NH NH - Maura Murray, 21, Haverhill, 9 Feb 2004 - # 4

[hydemi]

It appears the clean white towel in the tailpipe of the Saturn is yet another contested "fact" in the everlasting divide between the initial theories of the local & NHSP that Maura was suicidal on 2/11/04 and the fears of the family that she met with foul play.

If Maura had been sitting in the Saturn for twenty minutes or more after the accident by the Weathered Barn...if the engine had been running any large number of minutes with the towel in the tailpipe...if there was any back pressure of exhaust creating carbon monoxide fumes.....if, if, if, if, then we have the suicide theory of police or one version of it.

If the towel was placed there when Maura stopped for gas along the way, evidently not too far away as the towel otherwise would not have remained in the pipe very long without other problems (stalling out, etc), then new possibilities of foul play arise.

Was it a UMA school kind of towel, an athletic towel, that Maura would have carried in her gym or running bags?

I recall seeing towels or flags tied to tailpipes of disabled vehicles.

 

[Advocate4]

I personally have never believed that Maura was out to commit suicide, and I can't see anything about her situation that even suggests it.

What we know as fact, i.e., that she left school and drove to the White Mountains, is consistent with theories that she felt a need to get away for at least a few days, and fits the additional facts regarding her online searches and calls to see about rental possibilities. Assuming she did take the liquor with her as well as the wine, as opposed to having picked it up for someone else and dropped it off before she left, there isn't anything about that which strikes me as odd. It looks more to me like she wanted to pamper herself with some drinks she liked while she was gone, and if her plan was to return after those few days, she'd bring back with her whatever was still left in the bottles.

As for her putting the towel or rag into the tailpipe herself, even if she had wanted to commit suicide, I don't see her stuffing the tailpipe and then intending to simply drive until she passed out at the wheel and allow the car to travel on and quite possibly kill other people. If she put the towel into the tailpipe herself, then I think she did that because she thought it was a good thing to do, that it would help the performance of the car or something. She may have heard that somewhere or been told something about it, and possibly misunderstood what she was told, anything like that. She might have seen condensation dripping during a stop and thought she had something leaking there. She apparently had been driving only about 6 months anyhow, so I would guess that she didn't know a lot about cars.

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

(According to the post I read this fact was allegedly already known to Haverhill people because several were on scene the night of the accident & disapearance.) I have a real problem accepting this latest "fact". When all this time the state police have been saying that there exists no evidence at all that there was any foul play involved the family could have at any time released this info to the press to counter that claim and get the pressure on L.E. to treat this as a crime and more fully investigate and yet they did not?

Also in all this time since 2004 we are supposed to believe that no news media found this out? Having found out such a thing in their interviews we are supposed to believe that no news agency since 2004 was willing to break the big case wide open by pointing out that someone (possibly someone other than maura) had stuffed a rag in the tail pipe of the car?

When 20/20 did their piece this year and L.E. Lt. Scarinzina sat there saying "there is no evidence of foul play" and no one working for that show said a word about any possible other tailpipe evidence that might possibly refute that statement and no family member said a word either about the tailpipe evidence solely because L.E. had asked them not to say anything. . . . when the family has been so angry with L.E. that they have pretty much broken away and have even had to sue in court trying to get records released and we are supposed to still buy into this new "fact"? And CNN could have broken this case wide open and forced L.E. to take a more active interest in the case by reporting this little "fact" a long time ago but they also did not say a thing. . . . hmmm

Then there is the fact that this was "leaked" on the Mauramurray.com site forum where the family has full control and could easily have just deleted the post & then could have privately explained to the poster that the info needed to not be released yet and yet the family made a concious decision to allow this "leaking" to occur.

Something just does not sound right to me about this latest little "fact". It does serve to keep the case being talked about at a time when interest seemed to be waning. I am sorry but I have real problems accepting this as fact unless or until it is released by 1.L.E. and/or 2. an actual mainstream news media outlet that claims to have confirmed that such a rag/towel was found by L.E. where it has been alleged then releases the info.

Until I get some sort of reliable confirmation I think I will put this "fact" in the box with all the rumors and urban legends.

Thank you so much for posting this. I have been thinking exactly the same thing and was afraid to post it. Thank you for having the courage to do so.

