14. Maura Murray Listener Response Part 2

We follow up on the Missy Bevers case and answer all your burning questions about grand juries, slander, and FOIA in the Maura Murray case. And we ask ourselves, will the Maura Murray madness ever end?


The Best Argument Butch Atwood is Involved (we think he is innocent as the day is long)


7 thoughts on “14. Maura Murray Listener Response Part 2

  1. I really appreciate your coverage of the maura murray case. Quick question that has always bugged me: From a law enforcement perspective, if the White Mountains are registered as a National Forest (which they are) and route 112 is listed as part of White Mountains (which it is), than shouldn’t the FBI be in charge of this case? Or at the very least have the authority to involve themselves without state police consent? I’m assuming I am missing something and would appreciate some clarity on this. Thank you!


      1. The accident site to is not in the White Mountain National Forest. The sign marking the national forest is a mile or two further along route 112.

        Not sure how that info affects the answer.


      2. @trexify thanks for following up. While the crash site may not have been in the National park, surely the Search included 1-2 miles down the road.

        With the statute shared in this thread it mentions civil and criminal – a missing person doesn’t fit neatly in either category based on my research. If the search for Maura included national park, than perhaps the NPS is worth contacting. After all, they seem to be involved in national park missing people per this article:

        Yes, I’m grasping at straws, but that’s all that’s left in this case.

        Thanks again!


  2. Ordinarily, a crime committed on federal land falls under federal jurisdiction, and it would be investigated by federal officials (probably forestry rather than FBI, but you get the idea). But here’s the thing. There are a lot of national forests, and states don’t love giving up their land or authority to the feds. So, there’s a statute, 16 U.S.C s 480, and it says,

    “The jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, over persons within national forests shall not be affected or changed by reason of their existence, except so far as the punishment of offenses against the United States therein is concerned; the intent and meaning of this provision being that the State wherein any such national forest is situated shall not, by reason of the establishment thereof, lose its jurisdiction, nor the inhabitants thereof their rights and privileges as citizens, or be absolved from their duties as citizens of the State.”

    So, although it’s a good thought, New Hampshire retains jurisdiction over this case, unless and until a federal hook can be established.


    1. Thank you for your thorough response. I have so many of these one-off questions regarding this case.

      Can’t wait to hear the results on the Saturn emblem!



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s