How tacky of you to reply to yourself, but after reading that statement again, it struck me odd that they make this public chest thump, and then qualify it by saying she may have dropped out of sight... which in itself, is an interesting choice of words.
Doesn't that kind of take the steam out of the whole "letter ploy"? Are they qualifying because they don't want to look like complete buffoons if she steps forward suddenly?
Thoughts ... Is the message perhaps directed to JRN herself? "escape responsibility"... Hmmm. I don't think CPS would qualify anything to avoid looking like buffoons. If JRN were to step forward, they aren't going to look foolish for having written it IMO. Not at all.
SO, rather than releasing a statement, CPS sends a letter to Mom, hinting (requesting actually) that they'd like it to be shared. I would think this indicates that they know that a key person or people are watching social media (FB missing page). Specifically, an FB page that is not linked to CPS or APR. They could have just given her a call, but you cannot publicly share a call. The letter was 100% written for posting publicly. They couldn't say "here's a letter, we're doing something here so post on FB please" (although I guess that's what CPS did, didn't they?). MOO and all that.
The wording indicates that CPS sees only two possibilities: One possibility is this, the other possibility is that. The letter didn't say: one possibility is this, ANOTHER possibility is that (which would allow for further possibilities not mentioned).
Major Crimes took over the case March 31; yet the letter states that Major Crimes has collected information since JRN went missing (March 10). Would Major Crimes have been collecting information on a case they were not assigned to?
The public plea for AP to come forward or be identified happened well after the 31st, so information from/about AP did not seemingly play into the move from Missing Persons to Major Crimes. Although not necessarily.
The picture of AP. We've agreed it was taken from the front passenger seat. A gentleman sits in the back to allow a lady to sit in the front. Could it be that the picture was located from cloud backups from JRN's own phone? The amount of time from Mar 10 to the release of the picture could be how long it took to be certain something was really up with JRN, get access to JRN's online backups, check with family and friends and determine that AP was not otherwise locatable.
Could it be then that the pic was taken that very day, or close to? Its a daylight picture so would not be from after her shift, although pics can be manipulated. The pic seems to show rain or very wet snow. What was the weather on March 10 and the days leading up to then?
IMO a key here is that AP turned in something to police and CPS has this picture of AP taken in a car by someone; very likely taken with a phone. How is it that CPS had the pic? Plenty of options however that pic did not appear to be freely found online based on Google searching the image. CPS was given or retrieved the picture. How? By who or what means? At what point?
Did AP find JRN's ID or wallet? His comments online say ID, but I see mention of wallet. 'ID' can mean a lot of things: drivers licence, library card, SIN card, etc. 'Wallet' would potentially mean everything, and depending on the timing of when AP found it, could feed into the non-use of a bank card (footprints of life). If it was a month before she went missing it would mean she had likely replaced it already; if it was a month before the public pleas for AP to come forward, it may mean she had not done so. Can't replace a bank card if you are already "gone".
The more I ponder, the more I need to ponder.
