NH NH - Maura Murray, 21, Haverhill, 9 Feb 2004 - # 3

[armywife210]

can some one help me out here pls. i read the threads on her today and do not recall seeing anything about Maura being upset about her mom being ill. were her mom and dad together two yrs ago? was here mom sick then? thanks

Hi Petra. Her mom wasn't ill when Maura disappeared. Her parents divorced long ago but Maura remained extremely close to her father and they spent massive amounts of time together right up until two days before she disappeared. She had a good relationship with her mom as well.

 

[armywife210]

did maura take "time out" for herself before? why would she feeel the need after just coming back from winter break- the second week of school to do so?

during winter break was she taking classes, working, was she home with family?

did maura live in a dorm- single room or have roomate?

what were the financial arrangements for school? did she get money from parents?

Maura was an extremely bright person. She had a full scholarship from the time she left West Point from what I understand. She also had two part time jobs, but even with that she still wouldn't have much money to survive on.
Her dad was helping her find a new car but I am not sure what the financial arrangements would have been. I could find out for you if you need me to.
She had a lot of good friends there and back home. Ofcourse, there was her boyfriend.
Her Christmas Vacation was far from that. She did a huge amount of travelling around to see everyone and just hearing about it makes me tired.
Maura liked to take charge of her own life, and her own problems. She had free reign to do so. She didn't like to worry other people. She had never really taken off to take time out before... but she had other ways that she dealt with stress.

 

[CyberLaw]

A reporter is required to verify the "facts" he reports, so as not to spread gossip, libel and slander. So not to be sued also.

A paper can and will be sued. big time, if they cannot verify that the information they "printed" was "factual" and prove that it is based in fact and not a "figment" of someone's imagination.

Before a reporter prints a story, he will have to prove to his editior the "credible" sources and usually more then one source. The "facts" are required to be "stringently" verified. If there was an "innocent" mistake made, then of course a correction is issued.

So if it was reported that Maura "cleaned" out her 'bureau" and emptied all of her drawers of clothing and removed the artwork from the walls. Then that is a fact, not a myth.

I hope this clarifies the difference between "fact" and "fiction". Just because this "fact" does not fit in with the 'story put forth my the Murray family" and is disbelieved by the Murray family does not make it any less factual and true. They chosse to disbelief fact that do not support their "myth" so as to hold on to that "myth" then that is their choice.

I also recall at the time of the accident when LE came upon the "accident" scene that alcohol had been poured out in the snow right at the accident. This again was reported as fact.......based in fact and reality. Actually If I recall, the reporter was at the scene.

Please don't try my patience or intellegence with some "myth" and "speculation" about raccoons coming upon the cup and pouring it out in the snow, or a dog wondering the roads of New Hampshire taking the cup out of the car and then for reasons unknown pouring the "alcoholic beverage" out in the snow as to avoid LE. Please......

Why would LE be concerned about Fred Murray knowing whom these witness are and why also would they be concened about the "intimidation" of witness by Fred Murray et al.

Of course Fred Murray would disagree and "have problems" with anyone who reported to LE the facts supporting "running away from your "loved ones"" as opposed to the "fictional" theory of foul play put forth by the Murray family.

He may feel that he has to "advise" them to support his "myth" and question them as to what they reported to LE.

I find that very, very telling, as the Judge and LE seem to know first hand what Fred Murray is like and what he is capable of doing.

 

[tuppence]

Cyberlaw - you are joking right? You've been here awhile and followed a lot of cases. The papers have printed statements in almost all cases I have seen that have later turned out to be false and I can't remember a single correction. In many cases there were comments made by the police that later turned out to be wrong. In most cases there turns out to be a lot of misinformation out there. Often much of it is innocent and sometimes the police is planting information. More often papers just get things wrong in their hurry to get a story printed.

Already in this case there have been several things the police have said (or the papers/media have said they said) that later turned out to be untrue(about the letters, call etc.) -

A reporter is required to verify the "facts" he reports, so as not to spread gossip, libel and slander. So not to be sued also.

A paper can and will be sued. big time, if they cannot verify that the information they "printed" was "factual" and prove that it is based in fact and not a "figment" of someone's imagination.

Before a reporter prints a story, he will have to prove to his editior the "credible" sources and usually more then one source. The "facts" are required to be "stringently" verified. If there was an "innocent" mistake made, then of course a correction is issued.

