Locale:
1) Being held in the immediate vicinity of her route (within a 1-3 mile radius of where she was initially taken, likely directly along her route);
2) Being held at a remote local in the general region (i.e. at a camp, within 20-40 miles of where she was taken);
3) Far, far away - with Baton Rouge being the closest possibility here, due to aforementioned trafficking problem. My thoughts here, though, are that if she was taken far away, it's likely several states, if not completely out of the country.
I go with all three - except not the trafficking angle...
Could be local perp(s) but with friends involved who are farther away. So it could be a locally generated abduction, but with links to others who have a place she was transported to.
I keep thinking back to the bike. Was it meant to be found? Important point. I researched the water level, and at the time it was dumped - if done soon after the abduction - it would have been under about 3 feet of water - pointing toward it's not being meant to be found.
But then - .... if the perp(s) knew about the dump site - and went to dump it shortly before it was discovered, but thought the water was deeper than it was (no particular reason that the perp(s) knew how shallow the drop-off is there) - the perp(s) could have meant it not to be found, and either
1) threw it at night and didn't see how shallow the water was, or
2) threw it during the day, and panicked when they saw it was partially showing, and left in a hurry. This strains credulity for me - risking being seen dumping in during daylight. Yes, it could have happened, but very low percentage, for me, and would only have happened the next morning - not a week later.
Though LE's theory of it being dumped right away is plausible, I see an equally plausible case to be made that the bike could have been dumped the very night before it was found.
If it were dumped the night of the diappearance, this leads me to believe that it was NOT dumped as a ruse. I do not see the perp(s) checking the water level. That would take a meticulous plan, and something tells me there was a LEVEL of meticulousness (lack of evidence, cell phone, etc.), but I'm not sure that the perp(s) would be so far to one side of the Bell Curve as to time the water level.
If it were dumped the night before it was discovered, it could be EITHER a ruse, or a failed dumping.
Personally, I see it as a failed dumping. Yes, it would be brilliant to lead LE on a wild goose-chase. But when I add the probability of it's being dumped on May 19, plus the probability of it being dumped a week later without regard to water level (dumping likely was at night with zero visibility - new moon), I come down on the side of it not being a ruse.... and it being found by accident.
That's a simpler way to look at it.
Then you have to look at who knew about that remote part of the Whiskey Bay exit, and that you could get close enough to the shore to throw a bike in.
The perp(s) had been there before, as I read it. Not a random pull-off-the-interstate-at-a-swampy-exit scenario. You have to find a perp(s) who was near the abduction site, who also has visited that part of Whiskey Bay before.
Now as to my long-discarded "floating-bike" theory, in which the bike and other objects were placed upstream and the bike floated?
I am satisfied that the current there is slow enough that the bike would have sunk sooner. So - if the bike were placed there by boat.... then I DO see it as a ruse. Someone in a boat could have dumped the bike anywhere. Someone dumping other objects upstream could still have put the bike there specifically to lead LE to believe that the perp came by land...
Yet this theory hits the rocks when I consider that if someone took a boat out of - say - Butte LaRose - to dispose of evidence, then there was no reason at all to leave the bike where it could be found. You wouldn't want ANYTHING calling attention to Whiskey Bay.
So, once again, I "deep-six" my boat theory, and stay on a land approach.
Last part - dumped from the bridge?? Yes - theoretically possible. But I see three problems with that:
1. The risk of stopping on the bridge. This has been knocked back and forth here. I went out there at night to check it. This would be risky. The crown of the bridge is steeply arched - such that to stop right over the site, one would have no rear visibility, and could get rear-ended at 80 mph. There is no shoulder. The rebuttal is that one could see a long ways back, before getting to the bridge, and see if no one is coming and do it then.
My rebuttal to this rebuttal:
A. Late on a Friday night - with graduations going on - I believe that there likely was higher than usual traffic volume between Lafayette and Baton Rouge at 3-4 a.m. Not a lot - but enough to where there likely wasn't just empty road behind the perp(s). Yes, the perp(s) could have pulled off earlier to wait for a gap, but then a passing cop could investigate the stopped car. If I have a girl & bike - or even a missing bike in the car, I don't want to get checked by LE for ANY reason - ANY AT ALL - that could lead the cops to pull my plate number later once her disappearance was reported.
B. The perp(s) would have to pull over just at the perfect spot to have it jsut close enough to shore to look like it was thrown from land. Too far forward, it lands on the shore - too far backward, it is neevr found - it would have to be a perfect stopping point - at night.
So..... I just don't buy the bridge dump.
I believe that the perp(s) drove down in to the west end of the exit, walked around to the back of the bridge pillar - threw it in - heard a splash - and didn't think it would be found.... didn't take the tide into consideration.
So the perp(s) are smart but not uber-smart.
This is why I have hope that some slip will finally come to light that will lead to Mickey.
