Jane Birch
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 123
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh I've never meant to imply that he's lying, or that Renner is. There are a million ways information gets mis-managed.
1. Regarding the 48 hours rules--I was writing from what I imagine would be Fred's point of view. The car was wrecked and Maura was nowhere to be found. LE of course had a wrecked, abandoned car and assumed she was picked up, walked away, etc. I was trying to explain why a parent would not be "nice"--in fact might be terrified, angry, horrified, and feeling totally alone. How many times have we heard that the first 48 hours is crucial to a missing person case. We know NOW that she was missing, and whether she ran away or something happened to her, the trail was already cold by the time Fred found out.
2. Thanks for the response, Peabody. I was sure that there were multiple sources for the liquor bottle story, and Maribeth Conway's reporting has generally held up under scrutiny. It's always been a troubling aspect of the case. Why pack out the liquor bottles?
3. Scoops, I don't know what to say. Scarinza's statement implies that it was a suicide note. We have no idea when she packed or what that note meant to her at the time. She might have
meant to throw it away, even. Who knows? Fred's words have always meant, to me, that he was angry at the implication of suicide.
4. Jane Birch, I agree with your points.
ETA: 5. Peabody has been a long-time contributor to this thread. Some of us old hands were also active on other boards that included insiders to the case. And from my point of view, knowing none of the Murrays or the Rausches, I have seen nothing in any mainstream media account that indicates that the first priority was anything but to find Maura. If Maura died as a result of homicide, accident or exposure, all of the stuff about her personal life is, as we have said, white noise.
I will admit that I am basing my info of the contents of the note from what the blogger James Renner unconvered. I have no reason to believe he was lying about what he uncovered.
If it is true. That Maura had printed out an old email from billy to her about his infidelity and laid it on top of her packed boxes in her dorm room, then there is no way around it, Billy and Sharon have provided spin.
Sharon has said from day one as you point out that there was no note from Maura to Billy. (Technically true, but clearly not the whole story because the police did indeed find a note).
The same scenario would be that if I went into a store and stole a candy bar and got busted for it.
The newspaper the next day says I was busted for stealing a pack of gum.
I come on record defending myself the following day by saying, the newspaper was totally wrong, I never stole a pack of gum from that store and leave it at that. I would be right, but the whole point of me stealing would then be lost in the scenario.
The Rausch'es didn't like the contents of the note and didn't want them to be discussed, so they minimalized it as much as possible. You can't do that in a
missing person investigation. You have to look at everything you uncover very openly and very thoroughly and try to link it or dismiss it to how it relates to someone going missing. They have always painted a picture that Maura's relationship with Billy was going perfectly and they were gearing up for marriage.
Yet information being discovered seven years later is painting a much different picture about their relationship. Someone is purposefully wrong, or at least is
being purposefully misleading.
1. Regarding the 48 hours rules--I was writing from what I imagine would be Fred's point of view. The car was wrecked and Maura was nowhere to be found. LE of course had a wrecked, abandoned car and assumed she was picked up, walked away, etc. I was trying to explain why a parent would not be "nice"--in fact might be terrified, angry, horrified, and feeling totally alone. How many times have we heard that the first 48 hours is crucial to a missing person case. We know NOW that she was missing, and whether she ran away or something happened to her, the trail was already cold by the time Fred found out.
2. Thanks for the response, Peabody. I was sure that there were multiple sources for the liquor bottle story, and Maribeth Conway's reporting has generally held up under scrutiny. It's always been a troubling aspect of the case. Why pack out the liquor bottles?
3. Scoops, I don't know what to say. Scarinza's statement implies that it was a suicide note. We have no idea when she packed or what that note meant to her at the time. She might have
meant to throw it away, even. Who knows? Fred's words have always meant, to me, that he was angry at the implication of suicide.
4. Jane Birch, I agree with your points.
ETA: 5. Peabody has been a long-time contributor to this thread. Some of us old hands were also active on other boards that included insiders to the case. And from my point of view, knowing none of the Murrays or the Rausches, I have seen nothing in any mainstream media account that indicates that the first priority was anything but to find Maura. If Maura died as a result of homicide, accident or exposure, all of the stuff about her personal life is, as we have said, white noise.
