It is my belief that law enforcement has a pretty good idea what happened to these children . As a Canadian, I admire how much information is kept out of the public domain. This should not be construed to mean they have no leads or information. A strong example I recall was the case in Calgary of a missing boy and his grandparents, who were murdered by a disgruntled former business associate of the grandfather. When the details became known to the public, it was clear the police had been onto the truth early on and made their case relatively fast, especially when you consider how long murder investigations can often take to solve, years, even decades.
Our clues to what likely happened to Lilly and Jack - law enforcement stated early on the children are likely no longer alive. They stated their belief it was not an abduction.
My further interpretation of what has transpired - I believe law enforcement is quietly building their case.
Seeking video footage from the area, including from a few days preceding the disappearance, is for the purpose of showing they have explored every possibility, and have not fixated on one theory. They can show they looked at and identified and eliminated from suspicion any strange vehicles seen in the area.
Video footage can also corroborate or refute statements made by the parents or other family members as to their movements around the time of the disappearance. For example, hypothetically, if a family member claimed to have driven around a certain area looking for the children that morning, but footage of that area reveals no such travel occurred, this would be a hole in the story to be explored.
Re Searching the woods again. It is my belief the children never wandered into the woods. The woods had to be searched, of course, to rule out that possibility. The fact the children were not found in the first searches, with something like 160 searchers along with trained dogs tells me they were not in the woods. That the woods are being searched again is likely to show the thoroughness of their exploration of that avenue. By now, had the children perished in the woods, there would be decomposed remains to discover, and they would be more likely to be found now, even if they had been missed previously.
It is my belief that, had they wandered into the woods, they would have been found, either alive, or dead from exposure, or dead due to animal attack. I find it unlikely an animal attack would take away all evidence of 2 children. I don’t believe the children would have gotten very far away in that dense forest.
Without unpacking their account of what transpired that morning, I find the facts of the case as reported by one or both of the adults in the home do not ring true for me. I find inconsistencies in their descriptions of the children to be suspicious.
I find the statistical likelihood of an opportunistic predator passing through this remote region at the exact same time 2 vulnerable children happen to wander to the roadside to be very very small.
I believe investigators have a better handle on this case than we have been told. I am very hopeful for justice to be served.
All imho
