Trying to catch up here. Are they now saying she left school at 3pm or are they simply referring to the last time she was heard from (the 2:53pm text to bf)? I just can't stop feeling that there was some kind of tension between Mom and the authorities early on, and I at first assumed it was because they thought Mom might be involved or that perhaps they had questioned her in a manner that had made her feel uncomfortable. Now I'm wondering if it was because the authorities at first were leaning more on the side of runaway rather than abduction. That would explain why you would play it close to the vest, the last thing you'd want out there is that a 14 year old is on the run and alone. Now they might be leaning more on the side of this being an abduction. The tone has changed from "abby come home we miss you" to "be on the lookout for changes in the people around you".
I'm also not convinced that this was a stranger abduction. It would be too sloppy and too much up to chance. This had to be someone who knew when she left school, the route she took, how long it took to walk it, where she'd be along the route, the best spot to pick her up and not be observed, and be able to get her in a car with little reaction from her. She's not 5, she's 14 and if someone tried to grab her from the side of the road you just know there'd be screaming and kicking. It had to be someone she knew, just had to be. Had to be someone she trusted enough to get into a vehicle with and it had to happen fast. Someone she wouldn't turn down for a ride. Given that nothing has been found, she disappeared into thin air, I think this is someone that's done this before. Nothing was left behind, that we know of. Not a thing, no backpack, no shoe, no earring, nothing. Means she had to place herself into whatever vehicle she went off in, otherwise something would have been left behind.
