NH NH - Maura Murray, 21, Haverhill, 9 Feb 2004 - #12

[scoops]

Good find, Clint. And I enjoy hearing you on the program. A few things to clear up, here, though. I don't think anybody is saying she was kicked out of West Point, literally. But the make-up theft from Fort Knox and the other troubles in the dorm were leading to serious repercussions at the school and it's quite clear to me that she was certainly invited to leave.

Also, she was not running the year she disappeared. Would she still have been enjoying the full-ride benefits?

Finally, these photos further show a woman trained in survival by the US military. Do you really still believe she sat down in the White Mountains and slipped quietly into the good night? If she wanted to kill herself, there were faster ways to do it than Franzia and cold. This further suggests to me she had the means to make it out there and stay hidden.

First, Thanks for everything you have contributed to date and of course the interest that you have helped bring to this cold case.

Yeah, I made it clear that I was going off of family source information while I paid a lot of attention to the interview you did with the fellow cadet. I figure both sources could be correct on this one.

According to family sources, Maura actually had a pair of conditions she and billy were working on (while she was still at West Point) in order to get her transferred over to a new school. 1. The school needed to be close to billy. 2. it had to offer a full ride scholarship.

Maura chose UMASS which many may not know, but her father attended UMASS.

As far as her year away from athletics, yeah I would imagine money would've been an issue at that point in her life, but don't know what kind of arrangement she had set up.

We both go separate ways once the accident takes place and I can respect that and everyone else for not thinking she wanted to do harm to herself.

But, I feel like the blanket she packed (even though she left it in the car) was something that she would've used on that Tuesday (had she not wrecked) as she found a spot and hunkered down to avoid the strong winds and drank herself to death.

Once the wreck took place, she had to make a split decision one way or the other and if she was suicidal, then I think she would've accelerated her plans that night and not wait it out until daylight, which I believe was her original plan to begin with.

 

[Max17]

I haven't looked *that* close at this case before. A persistent man-flu was the perfect opportunity go down this rabbit hole. Wow that crash timeline is tight! This timeline has likely been discussed ad nauseam, but I just had to write it up myself from the dispatch logs.

~ is my own approximation.

~7:25pm Maura's accident.
7:27pm F.W. calls (while Maura steps out of the car and then walks around it). (source)
7:29pm Police dispatched & enroute.
~7:3?pm B.A. stops w/ school bus at car, talks to Maura.
~7:39pm B.A. calls. Trouble connecting?
7:42pm EMS & Fire Unit dispatched, both enroute 7:45pm.
7:43pm Dispatch: "AT 1943 HANOVER DISP CALLED TO ADV GOT A 911 CALL FOR US; 911 ADVISED ALL CUIRCUITS BUSY. THEY ADV ONE FEMALE. NO PI. BUT SHOOK UP."
7:46pm Police arrived.
~7:48pm Dispatch callback: "CALLED THE ATWOOD RES, WOMAN ADV HER HUSBAND SAW THE CRASH AND CAME HERE TO CALL, BUT NO IDEA WHERE THE FEMALE IS" **
7:54pm Dispatch: "H2 REQ ALL FIRE UNITS BOL FOR A FEMALE ABT 507 ON FOOT. VICTIM OF CAR CRASH."
7:56pm EMS Unit arrived.
7:57pm Fire Unit arrived.
8:02pm EMS Unit clears the scene (back in service 8:02pm)
8:49pm Fire Unit clears the scene, car has also been towed by now. (back in service 9:41pm)
9:26pm Police clears the scene.

** Meaning saw the crash site itself, not as it happened. B.A.'s wife has no idea about Maura's location at the time of dispatch calling back.

Holy moly!

 

[cascade]

So what has Fred Murray ever done to James Renner? The amount of slander against the guy (Murray) on Renners blog is astounding. Actually, it's a disgrace. Is this what you get for not wanting to talk to mr. Renner?

And for anyone saying Fred Murray should be more open or share more information, it's very simple: he owes us nothing.

 

[Reno]

I haven't looked *that* close at this case before. A persistent man-flu was the perfect opportunity go down this rabbit hole. Wow that crash timeline is tight! This timeline has likely been discussed ad nauseam, but I just had to write it up myself from the dispatch logs.

~ is my own approximation.

