docwho3 said:Those weren't the only discrepancies and points to ponder that I have noted. . .
In that part of my post I was addressing all readers and was not responding to your post.murraydwyer said:I'm well aware of that, I was trying to address points you raised about which I had information not generally available. . .
I simply said that I might have more "points to ponder" to post in the future. You looking for us to be arguing?
The main thing that had me questioning the truthfulness of the individuals was the posted report in thread part one that said that the schools website listed a different schedule. That made the question of true shift schedule relevant.murraydwyer said:I have no reason to believe that this person lied, I have no reason to believe that Maura's supervisor also lied and can't imagine why they would have lied well over a year later...while they were acquaintences of Maura's I have no knowledge that would lead me to believe that they were closely enough conected to Maura to have any reason in the world to lie. As to UMASS "officials"...when issues have been raised with them, family members have been referred to the NHSP, which is one of the reasons it took us so long to locate the two mentioned above...
When someone disappears and if foul play has taken place, as some seem to think in this case, then it is usually someone that knew the victem who had something to do with it. So any aquaintance who knew Maura even slightly falls into that dangerous category.
docwho3 said:. . .Also I have a question or two: When did Maura first begin wearing her hair up all the time?. . .
If true it fits with an idea I have had for awhile.murraydwyer said:. . .The only answer I have to that is that I have seen family photo albums and other pictures and have only found one or two where Maura's hair was down from about the age 15 or 16. And I was specifically looking for pictures with her hair down.. . .
Note: The above question was the first point in that post that was addressed specifically to you,murraydwyer. The rest of that post before and after was open to anyone with knowledge on the points. Again, I don't say that to be mean but only to be clear. It certainly did not hurt to have the other points responded to. I just wanted to be sure you understood the other points were not addressed to any one person.docwho3 said:. . .Oh and Murraydwyer, On the shift times you posted about: Did you get those times from Maura/family or from college officials? I don't ask to be argumentative but to be very sure I understand the source of that info.
Any college age student could tell their family they had to work certain hours when they actually did something else with their time but if the schedule came from official sources then that is a different thing altogether. . .
That is good to know.murraydwyer said:. . .The times as stated in my post came from and email sent by somebody who also worked security at UMASS. This person is not a family member. . .
docwho3 said:. . .Since evidently L.E. felt so strongly about the phone calls, was Kathleen ever poly'd about the phone calls? It would seem to be one way to quickly clear up a point even if a painful thing for family. . . .
You may be right but without the poly you may never know.murraydwyer said:. . .To my knowledge, Kathleen was never asked to take a polygraph...I am not sure I would agree that L.E. felt all that strongly about phone calls...it would seem to me that if that were the case her phone called for the day she disappeared would have been checked into. As to the repeated questions to Kathleen, I suspect it was a questioning technique used by law enforcement. . .
If I was Kathleen I would not want that possibility hanging in the minds of relatives over the years,especially after such rough questioning by L.E., and I would likely insist on taking the test. Still since the test was not done its a moot point.