I'm sorry that you misunderstood my post, I thought it was quite clear that I was in fact referring to social media as being one of the angles that we should avail ourselves of if we want to look at all angles.
We don't need to know someone personally to look at all angles, as an example it was a websleuths member who found evidence in the Casey Anthony case that would probably have seen CA convicted had prosecutors discovered it before the trial. It doesn't take personal knowledge of a person to look at all angles.
IMO the one who was bitter about the divorces was MR, he got to get out of child support, he was paid child support by EH, he also got both houses in his latest divorce. When he speaks about EH his bitterness is pretty darn obvious IMO and its not bitterness about current things that are related to Dylans disappearance, he denigrates EH and her parenting on a number of occasions.
Exs have a very intimate knowledge of how their ex behaves, they know signs of lying, of covering up, of taunting etc. If an ex wife sees those signs should she just ignore them to the possible detriment of a child?
Many people have very bitter divorces, that doesn't mean they are willing to throw the ex under a bus just for the sake of it.
What wide angle are we missing? and why will we never get a clear view of it?
I can see why the searchers and dogs would be better off left to do their work in peace and not under public or media scrutiny - tbh I was surprised that any family members or friends seemed to be engaging with Wendy and her dogs during her last visit. Perhaps it was only for photos/publicity purposes and not necessarily during the search process though? I would think that a handler would prefer to work with their dogs and without the influence of extraneous followers in any case.
