In defense of those with agendas, maybe they're right. If I had to give odds, I wouldn't, but the POI and the half dozen or so frequently mentioned known criminals have to be kept in consideration. It is hard to strike a balance between the passion for getting justice for Jacob on the one hand and the courtesy and tolerance required if a web forum is going to be productive on the other.
From my perspective, repeating the same conclusion over and over again risks making progress by ignoring viable alternatives. At some point, well-intentioned dedication to helping Jacob devolves into an emotionally-fueled marriage to a single solution. It becomes more about discouraging challenges to one's carefully considered conclusions than about seeking the truth. In my view.
"I've already thought about that so you shut up" is the message in a lot of of the posts in these Jacob threads.
.
.
.
Now, getting back to the clues....
Of course I agree with you Kevin and DR could both by lying, telling the truth, or some mix of the two. I will say that there is nothing in DR's story which seems unlikely to me, but a dozen things in Kevin's story that seem far-fetched to me. What in DR's narrative of the evening seems unlikely?
Having a child abduction on one's property automatically should make you a suspect in the absence of a good alibi. So by all means I want to keep DR in the picture. For me, DR works because he is in the right time and place. This is important, but Kevin is also in the right time and place. There may be a couple others in the right time and place, like what about that house across the street from DR's (I forgot their name at the moment), or what about the guy who was dropping off someone in the neighborhood?
---As for factors weighing in favor of Kevin's innocence, obviously the police vouching for him is a big one. But I don't like this approach that relies on outsourcing your thinking to others, I prefer to look at the evidence without a middleman. So that basically means the main thing saving Kevin is the presumed testimony of his family and gf that he is nothing more than a bored cop-chaser.
---As for factors weighing in defense of DR's innocence, I just saw a 2014 video of Aaron Larson where he reiterates the 'gruff voice, like a heavy smoker' memory that sticks with him. Never requiring a search warrant, not hiring a lawyer, voluntarily doing hypnosis, giving DNA and in general fully cooperating with the investigation says something to me, it may not to you, but in any event it does not establish guilt or innocence.
A lot is made of DR's job and living with his parents. DR's occupation and marital status fit in with Ken Lanning's FBI behavioral analysis of child molesters - but only the PREFERENTIAL type who is well educated, who grooms their victims over the long term for repeated use, and who methodically plans, rehearses and scripts everything and more often targets specific persons. The other type, the SITUATIONAL type, is more of a fit here - they are opportunistic, they rely on force and violence versus grooming, and are focused on general characteristics like age and gender versus a focus on a specific person.
In short, scout masters, priests, coaches and band directors don't do snatch abductions with a gun, they manipulate their victims through trust.
So I keep DR in mind, but since he already is the POI and unconvicted/unarrested, then perhaps looking at other candidates is an under-utilized approach.
777
