The story has always been that the employer came to the house Tuesday morning and said they couldn’t find David. I believe she also said that he had picked up his load, but never delivered it. She then said that the police had called her on Tuesday afternoon from David’s cell and that they had found his truck still loaded parked in the middle of the road.
We learned in recent days that David apparently had another job scheduled after the Eagle Grove run. I’m wondering if this might be the missed load she was referring to since she didn’t call it a missed drop off/unload?
The facts in this case are very murky. We have very little factual information to go on. I believe that the Sac County SO initially thought this was a non foul play case. By Wednesday, however, when they asked local residents to check properties/outbuildings/barns, they specifically asked them to look for anything out of the ordinary and if they found anything out of the ordinary to “not disturb the vicinity, and leave items in place”. This sounds like crime scene preservation and if someone were to find David’s body in a scene that seemed to indicate self harm, LE wanted to be sure that that scene was not staged.
Another observation that I think indicates LE were becoming suspicious of foul play was that after the initial searches in the vicinity of the found truck and also David’s jacket, the next searches, which included both LE and the United Cajun Navy, took place around Sparky’s. That is about 15 miles from where the truck was found. If you thought someone was sick or injured and out on foot, would you be searching 15 miles from where their vehicle was found? I think not. A missing person’s search is centered at the spot the victim was last seen and spirals out in ever broadening circles. For that reason, I believe Sparky’s is the last location they can positively place David; either by video or personal contact like a cashier. (Early reports indicated that David was last heard from early Tuesday morning. LE has never said who that last contact was with.)
View attachment 465102