First off, if I was a parent of a missing child, I would be all over the investigation from day one like Fred has been. So I don't question anything that Fred has done and the ways he has gone about trying to put pressure on the police to treat the case in an urgent manner (like pushing the homicide theory)
But why seven and a half years later are we are still left questioning a basic concept such as was billy and Maura in a strong happy relationship, or was there serious issues going on.
Maura doesn't have to be around to answer that. Plenty of people are still around that knew the couple really well, yet there seems to be two stories coming out about their relationship.
And with all the stuff James Renner has uncovered leads one to believe that someone is either hiding info or misleading about info and that is not a good sign when the ultimate goal in this whole mess is to locate a missing person. Not to save reputational face.
There was a cracked windshield but no signs of blood or blunt trauma and there was no waiting 48 hours to do anything, a search was done that same night.
But in a situation where the investigators deem an accident "Minor" (whether they are right or wrong) they handled the situation correctly based on it being a minor accident. They had the info for who owned the car (responsible for the car) and they did a search in the area for Maura figuring she was willfully hiding from them based on Butch Atwood's account. They also really believed she got into a car and left the scene.
Worst case, if Maura hadn't come forward to claim the car by the next day, they could hunt down the registered owner and pursue the matter that way and that sounds like what they did.
It was only after the first 24 hours had passed that this became more than a person avoiding police, but based on the info they had at the time of their initial investigation of the accident scene, I say they did things by the book based on what I have heard and read.
IIRC Fred felt LE never bothered to immediately search/drive east of the accident scene, instead they just stayed where her car was.
When he asked a trooper about this he got no answer...
Why wasn't a BOL issued that night instead of at noon the next day. Tuesday, Feb. 10, police issued a "BOL" (Be on the Lookout) for Maura Murray.
ETA Considering there was alcohol and a crash strong enough to crack a windshield had happened as night was approaching in a wooded, cold area - that's plenty of reason to be looking for an endangered person IMO.
The dispatcher (Rhonda Marsh) even followed up by asking if they found the girl or had she shown up to the cottage (not sure what she is referring to, whether it be a police station or that swiftwater store or somewhere else). Sounds like they expected she would turn up somewhere that night.
Also keep in mind, they were going off of Butch Atwood's statements and he described her as not appearing hurt or as being noticeablly drunk. And he also described her as not wanting law enforcement to intervene.
And as a former police officer that was friends with at least one of the responding police officers that night, I am pretty sure they took him (Atwood) for his word and therefore couple that with it being what they deemed a "Minor Accident" and that would explain their seemingly lack of urgency.
They likely felt Maura was safe, just trying to avoid trouble. But of course that changed the next day.
The bus driver was not ever a police officer. He was a former police department employee of Taunton MA, but in a civilian capacity. This is yet another thing that has gotten misunderstood and misreported over the years. How that one more than likely happened is he said to a reporter at one point "I used to work for the police department in Taunton" and assumptions were made. It's an innocent enough mistake. But it's a mistake nonetheless. Atwood was never a cop. Period.
There is no doubt Maura and Billy had issues at one time--most couples do and sometimes they make it and sometimes they move on. The problem is that we can read too much into their past problems and get side tracked in the process. There is that possibility their relationship has nothing to do with why she traveled to NH and why she is missing. JMO
Yeah, I will be honest on that one, I heard from two varying sources that he was a police officer and typically I will use two sources (with no relation to one another) to help me determine whether or not something is correct or false. And then I found an article in which they quoted him as saying he use to be a police officer, so that is why I believed it to be fact.
I did my own research on the matter and found out that his mom (who was living with him the night Maura went missing) was both a retired RN and a speical police officer for the Raynham Police department (I'm assuming that is either in NH or MASS) It is also possible his father was a police officer from Taunton as well who was shot and killed in the line of duty, but I just had uncovered that bit of info last night, so I haven't checked to see if that arthur atwood was his father or grandfather or no relation at all.
Seems like his family has a strong police connection though.