The following analysis is my opinion only.
It’s all about the cars, simple as that. Specifically, is DR telling the truth when he says he saw two cars in his driveway on the day that Jacob was abducted (with neither of those cars being Kevin's)? And equally as important, when did he report that information to LE and the media?
On the one hand, if DR is telling the truth about the cars, and told LE about those cars from day one – then it stands to reason that he could well be an innocent witness, and there was indeed something sinister brewing in St Joseph on that 22nd day of October 1989.
Factors That Support DR’s Story About the Cars
1. He did tell the media, on October 23, that he saw a small car turn around in his driveway. That info was reported in the St Cloud Times and directly quoted to DR.
2. There were several attempted abductions reported within a 50 mile radius of the Twin Cities in fall 1989, with the car being described as a large tan car. The abduction attempts reported tended to be within a few miles of I-94.
On the other hand – if DR did not tell LE about the 2 cars right away – that would most certainly indicate that he made up the story in an attempt to cover up the crime. If he saw the cars, there would be no logical reason for him to withhold that information from LE.
Factors That Question DR’s Story About the Cars
1. If he did tell the media and LE about both the cars he saw in his driveway, then why wasn’t that information reported publicly at the time? The newspapers were peppered with stories about attempted abductions, vehicle descriptions, etc – why was there no public communication about DR seeing cars?
2. There were several attempted abductions reported in the area shortly after Jacob’s abduction. A tan car was described in several of those reports. If DR did not report on the afternoon car immediately, then it’s likely that he took bits of info from the reports of attempted abductions, and crafted a story to fit those scenarios.
3. DR insists that the driver of that afternoon car is the one guilty of committing the abduction. There is no logic in that assertion; it just doesn’t make sense on any level.
4. Prior to this year, DR has been quoted as saying he witnessed things throughout the day that coalesced in his mind as important information that could lead to the abductor. He refused to go public with the information for fear that it could tip off the kidnapper. Again, that does not make any logical sense. The fact that DR publicly stated that he saw things that day, alone in itself, would tip off the “real” kidnapper because that person would know or figure out whose driveway he was on when he turned around – why would DR think holding back information about the cars would jeopardize the investigation?
5. DR says he didn't see or hear Kevin's car in the driveway that night, minutes after the abduction. DR's dog barking alerts him to the 2nd car in his driveway, but minutes later Kevin, presumably driving slower than the other two cars, doesn't give the dog cause to bark furiously? IMO, the slower the car in the driveway, the louder and longer a dog will bark. A fast moving car - that's likely to startle a dog, but hard to tell how quickly the dog would react by barking.
6. When Kevin came forward in 2004 to provide the information that he was driving the car in DR's driveway that night - why did LE suddenly change their theory of the case to an abduction on foot? That would indicate to me that LE didn't "buy" his story about he other two cars he reported (again, when did he report them?). So that raises a big question - if LE didn't believe DR about the other two cars, then why would they believe a car was involved at all, ever?
Another thing about DR’s story that does not add up, in my opinion, are parts of his account of his day. This is an example I don't think anyone has brought up before now - he says he remembers getting the newspaper that evening when he returned from his run. First – that is an odd thing to remember about something that happened 23 years ago. Second – it’s so insignificant that one has to wonder why he even stated it. Third – who doesn’t look forward to getting the Sunday paper every week? I don’t know about you all, but if I don’t get the Sunday paper from the box before 8am it’s because I’m out of town! OK, yeah I’m probably making too big a deal about the newspaper, but one has to wonder if DR’s motive for including that odd detail is to have an explanation at to why his scent or presence was detected near the mailbox where the abduction took place. He lives there, why would he feel the need to justify it?? Just sayin’
