Sunday, March 31, 2013

Fred Speaks... But Not to Me

Lengthy article in today's Concord Monitor. It's a good starting point for anyone unfamiliar with the details of the case, a good well-rounded timeline of events.

The reporter was also given access to Fred, Julie, and Kathleen, though all questions about the past were off the table.

And this blog is mentioned near the end.


Renner writes on the blog that he’s made many attempts to interview Fred for the book but has been stonewalled, and he questions Fred’s motivations for not talking to him.

Fred said he doesn’t like to discuss the book but has refused to participate in the project because he doesn’t trust the angles Renner might take, and because he doesn’t think Renner will “dig up anything I haven’t.”

Toggling between the Facebook group and Renner’s blog, it’s as if two camps have formed: the former for sympathy and the latter for pointing fingers.



The key to finding Maura, of course, is to understand her past and this family's past. It's insane to insist her past (such as the credit card fraud, her cheating, her relationship with Fred) did not figure in to her decisions the day of her disappearance. They want the cops to figure out the solution without presenting the problem. It's like solving for "x" without looking at the other side of the equation.

It's good to see that Kathleen is okay, though. I've been looking for her in Swanton, VT, where former neighbors say she disappeared shortly after her boyfriend was sent to jail.

A message to Kathleen: Tim told me some scary things. I would like to hear your side before I write about them. Please contact me.



8 comments:

  1. This is the first time that I have posted on this blog, however, I have been aware of this case for quite a while. However, what struck me today, for the first time, is something that is likely just a coincidence, which will be dismissed easily.

    When I read about the alcohol that Maura purchased, it was consistent with the ingredients of a drink known as a white russian. As many readers may know, the white russian (fairly unusual nowadays) is the drink of the "Dude" in the movie "The Big Lebowski" starring Jeff Bridges and John Goodman. This movie has achieved cult status and is one of the most beloved movies of the Cohen Brothers. The plot of the movie involves the disappearance of a young female, and the Dude's efforts to serve as an impromptu detective. While a ransom note is received, the disappearance is staged and the result of the woman's attempt to separate herself from her husband, who is signficantly older than her. In the movie, it is implied that she hides out in Las Vegas.

    What is likely just coincidence is that the first real national "Lebowskifest," which is a product of the cult status of the movie, occured in Las Vegas in late February 2004, less than a month from Maura's disappearance.

    I do not, in any way, want to make light of Maura's disappearance, or the pain which she and her family are going through, I just wanted to share this insight that just struck me this afternoon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While interesting, this theory kind of sounds like 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon to me. I am a female and a White Russian was one of my favorite drinks when I was in college around the same time as Maura.

      Delete
  2. So the article got me to wonder about a few things.

    First: Fred believes that everything would be different if the FBI were holding the reins. The tough questions would be asked. Family members would be tapped for relevant information that could lead to tangible results.

    My question: Does Fred think that members of the family are withholding critical information?

    Second: In person, Fred is polite and composed, albeit assertive when discussing his daughter and her disappearance. He does not want to talk about what was going on in Maura’s life before she vanished. According to him, it’s not relevant.

    My question: How can it not be relevant? I understand it is anything but fun for the family to have people digging in their past. Nobody wants this, the thing is i dont think people judge anyone in the family, we simply want Maura to be found. Then we/I would not care at all what is going on in the family.

    Third: “People say mean things about my family, my dad,” Julie said.

    Statement: If anyone do think less of the family because of this they are horrible people and dosent deserve any attention. We all have things in our family and past that we dont want out there and we all have things that people think about us that isnt true. This case has put them in a hard spot but without this blog/book alot less people would know about this case. People who could help solve it.

    // Viktor

    ReplyDelete
  3. It may seem like Fred doesn't have any sympathy on this blog due to his silence. Also seems like Fred wants total control over any situation he is faced with (like agreeing to an interview with the interview terms are his).
    Also, if I had a missing loved one and I truly, truly wanted to find out what had happened and where they were, I would not care what people said about my family.
    And last, why does Fred distrust the angle James may take? To me that speaks volumes about what has been hidden and he knows James will dig it up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are not in Fred's shoes. How do you know for sure that you would not care what people say on the internet about your missing loved one and their family?

      Delete
    2. Fred and the family can clear things up by simply speaking. That's all they have to do, is talk open and honestly.

      Delete
  4. There's a point in any interview with a politician, where, if you read carefully, they get to a question they really don't want to answer and they throw out something that doesn't make any sense. Everything sounded suitably grieving father-like until you get to the question about James' blog, and then it veers off into nonsense. "Didn't think he'd dig up anything he already hadn't?" Please. That's laughable on its face as an answer.

    It seems very, very clear that the family is hiding SOMETHING. They almost admit it themselves when they discuss not wanting to talk about what was bothering Maura before she left. To them, it's irrelevant...and the thing is, it may be -- and that could explain their actions -- knowing something bad, knowing it would change peoples' views on the case, and wanting to prevent people from going down the wrong path in investigating it. But it's a huge thing to ask people to take on faith, and it's a big judgment to take on one's home. If they truly don't know what happened to Maura, then they can't categorically say that what happened before she left had no bearing on it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete