I like how your mind works, and the way you think out of the box. [ to put it mildly]
but i am going to disagree that BD was there at the house when DD climbed thru the window.
If so, then she would have been there when Hailey left for the sleep over. Do you think that is the case?
I agree 100%..and also agree that would indicate BD was in the home when Hailey left out for her "sleepover"{DD arrives home at 4pm.} going with the scenario that BD is in the home with SA at this time..and we have Hailey's departure at 3:15 witnessed by SA.. there would not be enough time in this tight of a timeline that would allow SA to get to Snyder Hospital pick up BD and both SA/BD be securely back in the home...with the doors all locked by 4pm when DD arrives and begins knocking..
But regardless of any type of timeline the MAIN REASON I do not believe that BD was in the home at 4pm when DD arrives is that Billie's whereabouts during work hours are easily verifiable.. and its been stated numerous times that BD left work a little early..going to the ATM{6:19/6:20 verified by the ATM withdrawals}..
So if this WERE NOT TRUE and BD being in the home way earlier SA would not be named alone as the last person to see Hailey.. ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT DD DEFINITELY would have relayed this info to CD when telling his dad about the "odd" situation that he had returned home to at 4pm on the 27th..
In the affidavit it DOES NOT have DD's direct acct of these events that occurred when he arrived home at 4pm on the 27th.. but rather have Clint Dunn's account of the events as he was told by his son DD..
If BD had been part of the events{i.e. in the home at 4pm on the 27th refusing to answer DD's banging on the door}then we would have seen in the affidavits Clint Dunn stating that BD was in the residence as well at 4pm on the 27th..{IMO any speculation of CD being too high/lack of memory to have remembered or paid attention to this DIRE OF IMPORTANCE fact that his son..DD relayed to him..well..is just ludicrous..IMO}..
So for whatever reason LE DOES NOT directly quote DD with regards to the account of the events at 4pm on the 27th when he returned home to mom's house and bangs with no one answering..In the affidavit LE instead has this account stated by DD's father..CD..as the events were told to him by his son..
LE then corroborates this statement{per CD} by then stating that mother..BD confirms those exact events as they are stated in the affidavit..
Which IMO simply means that LE is giving additional proof to back up the initial claim of DD's given by his father..CD{that DD arrived at 4pm on the 27th..banged for 5mins..then entered thru a window..where he sees SA with the "deer caught in the headlights look"}..by having BD confirm that this is the exact events that she was told by DD as well..Making it all the more likely that these exact events were exactly as they are being stated that they are.. By having DD's account of events being told the exact same way to two separate ppl and having this corroborated..confirmed and backed up..in the affidavit..
Hope that makes sense..I tried to explain it as simple..yet as detailed as I could to make it understandable..
I am not sure why it is that LE chose NOT TO DIRECTLY QUOTE DD'S ACCOUNT OF THE EVENTS in the affidavits{maybe because he is a minor?..like I said I really don't know}..but for whatever reason it is a fact that LE chose NOT TO DIRECTLY QUOTE DD'S ACCOUNT and instead to have his account given by his father and then confirmed by his mother as to what DD saw and had occurred at 4pm on the 27th..
