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

[Fireweed]

If I had a family member missing, I would be very happy if someone was writing a book about it. Sorry, but to me, the Murrays are very strange people in this regard. Renner reached out to them before they ever saw his blog, and they still shut him down. It is so damn odd to me that I can only suspect that they either know what happened to Maura or they do not want her found. I do not consider my thoughts on this to be a "character assassination." The reason many of us bring this up is to make a very important point in this case, namely that the Murrays seem to know something material to this case that they are not revealing. In fact it is my own belief that this is the reason why they refused to talk to Renner (note again that he contacted them before the blog went up).

 

[Jmoose]

If I had a family member missing, I would be very happy if someone was writing a book about it. Sorry, but to me, the Murrays are very strange people in this regard. Renner reached out to them before they ever saw his blog, and they still shut him down. It is so damn odd to me that I can only suspect that they either know what happened to Maura or they do not want her found. I do not consider my thoughts on this to be a "character assassination." The reason many of us bring this up is to make a very important point in this case, namely that the Murrays seem to know something material to this case that they are not revealing. In fact it is my own belief that this is the reason why they refused to talk to Renner (note again that he contacted them before the blog went up).

I was actually referring to JR's character assassination of whoever is his suspect of the moment. Maybe the Murrays are odd-not against the law, and not an indicator of guilt. And they have no responsibility to speak to him at all. So far, I am not aware of any track record for JR solving cases, and I am quite sure that the murray family has been advised by people who have some expertise in this, not to engage in any kind of conversation with him. That's just the way it is. I know that some people here are convinced that local LE are somehow involved in her disappearance, and that that ought to encourage the family to seek help outside of LE-the Murrays, for whatever reason, don't believe JR is going to be helpful to their cause. It seems to bother him that they won't talk to him, and I think FM is going to pay for it, like Fettinger did. By the way, I am calling him Fettinger, even though that isn't what JR called him, to protect him from Googling.

 

[Fireweed]

Fair enough. Renner has never solved a crime. I guess if my brother went missing, that is not what would matter to me the most. The most important thing to me would be to get as much publicity as possible in the hope that it would lead to him. You're right, the Murrays are entitled to be odd, but guess what, if I point that out, that is not assassinating their collective characters.

FM has also been a reluctant communicator with law enforcement, you know, the people who actually do have a tract record of solving crimes. I guess someone with some expertise than I certainly do not have, advised him to make this extra-brilliant move.

 

[Jmoose]

Fair enough. Renner has never solved a crime. I guess if my brother went missing, that is not what would matter to me the most. The most important thing to me would be to get as much publicity as possible in the hope that it would lead to him. You're right, the Murrays are entitled to be odd, but guess what, if I point that out, that is not assassinating their collective characters.

FM has also been a reluctant communicator with law enforcement, you know, the people who actually do have a tract record of solving crimes. I guess someone with some expertise than I certainly do not have, advised him to make this extra-brilliant move.

I wasn't talking about you in relation to character assassination, but rather James Renner, as I have already said. And just because James Renner is a "journalist" doesn't mean that he is going to be helpful to them. If his (and your) opinion is that the Murray family must be hiding something if they don't talk to him, I have no interest in debating this-James' plan is to make money by writing a book, whether they talk to him or not; it just makes the book a more interesting read if they do. If they don't, then he will punish them, it seems. Her case has had plenty of publicity already-do you think that by talking to JR, it'll break the case wide open? I don't...it wouldn't surprise me if FM ran James' request past an attorney, who said "I've read some of his stuff-better not ". I don't know that to be the case, but if it was me, I'd have checked him out first.

 

[goldiegirl]

I really don't understand the family on one hand raising a stink about supposedly wanting more attention paid to the case yet refusing to talk to Renner from the beginning. It honestly makes no sense. There's a great opportunity for them right there, and they're turning it down while still asking for more attention to be paid to Maura's disappearance. They're basically talking out of both sides of their mouths. Even if they do have some type of issue with Renner, I'd want my side heard if I were them, and I'd be happy to have the book published so it gets people curious about her case.