 

[Advocate4]

Further to my speculative post above re Maura hitching her own ride out of the immediate area of the accident scene.

A number of people live out on Bradley Hill Road, it does not seem at all unlikely that there would be at least a couple of cars or trucks, people traveling home from work, who would have slowed down passing the disabled Saturn and then slowed even more to make that Right turn onto Bradley Hill. Suppose Maura did hitch a ride for herself on the back of a pickup truck turning onto Bradley Hill. Bradley Hill circles around and eventually becomes SR-116, which then further on intersects with SR-112. Very unlikely that a pickup truck turning onto Bradley Hill at that hour would continue on to the intersection of SR-116 and SR-112 ... the individual would stop at his/her home somewhere along Bradley Hill or would turn off onto some other road (again slowing to make a turn, allowing Maura opportunity to jump off).

She naturally doesn't want to walk back the way she just came. Very likely she would have stayed on Bradley Hill/SR-116, maybe looking for a payphone location or a motel, but maybe not. I don't know the distance along Bradley Hill/SR-116 to where it intersects again with SR-112, but depending on how far she rode the hypothetical pickup truck, it seems she could easily have been back on SR-112 near the junction with SR-116 by the time the CW passed by and noticed a young person (he did not say "female") in that area moving at a fast clip, ducking up a side road.

Speculation: the young person CW claims to have seen was wearing what appeared to him to be a darker colored coat or jacket with a lighter colored hood. While I have a hard time imagining Maura being "frightened" of the SBD when he stopped, that experience may have made her think about the risks of being a young FEMALE stranded along that road. So if she hitched the pickup truck ride, when she and the truck parted company I can imagine her adjusting her clothing in some way to cover her hair and disguise the fact she was a young female. She may have had a warm scarf in her backpack she could wrap around her head; she may have been wearing a sweatshirt or sweater under her coat that she could remove or adjust in some way to pull up over her head (this would have the added advantage of covering her head and ears against the cold ... heat is mostly lost through the uncovered head and she would know this ... she could use her pockets if she needed to protect her hands).

The CW. There have been questions now and then wondering why it took him so long apparently to travel home from his job site in Franconia. I've known many construction workers in the past, and just like anyone else they often make a stop at the grocery store on the way home from work. They also commonly will give rides to one another when working the same jobs. This CW may have needed to drop someone off that made his route home longer, may have made one or more stops, etc. As to wondering why he did not stop and see if this walking young person needed any help ... this was not LATE in the evening. There are businesses and homes along SR-112 even though my understanding is that they are scattered. This young person could be walking home from somewhere, as far as the CW knows. It apparently was not common at all for him to see someone on foot in that area at that time of evening, so between that and the fact the person turned off the road as he was approaching, it did register with him. But there was no reason for him to think the person was in need if that person did not flag him down.

I don't believe Maura perished in the elements. Someone with years of hiking and camping experience, followed by whatever survival training she may have received at West Point, very likely knows how to survive outdoors under tough conditions. I believe chances are excellent that if this person the CW saw along SR-112 near the intersection with SR-116 was Maura, that she had determined to follow SR-112 on to the nearest useful goal, and that she made it.

 

[murraydwyer]

(

According to the post I read this fact was allegedly already known to Haverhill people because several were on scene the night of the accident & disapearance.) I have a real problem accepting this latest "fact". When all this time the state police have been saying that there exists no evidence at all that there was any foul play involved the family could have at any time released this info to the press to counter that claim and get the pressure on L.E. to treat this as a crime and more fully investigate and yet they did not?

Do you then consider this evidence of foul play?

Also in all this time since 2004 we are supposed to believe that no news media found this out? Having found out such a thing in their interviews we are supposed to believe that no news agency since 2004 was willing to break the big case wide open by pointing out that someone (possibly someone other than maura) had stuffed a rag in the tail pipe of the car?

Believe what you will.

When 20/20 did their piece this year and L.E. Lt. Scarinzina sat there saying "there is no evidence of foul play" and no one working for that show said a word about any possible other tailpipe evidence that might possibly refute that statement and no family member said a word either about the tailpipe evidence solely because L.E. had asked them not to say anything. . . . when the family has been so angry with L.E. that they have pretty much broken away and have even had to sue in court trying to get records released and we are supposed to still buy into this new "fact"? And CNN could have broken this case wide open and forced L.E. to take a more active interest in the case by reporting this little "fact" a long time ago but they also did not say a thing. . . . hmmm

I honestly don't know whether anybody in the family or LE told 20/20. I choose not to go to NH for the taping, but I know I would not at that point have mentioned it had I been interviewed....and at that point, I don't think it would have made a difference in how L.E. was investigating the case.