~7:25pm Maura's accident.
7:27pm F.W. calls (while Maura steps out of the car and then walks around it). (source)
7:29pm Police dispatched & enroute.
~7:3?pm B.A. stops w/ school bus at car, talks to Maura.
~7:39pm B.A. calls. Trouble connecting?
7:42pm EMS & Fire Unit dispatched, both enroute 7:45pm.
7:43pm Dispatch: "AT 1943 HANOVER DISP CALLED TO ADV GOT A 911 CALL FOR US; 911 ADVISED ALL CUIRCUITS BUSY. THEY ADV ONE FEMALE. NO PI. BUT SHOOK UP."
7:46pm Police arrived.

SnippedBM. That breakdown is interesting and helpful, but I wonder if you have any sourcing or a point of view, for the first and fourth items. Those seem like the keys to theorizing about the evidence found at the site (1st one) and her reactions, which also would invite inferences about her state of mind (4th to last one...17-19 minutes, from 'official' facts).

 

[coolaid213]

Scoops, everything you post seems to be speculation. You think she packed her blanket to drink herself to death on? Respectfully, I think the conclusions you jump to are way more far fetched than anyone here who you have dismissed for suggesting foul play. I have a blanket in the backseat of my 98 Saturn SL, does that mean I'm planning on committing suicide on it? I can't believe I have to repeat this; but there is no indication that she was even suicidal, let alone on a suicide mission. If she was going to commit suicide by exposure to sub-freezing weather, wouldn't bringing a blanket to snuggle up in be counterproductive? I'm glad you're getting lots of publicity for yourself going on podcasts and stuff, but if you are convinced she committed suicide I don't see what the purpose is other than to discourage other people from investigating for themselves.

 

[scoops]

Scoops, everything you post seems to be speculation. You think she packed her blanket to drink herself to death on? Respectfully, I think the conclusions you jump to are way more far fetched than anyone here who you have dismissed for suggesting foul play. I have a blanket in the backseat of my 98 Saturn SL, does that mean I'm planning on committing suicide on it? I can't believe I have to repeat this; but there is no indication that she was even suicidal, let alone on a suicide mission. If she was going to commit suicide by exposure to sub-freezing weather, wouldn't bringing a blanket to snuggle up in be counterproductive? I'm glad you're getting lots of publicity for yourself going on podcasts and stuff, but if you are convinced she committed suicide I don't see what the purpose is other than to discourage other people from investigating for themselves.

I don't and have never thought that the blanket proves that Maura committed suicide, just like Maura having the book in itself doesn't prove suicide, or Maura having the mixture of Tylenol pm and alcohol proves that she committed suicide or that Maura stuffed a rag in the tailpipe of her car while her car had its driver's side passenger window cracked open proves that Maura committed suicide or that Maura refused help from several houses and a store she just passed less than a mile before her wreck proves suicide or that Maura left her valuables behind in her car but took alcohol with her proves that she committed suicide or her father believing she committed suicide right off the bat proves that she committed suicide.

Nor do I believe the families consistent protests and way out there defenses for Maura not committing suicide ... prove that Maura committed suicide.

But when you start putting everything together ...

 

[brokerage]

I don't and have never thought that the blanket proves that Maura committed suicide, just like Maura having the book in itself doesn't prove suicide, or Maura having the mixture of Tylenol pm and alcohol proves that she committed suicide or that Maura stuffed a rag in the tailpipe of her car while her car had its driver's side passenger window cracked open proves that Maura committed suicide or that Maura refused help from several houses and a store she just passed less than a mile before her wreck proves suicide or that Maura left her valuables behind in her car but took alcohol with her proves that she committed suicide or her father believing she committed suicide right off the bat proves that she committed suicide.

Nor do I believe the families consistent protests and way out there defenses for Maura not committing suicide ... prove that Maura committed suicide.

But when you start putting everything together ...

Not that he needs me to defend him, but Scoops has put more time and literal effort into Maura's case than virtually anyone else on this board, so his opinions have to be respected. I'm open to all possible outcomes but Scoops' presentation of the known evidence certainly makes for a compelling argument in support of suicide. Again, I'm not totally convinced of that myself, but let me ask you this: if Maura went up to NH with the intention of doing herself harm, but while up there was murdered, would Scoops' theory be "correct"? Obviously in that scenario we may never know what her true motivation was for actually going up there, and that scenario is also statistically improbable. Then again, most people don't drive 3 hours away in the dead of winter on an obscure Monday night and then go missing for the next 11 years, so who knows. Suffice to say that whatever her motivations were for making the trip, two of them probably weren't to become a murder or accident victim, yet either one might've happened.