So if it was reported that Maura "cleaned" out her 'bureau" and emptied all of her drawers of clothing and removed the artwork from the walls. Then that is a fact, not a myth.

.

 

[KatherineQ]

Cyber - I don't think there's any dispute all of Maura's things were in boxes, and the pictures were not on the walls.

I think the point of dispute is whether Maura had just not unpacked anything since returning from Christmas. The point of dispute is, had she packed up all her stuff to leave, or had she just not unpacked it in the weeks since she had returned.

To me, that's also telling, living out of boxes. No one is too busy to dump a box of clothing in a drawer, given a couple weeks time.

And it also points to no one had been in her dorm room in weeks who could help solve this fairly simple question -

 

[Peabody]

Cyberlaw - you are joking right? You've been here awhile and followed a lot of cases. The papers have printed statements in almost all cases I have seen that have later turned out to be false and I can't remember a single correction. In many cases there were comments made by the police that later turned out to be wrong. In most cases there turns out to be a lot of misinformation out there. Often much of it is innocent and sometimes the police is planting information. More often papers just get things wrong in their hurry to get a story printed.

Already in this case there have been several things the police have said (or the papers/media have said they said) that later turned out to be untrue(about the letters, call etc.) -

Tuppence,

Well said about the "state of affairs" as to media reports, not only in Maura's case but in most.

Steve Huff, a most highly respected blogger and mystery solver, wrote these words:

Published Thursday, January 05, 2006 by Steve Huff.
The Harvey Family Murders... Rumors, Revenge...
Rumors. Damned lies and rumors. I can't think of a crime that has been covered in this weblog in the past year that didn't have a plethora of rumors swirling all around it -- frequently even after trials are over and bad people locked away.

<snip>

the mainstream media, with that story, Tuesday night, did precisely the thing many mainstream journalists constantly lambaste bloggers for doing. They reported rumor as if it were fact.

More at Link: http://darksidesteve.blogspot.com/

Truly, only those who knew Maura well know about her; and many questions regarding her missing are only known by Maura: ie why and where and for how long did she plan to be gone.

IF she has been harmed, the key to that question is held by the person(s) involved.

Sadly, because LE chose not to look for signs of foul play in Maura's case, IF there is foul play, it most likely will not be determined unless someone comes forward (because LE saw no evidence at the scene where Maura vanished, they said "no foul play" instead of questioning neighbors and looking for evidence until it is probably too late; however in the case of Brooke Wilburger, the only evidence of foul play, aside from her absence, was her remaing sandals; there would be some websleuthers and LE that would say that was not evidence of foul play, only the remainder of a sensible decision to wash lamp posts in warm weather without ones shoes - thankfully for the Wilburger family, LE chose to interpret Brooke's absence as evidence of foul play.)


With special prayers for Maura and her loved ones at this difficult time - 2 years to the day that they learned of her missing.


.

 

[KatherineQ]

Peabody, I think sometimes people are too close to the situation to see it clearly.

Like with Olga Khaleel, who ran off from her husband a couple weeks ago. He couldn't see it, he honestly couldn't see that she probably left, but everyone at a distance could see it, who didn't know her, and just had the benefit of reading newspaper articles. They could see it. He couldn't.

It seems like people can be too close to the person missing to have real perspective, and look at real facts.

No one thinks that of Brooke Wilburger, and no one ever thought that. Those close to her, those reading about her, no one thought she just up and decided to leave everyone behind. THe clues and the facts weren't there, and the personality wasn't there.

With Maura, all the clues that you can see from the distance of a stranger point clearly to her leaving on purpose. Prayers for her return.

 

[Peabody]

Peabody, I think sometimes people are too close to the situation to see it clearly.

Like with Olga Khaleel, who ran off from her husband a couple weeks ago. He couldn't see it, he honestly couldn't see that she probably left, but everyone at a distance could see it, who didn't know her, and just had the benefit of reading newspaper articles. They could see it. He couldn't.

It seems like people can be too close to the person missing to have real perspective, and look at real facts.

No one thinks that of Brooke Wilburger, and no one ever thought that. Those close to her, those reading about her, no one thought she just up and decided to leave everyone behind. THe clues and the facts weren't there, and the personality wasn't there.