 

[Lolacat]

I really don't understand the family on one hand raising a stink about supposedly wanting more attention paid to the case yet refusing to talk to Renner from the beginning. It honestly makes no sense. There's a great opportunity for them right there, and they're turning it down while still asking for more attention to be paid to Maura's disappearance. They're basically talking out of both sides of their mouths. Even if they do have some type of issue with Renner, I'd want my side heard if I were them, and I'd be happy to have the book published so it gets people curious about her case.

Its because they are in a quandary. They have a deep seated need to protect themselves and they KNOW that digging will unearth some unpleasant truths about their family and possibly Maura. But, at the same time they want Maura found. They really are between a rock and hard place. Thats why they welcome the superficial, warm and fuzzy, "bless you, and all our hearts are united together" stuff but reject the more clinical and invasive attempts to dig into the circumstances surrounding Maura's last days. Maybe thats exactly why they gave the handling of the website to an elderly aunt- much, much easier to keep emotional distance and keep everything *nice*.

 

[txsvicki]

Oh my, haven't been following the thread in a long time, but Charlene definitely looks like Maura, imo.

 

[JamesRenner]

For the record, JMoose, I worked with the family of Tina Harmon and successfully helped them push the police to reopen that case and then push the prosecutor to retest evidence which led to them identifying a killer.

As to Harold Bound, he was the main suspect in Amy's murder for the first 11 weeks. And for good reason. He admitted to be attracted to the 10 year old girl. He also had a history in the state of Washington for raping a 14 yr old. Fettinger lied to me in order to cover that up.

 

[Jmoose]

I really don't understand the family on one hand raising a stink about supposedly wanting more attention paid to the case yet refusing to talk to Renner from the beginning. It honestly makes no sense. There's a great opportunity for them right there, and they're turning it down while still asking for more attention to be paid to Maura's disappearance. They're basically talking out of both sides of their mouths. Even if they do have some type of issue with Renner, I'd want my side heard if I were them, and I'd be happy to have the book published so it gets people curious about her case.

I wonder if it might be different if it was the Today Show or Good Morning America, rather than James Renner? Most people haven't heard of him, and I'm not sure his book would actually be in every Barnes and Noble across the country-not sure if his first book was, because I got it on Amazon-I found that book while looking for information about a case with which I was already familiar. Who can tell why they don't want to talk to him? It's possible that they aren't talking to any media (seems silly not to), but there was the episode of Disappeared, so they did at one time talk to somebody. Maybe JR rubbed FM the wrong way in their first conversation. There are many reasons that we will likely never know. I do know that JR has burnt bridges with the family by the things he's said about them in his blog and here at Websleuths. That's never a good way to get anyone's cooperation.

 

[Jmoose]

For the record, JMoose, I worked with the family of Tina Harmon and successfully helped them push the police to reopen that case and then push the prosecutor to retest evidence which led to them identifying a killer.

As to Harold Bound, he was the main suspect in Amy's murder for the first 11 weeks. And for good reason. He admitted to be attracted to the 10 year old girl. He also had a history in the state of Washington for raping a 14 yr old. Fettinger lied to me in order to cover that up.

Well-good for you. Why isn't Harold Bound still a suspect? And now that is is no longer a suspect, how is the damage undone (I know-he's a rapist, so you can say anything you want about him). As far as Hollie lying to you...I'd probably lie, too, not necessarily to save my brother, but to try and protect my reputation, and the reputation of my business. HB was never a problem for the years I rode and worked at that farm (when I was a young girl). Look-my point is that people have a right to speak or not speak to anyone as it relates to the disappearance of their loved one. There is likely only one actual suspect in Amy's disappearance, but there were lots of people who have been dragged into the mud between then and now-do you honestly think it's helpful to Maura to accuse her father and her siblings of all kinds of offenses, because you have determined that they are low-riders, anyway, so it doesn't matter? Go for it, then-do you really think that so many doors have been shut for you in Maura's case because everyone is hiding something sinister?