 

[BillNH]

So what has Fred Murray ever done to James Renner? The amount of slander against the guy (Murray) on Renners blog is astounding. Actually, it's a disgrace. Is this what you get for not wanting to talk to mr. Renner?

And for anyone saying Fred Murray should be more open or share more information, it's very simple: he owes us nothing.

The very first exposure I had to this case was watching the Disappeared episode. Prior to that all I knew was that a college girl went missing down the road a year before I moved to the area. What I came away with from the disappeared episode was that her father acted creepy and untruthful. I also thought Billy's mother played a much too prominent role in Maura's life. It is no wonder that Fred and Sharron are the two people that get the most negative things said about them. Maybe its just Fred's personality, maybe he knows more or was more involved in her disappearance, but something about him doesn't sit right with far too many complete strangers to single out James Renner as the instigator of Fred's bad press. I know many MANY people have the same impression of Fred. That is not James Renner's fault and Fred should not get a pass on scrutiny just because he is her father.

 

[cascade]

Hi Scoops,

Although I agree with you that the circumstances in which she left and her behaviour are very alarming indeed, and she must almost certainly have been in a desperate state of mind, asking whether she was suicidal or not, doesn't seem that that useful to me.

If her remains are ever found it will likely be impossible to conclude whether it was suicide or not. They will probably conclude that she died of exposure and her death ruled accidental or by misadventure.

Focusing on something that we simply cannot know (her intentions) makes matters only more complicated. After all, she needn't have been suicidal for the rest of your theory to still be the right one (that she basically died by her own doing). (For some reason the suicide notion seems very upsetting to a lot people here.)

Anyway, I hope you understand I'm not being critical of your work, which I really value.

 

[Caffeine]

I was far more put off by Sharon's personality, than Fred's based on Disappeared and other media. Perhaps because I'm from New England, Fred just strikes me as your average born and raised NE person: blunt, sometimes abrasive. I don't sense anything overly elusive or fictitious about his account. If anything perhaps he got too caught up in painting Maura as your average good girl, brushing off any negative portrayals. So perhaps in a way that was a hindrance, but to what extent, I don't know. I don't think there is any agenda beyond that. People deal with things differently, and the fact he took the time and money to sue the state of NH and did countless interviews doesn't suggest to me he's hiding much, if anything.

Sharon on the other hand, I dunno. I doubt she too knows anything pivotal to this case but just her well-to-do and overly casual attitude was odd to me. She seems so matter of a fact about it, it seems almost like she lacks compassion about the ordeal.

 

[Fireweed]

Not that he needs me to defend him, but Scoops has put more time and literal effort into Maura's case than virtually anyone else on this board, so his opinions have to be respected. I'm open to all possible outcomes but Scoops' presentation of the known evidence certainly makes for a compelling argument in support of suicide. Again, I'm not totally convinced of that myself, but let me ask you this: if Maura went up to NH with the intention of doing herself harm, but while up there was murdered, would Scoops' theory be "correct"? Obviously in that scenario we may never know what her true motivation was for actually going up there, and that scenario is also statistically improbable. Then again, most people don't drive 3 hours away in the dead of winter on an obscure Monday night and then go missing for the next 11 years, so who knows. Suffice to say that whatever her motivations were for making the trip, two of them probably weren't to become a murder or accident victim, yet either one might've happened.

I do not mind Scoops' theories or his research. What bothers me personally is that he has a history of using all of his research as strong evidence that he is right and others are wrong. I have seen him shut down several good conversations here that are not going on the suicide theory. He also strawmans other people's posts to make us look stupid. He claims to have lots of stuff just at his house that he refuses to post online (though I see with the podcast some of that is changing). So he refuses to make most of the research he uses to "prove his point" public yet we here on the board are just supposed to assume that he has all this stuff he claims to have. It's so beyond absurd. I know that several people here think that Scoops is not getting the respect he deserves, and that may or may not be true, because over the years Scoops has claimed to have done a lot of research, yet he has never created a website or blog where we can all view this research for ourselves. I won't know if Scoops' research is worthy of respect until I see it for myself. I find that to be perfectly reasonable yet I know that many people here require limited evidence so I am sure that I will get lots of responses about how I am just supposed to trust that Scoops has all the evidence he claims to have and that he is right in his conclusions.

