No it doesn't. I like how they say in the release that it supports the abduction theory, but my first thought was, that it was "in house". Someone who was involved with the family, assisting in something, transfer of baby (hopeful) or disposal of baby. 2:30? The couple, i believe, said they (or just the husband, according to first accounts as reported,) saw the baby close to midnight-ish? So I don't see how this relates to the man in the woods. Do they give a location of the woods where this "man in white" was seen? The time line doesn't work if it was close in time to the other baby sighting by the couple. Does anyone else, doubt that a man would be walking around outside for 3 or 4 hours with a baby? I do. Motorbike man is mentioned in the report right after this new surveillance information, as if they are tied together, but i can't see that. IMO