With Maura, all the clues that you can see from the distance of a stranger point clearly to her leaving on purpose. Prayers for her return.

Thanks KatherineQ -


But Not ONE person who knows Maura believes that her personality in any way conforms to running away or commiting suicide. None of her family, not her fiance or his family, none of her life long friends from childhood, not her few friends at UMass.

That is why I referenced Steve Huff's article: there are so many printed rumors and mis-statements in Maura's case. Combined with the little factual knowledge and the truly many unanswered questions, her case is a deep mystery. It is a deeper mystery for strangers - they do not have the benefit of facts.

For Maura to have run away, she would have needed to get away from both family and fiance. I don't know if it was in print, but I know the fiance said he could understand Maura falling out of love with him, but he could never understand her leaving her family. And after all of this time, there is no evidence to support that she had another relationship with any other man; therefore, it seems difficult to believe that she could not have ended ONE relationship, ie fiance or family, and kept the other, and living somewhere with people that she knows and enjoying life with being loved and supported in return. Has it crossed your mind, how difficult it would be for anyone to start a new life without the benefit of companionship as well as financial resources? Could not be easy at any time in life, especially at 21, when one is so vibrant and passionate about life.

The police did not have the benefit of any clues about Maura when they announced to the family that she was a runaway and suicidal other than their deducement from the alcohol and across the counter medications left in her car. This is Fact - this is what they told the family on the evening of 2/11. It took a few days for them to learn of the email about "the death in the family" and to tie in the "Without Peril" book.

Also, RC Stevens, a highly respected pi, retired from MA SP who worked the Molly Bish case worked with the Murrays in the beginning. He was privy to most of the case information and it was his determination that foul play was involved.

The current group of private investigators also believe that foul play is the most likely cause for her missing.

Therefore, it seems unlikely to me, that the "distance of strangers" that sees clues pointing to Maura's running away is is more reliable than those who are close to the situation. It is my opinion that many read the rumors and theories and accept them as fact.

I would like to add that I know for certain that the family hopes with all of their heart that Maura is indeed a runaway.......why would anyone think they want otherwise?

I have determined that the reason my blood boils over regarding posts in support of her running away is that the majority of them end with the conclusion that everyone must stop searching for her. IF she wants to live a new life, fine. But, in addition to the heartache created by her missing, Maura should not, nor anyone that is deliberately missing, be allowed to cost the taxpayers as well as to instill fear in the hearts of those citizens living in the area of the disappearance. I have heard from citizens in NH who believe there is likely a serial killer and that the police are either not concerned or can not catch him.

 

[KatherineQ]

Peabody - I do think foul play was involved, and I don't think people should stop searching for her.

I also think at some point LE should be compelled to turn over what they know to the family, so they can make the best of whatever information is available. There seem to be so many in her circle who are being robbed of a normal life because they are dedicating their waking hours to worrying what happened to her, when LE knows critical information. That just seems wrong.

I've been depressed in my life several times, never so severely I had to be medicated, but no one ever would have guessed. No one. I carry on cheerfully, and except for taking stupid risks and sleeping too much and eating too little and pacing, no one would ever have had any idea I was depressed. I'm a stiff upper lip kind of person who would be very ashamed to say I'm sad, I'm depressed, I'm weak, I need help. I don't do that and I have kind of a disgust for people who DO do that. Even though that's irrational. ;D

Anyway, from the heart, Peabody it looks to me like her intent was to drive to her favorite place in the world, and rent a bed and breakfast room for the weekend and drink herself to death. And she wrote the professors to tell them she'd be back in a week just in case . . in case she chickened out, she'd still be able to come back. That's what I think happened.

And then, while she was trying to execute the plan something awful and unplanned happened to her.

I hope I haven't overstepped. I just think so often family is COMPLETELY surprised by suicides, no one knew the person was depressed, and then it happens. And they never knew. But the signs were there, they just didn't pick up on it because the person always acted cheerful and didn't complain.

 

[docwho3]

Well we all know that a complete stranger would have more of an idea about her habits than anyone else. To me, that is speculation on anyones part. And I certainly dont think that was ever stated to anyone as fact, but as how it appeared to the officer. . .

What a reasonable person can do is expect that if the state police investigate and make a pronouncement that they didnt just walk in and make assumptions but instead they investigate and ask question such as asking those other students if Maura had always kept her room like that or if she had ever unpacked. Maybe in some circles it is popular to act as if all L.E. are just keystone Cops from the old comedy movies but in actuality that is almost always far from the truth especially in the case of state police and up.

