I totally agree that opportunity perp abducting a girl to drag her more than 4 miles to the nearest road (likely much farther back to his vehicle) is "unlikely to say the least".
But why drag her to the road? To take her to some less secluded area than Yosemite - where most people agree that dozens of experienced organized searchers aware of the disappearance could miss her?
As far as I recall Stacy told the older man that she will be back in "few minutes". So at least that much passed before he followed where she went (+ few minutes before he got there), probably looked around for a bit, as much as he could (+ few minutes), even with high adrenaline rush surely it would take him at least few minutes to get back to the camp and alarm others in the camp. Few minutes before some of them got there.
Thats 5 x "few minutes" at least. That could be slightly less but probably bit more than 30 minutes. Considering that Stacy was taking pictures and surely wasnt going fast in straight line the moment she passed these trees that obscured her from the sight of others. So the most she could make in that time would be approx. 1 mile.
Before that nightfall came Stacy would be well aware that she's lost.
Yet she didnt heard people calling her (I assume that they were) not screamed for help herself. Why not? Cause she was already severely injured and couldnt do that or already dead? That would mean it happened relatively close to the camp.
That was a massive search. And people were very fast to start it. No rainfalls, no snowstorms, no thick bushes, no wild rivers.
Instead of that steeps, boulders, lakes and no super distinctive trails - enough to get lost. Stacy may be unaware of that, her dad may be unaware of that, older guy may be unaware of that... but sure as hell the guides who were there with them should be aware of that. Yeah, they could be not alerted seeing two people going relatively short path to the nearest lake. But that one who allegedly saw Stacy walking farther alone knew that she disappeared from his sight walking somewhere alone.
For me this case sounds just vastly different to almost all of these "disappeared in the wilderness" kind of cases. Rarely all these factors combined appear:
- Not much of a delay with starting the search.
- Massive search, decent effort, good resources, experienced searchers, tracking dogs, decent presence of the event in newspapers.
- No sudden change of weather that would force the searchers to stop or make it harder for them.
- Very clear idea where exactly Stacy was right before she disappeared.
- Confirmed presence of at least one other group of hikers/horseback riders who came from the direction where Stacy would be expected to go if she followed the trail not so long after she disappeared who didnt saw her on their way.
And excuse me for the roughness of that note, but as far as the coverage that I was able to get and read about this case (which as we all know isnt rich in solid info) nobody on that searching group got injured during the search - which sadly happens in rough and challenging areas. Not here. Doesnt mean that area is safe to aimlessly wander around but it implies that it wasnt that bad and dangerous to search and look around.
And what about animals? In case she slip and fell somewhere and succumbed to exhaustion and possibly an injury in that summer heat - wouldnt that attract scavenger birds that would alert searchers?
Maybe not cause some reason, maybe something else cause another reason.
And maybe I wasnt clear enough with the abduction theory - which is in my opinion like 45% probability vs. 55% that she got lost and wandered so far away before accident happened that searchers didnt even consider looking there for her.
Im not seeing some random hiker attacking her right away or dragging her miles away by force or threat as very probable scenario.
My bet would be on someone with good grasp on the area, with good awareness that late afternoon means that most hikers either went somewhere to camp or leave the park and possibly even some knowledge how to get by away from trails. Surely someone who knew that nobody but overwhelmed, tired elderly guy could look for her right away.
Sources cant agree even on that how many people were in that group Stacy was travelling with. Was it 7? 9? 12? 20? How many guides? Were all these people together as Stacy left and stayed together so 100% nobody from that group followed? Were all their horses in the camp?
Pretty sure nobody followed Stacy the exact route she took to get to the first lake but was it impossible to get there other way? It doesnt look like it wasnt. And surely someone from the group could easily convince her to go with him under false promise of leading her to another lake. Or maybe even taking her on the horseback with him. Nobody whitnessed that, but avoiding meeting people on the trail for someone who knows the area and doesnt want to be seen by anyone aint that hard.
If not someone from the group then someone who coerced her to believe that theyre working in the park or friendly and helpful could be a reason why she "disappeared". She could be literally miles away when she realized that something is off or before she got attacked.
Would dogs be able to follow her scent if she got on a horse with someone?
For me it doesnt work both ways:
a) super easy for Stacy to get lost and wander away to not be seen, heard or traced by anyone,
b) crazy and impossible than abductor with evil intent could not possibly get away from there with her unseen.
For me either A was as (if not more) easy as B - or if B is so totally unplausible that A is not that plausible either considering all the searching efforts.
*by "getting away from there" I mean getting far enough to have some time to assault, murder and hide the body