Then there is the fact that this was "leaked" on the Mauramurray.com site forum where the family has full control and could easily have just deleted the post & then could have privately explained to the poster that the info needed to not be released yet and yet the family made a concious decision to allow this "leaking" to occur.

I've already addresses this by relating that it has been taken off the website more than once...and yes, I guess we did, afer two years make a conscious decision to stop removing it and allow it to stay. Whether you believe this or other truths relayed by the family is immaterial, but by rejecting it as fact you by default limit your ability to discuss intelligently or come to any meaningful conclusions.

I sincerely hope that none of you will ever be in a position to have to make some of the choices and decisions the Murray family has had to make. Quite frankly, even posting this tonight was a tuff decision...my inclination was to remove my username...you can accept the truth or imply that because I am a Murray (by marriage) I must be lying...I don't particularly care....

 

[docwho3]

. . . I've already addresses this by relating that it has been taken off the website more than once...and yes, I guess we did, afer two years make a conscious decision to stop removing it and allow it to stay. Whether you believe this or other truths relayed by the family is immaterial, but by rejecting it as fact you by default limit your ability to discuss intelligently or come to any meaningful conclusions. . .

I only posted once and you have responded twice. Sounds as if you were possibly upset that the post was quoted in someone elses post and thus posted a second time(although not by me.)

. . . I sincerely hope that none of you will ever be in a position to have to make some of the choices and decisions the Murray family has had to make. Quite frankly, even posting this tonight was a tuff decision...my inclination was to remove my username...you can accept the truth or imply that because I am a Murray (by marriage) I must be lying...I don't particularly care....

Remove your name if you want. I neither advocate that nor do I argue against it. You must do what you think best.

As to believing the latest "fact" or not believing it: I said that, for myself, I will wait for it to be corroborated by a reliable mainstream source such as mainstream media or L.E. I do not say that because I feel it goes against any theory of mine. I have always said it is possible Maura was double crossed by her helper so this fact does not by itself cause any bumps in my view of the case. What does bother me is not having mainstream source confirming this latest rumor/fact that you have released. As you know the TOS here at websleuths says we are not supposed to speculate based solely on posts made in another forum but are supposed to have mainstream media reports or L.E. announcements to base our speculations on.

Maybe your new "fact" is true and maybe not. If it is true I still do not know all the facts around this discovery and I have a feeling there is a bit more to this than we are being told.

When and if this fact is confirmed by L.E. or MSM I will probably have quite a bit to say about it but for now I can only treat it as an interesting but unsubstantiated rumor.

 

[gatetrekker44]

disappearance are ALL retired LE from NH and adjoining states, and all have many years combined in LE and ALL are now licensed PI's-their spokesperson has even stated that one of the first things they were going to do was to "separate the truth from the fiction"-I for one am eager to see what exactly they come up with-especially since the reason they took the case in the first place was because of a belief that Maura came to some type of harm. Please see link below to local newspaper"The Caledonian Record" for additional comments.


http://www.caledonianrecord.com/pages/top_news/story/3b220200e

 

[Peabody]

disappearance are ALL retired LE from NH and adjoining states, and all have many years combined in LE and ALL are now licensed PI's-their spokesperson has even stated that one of the first things they were going to do was to "separate the truth from the fiction"-I for one am eager to see what exactly they come up with-especially since the reason they took the case in the first place was because of a belief that Maura came to some type of harm. Please see link below to local newspaper"The Caledonian Record" for additional comments.


http://www.caledonianrecord.com/pages/top_news/story/3b220200e

gatetrekker44,

Thanks for that link............it expresses at least 2 times that Sharon Rausch, mother of Maura's boyfriend has HOPE that Maura is living.

I was not aware of this link when I posted a few posts back that the Murray Family are not convinced that Maura is no longer living........that they are only fearful that she is not, and hope is what keeps them going.

 

[czechmate7]

gatetrekker44,

Thanks for that link............it expresses at least 2 times that Sharon Rausch, mother of Maura's boyfriend has HOPE that Maura is living.

