×

1
2

AnalysisThe Current FBI Petition Doesn't Matter (self.MauraMurrayEvidence)

submitted by [deleted]

Just setting the record straight ;P

The Current FBI Petition Doesn't Matter - Signatories are asking the FBI to break Federal Law. Make A New Petition Instead.

The entire U.S. Code is housed at Cornell University. Here is the text of Federal Law that states what the FBI can and cannot do:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/part-II/chapter-33

"Section 540A
(a)In General.—
At the request of an appropriate law enforcement official of a State or political subdivision, the Attorney General and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may assist in the investigation of a felony crime of violence in violation of the law of any State in which the victim appears to have been selected because he or she is a traveler.
(b)Foreign Travelers.—
In a case in which the traveler who is a victim of a crime described in subsection (a) is from a foreign nation, the Attorney General and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and, when appropriate, the Secretary of State shall assist the prosecuting and law enforcement officials of a State or political subdivision to the fullest extent possible in securing from abroad such evidence or other information as may be needed for the effective investigation and prosecution of the crime.
(c)Definitions.—In this section—
(1) “felony crime of violence” means an offense punishable by more than one year in prison that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another.
(2) “State” means a State, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(3) “traveler” means a victim of a crime of violence who is not a resident of the State in which the crime of violence occurred.

Section 540B
(a)In General.—
The Attorney General and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may investigate serial killings in violation of the laws of a State or political subdivision, if such investigation is requested by the head of a law enforcement agency with investigative or prosecutorial jurisdiction over the offense.
(b)Definitions.—In this section:
(1)Killing.—
The term “killing” means conduct that would constitute an offense under section 1111 of title 18, United States Code, if Federal jurisdiction existed. (2)Serial killings.—
The term “serial killings” means a series of three or more killings, not less than one of which was committed within the United States, having common characteristics such as to suggest the reasonable possibility that the crimes were committed by the same actor or actors.
(3)State.—
The term “State” means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States."

Every action taken, thus far, by both the New Hampshire State authorities and the FBI makes perfect sense, as it related to the Maura Murray case GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS OF FEDERAL LAW.

  1. The FBI cannot be involved in the investigation at this stage because there is no direct evidence, or unexplored leads that would indicate that Maura was murdered.

  2. Early in the investigation, the FBI was allowed to be involved, because information needed to be gathered outside of New Hamshire's jurisdiction, and New Hampshire requested the FBI's assistance.

  3. The FBI cannot take over an investigation. If they did, they would break the very federal law they were asked to uphold.

  4. Discussions here: https://www.reddit.com/r/mauramurray/comments/4xkbsa/setting_the_record_straight ... are misguided.

a.) James Renner's statement that "the FBI have been involved since about day 2" is only half correct.

Yes, they were involved early on, but they aren't now, and they certainly are in no legal position to "take over" the case as the Murray Family want.

Once you look at the law that governs the FBI and apply it to the history of the case, it is clear that they were involved in the case initially to 1. help gather information outside New Hampshire's jurisdiction and 2. investigate the possibility Maura was murdered.

Specifically, as the law applies, the FBI, with permission of New Hampshire authorities, can investigate any lead that is indicative of murder, as the traveler requirement is inherently satisfied: she was a resident of Massachusetts. (However if she were murdered in Massachusetts, the "traveler" requirement would not be satisfied.)

If a lead indicative of murder is exhausted, all the FBI can do is document their findings and wait for new leads. This is far short of what the Murray Family apparently want.

b.) There has been no "pushback" here, only the acceptance of reality.

c.) If there isn't enough evidence to solve the case, then using an "outside agency to dig even deeper" won't solve the case either.

d.) The fact is that Federal law does not allow for the FBI to take over this case. The FBI even says so, see the linked FAQ below.

e.) The "traveler" requirement is fulfilled based upon where a murder took place, if one did. That "Maura's disappearance involves three states. Massachusetts Vermont and New Hampshire." does not satisfy the requirement. Her last known location, being out of state and in New Hampshire, satisfies the requirement until proven otherwise.

The only chance Fred Murray could realize his hope that the FBI take over the case, is if Congress were to change Federal law to allow the FBI to do so.

A petition requesting the above would matter. If there were enough supporters, such that Congress felt it necessary to act on the petition. I think this petition would be even more successful (as far as number of supporters) because it will have a broader base of support. Obviously, the Murray Family are not the only ones that would like the FBI to take over a case.