Scoops, please create a blog and put up the boxes of documents you claim to have. You can just take a picture with your phone; it does not have to be fancy. I know you have done a lot of research on this case, but we do not know you and so you will have to post what you have in order for your secret research to have credibility. I asked a while back that you do this. I can think of no reason why you would not unless you are fibbing about the information you claim to have.

 

[Lolacat]

if Maura went up to NH with the intention of doing herself harm, but while up there was murdered, would Scoops' theory be "correct"? Obviously in that scenario we may never know what her true motivation was for actually going up there, and that scenario is also statistically improbable. Then again, most people don't drive 3 hours away in the dead of winter on an obscure Monday night and then go missing for the next 11 years, so who knows. Suffice to say that whatever her motivations were for making the trip, two of them probably weren't to become a murder or accident victim, yet either one might've happened.

Is this statistically improbable? This is a VERY important point you make. People who are deeply troubled are far more likely to make risky or unwise decisions when they are very unhappy. There have been several cases on the disappeared programme where people have been deeply unhappy and have ended up being harmed by others as a direct result of the decisions they have made whilst under the influence of such unhappiness. Their actions leading up to their disappearance are indicative of this. This is NOT to say that they are to blame in any way, it is certainly not their fault if others harm them. BUT, if you are very troubled you are far more likely to engage in behaviour that is risky- e.g., drugs or alcohol, lying to those close to you, hiding stuff, going places alone to sort stuff out in your head etc etc.. This naturally makes you more vulnerable to harm than if you were feeling content, confident and in control of your circumstances. It is far easier to take advantage of someone who is insecure or in a bad place emotionally, than someone who is confident and self assured.

 

[scoops]

I do not mind Scoops' theories or his research. What bothers me personally is that he has a history of using all of his research as strong evidence that he is right and others are wrong. I have seen him shut down several good conversations here that are not going on the suicide theory. He also strawmans other people's posts to make us look stupid. He claims to have lots of stuff just at his house that he refuses to post online (though I see with the podcast some of that is changing). So he refuses to make most of the research he uses to "prove his point" public yet we here on the board are just supposed to assume that he has all this stuff he claims to have. It's so beyond absurd. I know that several people here think that Scoops is not getting the respect he deserves, and that may or may not be true, because over the years Scoops has claimed to have done a lot of research, yet he has never created a website or blog where we can all view this research for ourselves. I won't know if Scoops' research is worthy of respect until I see it for myself. I find that to be perfectly reasonable yet I know that many people here require limited evidence so I am sure that I will get lots of responses about how I am just supposed to trust that Scoops has all the evidence he claims to have and that he is right in his conclusions.

Scoops, please create a blog and put up the boxes of documents you claim to have. You can just take a picture with your phone; it does not have to be fancy. I know you have done a lot of research on this case, but we do not know you and so you will have to post what you have in order for your secret research to have credibility. I asked a while back that you do this. I can think of no reason why you would not unless you are fibbing about the information you claim to have.

I have no secret documents or no murder weapons or no suicide notes in my possession.

I have what everyone else has always had 100 percent access to concerning this case.

I have taken a very objective approach to come to my conclusion and that is where I believe I differ from others who wish for a better outcome for Maura or want a more mysterious case to talk about

 

[TessDeco]

I have no secret documents or no murder weapons or no suicide notes in my possession.

I have what everyone else has always had 100 percent access to concerning this case.

I have taken a very objective approach to come to my conclusion and that is where I believe I differ from others who wish for a better outcome for Maura or want a more mysterious case to talk about

I think you did a great job presenting your thoughts on this case objectively on the Missing Maura podcast. I especially appreciate that you don't over speculate or criticize the Murray family, especially Fred. I've read way too much of that in this case. No one knows what Fred Murray is thinking and honestly, I don't blame him for avoiding the on-line interest in this case. This is his daughter people are talking about, exposing every little thing about her life, too often with a negative slant attached. I know some of Fred's behavior has raised questions but Fred seems damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. In reality, he doesn't owe anyone any explanations.

