Hi All- Glad so many of you, like me, are still coming here daily to share ideas, keep the morale up til Justice Prevails. I do believe it will. In fact I believe LE does have a main POI and are working on tightening up the case to assure a conviction when the hammer comes down. More tips might help in that regard and I think some of their expressed low optimism is bluffing. I miss some WS folks whom I've not seen posting lately and look forward to hearing from you again when you are able as I know you all want to see this solved as much as I do.
Does anyone besides me recall a family member saying quite a while back that one or both of the girls had been in the vicinity of the bridge not long before this walk they took Feb 13? It made me wonder, had they met up with anyone there in the recent weeks prior to Feb 13? Did either of them do any work for anyone there such as animal or pet care, selling or fund raising for school, babysitting, chores inside or outside to earn money? I feel there is a SA factor here, either ON Feb 13 or perhaps multiple times prior, and the perp felt he had to silence them.
I wonder, too if RL might be serving time in part for his own protection until an arrest is made then perhaps he will get out on time served? Feel it is more likely he would be involved tangentially (is that a word?), perhaps even unwittingly he msy have witnessed something or provided shelter or materials to someone w/o realizing their darkside. If he is more deeply involved I will be surprised but I haven't ruled that out either. I just know that SA of girls this age and younger is sadly not uncommon so that seems the most likely draw here, whether a perp seeking twisted thrills or one seeking to cover up past transgressions he had perhaps acted upon when the girl (s) were slightly younger and more easily manipulated, but now he saw they might speak up so he savagely silenced them. Left them at or returned them to site so as to make it all seem less personal, more random?