FBI's lack of involvement is not a matter of ignoring a grieving father or the "comment section as well as the over 5,000 signatures." Weather the FBI has "done enough" or not is besides the point, when they don't have the authority to do more.

The FBI petition asks the FBI to break the law.

A petition requesting congress to change the law, so the FBI can act, is what is needed.

FAQ:

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/if-a-crime-is-committed-that-is-a-violation-of-local-state-and-federal-laws-does-the-fbi-take-over-the-investigation

Question: "If a crime is committed that is a violation of local, state, and federal laws, does the FBI 'take over' the investigation?"

"No. State and local law enforcement agencies are not subordinate to the FBI, and the FBI does not supervise or take over their investigations. Instead, the investigative resources of the FBI and state and local agencies are often pooled in a common effort to investigate and solve the cases. In fact, many task forces composed of FBI agents and state and local officers have been formed to locate fugitives and to address serious threats like terrorism and street violence."

all 10 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Other comments:

"The petition is not going to change anything. You know what will? Fred Murray, Kate Markopoulos, and Sara Alfieri answering some basic questions about the weekend leading up to Maura's disappearance."

I find this quote to be irresponsible and likely misguided.

First, the public is not privy to all the information police hold. We have no idea if they were already interviewed, and if they were, what was said.

Secondly, they may only know what they have said.

These kind of statements, made by public "websleuthers" are where things go very wrong.

[–]BonquosGhost 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All correct, unfortunate for people looking for answers. I believe this has been the FBI's current activity all along. It's not a lack of caring, it's the law. Maybe the family needs to hire fresh PI's to try and turn over new leads.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I always thought The Petition a long shot for many reasons. I'm not convinced the "traveler requirement" has not been satisfied.

Here's why: Violence. The law is not specific. It doesn't say, "bodily violence". We have automobile violence, which is commonly called an "accident". Plus, per Frank Kelly's findings, there's ample evidence there was deception involved, as in the lack of auto debris nor skid marks on Rt112. That alone implies deception, that whomever ditched the car there was some distance from the actual event. Also, there's no body. Yes, people disappear voluntarily. That's not a crime.

But the circumstances surrounding this disappearance, according to a respected team of investigators, is suspicious enough that, depending how one interprets the law (which often is open to interpretation – I don't care how specific the verse), this case could satisfy the "traveler requirement". Seems to me that's why there are judges, to determine which way a situation swings. Perhaps a judge is needed here.

But, whatever. To force The FBi to wrest the case from NH is secondary to my mind. That it reasserts its involvement here is the real goal. No Act of Congress is needed and besides, noone wants to wait multiple lifetimes to get that useless body to act. That The Petition serves to garner attention to Maura Murray's (and others') disappearance is a good thing, however short the modern attention span.

In the end, The Petition has mattered. Not patting anyone on the back here, it's not done enough. I'm unconvinced the internet is a great tool to help crack these types of cases. Sitting around posting stuff won't really help but there's tools available that can get those motivated enough to act, maybe even get more boots on the ground. But enough people use the computer for such endeavors that a possible breakthrough can occur. That's why The Petition matters.

Related, but not at all the same sort of case, is in the following link. If what is alleged therein exists any shred of truth, it shows how much the law is truly respected. So all this highbrow "Act of Congress" jazz can be tossed in the can, because what I read strongly implicates one of our midwestern states of systematic obstruction of justice and state-sanctioned murder.

Read it, all the way through. You may change your mind about one or two things by the conclusion.

"https://medium.com/@J.Reuben.Appelman/blood-semen-saliva-prints-3fdab84c73d7"

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I just say - try anyway.

If goal was for the FBI to take over the case, current federal law literally doesn't allow for that.

So, if the Murray family wants the FBI to take over (I believe he has said that is what he wants) Congress has to change the law to allow for the FBI to take over the case. Congress won't act, unless it is aware, that the people want a change.

No Act of Congress is needed

So all this highbrow "Act of Congress" jazz can be tossed in the can, because what I read strongly implicates one of our midwestern states of systematic obstruction of justice and state-sanctioned murder.

So lets assume you are right - "strongly implicates one of our midwestern states of systematic obstruction of justice and state-sanctioned murder."

I'll go further, and say that the idea of the FBI taking over may have support from numerous groups in and across this country. Your germane example is just one of them.

