So, what is the concensus? The Ex boyfriend, comes to the back door at closing time to make one final attempt at winning her over. She refuses him and he goes to plan B, he takes her down with a punch in the face, bloodying her nose, leaving her dna on the ground at the back door. Secures her in the back of the van and takes her to one of his hunting shelters. The family members see him, know the vehicle, and have been covering up.
Sadly, his end game is likely rape and murder, left in the woods. He can't have her so no one can... then he drives past the station at midnight to see what's going on. He is spotted and called to come back to the station. Why didn't stop if he was just happening by and saw police cars, knowing someone he cared about worked there? I think it's called, Guilty Knowledge. Like posting about her 'kidnap' when she wasn't declared kidnapped yet?
Is that the gist of it?
Oh, and the sketch of the driver as described by the 'witness'. Doesn't he look like the Owner? So bizarre, to think the 'witness' may have described him to throw off the investigation, hmm. Yet, he identifies the vehicle precisely because his relative owns one. what?
What a tangled web they wove.
"... killing a 13-year old girl would be like killing a deer." Shawn Adkins