I was not aware of this link when I posted a few posts back that the Murray Family are not convinced that Maura is no longer living........that they are only fearful that she is not, and hope is what keeps them going.

Ok, I know I said I wouldn't post anymore on this thread....but I need to put my :twocents: in...it's killing me!!
I've been reading post on both Maura's website and here. I think the reason some folks (myself included) feel family/friends are "writing Maura off as dead" is because of the *way* post come across....
Example....I read a post on Mauras forum (I know we aren't supposed to bring other forum info here, but.....)
...1 poster wrote (to the effect)..I have no problem thinking Maura met with foul play, but please someone give me evidence that foul play has taken place..
..2nd poster wrote...."There's no evidence foul play hasn't taken place"

This is the tone on Maura's website forum which is run by family/friends. There are VERY few posters who believe Maura is still alive.

There is no evidence claiming Maura is dead (or alive)....but why think the worst and run with it ??????

I would think Maura's family would rather come to websleuths because there are more positive posters who feel Maura could still be alive!!! Isn't that what's important?? To encourage the family?? To keep discussion and hope alive???

 

[Advocate4]

The last known evidence as to Maura herself is that a) she was alive at the scene of the accident; b) she was alive and walking for about 100 yards to the east of the accident; and c) she was alive on the 11th when the call was made to Lt. Rausch in which he heard whimpering and was positive this was Maura. Item "c" may not be fact as to it being Maura, but it is evidence strongly suggestive of her being alive on the 11th.

The only evidence suggestive that she is dead, is that she has disappeared and has not been in contact at all with her family since the accident. I can well understand the family taking this lack of contact to mean she must be dead. But it is a fact that some people do choose to go missing. And it is also a fact that Maura chose to leave school without telling anyone, not even her family, of her plans -- it is fine to speculate that her several calls to Lt. Rausch that day meant she was trying to reach him to let him know her plans, but it seems to me that most people would leave a simple message saying "Hey, I need a break and I'm going up to X for a few days, I'll call you this evening and fill you in." She didn't do that.

So I feel that the evidence is open-ended. There is value in pursuing discussions in both directions. If she is dead, then discussions about who may have done it and where to look for her remains, are of value. But discussing those things won't find her if in fact she is alive. Both paths need to be followed until she is found one way or the other, or until evidence surfaces that tells with a certainty what happened to her.

...1 poster wrote (to the effect)..I have no problem thinking Maura met with foul play, but please someone give me evidence that foul play has taken place..
..2nd poster wrote...."There's no evidence foul play hasn't taken place"

This is the tone on Maura's website forum which is run by family/friends. There are VERY few posters who believe Maura is still alive.

 

[Peabody]

So I feel that the evidence is open-ended. There is value in pursuing discussions in both directions. If she is dead, then discussions about who may have done it and where to look for her remains, are of value. But discussing those things won't find her if in fact she is alive. Both paths need to be followed until she is found one way or the other, or until evidence surfaces that tells with a certainty what happened to her.

You are absolutely correct:

"Both paths need to be followed until she is found one way or the other, or until evidence surfaces that tells with a certainty what happened to her."

To learn the truth, BOTH avenues must be investigated.

 

[hydemi]

Dear A,

your post touches on an issue I and others have pursued for a long time, especially SearcherMe on the Maura site (see member list there)--the idea that Maura's quick departure from the crash scene could have been up Bradley Hill Rd whether on foot or by car (however she got the ride).

Early on in 2004 SearcherMe with Mr Murray and others combed the roads in the area and realized that going up Bradley Hill Rd was a natural quick & easy way to get out of sight from 112, before police arrived or anyone else stopped at the location of Maura's disabled 96 Saturn located perhaps 150 yards or so back west on 111 from the intersection.

As it happens the driveway or entrance to CW's (construction worker's) trailer at that time was on Bradley Hill Rd. And bus driver Atwood's place is on the other side of the intersection, where he and his wife/girlfriend had one or two schoolbuses parked on most days as they both drove buses. Maura's scent trail as followed by the search dog on Wed am 2/11 ended in this area near the intersection of Bradley Hill Rd in the "general area" of Atwood's driveway according to Lt Scarinza of NHSP.

