Well, I'm not sure what to BELIEVE, but what I **Think** is that all the items retrieved from and with the bag should at least be checked to determine if there is any evidence of decomp on them. What occurs to me is that these toys sound like the kind of thing that might accumulate in a car that frequently has a young child as a passenger -- Happy Meal toys, little stuff to keep a child occupied. Many children aged 2 - 3 are fine with small toys that technically are for older age groups because of their size. My son didn't put things in his mouth, for example, so I was able to allow him to play with small toys at an early age.
And if the bones are Bones and were not rocks, then even chicken bones might have been in Casey's car.
If in fact there was a shamrock charm, that would make me feel even more sure that the items at least should be checked closely and thoroughly to rule them in or out. A shamrock charm, and if the cross on the tree in fact does have beads that match beads Casey is known to have owned, are enough reason to me to check the area well.
As far as sonar, I don't know anything about it except what I've seen on deep-sea search programs, but I suspect that their sensitivity lies more along the lines of basic shapes, outlines and sizes and less along the lines of fine details such as those that bones and toys would produce. If I'm right, then TM's sidescan sonar search likely was looking for something the size and shape of a suitcase, duffel bag, plastic storage container, etc. A thin plastic garbage bag buried under silt and containing small objects wouldn't show up looking like anything much, seems to me.
And if the bones are Bones and were not rocks, then even chicken bones might have been in Casey's car.
If in fact there was a shamrock charm, that would make me feel even more sure that the items at least should be checked closely and thoroughly to rule them in or out. A shamrock charm, and if the cross on the tree in fact does have beads that match beads Casey is known to have owned, are enough reason to me to check the area well.
As far as sonar, I don't know anything about it except what I've seen on deep-sea search programs, but I suspect that their sensitivity lies more along the lines of basic shapes, outlines and sizes and less along the lines of fine details such as those that bones and toys would produce. If I'm right, then TM's sidescan sonar search likely was looking for something the size and shape of a suitcase, duffel bag, plastic storage container, etc. A thin plastic garbage bag buried under silt and containing small objects wouldn't show up looking like anything much, seems to me.