"And on to the red car. 
Honestly, I'm undecided the sibling witness accounts. I can't decide if they are telling the complete truth or elaborating their story to make it more interesting, which has created a situation where misinformation is out there. There are too many situations where witnesses have truthfully given their account of what they saw, yet they got the details wrong. [/B] Look at all of the sketches of suspects that are given by multiple witnesses and none of them match-yet they are all of the same person. It happens all the time, even when witness accounts are taken moments, instead of days, after the crime. The witnesses had no reason to pay special attention and it was so far away that I have a hard time believing that he paid special attention to the person sitting in the car or that he could even see the details of the person sitting in the car. I think he wants to remember and might be trying so hard that he is making himself believe he saw something that he did not or might have seen at another time and is confusing things in his mind. Here is an example, my neighbor's house is directly across the street from me and I was in my driveway the other day. My neighbor's friend was visiting and before he drove away, he rolled his window down. I wasn't able to determine much about him even though I was paying attention and he was only about 50 feet from me. Try it sometime. Go about your day in a normal manner and without trying to cheat. As you lay in bed that night, go through your day and ask yourself to remember someone completely random such as a grocery store clerk, the UPS guy, the woman walking her dog, the family in the crosswalk, the guy eating lunch in his car at the park, etc. I was blown away by how little I remembered. As a result, I tend to dismiss the description of the person inside the car, and the car. We have no idea if he would have gotten Erin's car description correct since it was still sitting there so he didn't have to remember. In my opinion, it makes sense to me, that a car was being parked on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere and the witnesses were curious and looked to see what was happening. It makes sense to me that if they paid any attention at all, they would have watched the woman exiting the car out of curiosity. If it was me, I would have originally been focused on the car being parked to see if it was damaged or just being parked and then I would have moved my focus to the woman getting out of the car, locking her car, and then walking to the other car and getting inside. Then I'd be done. Maybe it is just me, but I wouldn't have paid much attention to the other car since my focus would be on trying to figure out what the woman was doing. I'm not sure I would be able to remember details about the other car or who was inside, other than another vehicle was there. This is pure speculation on my part, but when I put myself in the position of the witness, this is the way I would have watched it unfold and remembering it accurately several days later would be sketchy, at best. That said, my other issue is that CL's jeep tracks match the tracks at the scene. If a red car was present, where are the tracks? A red car doesn't match the hard facts known to be true. In my opinion, there is no red car. The witness wasn't paying attention because he never thought he would need to remember anything or that he was seeing anything sinister. When he realized that was Erin's car, he desperately wanted to remember everything and that might have created a situation where he wrongly convinced himself of what he saw or maybe saw at another time. I think it would be easy for misinformation to be presented, even when he believed he was giving accurate information.
On the other hand, let's say I'm completely wrong and there is a red car and there are tracks (that we don't know about) to support the car's existence. I think Erin was transported in the car and it is burned out and sitting in the desert somewhere in a different location than Erin is or it is at the bottom of a mine with, or without, Erin. I can only speculate, but if I used a car to carry out a murder, I would burn it so no trace evidence could be linked back to me or I would dispose of it in a location with minimal chances of it being located. I would dispose of it separately of the victim. In the desert, it would be WAY too easy to go out in the middle of nowhere, carry out the crime, dig a hole, or just walk away and let the animals do the work. A car is a lot harder to dispose of, I would think."
"Intrigued Again" EXCELLENT POST !!! I was getting frustrated with the slow progress but your post recharged my battery. Thanks!
I think the issue of the RED car needs t be determined if we (us on this board) are going to help on this case. (1) Is the sighting legit? If so, (approximately 10:00 AM) who were the people that were seen by the witness? Was the woman EC, NL or someone else? Who was driving the Red car? CL , JC or someone else. The time line is also CRITICAL! If we assume the woman was either EC or NL, that means the distance to the "destination" was within an eighty (80) mile radius, maximum, and probably less do to down time (time out of vehicle). If woman was NL, she was returning the blue car from wherever and the person in the other vehicle has important information (who could that be?). If the woman was EC (doubtful), she met with whomever was driving the red car (possibly someone unknown). I think the time line, based on the witness observation is CRITICAL, in finding any information on EC's whereabouts!
Did MB see a red and a blue car or just two vehicles. The blue car was EC and was there when MB returned so that is a given, but was the second vehicle as he described? The "two hours away" is out the window if the witness statement is accurate!
As with everyone, the second vehicle is bothering me. I think this needs to be confirmed, as it would greatly aid in determining what has happened to EC and where she might be at this point.