To simplify his story is either 1) true, he saw her 4 miles west on 112 when he said he did betwen 8.15 and 8.30 2) true and false, he saw her but not there perhaps at the scene, perhaps he picked her up as he turned on Bradley Hill Rd 3) totally false, he never saw her or had any interaction with her of any kind.

I would vote for number two of these; there is a mixture of truth and falsehood in his original story told to police (finally) in late April 2004 after he was overheard somewhere in Woodsville publicly talking to a friend saying that he might have seen the missing girl that night. He never went to police on his own--they went to him after finding out that he had publicly been overheard talking about seeing Maura.

If Maura went up Bradley Hill Rd either on her own or with CW or someone else, I had always thought of her continuing on 116 east which rejoins 112 about where the CW said he saw her (four to five miles east).

But if she or her "ride" took her back west on 116 she could have been back in Haverhill, on route 10, in an hour to hour and a half depending on her foot speed or in less than fifteen minutes by vehicle. The distance from the crash scene back to N Haverhill up Bradley Hill Rd to 116 west is about 7 miles.

As it happens CW drove or still drives (not sure) a panel truck which would have been great for concealing a passenger whether as a hitchhiker or as a victim of assault.

So your post has some fresh out of the box thinking, and those of us who believe that the CW had something to do with Maura's disappearance--as her getaway ride? as her abductor? as her overnight hideout provider?--see his belated story as too great a coincidence and too self incriminating not to wonder how he was really involved with her.

 

[Advocate4]

Thanks for the validation, hydemi .

Could you clarify for me the "mixture of truth and falsehood" in the original story that CW gave to the police? I know what he basically said re what he saw, and I know there are questions about the location, the timing and etc. as well as the fact he apparently didn't say anything about it to anyone until over two months later, so that he is a figure of interest, but just wondering if I missed something that was clearly false in what he said.

Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't he also the person in the area who refused to allow a search of his property? Was that "early on" re a search being done by the police, or was that with regard to searching by the family?

And one other question: when I look at the aerial views of the intersection of Bradley Hill and SR 112 near the accident site, I can see the SBD's house on the left of SR 112, then Bradley Hill going to the right ... there are two residences right away on Bradley Hill. One residence is on the left side of Bradley Hill (if one was walking up Bradley Hill from the intersection), and one residence is on the right. Could you clarify which residence is the one belonging to the CW?

Yes, a panel truck would be ideal for hitching a ride, and also for other purposes. I have a hard time, though, imagining Maura agreeing to a ride with any male, especially after turning down the SBD. If the SBD did in fact make her nervous, then it had to be the nervousness of being a young woman alone on a dark road and recognizing her vulnerabilities particularly to men with evil intent. As a runner who went out frequently by herself, she had to be very aware of that sort of risk. And I also have difficulty picturing Maura being easily snatched from the road by any one person. If someone was making either a right or a lefthand turn onto Bradley Hill from SR 112 at that location, the driver would be across the cab of the truck/car from Maura's position on the right hand side of SR 112. I don't see her leaning into an open passenger door to talk to a strange male.

Two males could have snatched her from the road, but again I feel that she would have been able to put up enough struggle that the SBD would have heard or seen something.

I would vote for number two of these; there is a mixture of truth and falsehood in his original story told to police (finally) in late April 2004 after he was overheard somewhere in Woodsville publicly talking to a friend saying that he might have seen the missing girl that night. He never went to police on his own--they went to him after finding out that he had publicly been overheard talking about seeing Maura.

 

[czechmate7]

Thanks for the validation, hydemi .

Could you clarify for me the "mixture of truth and falsehood" in the original story that CW gave to the police? I know what he basically said re what he saw, and I know there are questions about the location, the timing and etc. as well as the fact he apparently didn't say anything about it to anyone until over two months later, so that he is a figure of interest, but just wondering if I missed something that was clearly false in what he said.

Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't he also the person in the area who refused to allow a search of his property? Was that "early on" re a search being done by the police, or was that with regard to searching by the family?

And one other question: when I look at the aerial views of the intersection of Bradley Hill and SR 112 near the accident site, I can see the SBD's house on the left of SR 112, then Bradley Hill going to the right ... there are two residences right away on Bradley Hill. One residence is on the left side of Bradley Hill (if one was walking up Bradley Hill from the intersection), and one residence is on the right. Could you clarify which residence is the one belonging to the CW?

