Some random thoughts --
We don't know how many foster children the fosters have had, over time or at any one time. The dates may look wonky because the reference is perhaps to a different foster.
Active monitoring -- what exactly does that mean? 24/7 a dedicated LEO sitting there listening? Or spot checks? Or software trained to pick up key words which send alerts? For wiring a home, are they free to listen to every single thing? Are they supposed to tune out, hum for things that are mundane? Surely there's protocol and precedent involved.
Presumably those audio files are archived. Maybe, only after the alleged abuse was reported, the corresponding archived audio was isolated, supporting the child's allegation. Do we know which came first? LE hearing it or the child reporting it, like to a teacher? Or did LE sit on it, knowing they'd be monitoring in the event of graver abuse, to preserve the integrity of the covert op? A judgment call, poor or otherwise.
I wonder if that surveillance yielded anything of substance, relating to Wm, save a glimpse of "parenting".
If the foster mother covered up a fatal accident in order to save her marriage and current foster, and to protect future fostering, it worked. Till this.
If she told no one, no amount of audio surveillance will yield a word, unless she's in the habit if talking to herself. About it.
If she covered it up, it's in the vault (of her mind), and everything that happened to Wm will be voiced as external to her -- he just up and disappeared.
JMO
