Who do you think kidnapped her in that scenario? I can't see anyone with motivation. And it didn't keep him from involvement in the hearings anyway.
Do we know Otto Schulze continued on to be involved in the hearings?
Either as part of Combustion Engineering's united front, or as an individual renegade, Schulze's testimony would have been key. Whether he testified or didn't is the first question; what he said, if he did testify, is the second. Whether or not he changed what he intended to say, at the last minute, is the third.
The Union of Concerned Scientists was going around and finding individual scientists who were willing to offer personal opinions on the nuclear problem; as one author put it, most of these scientists were in this for the science--they weren't interested in politics, they were interested in what worked and what didn't. A cooling system that was inherently faulty might be something a crooked politician was willing to promote, but scientists were interested in identifying and fixing problems, solving the puzzle and achieving success. By scientists' terms, success means a functioning product. So, they were not necessarily averse to speaking openly about the very issue the public found so alarming: the emergency cooling system just plain didn't work. In every, single test of model cooling systems leading up to the hearings, the safety system failed. There was literally no way any regulatory body could, in good conscience, license any more nuclear plants.
That was pretty huge--and it was the sole reason for the hearings. Otto's and or his company's expert testimony on nuclear plant safety would determine the future (or even the existence) of the nuclear industry.
Before working at Combustion Engineering, Otto was VP and general manager of AMF Atomics; it's unlikely that his move to Combustion Engineering involved dropping down the chain of command, so we can safely assume he was a big player in Combustion Engineering, as well. After Lynne's disappearance, he was dispatched to Iran to start the Iranian and Pakistani nuclear programs; safe to say, his star was rising, not falling.
Point being that his role in the hearings, either directly or behind the scenes, would have been significant.
He graduated in '48 and was immediately employed at Argonne National Laboratory; he is literally one of the fathers of the nuclear industry. His opinion at the hearings, however delivered, would have been essential to the outcome.
In a world where pizza drivers are murdered for 20 bucks, that's more motive than anyone would ever need to kidnap someone's offspring.
Durst?
The public, to date, has zero proof of his residence in Ripton, nor of his owning/renting a storefront in Middlebury. The sudden development of "Durst living near Lynne" is pure hearsay. The prune thing is an unsubstantiated fantasy, and I think it's a safe guess as to who provided the tip.
However--if in fact Durst is the perp, his itinerary is incredibly suspect. He appears in Middlebury/Ripton either simultaneously or just before Lynne starts college; within weeks, she is gone, and he is soon to follow. He just happens to have with him a girl of Lynne's age; someone who would be able to provide a natural connection between Lynne and himself in order to make her eventual abduction easier. This girl, Kathie McCormack, just happens to fall for his charms and move with him to Vermont in time to be present for Lynne's kidnapping, and then leave with Durst back to NY because "his dad was mad."
If it was Durst, it looks very possibly like a hit.
At any rate, we are faced with the following statistical conundrum: which is weirder, being kidnapped because your father is about to testify at federal hearings, being accidentally kidnapped by a serial killer just as your father is about to testify at federal hearings, or despite the fact that your father holds the entire nuclear industry in his hands, and the fact that your local grocer is a serial killer--you coincidentally meet a fate related to neither?
There are to date no property records available for the place Durst was allegedly renting in Ripton, and there are no business records (to date, anyway--I realize they could exist) indicating Durst owned or operated All Good Things. There is also, to date, no hard proof that he ever killed anyone; he allegedly confessed to his elderly neighbor's death and dismembering, but there was never so much as a spot of blood physically linked to Durst.
Honestly, the most suspicious thing about Durst right now is the timing of officials' sudden suggestion in 2015 that he's responsible for basically everything from the Cold War to polio.
Another very important track that needs following: of those testifying at the ECCS hearings, did anyone else face sudden personal trauma in the weeks before January 27, 1972?
This is all just my personal working theory--I'm completely open to other scenarios. However, the fact that all known investigation to date has ignored Lynne's dad's unique status is, in and of itself, a huge red flag.