I was reading the original article posted at the beginning of this thread when I got to the comments under it. I realize that the drug found in the child was FOUND in her blood, so "no grounds for arrest" couldn't be because they didn't find any drug, as I had wondered. I'm assuming the police log report actually states the drug was found in the child at the ER and has a hospital lab report to back that up.
I'm confused. Obviously.
In the comment section, from an anoymous person, of course: A person who lives in the Orchard Estates community says that the police went door to door to find the missing child in January, and the residents were told she was found at her "friend's house". That sounds like Huckaby's child and house, of course. Did Huckaby use her little girl and parents' religious affiliations to lure children?
A couple of things about this article bother me. One, the "Orchard Estates Mobile Home Park" can therefore techincally be called A PARK. So is that the "park" in question getting mixed up with WHERE the little girl was taken? Or not?
And this really bothers me about the article: it's poorly constructed and keeps bouncing back and forth between the case of the drugged child in January and Sandra's disappearance and murder. The reporter doesn't always make it clear which case she's referring to at times, so I had to go back and reread. Again, confusing as to exactly what happened. I wonder if the police report is that boondoggled.
http://www.tracypress.com/pages/ful...report =&instance=home_news_lead_story&open=&