Earlier this year, Joe Anderson sued the Attorney General of the State of New Hampshire after he was denied access to crime scene photographs of Maura Murray’s accident that were taken by officer Cecil Smith, in 2004.
In October, a hearing was held in Merrimack County Superior Court where the detectives and prosecutors involved in Maura Murray’s case presented arguments about why these records should not be released. In an interesting twist, the precedent they cite – the Murray exemption – was created when Fred Murray, Maura’s father, sued the state of New Hampshire years ago during a similar request.
In their Objection, they argue that the release of these photographs will result in more “false leads and cruel hoaxes.” Recently, someone went to great lengths to derail the investigation and fool detectives by creating a fake name, phone number, and false eyewitness testimony.
But Detective West also says releasing this evidence could embolden the harassment of police officers by the careless bloggers and podcasters who have claimed police, including Cecil Smith, were involved in Maura’s disappearance. Smith later died by suicide.
He also states that several witnesses who have been contacted by bloggers and podcasters are fearful of their safety because of the rabid online following and doxxing that occurs.
One point of interest: Detective West is quoted in the objection as saying, “It is reasonable to anticipate enforcement proceedings could be pending.”
Read the documents here:
“One point of interest: Detective West is quoted in the objection as saying, “It is reasonable to anticipate enforcement proceedings could be pending.”
Enforcement proceedings against who…?
In my opinion the context of that statement is said in regards to those who are trying to FORCEFULLY violate the right that PD has to protect certain information for the future and possible pending investigations to come. I mean, at least that’s how I took it. I would also have to say that if this was filed by Joseph Anderson, and that it included the claims, the very disturbing claims, that people FALSIFIED TIPS and EVEN PHOTOGRAPHS and sent them to Chuck, who already has a hard enough job since this case is a legendary level clusterf*ck, that they also (unnamed) could be prosecuted for their clear criminal behavior. A single conviction of falsifying physical evidence is a Class B felony here. That comes with 3-7 years imprisonment and a hefty fine. It’ll ruin your life, but you deserve it if you try to mess with an investigation especially one of this magnitude. Furthermore, giving false information to an investigator is I think one year in jail, as it’s a class A misdemeanor if I’m not mistaken. Regardless, I hope they do go after any and all parties that did this, and after Anderson for being a dumbass if that’s a thing they can charge for. LOL Let’s cross our fingers, shall we?
Hopefully Erinn 🙂
How can those pictures of the Haverhill crash be deemed as crime scene photographs if the dissapearance hasn’t been deemed officially to be of foul play?
I interpret this to mean that the cops are DONE with internet trolls and will go after them. If so, that would be High Time. Too many people have been accused or abused by these idiots. These people are well beyond trolls: They have actively misdirected the case for giggles or worse. They have NO PLACE in an active investigation. The UK has gone after such persons with success.