 

[Fireweed]

Ok, whatever-her family doesn't matter...you've decided that her family, unlike so many of the families of crime victims and other people who have disappeared, is somehow deserving of derision. I am not sure that it matters that your family in Texas hasn't heard of Maura Murray, since she isn't likely to be in Texas. Does your family in Texas know anything about Amy Mihaljevic? You said you didn't know anything about her case, but the "best selling author" of whom you spoke wrote a book about her, and has a blog about her murder, too. He's going to write a book about Maura, whether or not the Murray family speaks to him-it won't make any difference. And since JR isn't part of law enforcement, there's all kinds of trouble he could cause when or if they find Maura, and a suspect, if there is one. If it was my daughter, I am not sure I would go near him. For what it's worth, I don't think she's in a homeless encampment-she's likely dead and has been since the night she crashed her car-up there in NH. If they find her, it'll be by accident.

Not everyone will hear of this case even if a best-selling author writes a book about it. But a lot more people will hear about it, way more than currently know about it. And how do you know Maura is not in Texas? If I were Maura that is exactly where I would be. She knows no one here and very few people know about her. To me it would make sense for her to be here in Texas.

I do not think that the Murrays deserve derision. I think that they do not deserve protection. Why? Because they know a lot of important things about this case that they are not sharing, and a young woman is missing. She could possibly be chained up in a guy's basement somewhere. This family has unilaterally decided that they know what is best, when clearly they do not because no progress has been made on this case in 10 years. It is perfectly fair to call them out on this, and I have no moral conundrum doing so. In fact, I find it immoral not to. A young woman is missing, possibly in connection with a criminal act.

Finally it is okay for someone to be suspected of a crime they did not commit. I know this is really hard for people to grasp and it is upsetting, but we have criminal law procedures in this country for a reason: people are accused of crimes they did not commit. It is okay to question whether someone did or did not commit a crime. People here do it with Butch Atwood and Rick Forcier all the time. The police investigated those men, found there was no (or weak) evidence against them at let them go. That is perfectly okay. Those men have protections and no one here is calling for a lynch mob.

When people here "bash" Fred Murray, they are doing what any good crime solver would do: we are questioning his motivations and we are playing devil's advocate when we attempt to impeach him. When I evaluate FM's decision not to talk to Renner, I do so holistically. It is not just this one thing that makes me question FM's version of events, rather it is a whole lot of things that lead me to the conclusion that he is lying.

But I know, I know, I should not be such a meanie. The only witness to much a Maura's pre-disappearance weekend should not be questioned because he is a dad after all.

 

[Fireweed]

Why isn't Harold Bound still a suspect? And now that is is no longer a suspect, how is the damage undone (I know-he's a rapist, so you can say anything you want about him).

It is not up to Renner nor the public nor anyone to "undo the damage" of someone having been a suspect in a murder case. This is why we have a criminal justice system. Anyone can be accused of anything. This is why we have procedures and trials and appeals. It is why you can take your lawyer with you and why you do not have to talk. It is why you can confront your accusers.

You know what it does not do? It does not stop the rest of the world from thinking that you suck. You have no right to that.

 

[Lolacat]

I happened to watch the film "Enough" with Jennifer Lopez the other day. Its about an abused wife who runs away from her husband and starts a new life in a different town with another identity. She searches local records for women who were born around the same time as her and who have subsequently died. Then, she requests a copy of their birth certificate. From that, she gets a whole new identity. Apparently, its called "ghosting". I must admit, I am skeptical of the idea that Maura ran away to start a new life elsewhere but it made me wonder- how possible is it to obtain an entirely new identity? Ghosting has become much harder nowadays due to increased communication between agencies and electronically stored information. If Maura did run away, would she be doomed to a life of working *under the table*? what about her driving licence, her passport or renting a property? I know it has been done before by people so obviously, it *is* possible but it would make life incredibly hard

 

[JeannaT]

Lolacat, interesting about "ghosting". I don't know how anyone could do that now, though. 40 years ago, you sure could. 100 years ago you could just slip in and out of societies and no one would have any idea or any easy way of verifying you are who you say you are. And if you had access to a printing press, you could manufacture your own documents and no one would have a clue in the world that you aren't who you say you are.

I don't think you can do that now. I guess you could, but you'd be stuck with taking jobs that pay you without knowing your social security number. So you could mow lawns or clean houses.