Yes, a panel truck would be ideal for hitching a ride, and also for other purposes. I have a hard time, though, imagining Maura agreeing to a ride with any male, especially after turning down the SBD. If the SBD did in fact make her nervous, then it had to be the nervousness of being a young woman alone on a dark road and recognizing her vulnerabilities particularly to men with evil intent. As a runner who went out frequently by herself, she had to be very aware of that sort of risk. And I also have difficulty picturing Maura being easily snatched from the road by any one person. If someone was making either a right or a lefthand turn onto Bradley Hill from SR 112 at that location, the driver would be across the cab of the truck/car from Maura's position on the right hand side of SR 112. I don't see her leaning into an open passenger door to talk to a strange male.

Two males could have snatched her from the road, but again I feel that she would have been able to put up enough struggle that the SBD would have heard or seen something.

Advocate~
You do have some excellent ideas/questions. Being there wasn't much time between the SBD/neighbor calling and the arrival of LE on the scene it seems if something did happen to Maura it was not in that general area....possibly down the road.
With her self defense skills and her military "survival" training it's hard for me to understand, even though SBD looked intimidating, why she would have been so afraid of him...he was 350lbs.; I have an uncle who weighs about 350-375...did you ever see someone of that weight run? She was highly skilled in self defense and a seasoned runner... I'm sure Maura was aware that he was no threat...
My big question is why would/did Maura leave the accident scene? There were several houses in the area she could have gone to for help, right?

 

[Advocate4]

czechmate7 -- I agree that it seems more likely that she wasn't afraid of the SBD but simply nervous about the situation she was in and what to do next, especially if for whatever reason she did not want to wait around for LE to arrive. It was the SBD and his wife who thought maybe she was intimidated by his size, but just because they think that does not make it so.

As far as why she left the accident scene ... personally, I don't think she had been drinking while driving. I don't think she was intending suicide at all, and she was a sensible girl -- drinking and driving is a bad thing to do under any circumstances, and if she was a bit drunk when she had the earlier accident with her father's car then she had certainly learned that lesson. Also, drinking and driving on icy road conditions is even less smart. So I don't think she left the scene because she had been drinking and was worried about LE for that reason. On the other hand, she may have left the scene because with the wine spilled all over the inside, the car sure smelled like alcohol and she might well be arrested for drinking and driving ... a blood test would have revealed differently in that case, but the whole thing would have been just further unpleasant hassle.

Lincoln was not too much farther on SR 112 and if I recall right she was familiar with that area. One thought I have was that she wanted to get away from the accident scene as quickly as possible to avoid LE, and get to Lincoln. Sneaking a ride on a tailgate/bumper would get her away quickly to avoid LE, but no assurance it would take her closer to Lincoln, but if she figured to hop off at the soonest chance, it wouldn't have taken her much out of her way.

I will add that I didn't realize that SR 116 ran both ways (further east to reconnect with SR 112 but also to the west back toward Haverhill).

Not to confuse the issue, but with regard to rides away from scene of accident, there is the fella in the red pickup truck with MA tags who was reported by the walking woman, she felt he was suspicious because he was really looking at her. What if this person is someone Maura knew and who had agreed to follow her up there due to her car being not so great? He makes a stop to get gas or a snack, and while he is stopped Maura had gone on and rounded the curve and spun out. He comes out of the store, gets in his truck, sees a woman walking toward the store -- maybe he looked twice at her thinking at first it was Maura, realized it wasn't and drove on. Came up on the accident scene, finds Maura walking down the road, and she hops in with him and off they go.

Advocate~
You do have some excellent ideas/questions. Being there wasn't much time between the SBD/neighbor calling and the arrival of LE on the scene it seems if something did happen to Maura it was not in that general area....possibly down the road.
With her self defense skills and her military "survival" training it's hard for me to understand, even though SBD looked intimidating, why she would have been so afraid of him...he was 350lbs.; I have an uncle who weighs about 350-375...did you ever see someone of that weight run? She was highly skilled in self defense and a seasoned runner... I'm sure Maura was aware that he was no threat...
My big question is why would/did Maura leave the accident scene? There were several houses in the area she could have gone to for help, right?

