMO, highly unethical.

 

[Jane Birch]

Oh no, I hope it didn't have anything to do with what was written about him in the new Boston Magazine article:

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2014/01/28/maura-murray/

I won't include a snip because it mentions his real name, occupation, and location . . . but I wonder if he gave permission to the author to write any of that stuff about him and his efforts in looking for Maura?

I don't know if it is directly related--the timing seems unlikely that it isn't--but he DID give permission to the author, as he's quoted, so clearly he was interviewed.

 

[Lolacat]

Folks, please correct me if I'm wrong, but apparently the source of the famous $4,000 is Fred's early statement to LE (I think) that he had gone to Amherst to car shop with Maura that weekend, and that he had brought $4,000 with him. Some sleuths have been suspicious about why he bothered to mention the oddly specific dollar amount. And yes, some have speculated that the money (if it existed and if it was indeed given to Maura) might have been given to her to solve a serious problem of some kind.

Yes. In the recent Boston article it says, Fred "says he withdrew $4,000 over the course of eight ATM transactions....they ended up a couple of thousand dollars short so Fred figured he'd go home, round up some more money and come back another time". I too, am not convinced the money was for a car.

 

[Gene S.]

For the reasons others have given above, I am also skeptical of Fred's statement that he was visiting Maura to buy a car.

I am also puzzled why Maura ended up with Fred's car on Saturday night. If Maura, Kate, and Fred were at Amherst Brewing Saturday, it would have been very easy and quick for Fred to drop Maura and Kate at their Southwest dorms on his way back to his hotel. In 2004, Amherst Brewing was in Amherst center--if I'm remembering correctly it was in the old bank building at Amity and North Pleasant (it has since moved to University Drive). If you look at a map, you can see it would have been easy for Fred to drop them off without going very far out of his way.

His hotel (now a Comfort Inn in Hadley) is 3 miles from Amherst center and that stretch of Route 9 is very slow going pretty much any time of day. There are a lot of traffic lights--if the red light gods are unhappy with you, that drive could take 10+ minutes each way.

If Maura and Kate are just planning to hangout on campus, why would they go through the hassle of driving Fred to his hotel and then driving back to campus? Moreover, why would Fred want to be without his car? He's now stuck at his hotel until Maura comes back on Sunday (there aren't too many places you can walk to in the area of his hotel). Maura keeping Fred's car makes things inconvenient for both Maura and Fred.

Did Maura want or need Fred's car Saturday night for some reason?

 

[Captain_Khan]

For the reasons others have given above, I am also skeptical of Fred's statement that he was visiting Maura to buy a car.

I am also puzzled why Maura ended up with Fred's car on Saturday night. If Maura, Kate, and Fred were at Amherst Brewing Saturday, it would have been very easy and quick for Fred to drop Maura and Kate at their Southwest dorms on his way back to his hotel. In 2004, Amherst Brewing was in Amherst center--if I'm remembering correctly it was in the old bank building at Amity and North Pleasant (it has since moved to University Drive). If you look at a map, you can see it would have been easy for Fred to drop them off without going very far out of his way.

His hotel (now a Comfort Inn in Hadley) is 3 miles from Amherst center and that stretch of Route 9 is very slow going pretty much any time of day. There are a lot of traffic lights--if the red light gods are unhappy with you, that drive could take 10+ minutes each way.

If Maura and Kate are just planning to hangout on campus, why would they go through the hassle of driving Fred to his hotel and then driving back to campus? Moreover, why would Fred want to be without his car? He's now stuck at his hotel until Maura comes back on Sunday (there aren't too many places you can walk to in the area of his hotel). Maura keeping Fred's car makes things inconvenient for both Maura and Fred.

Did Maura want or need Fred's car Saturday night for some reason?

Very good point. I wonder if Fed initially wanted Maura to make the drive to wherever she was going on Feb 9th in his car? When she crashed it, she would be left with no option but to take her own.

 

[Dixie811]

For those who do not believe Fred really came to Amherst to look at cars to buy for Maura-- does anyone know if this part of the story was or was not corroborated by whatever local car lot(s) Fred said he and Maura went to?

That seems like basic police work to me, I would hope it would be either proven or disproven long ago.