 

[Fireweed]

He did the same thing in the Amy Mihaljevic case-went after the Fettinger son (from the horse farm), and now you never hear a word about him-but it wasn't right. Made the woman who now runs the operation (the former suspect's sister) sound like a witch. She (Holly Fettinger) was my riding instructor, and wasn't a witch-had some unkind things to say about Holly's mother Grace, who was a nice lady.

I just finished reading Renner's book on Amy. He did not "go after" Bound; he interviewed him for the book after finding out he was a suspect in the case. So?

He did not make Holly out to be a "witch." He portrayed her for what she was on the two times that he spoke to her: a person who lies to cover their reputation and their business. Essentially, he portrayed her to be like 99% of the people on the planet.

I also saw nothing in the book that said that Bound was a convicted rapist (unless I missed it).

BTW, if it is true that Bound is a rapist of a child, and his mother allowed him to live on site at a business that caters almost exclusively to young women a girls, then by God she should be portrayed in a negative light!

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

You know what, now I'm interested a bit. She looks A LOT like Maura. However, the Moulton thing is a stretch. But... is there someone still living near that intersection who could have picked both women up. I still don't see any evidence that Maura's case is an abduction, but their similar features says something.

Maybe Maura is really an alien human hybrid clone of Jean, created at Dulce Base, and programmed to return to the same site at a certain time.

Or maybe I've been reading too many conspiracy theories lately...

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

If I had a family member missing, I would be very happy if someone was writing a book about it. Sorry, but to me, the Murrays are very strange people in this regard. Renner reached out to them before they ever saw his blog, and they still shut him down. It is so damn odd to me that I can only suspect that they either know what happened to Maura or they do not want her found. I do not consider my thoughts on this to be a "character assassination." The reason many of us bring this up is to make a very important point in this case, namely that the Murrays seem to know something material to this case that they are not revealing. In fact it is my own belief that this is the reason why they refused to talk to Renner (note again that he contacted them before the blog went up).

I agree completely. AFAIK, they shut most journalists down if they are contacted, which seems extremely counterproductive if they are still looking for her.

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

I wasn't talking about you in relation to character assassination, but rather James Renner, as I have already said. And just because James Renner is a "journalist" doesn't mean that he is going to be helpful to them. If his (and your) opinion is that the Murray family must be hiding something if they don't talk to him, I have no interest in debating this-James' plan is to make money by writing a book, whether they talk to him or not; it just makes the book a more interesting read if they do. If they don't, then he will punish them, it seems. Her case has had plenty of publicity already-do you think that by talking to JR, it'll break the case wide open? I don't...it wouldn't surprise me if FM ran James' request past an attorney, who said "I've read some of his stuff-better not ". I don't know that to be the case, but if it was me, I'd have checked him out first.

Speaking of character assassination...

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

I happened to watch the film "Enough" with Jennifer Lopez the other day. Its about an abused wife who runs away from her husband and starts a new life in a different town with another identity. She searches local records for women who were born around the same time as her and who have subsequently died. Then, she requests a copy of their birth certificate. From that, she gets a whole new identity. Apparently, its called "ghosting". I must admit, I am skeptical of the idea that Maura ran away to start a new life elsewhere but it made me wonder- how possible is it to obtain an entirely new identity? Ghosting has become much harder nowadays due to increased communication between agencies and electronically stored information. If Maura did run away, would she be doomed to a life of working *under the table*? what about her driving licence, her passport or renting a property? I know it has been done before by people so obviously, it *is* possible but it would make life incredibly hard

That's so interesting. I watched a Disappeared recently where the person actually turned up later, after someone recognized her after seeing the show, but she was able to walk away with nothing and get a job with no I.d. by saying she had fled an abusive boyfriend (this explained why she had nothing), and had lost her I.d. in Katrina. The hotel that had hired her said these were definite "buttons" for them, and they hired her with no proof of anything. Later she was able to obtain fraudulent I.d.. within two years she had a job, I.d., an apartment.

If Maura started a new life and employed this ghosting technique, after this long, she really could be anywhere. (Even Texas.)

 

[Fireweed]

I still think the best insight Renner would get into this case would be to interview actual people who took off to start a new life. I am not saying that is what Maura did, but if she did, I think it would be helpful to understand the mind of a person who does that.