 

[hydemi]

The possible "clearly false" detail in CW's story is his mixing up the date of the missing girl's disappearance, although in his favor are the fact there was no search till Wednesday, and Fred's acceptance of this mix up in Fred's first letter to NH Governor Benson still posted on the Maura site.

Also questionable is his saying he saw nothing up ahead at the scene. If he arrived any time between 7.30 pm up to 8.30pm or even later there had to be Maura's car at the very least and later the emergency vehicles easily visible from the intersection where he should have turned left up Bradley Hill.

We do not know if Atwood or anyone saw his panel truck in his driveway that night, and his place (newly built replacing the trailer) is just to the left as you go up Bradley Hill even though his address is Wild Ammonoosuc Rd or 112.

The mix of true and false in his story is THE question, isn't it?

I believe he refused the family request to search on his property.

Weeper on the Maura site thinks there were two abductors involved with Maura. The family early on was quoted as saying they believed she would have struggled with any attacker and that she would not have been an easy capture.

Sharon notes in posts on the Maura site that Maura was very cocky about her running prowess, that she could outrun anyone so she did not need to worry when running at odd times and places by herself. Hmmmmm!

ATWOOD said she might have been afraid of him, not Maura! Alas we don't know what she thought!

Indeed why did Maura not knock on the Westman's door or the doors of other houses with lights still on by the big curve near the Weathered Barn? Someone noted on the Maura site there as many as seven houses there.

I long ago decided she most likely left the site on her own on foot to avoid the police--I can think of no other simpler better explanation.

It has only been recently(last four to six months) that I have re-examined and questioned minutely the CW story and concluded that he is involved and being investigated but we do not know how or why.

 

[hydemi]

I hope my last post on 4/26 did not scare off posters, as this site has been quiet for ten days now.

The only new thing I can mention is that it is my guess that new searching of various kinds is being done in the area of Maura's disappearance by family & friends & volunteers and we will see if they turn up anything.

There is focus, I think, on a five mile radius in that area around Swiftwater.

There are photos posted by Pike on the Maura site several pages back which are worth attention if you have not seen them. I observed that the photo of Maura's sister Kathleen holding Maura's running sneakers shows a neatly folded white gym or athletic towel underneath some of what I take to be clothing items from Maura's running bag. I have wondered if the clean white towel found in the tailpipe of Maura's car (see Maura site for details) is the match to this towel in the photo.

At this stage only the police know.

 

[czechmate7]

I hope my last post on 4/26 did not scare off posters, as this site has been quiet for ten days now.

The only new thing I can mention is that it is my guess that new searching of various kinds is being done in the area of Maura's disappearance by family & friends & volunteers and we will see if they turn up anything.

There is focus, I think, on a five mile radius in that area around Swiftwater.

There are photos posted by Pike on the Maura site several pages back which are worth attention if you have not seen them. I observed that the photo of Maura's sister Kathleen holding Maura's running sneakers shows a neatly folded white gym or athletic towel underneath some of what I take to be clothing items from Maura's running bag. I have wondered if the clean white towel found in the tailpipe of Maura's car (see Maura site for details) is the match to this towel in the photo.

At this stage only the police know.

Do you know if the new investigative team has come up with any new info? Is it still your thought that the CW knows *something* more than telling? Is there new evidence that is causing focus on the 5 mile radius?
I'm still having a hard time believing anything happened to Maura at/around the accident sight because of the time limit, witnesses/potential witnesses around the scene (how would an abductor know people weren't watching from their windows?...there were several houses in the area).
I like Advocates' idea of Maura hitching a ride, possibly unknown to the driver, out of the area.

 

[hydemi]

I believe the CW has been and remains a person of interest to investigators.

The five mile radius is a standard search zone for locating both bodies and perpetrators in murders, rapes, etc.

 

[czechmate7]

I believe the CW has been and remains a person of interest to investigators.

The five mile radius is a standard search zone for locating both bodies and perpetrators in murders, rapes, etc.

Hasn't there been searches of the area already? Could they be working off of a"tip"?

I know you've probably already stated your opinion on this, but what about the phone call Lt Rausch received a couple of days after the accident; do you believe it was from Maura? Let's say the call WAS from Maura (as the family believes); wouldn't that mean that she had made it out of the area; at least made it past/away from the accident scene? I have a hard time seeing her use a calling card in distress; also calling Lt Rausch vs 911.