I wonder what the 'differential' theories might be here. Of course we all see the circumstances and Bane's history and reach similar conclusions, but if we were detectives stopping there would be a poor approach as it blinds us to any other possibility.
I wonder what the kidnap angle is here. The FBI don't really ever investigate "missing persons" cases unless the missing is a child. The only other time they get involved is if a local authority requests their assistance with a missing adult, but in that circumstance they only provide assistance with identification and forensics (from what I can find publicly).
The
FBI has jurisdiction to investigate kidnap of an adult in six circumstances, including this one:
-
(2) kidnapping within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States;
Is kidnap what they're investigating?
A very intense spotlight has been on Bane for two week now. That's a good thing, and from the public information available there's a 50%+ chance that he has something to do with this.
But what if there's a counterfactual and we've been distracted by a red herring? I think it's really important we ask the question: Is there anything else that might have happened?
Some ideas:
- Perhaps she wanted some alone time and went for a stroll just as they got back to the dinghy;
- Perhaps they're swingers/have an open sex life and some activities happened that night involving third parties;
- Perhaps she really wanted off the USVI and willingly got on someone else's boat - which boats were in the vicinity?
- Perhaps Bane himself left the boat after they returned and she wasn't there when he got back.
One thing is for sure. Whatever level of complicity Bane has, he has handled this horrifically. But my impression of him - beyond his conviction for DV - is that he's likely a weed-smoking alcoholic who lives on a boat, the type of guy who could very well do harm to a woman, but also the type of guy who is quite able to pass out for hours and not know what the hell's going on around him.
A technical point on anchor alarms. Modern anchor alarms work like this: you set your 'anchor' point on an iPhone app or a device (e.g. a Garmin device), as well as the acceptable distance you're happy for the boat to drift around the point. The software then monitors how much the boat moves around that point, and if it goes beyond that distance (e.g. 10m) it warns you with an alarm. It isn't a physical alarm attached to or monitoring the physical anchor. It just means the boat moved too far at that point, away from where it was meant to sit.
With the recent Sarah Everard search in the UK, the primary theory was that her boyfriend was involved, and he abjectly was not. I wonder if some opportunities were missed, and some energy mis-spent on the certainty of that theory, that could have been spent elsewhere.
All MOO of course!