Veracity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 390
- Reaction score
- 1,838
One of the other discussions I wanted to open in reading everyone's great comments relates to probabilities.
I keep asking myself a few questions.
1. If someone abducted or manipulated Mollie into leaving, it doesn't seem to have occurred through a blatant display of force. Lamps weren't knocked over, items weren't strewn across the floor, blood splatter hasn't been found (at least yet). So what is more probable, in your minds, I'm curious? That the person who "took" Mollie is a A. masterful, highly skilled professional kidnapper...or that B. it was a person she engaged willingly? For me, either is possible, but B. seems far more likely.
Happy Good Morning all!
I wanted to reply to you yesterday but the thread was locked.
When it comes to skill to force someone to comply it might only take a person with a gun in his/her hand pointed at you! That may have been the only thing necessary here AND when you factor in that they didn't routinely lock their doors AND even though the house or the street were her last geo points if a person jumped out of a row of corn with a gun, or came up beside her as she ran and pointed a gun. If she was knocked to the ground first by either a car or truck and then faced someone with a gun she would even have been more likely to comply.
When you say Masterful - do you mean imposing? Or were your driving home that the person was adept/proficient?
If a gun or weapon was not used, then I do believe the person responsible for her disappearance was most likely BIGGER- and hence, imposing to Mollie in that instance and afterwards.
All my opinion of course.