Which means you'd get more signatures. You'd get all the signatures you had before, plus all the people from all these other places.

That's why The Petition matters.

The desire to have the FBI involved does matter.

But a request for them to do something they are not allowed to do doesn't matter.

So why not try to change the circumstance so that the FBI are allowed to take over the case? That way the petition will matter.

Because if they are not allowed by federal law to take over the case... they won't take ever the case. The FBI is not going to break federal law. Even if there is a petition for a worthy cause. They are law enforcement - for all the laws..

Your example above might be a reason to have a law to allow the FBI to take over. But that law does not exist yet.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

All good points ... although, it's clear such "good intentions" open the door to further mischief, to a level not yet seen. THAT I'll never support. So our only hope is that somehow that "traveler" clause is satisfied. To get that, LE will need more information. I think at this point we have all we'll ever get.

So ... yes, I think Smith's heart is in the right place, which is why I supported his idea (I'm just the cheerleader) but the lack of official response is unsurprising, partly for the laws you cite, partly because of the (known) lack of evidence.

As Kelly said way back 10 years ago, we can't know what cards LE has. Anybody who wants to know the faces of those cards had best resort to knitting as a hobby.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good points ... although, it's clear such "good intentions" open the door to further mischief, to a level not yet seen. THAT I'll never support. So our only hope is that somehow that "traveler" clause is satisfied.

Alright - I respect your opinion...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

"traveler requirement"

Yes - traveler is satisfied. Problem is that they need evidence of violence and not just belief. When the leads for violence run out, they can't do anything else.

Maybe they could, but its impractical to pursue hypothetical possibilities. Because there are too many of them.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think Dick Guy or anyone involved in the cleanup scene can help here ... one of those guys can verify or disprove Kelly's observation there was "no visible debris from The Saturn" at that Rt112 location that night. I suppose the best chance to find anything of substance occurred the following morning.

I wish we had modern statements from Kelly and Healy but they're probably done at this point. The fires have long since been doused.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Just another comment here.

Literally solving the case depends upon having gathered evidence that will allow for the case to be solved.

If the evidence just isn't there, even sending out the storm troopers to pound on doors won't cause a solution to be found.

But it could be possible that all the people that have looked at all the information have missed an important implication, thus preventing them from solving it.

Also possible, but difficult for me to believe, is the idea that the various LE departments that have looked at the case, have all refused to accept a case solving implication. But what I believe doesn't matter. Evidence matters.

For argument’s sake, lets suppose that Maura ran up Old Peter's road that night, [amonst a billion possibilities] and that the dirt road there had been traveled on and footprints were not distinguishable, many cars had driven down the road before she went up. No snow powder, at least not nearby.

Lets say she thought that would take her to Bartlett.

Scenario 1: What if she got pretty far up Old Peters road, its pitch black. I don't know the road at all, but for some Youtube videos. In some places, it looks like, without the benefit of the light, it looks like someone could make a serious misstep and die going off the side of the road. Now if that happened, the only thing that would solve the case is a serious search over these cliffs. Boots on the ground in a police office won't be enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCyxLvfhQl4&feature=youtu.be&t=12m15s If its pitch black at night, or even moonlighted, which way do you go?

Scenario 2: What if she got pretty far up the road and was trespassing and didn't know it. Someone goes out with their gun, the rest is history. What are the chances that person would ever speak, even if the FBI knocked on their door?

Anyway, there are too many scenarios that are plausible. On Bradley Hill road, numerous other places.

So unfortunately, I'm not really optimistic, I admit. But because there is a chance they might realize that there is a solution, or discover willful ignorance, it wouldn't be a bad thing for the FBI to check. On the other hand one must be realistic.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Per Alex C and Boot's observations, the moon wasn't up yet. I believe Old Peter's was a deadend that capped a property owned by a person who disallowed searches there. THAT is pretty suspicious! Since then I think that property's been developed. Correct me if I'm wrong.

But yeah ... I've always thought a gunning possible but noone reported such that night and it's not in the dispatches. That doesn't mean it never happened.

I forget which road ... Old Peters? RO walks her dog up there and gets spooked by a noise, a movement, something, and barks.

I still think The Red Truck figures. It was parked up there on Bradley for a spell.

Cliffs there? News to moi. Boots lives up there, he's posted his drives online. I'll ask him. I'd think that area was well scrutinized in those initial searches.