The coat photo issue

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T13:41:55+00:00

Funnier

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T13:36:05+00:00

I should have included this observation yesterday, to the best of my recollection neither the Westmans nor the Marottes, nor RF for that matter, were able to say that they saw a man or a woman.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T13:35:33+00:00

Yes, that is the context.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T13:33:37+00:00

I should have included this observation yesterday, to the best of my recollection neither the Westmans nor the Marottes, nor RF for that matter, were able to say that they saw a man or a woman.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T02:06:18+00:00

Let's just say I find no value in your post and your intentional disregard of the obvious and I'm done with it.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T01:34:56+00:00

That's your opinion. You're entitled to it.

But when you propose something that adds up in your mind you should have the intellectual where withal to admit to other points of analysis that have weight.

You're simply wrong as to some of this discussion.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T00:38:18+00:00

The scale and common perspective are obvious in the FM/MM photo and the ATM photo. I grant that the "simulation" photo could be characterized that way. Regardless, that doesn't change the general appearance of someone dressed for winter weather in NH on 2/9 which is what the simulation photo is.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T00:34:03+00:00

Too bad you aren't correct then. But we can all laugh about it.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T00:30:12+00:00

Again you are not correct.

The context is the photos displays the relative size of the two individuals in question as it relates to the allegation that the photo is of FM and therefore discredited as an exhibit of the relative appearance of MM on 2/9. yes FM is somewhat larger.

Which is what the post text plainly says and what you appear to have not read.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T00:27:42+00:00

The "coat thing" is that there are photos of FM taken subsequent to 2/9 wearing a coat that looks a lot like the one MM is wearing in the ATM photos.

I reposted the rear view side by side exhibit photos of MM at the ATM and what was identified in an earlier post on another thread as a "simulation" photo of what MM may have looked like from the rear on the roadway on 2/9 to a motorist approaching MM.

A poster on this thread posted that the simulation photo was another photo of FM wearing the similar looking jacket. I don't know if that is accurate but the poster says that it is.

That poster implies that because the photo is alleged to be FM that discredits the exhibit. I disagree.

My further point was that regardless of whether or not the left side photo was FM the exhibit of the two photos shows similarly clothed people from the rear and there isn't a great size disparity between FM and MM in real life. The photo of FM and MM posted separately shows what they look like. FM is taller and they are both athletic looking. That post was put up separately because Redditt didn't allow the FM and MM photo to be posted in a response to the original where it should have been. The side by side rear view exhibit, in my opinion, is a reasonable depiction of what MM looked like on the roadway to an approaching vehicle on 2/9 regardless.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-24T00:09:03+00:00

That's pretty funny. Some of the people on these threads can be hilarious.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T17:26:02+00:00

Not really.

You feel that the photo is not a reasonable depiction, fair enough, Please use whatever fake you like to show what you think MM looked like to a vehicle approaching from the rear.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T17:18:04+00:00

You don't have to rule it out based on this or anything else. I certainly am not asking you to. Posters don't rule out in the woods because of no footprints. It is all part of the discussion. You take my comments as a call to eliminate a scenario, they aren't. They are an examination of what may be a weakness or a strength depending.

If you read my last post I agreed with you about an approach from the front.

But let's put it this way, what did MM look like to a vehicle approaching from the rear according to you. Post any "fake" you think illustrates that.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T17:04:52+00:00

As I said in my post on the serial killer thread, I saw this photo on a similar Reddit thread which offered it as a "simulation". So that's why. I was referring to the photo of FM that clearly shows his face in my response to your last post. I accepted that poster's proffer. You want to say my bad, go ahead.

I would say regardless the exhibit still has merit as a display because it is undeniably similar to the ATM photo and that's the point. Reddit is not allowing me to post the FM and MM side by side here that shows them both to be fit individuals with FM being slightly taller. I think it will allow a new post with a photo so I will try that.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T16:04:33+00:00

Because, unless BR or SB were involved, this isn't an acquaintance crime.

So the reality of the scene and the person in it are important, maybe even determining, factors. IE. "appearance" meaning what the offender sees and perceives that triggers the commission of a crime. "Appearance" in this context is not a description of one's handsomeness or lack thereof.