. . .

I, myself, carry cash on me every time I go anywhere as a safe gaurd. Why not close it out if you aren't returning? Coverup, a big coverup. . .

Cover up? Ummm what are you talking about? Have you had your morning coffee? . . and was it decaf?

Media... it most certainly doesn't make it gospel though, and most of it IS speculation on someones part. You can quote an officer as having said that it appeared anyway he thinks it appeared, but that doesn't make it fact.

No news reports aren't gospel but when you call a post pure speculation when it goes to the trouble to cite a news source that is incorrect and attacks the honesty and credibility of the posting person. If you believe that a news report was wrong you should say that you believe the news report itself was wrong.

Having said all that, one thing about this case is that any one part of it taken by itself might seem to be an innocent action but in the totality all the pieces of the puzzle that have been released to the public seem to give at least a strong picture of likelihood that Maura willfully left.

For instance: I might read a book and happen to mark a chapter and that seems innocent enough by itself.

Then you learn the book chapter I marked was one about choices that determine whether you live or die. Hmm still nothing really wrong with that by itself either.

But then you learn that the book mark I used was a pic of my younger brother and a halmark card. Oh Oh it is beginning to sound like I am planning to do away with myself. Still there is a certain amount of doubt about that. Maybe it is all coincidence.

Now you learn that I nearly cleaned out my bank account. That is innocent by itself but in conjunction with the book info it would make anyone concerned.

You learn that I had received a phone call that brought me to tears and in fact required me to be escorted home from work. Anyone can receive a phone call and be upset right? But if you take my being upset with all the other info you might get worried about my state of mind.

Now you add in that I lied to my boss at work and gave a false reason to be missing a few days. Not a terribly evil or dangerous fact by itself but combined with all the other facts it begins to form a picture of probability in the mind of the reasonable person.

Now you add in that I bought a significant quantity of alcohol. Nothing so bad about that by itself but taken with the other facts it might be worrisome.

Now you learn that I bought some tylenol when I bought the alcohol. Tylenol is not bad to purchase by itself and not necessarily wrong to purchase at the same time you purchase alcohol, but don't be surprised if the clerk looks at you funny since it is known to be used in suicide attempts. But this fact taken in conjunction with all the other facts might be very worrisome to an observer.

Now you back up and at the top of this list of facts add that I went missing and that you uncovered this chain of facts in your reading of news reports of the investigation.
*************
I could go on and on but I think you should by now get the point. This case has been full of things that, although innocent enough in single separate doses, taken together would be a huge red flag in the mind of anyone looking into the case. In Maura's case all those things and several more besides came together all in one case.

When you or others belittle the posts of those of us that looked at that amazing chain of facts and then you dare to say it is all rank speculation with no corroborating facts you should not be shocked to find that we take that amiss. The facts are that, yes, we have news reports and nothing else to go on but we didn't make up those news reports and calling a post pure "speculation with out corroborating facts" implies that the facts were made up from whole cloth. The facts and news reports exist and we (most of us) provide links so that you can go read for yourself. But what did you think those on this forum had to work with, a crystal ball?
****************
On to another point: It seems that people often assume that someone looking at this case has to choose one view or the other and that isn't really true. For me, my understanding is always subject to revision as facts surface. And I have always realized that several possibilities were never completely ruled out in this case. Thats why in my original postings of my own theory included the possibilities of Maura's death and pointed out some things that needed looking into. It is also why I have since posted some of those things again.

When I did that workup on the case and posted it I was, at first, looking for some way to explain the mysterious facts as they were reported, including what she took or did not take with her when she left. Once I felt I had explained how she got to the point of the wreck and a possible way she disappeared I came to the realization that I still did not know for sure whether she was alive or not. Just because I felt there was probably a helper who had picked her up did not rule out that the helper might have decided to do her harm.

But I noticed that since so many people were so desperately trying to defend against any thought that Maura might have left on her own they were in danger of totally ruling out the possibility of her having the helper and that might mean a killer,if one existed, might escape.

