I was thinking more of a gang of young tough guys, do a crime as an initiation sort of thing.yep i've thought this too wrt to that large group... failed saviour..?
I was thinking more of a gang of young tough guys, do a crime as an initiation sort of thing.yep i've thought this too wrt to that large group... failed saviour..?
But surely there would be evidence left on the roadway? I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.I'm not 100% on it although i lean toward it The other thing that comes to mind is an accident. A car wouldn't need to be moving very fast to knock a child over, nor would it need to be very loud... JMO
But surely there would be evidence left on the roadway? I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.
What I meant was the only people likely to be using the driveway (other than an expected visiting tradesman) would be the FF, and we know they have been ruled out numerous times. I'm sorry, I thought that would've been obvious: 'I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.'The driveway has been 'ruled out'? By GJ? Is there a link?
Any of those persons on the list could have used the driveway.What I meant was the only people likely to be using the driveway (other than an expected visiting tradesman) would be the FF, and we know they have been ruled out numerous times. I'm sorry, I thought that would've been obvious: 'I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.'
I guess it's because there have been so many veiled accusations in this thread over time about the ff and I just wanted to put a reminder out there that they have been ruled out. IMO.
Not necessarily. & no not talking about the drive way per se, rather the road. saying it's a possibilty...But surely there would be evidence left on the roadway? I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.
What I meant was the only people likely to be using the driveway (other than an expected visiting tradesman) would be the FF, and we know they have been ruled out numerous times. I'm sorry, I thought that would've been obvious: 'I'm assuming you're not meaning driveway, as we know that has been ruled out IMO, unless he was hit by a visiting tradesman.'
I guess it's because there have been so many veiled accusations in this thread over time about the ff and I just wanted to put a reminder out there that they have been ruled out. IMO.
Yes possible scenarios that could have been planned that morning on seeing the children playing in the yard and the opportunity taken. Otherwise they don't really fall into the category of opportunistic?
Ok. If he was hit in the driveway, there would still be some sort of evidence. And the dogs would also have found the scent. IMHO. And don't forget, we're down to 5 POI's and at no time to my knowledge, has anyone from LE mentioned a driveway (or roadway for that matter) accident! IMHO.Any of those persons on the list could have used the driveway.
Thanks for the clarification, iailwa. I was hoping (thought) that was what you meant.Not necessarily. & no not talking about the drive way per se, rather the road. saying it's a possibilty...
No it wasn't, nothing was. That's what I was trying to clarify. I wasn't assuming anything. In fact, if you re-read my post you'll see I was trying NOT to assume you meant the driveway.Anyone can use a drive way to turn around. anyway, you keep assuming driveway but it was never initially mentioned...
I tend to think you're on to something there, soso.I wonder sometimes if it was planned. Planned for the weekend.
The surprise early arrival presenting an opportunity on the Friday.
No it wasn't, nothing was. That's what I was trying to clarify.
The driveway was mentioned to clarify where the 'accident' might have occurred. <modsnip: unnecessary>I mean it was only mentioned by you
He was asked to return and replace the part that day. I assume the police onsite were observing his reactions.This is a very early article, about day three.
Police have not ruled out abduction as a third day of searching for a three-year-old boy missing on the state's mid north coast since Friday morning failed to turn up any clues........
Inspector Fehon said the search had not found any evidence pointing to William's whereabouts and police were also looking into the possibility the boy was abducted.............
The search had been widened to a 10-kilometre area, however police believe the boy is within a 1.5 kilometre radius of the house. .............
William was left alone with his sister for no more than five minutes in the front yard of the house, which sits at the end of a quiet street, next to bushland....................
Odds of survival diminishing for missing 3-year-old boy
Yes I know it has been 4 years. I just thought that given the search had recently returned to the area and the purpose according to GJ was to rule out misadventure.
I figured why not re-visit some of those very early reports.
BS returned to repair the washer on Thursday the 18th September 2014.
That trip seems really significant, somehow .... imo.
Was he interviewed before or after the repair?
BS returned to repair the washer on Thursday the 18th September 2014.
That trip seems really significant, somehow .... imo.
I still sometimes wonder, if it was planned. Planned for the weekend.
The surprise early arrival presenting an opportunity on the Friday.