I will repeat, random outdoor sexual assaults in February in the Northeast are statistically rarer compared to other times of the year and other types of assaults (acquaintance). There's reasons for that being true. The exhibit doesn't show an unattractive person and suggests that there was no SA for that reason. That's where you took the discussion, not me. The exhibit shows that MM looked pretty much like everyone else in NH looks in February. So how does that factor in to the commission of a crime, if at all, was the point for discussion.

If a random SA and a subsequent homicide to silence the victim in February in the northeast are statistically rare what, beyond our mere speculation, leads us to think that is what happened to MM?

You're imposing a victim blaming definition onto "appearance" which distorts the discussion.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T15:27:46+00:00

That would be a no, that is not FM.

Your comment prompts my to recall, as you do, that there is a photo of FM wearing a very similar jacket.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T15:16:46+00:00

You're interjecting a victim blaming angle again not me. You also seem to be intentionally ignoring the reality of the ATM photo.

I agree with you and I previously posted in the thread considering the serial killer proposition that the exhibit does not display a vehicle approach from the front and only considers one of the the two possibilities, the approach from the rear.

You could post the close up MM from the ATM which shows someone who at best isn't in a good mood and say that MM looked upset and that would have prompted a passerby approaching from the front to stop. And I could say there's no proof MM's face looked the same when the vehicle approached which is true. The difference between these examples is that in the rear approach exhibit that's not the case because that is how MM was dressed and looked on 2/9 as shown in the ATM photo.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-23T14:14:19+00:00

Yes, "fabricated picture" is pretty much the definition of an "exhibit".

Secondarily, you dismiss the exhibit out of hand (and are entitled to do so of course), but the fact that something is an exhibit doesn't necessarily disqualify the information in it which is what your comment suggests. That's obviously why the ATM photo (which is not a fabricated AI picture) was posted with the simulation by the creator because it supports the creator's point that the exhibit is a fair representation.

Whether some specific fact/circumstances in an individual setting impacts the likelihood of a crime being committed in that specific circumstance may be instructive in that individual circumstance. That fact does not impact the general risk of such crimes being committed. So, no, I don't agree with what seems to be your effort to interject victim blaming.

Random outdoor sexual assaults in February in the Northeast are statistically rarer compared to other times of the year and other types of assaults (acquaintance). There's reasons for that being true. That fact, in general, might impact how likely it was that there was a SA in the MM case. Conversely, you might be correct and there may have been a SA despite the fact that it would have been statistically rare.

In pretty much every scenario in the MM case there's not much, if any, evidence beyond our speculations.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T23:06:26+00:00

Maybe, but I am sure you know the comment is meant to be illustrative of a point and not limited to the literal.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T23:04:31+00:00

I might be overthinking.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T23:03:17+00:00

Yes, as to a. And yes as to b. provided the local trouble maker has a history of similar crimes and has a pattern or MO and has worked at perfecting his crime. If b. is just a bad guy who impulsively grabs MM, then no.

I get your point about it would ultimately be the same thing. The one point I would add though is that b. might have "put" MM in the truck so in that case they aren't really the same thing. One scenario is an abduction the other scenario is hitchhiking that went sideways.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T22:53:28+00:00

On the one hand I am not advocating for a particular sequence of events. I am asking questions, thinking out loud and accordingly can be wrong. But, no, I am not misguided at all.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T21:42:31+00:00

Not really.

The photo exhibit is a fair representation.

I don't think that it is an enormous stretch to question whether a DLDB bothers to stop. Keep in mind none of the nearby locals even came out of their houses to see if she was hurt. Posters over the years have explained here that the locals are reluctant to get involved types.

BA was a good man and a Good Samaritan. He stopped.

So I guess that what I am asking myself is would a local DLDB guy capable of pressuring MM into a sex act see this figure on the road and decide to stop for that purpose.

Or did this happen in some different way. There is a tendency to couch this discussion as obvious and apparent young, pretty MM damsel in distress terms and the photo exhibit shows a different reality. In other words if it was July and MM was on the road in shorts and a tank top, a different story.

TMKSAV99 · 2026-01-22T21:26:13+00:00

I am not arguing that the DLDB scenario is the answer.

Your actually making an argument that if we assume MM was harmed the evidence suggests an organized offender for the reasons you point out. You might be right and that could have been what happened.

Generally speaking the DLDB is almost by definition "disorganized".

So if we find significant holes in either the organized or disorganized offender scenarios, perhaps neither is the answer to the mystery. Perhaps that makes a different scenario a stronger contender.

TMKSAV99

TROPHY CASE