So why do I say in posts that Maura is most likely alive according to the evidence made public so far? Because so far there is no evidence that she is not alive. . no blood traces, no sightings made public of her being abducted, no security camera footage showing her being with someone when she made her purchases when she started out on her trip, no one using her credit card or her possessions but that does not mean that I think it impossible for such information to surface. I am just being conservative and careful in saying, that unless or until such info does in fact surface the L.E. stats on such cases say that she is likely alive and a willful runaway.

I think that until we have more evidence made public I can't justify saying more than that. To date I know of a few things in the case that make it possible for foul play to have happened and I have posted some of them.

But saying that there was an opportunity for someone to have acted does not make it so. Without tangible evidence that something of foul play was done I fall back to the most conservative outcome, one that has precedent and is supported by stats as a probable outcome. As I said when I posted the original theory, in the absence of evidence to go on I play the odds as supported by real stats of cases because until we have more evidence to go on thats all we can do. And the public facts as currently known do not yet contradict that. I stand ready to believe she is dead when evidence comes forth to indicate that. I am not married to the current theory.

So Maura may be alive, or she may be dead. I can't jump up and shout that she is dead if I have nothing to back that up. One thing that should encourage you as to her being dead is that, in the denial of Fred's case, the wording from the judge made it sound as if this case is being pursued as a criminal case with people providing confidential information to L.E. abut that case. If that is true perhaps Maura's killer and her remains will someday be recovered.

Until that day of new evidence coming forth I have to be careful not to possibly help breach someones right to privacy whether I think they should have left a note or not.

 

[armywife210]

Ok, the "coverup" that I referred to was that darn sarcasm of mine.
I would like to point out that I have never said that any one individual is responsible for anything. Though I do find questions regarding actions. As far as anything I have said regarding the police, I recant. While I find conflicting statements made, I do not believe that any of them had anything to do with her disappearance, though I do think things have been done differently. Hindsight is 20/20, though I do think at some point that one should fix his earlier mistakes.
Just please understand that I will state facts from the point of view of those closest to her, and point out inconsistencies made by the very people who you are basing your evidence on.
That being said, let's drop the gloves, exit the ring, and get back to what is important. I fear that this has gone on too long and is hindering the outcome.

 

[armywife210]

Cyberlaw - you are joking right? -

I was about to ask the same thing

 

[nnglas]

I am wondering if someone can help me with a question. The point of whether Maura's room was packed, or not unpacked. I saw reports that the pictures were taken down from her walls. I don't understand, if she had just went on break and visiting people prior to her disappearance why would she take the pictures off the walls if she was returning after the holidays. Did she perhaps change rooms from the time that she was visiting family members and came back? Or is it that the reports speculate that she never unpacked anything from the time she moved in the room? I am asking because the reports say pictures were removed from the walls. So is there evidence that she ever put them up?

 

[armywife210]

To me, that's also telling, living out of boxes. No one is too busy to dump a box of clothing in a drawer, given a couple weeks time.
-

The problem with that is that Maura was a neat person. If I dont have time to completely unpack, I save the unpacking until I do. The fact is that no one had been around for weeks, the dorms were closed because of Christmas break. When they opned back up she didn't have time to unpack completely, so many would opt to wait until they did.
Also we have to take into account that many dorms have policies about anything that is not taken with them for breaks must be boxed up and placed on beds, this includes when they will be gone for a few days, in order for standard housecleaning to come in to vaccuum. I dont know if this is the way it worked at her dorm, but it was in my dorms!

 

[czechmate7]

:twocents:
I have been following Maura’s thread for a while and take in everyone’s "ideas" about what they think happened to Maura.

Docwho...well said. I too believe Maura has decided to voluntarily disappear from the facts that I've read.

I was just wondering if Armywife knew Maura because the way she post it sounds like they go way back. Just because your husband went to the same school as Maura and Cpt Rausch that doesn't give you more "insight" on how Maura felt, handled her problems,etc....

I also agree with a point Katherine has made; sometimes you don't truly know a person unless you are inside of their mind. The outside could be simply a charade.

And one more thing...Armywife, you have made several comments about how YOU have handled different situations that Maura had been in; but you need to realize that people handle situations differently; just because you handled them without breaking down doesn't mean Maura was able to.

