Grainne Dhu
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,051
- Reaction score
- 17
I know this may not be the majority opinion here, but I feel that although they followed the protocol of what to do in the case of a missing child, I didn't get the feeling (initially anyway) LE thought it was just a random kidnapping.
I really felt at the beginning that while they were trying to keep everything close to the vest, their real focus was a narrow scope. From the taking of Dan and Misty's cell phone, to the beating down of the hotel door in the middle of the night - flat out accusing Dan of knowing what happened to the girls, to the subpoena of Misty's interview with KWWL, to the requests of multiple lie detector tests, to the tightening up of Dan's supervision, to the flat out lying to the public that "all RSO's have been cleared" within 48 hrs (later finding out they were still interviewing them a week later), to denying knowledge of witnesses (TG), to the ambush of the house a block from where Wylma lived, etc...the list goes on.
Do I think they were keeping open the "possibility" that a random perp had taken the girls? Absolutely. And publicly they were doing all the "right" things that LE should do in the case of a missing child. But do I think that they really thought they were going to find the girls stuffed in the trunk of someone's vehicle at a checkpoint? Not for one second.
In my opinion, I think they had their faces sniffing down the "obvious" rabbit hole - and truly, honestly felt that is where the strongest lead was - that the girls were not really "missing" but rather "conveniently missing". I have ZERO facts to back this up, this is just what MY impression was early on.
I feel that over time that focus shifted...after months of waiting and searching through all of these thousands of "leads" they reportedly receive. The focus then shifted to the white SUV, the paddleboat rider, the location of Seven Bridges, etc...slowly shifting the focus to a much broader scope.
Drew has made it clear via his interviews that he feels this is a sex offender, period. Heather? Not so much. She maintains her belief that it was, indeed, tied somehow to drugs and Misty and Dan's connection to that world.
But I think straight out the shoot...the most obvious, the most likely, the BEST possible outcome, would have been that it WAS tied to drugs (aka Dan and Misty) and their disappearance was no more than an attempt to maintain freedom (per Dan's words of "I'm not ready to go to jail").
And that is why I personally think they commented that they had reason to believe the girls were still alive. I know others may not agree...that is just how I felt at the beginning. I think differently now, but at the time of that comment I really felt they thought they were getting close to finding out this was all a big sham and the girls weren't in danger.
SBM & BBM
As to accusing Dan of knowing what happened to the girls? That's SOP in all interrogations except ones in which the person they are talking to is clearly innocent. Multiple lie detector tests doesn't surprise me either--who wouldn't have a good chance at failing a polygraph when their child is missing? Those who support the use of this fallacious technology often say "parents should take the polygraph right away so the police can rule them out and concentrate on finding their children." They conveniently ignore the issue that if a factually innocent parent like Steve Groene fails the polygraph, it causes LE to concentrate efforts on that parent, which diverts LE from other investigative leads.
When I read what you wrote above, I did start thinking maybe LE was concentrated too much on Dan and Misty. If they did so because they failed polygraphs, then that's yet another example of investigations being pulled off track by junk science.
I don't know. My impression from within a few days of the disappearance was that the girls were already dead and it was actually a recovery effort rather than a rescue mission. I wish I hadn't been correct, though.