As for people promoting their own conclusions about Maura fate, we are all just guessing. No one is more right or wrong than anyone else. No amount of research so far by anyone has given us the real truth and we may never know more until Maura is found some day. I can only hope, as this Podcast moves forward, that the Podcasters focus more on the facts of this case without all the drama and speculation. Anyways, I hope you will do more Podcasts in the future.

 

[bragi]

This morning James Renner posted a notice that he has received and corroborated "alarming" new information about Maura Murray and people she knew near the time of her disappearance.

This information is important enough that, in addition to rethinking the purpose of the "tailpipe rag," Renner is now on the fence regarding believing her alive or dead.

What could this new information be? Does anyone have any knowledge or reasoned speculation?

http://mauramurray.blogspot.com/2015/10/new-info-will-not-be-released-at-this.html

 

[Migmuu]

This morning James Renner posted a notice that he has received and corroborated "alarming" new information about Maura Murray and people she knew near the time of her disappearance.

This information is important enough that, in addition to rethinking the purpose of the "tailpipe rag," Renner is now on the fence regarding believing her alive or dead.

What could this new information be? Does anyone have any knowledge or reasoned speculation?

http://mauramurray.blogspot.com/2015/10/new-info-will-not-be-released-at-this.html

No idea, but honestly, I take everything Renner says with a massive grain of salt. He reminds me WAY too much of Rick Baker from the McStay family case: the family wants nothing to do with him, nobody else wants to talk to him, he claimed Maura was a psychopath with NO evidence, and he's needlessly cast suspicion on the family (namely Fred Murray) when there's no evidence of wrongdoing on their part.

Seriously, Renner tried to connect Vester Flanigan to Alden Olson. Because the poster of the top YouTube comment had the name "Vester Flanigan", on a website where you can (and people often do) change the username to whatever you want. He proceeded to talk about it on the Missing Maura Murray podcast for like five minutes. A responsible journalist wouldn't have put that on air without confirming that it was indeed Flanigan's account, and a responsible journalist most certainly would not have gone so far as to report that Olson possibly "inspired" the shooting with the amount of evidence he had (which was none).

 

[copy_kitty]

Maura is on my mind tonight. I hope that we will know what really happened. My thoughts are with her friends and family. As a member of the Websleuths community, I know that much brighter minds than mine have tried to find her.

 

[Caffeine]

I was always skeptical of Maura running away to live a life in hiding. Doing so successfully is not a common occurrence by any means. It's not impossible and I'd never rule it out, but it's not a scenario that seemed probable to me.

With that said, it seems like Renner may lean to suicide or foul play as a more likely outcome.

It's ironic because he always found foul play a one in a million type thing, when successful voluntary disappearance for over a decade is a pretty uncommon event as well.

 

[Fireweed]

I was always skeptical of Maura running away to live a life in hiding. Doing so successfully is not a common occurrence by any means. It's not impossible and I'd never rule it out, but it's not a scenario that seemed probable to me.

With that said, it seems like Renner may lean to suicide or foul play as a more likely outcome.

It's ironic because he always found foul play a one in a million type thing, when successful voluntary disappearance for over a decade is a pretty uncommon event as well.

I agree that foul play is the most likely scenario when a young woman vanishes, but do we really know if it is really that uncommon to voluntarily disappear? I mean, if people are successful then we don't know, right? And we do have examples of people who pulled in off for many, many years.

 

[Caffeine]

I agree that foul play is the most likely scenario when a young woman vanishes, but do we really know if it is really that uncommon to voluntarily disappear? I mean, if people are successful then we don't know, right? And we do have examples of people who pulled in off for many, many years.

You are right, it's tricky to assign a percentage or statistic to something like this because, in many cases we don't know or never will know.

But generally it's not something we hear that often, right? A person vanishes for 10+ years and found safe, after living under the radar. But because we don't hear about it, does it make it more probable?

When you weigh that against the scores of folks who disappear and are found deceased, I don't think it's in the same realm.

I surely wouldn't think after 10+ years missing that the probability of her being alive is even in the same ballpark as deceased.

But again, too many unknown variables to truly say for sure and with this case the scant evidence could spell a multitude of outcomes.