 

[mocity]

This whole thread is really annoying. I know I should just stop reading it. I hope Maura's family doesn't read it. Everyone is so staunchly acting like their view is the right one. No one knows for sure here. At least the ones thinking she was a victim of foul play seems to be listening to the others points of view. The ones that think she ran away seem to just think they are right. No one here knows. I would tend to think the people that have some sort of relationship or connection with her would know better than others that have no idea of the person she was. AND why wouldn't you place some credit with her family. I am pretty sure her Dad knows the kind of person she was better than any of us. This whole thing is annoying and non-productive.

 

[Masterj]

This whole thread is really annoying. I know I should just stop reading it. I hope Maura's family doesn't read it. Everyone is so staunchly acting like their view is the right one. No one knows for sure here. At least the ones thinking she was a victim of foul play seems to be listening to the others points of view. The ones that think she ran away seem to just think they are right. No one here knows. I would tend to think the people that have some sort of relationship or connection with her would know better than others that have no idea of the person she was. AND why wouldn't you place some credit with her family. I am pretty sure her Dad knows the kind of person she was better than any of us. This whole thing is annoying and non-productive.

I agree.

 

[docwho3]

As to Maura's dorm room having been repacked or just never unpacked:
It might prove helpful for some to read posts 186 to 195 in Maura Murray Part 2-merged
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26673&page=3&pp=40

In summary, we really don't know for sure. Only L.E. and her boyfriend were ever in the room after she left while her things were still there so far as I am aware. L.E. has been quoted in news reports with their version and thats what I personally am working with so far, but we don't have any way to verify how the State Police investigators came to that conclusion to prove them as being right or wrong.

Note to newcomers:Getting up to speed:
I recommend newcomers read the whole thread of Maura Murray Part 2-merged
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26673&page=1&pp=40

It may take a long time but there is a wealth of info there.

 

[docwho3]

This whole thread is really annoying. I know I should just stop reading it. I hope Maura's family doesn't read it. Everyone is so staunchly acting like their view is the right one. No one knows for sure here. At least the ones thinking she was a victim of foul play seems to be listening to the others points of view. The ones that think she ran away seem to just think they are right. No one here knows. I would tend to think the people that have some sort of relationship or connection with her would know better than others that have no idea of the person she was. AND why wouldn't you place some credit with her family. I am pretty sure her Dad knows the kind of person she was better than any of us. This whole thing is annoying and non-productive.

More than one of us has taken the time to explain why some of us don't take family assessment that a missing person would "never runaway" as an absolute fact. They even provided examples of parents and family being wrong in thinking their loved one would "never do that" and yet you post asking why we don't. That sounds like your mind is just made up, end of story.

Ok, that's your right. No one is calling you a name over it or telling you you can't post. And since I now see you have your mind made up I probably won't even bother responding to any of your similar posts in future.

As to the disagreements that seem annoying to you: People do disagree and this thread includes case discussion. It is in the nature of things we won't all always agree on things. At least no one is being called names here and people get to post their points about the case. I might disagree with some posters very much but there isn't anyone yet that I would,if I could, push a button and ban them from posting. I might agree with others very much but I would not want only those to be posting either. The world needs diverse thoughts.

 

[armywife210]

:twocents:
I have been following Maura’s thread for a while and take in everyone’s "ideas" about what they think happened to Maura.

Docwho...well said. I too believe Maura has decided to voluntarily disappear from the facts that I've read.

I was just wondering if Armywife knew Maura because the way she post it sounds like they go way back. Just because your husband went to the same school as Maura and Cpt Rausch that doesn't give you more "insight" on how Maura felt, handled her problems,etc....

I have recently been asked to speak for her family and friends as they are just worn out and hurt by the light she has been put in by some. My answers have come from those closest to her. I have stated that before, and before an attack is launched, perhaps the past few days posts should be read.
I never knew her, but I was also asked to state what I know as fact as far as WP is concerned. When I dont know I ask my husband and the many others I know that graduated from there and that opted to transfer from there that I know very well, some of whom knew Maura well.

I also agree with a point Katherine has made; sometimes you don't truly know a person unless you are inside of their mind. The outside could be simply a charade.

I am sure a complete stranger who only has news reports to rely on would have some better view???

And one more thing...Armywife, you have made several comments about how YOU have handled different situations that Maura had been in; but you need to realize that people handle situations differently; just because you handled them without breaking down doesn't mean Maura was able to.

This is precisely what I am saying. I am pointing out that while some view her actions suspicious, others who know her don't.