- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 11,189
- Reaction score
- 74,047
CB said in her interview that KB had a busy work schedule and she seemed to indicate that it was easier to reach KB at certain times than others. We don't know how many times CB tried to reach KB. Maybe once Monday the 26th rolled around, CB expected KB to be at work most of the time, so she might not expect a return call until the weekend. (Everybody's different when it comes to how often they speak to family members. I won't bore you with my own experience.)
We also don't know what was regular communication between KB and PF, nor do we know what their parenting time schedule looked like---at least the details.
Let's just suppose that he typically kept the child M-F while she worked and usually had the child on weekends, but this year he had all of the Thanksgiving weekend; OR maybe they did a week with him and a week with her and they exchanged on Thursday.... in either of those scenarios, he wouldn't have worried about her at all until it was time for her to pick the child up. Child's too young to talk on the phone. If the child doesn't get sick, he has no reason to call. PLUS, we don't know what she (or somebody) said in the text and and how that might have changed his expectations of when she would be back.
But the point is, he may not have had any reason to miss KB until December 1 or so. Then CB finally calls him and says "have you heard from KB? I have tried and tried and I can't reach her and she's not returning my calls?" (She's understandably frantic because she has been trying and trying to reach KB, and she is the one who expected a call back.) And PF says, "No, she texted me on 11/25 and said she was going to your house in Idaho and wouldn't be back until tonight. I thought she was with you." (Or whatever it might be.)
See what I mean? That would be a very reasonable explanation.
And we really don't know how many times PF and CB tried to contact KB or how, but I'm sure the police know.
I can't find your earlier post, but I can see how after Watts's story even people who are innocent would lawyer up and refuse polygraph testing and in general, behave as if they were accused.
A story comes to mind. Brooke B., the friend of Columbine shooters, was suspected merely because Eric H. advised him to go home that day. Brooke was innocent, and yet parents went through private polygraph testing.
I am not viewing the behavior of PF as suspicious at this point, merely cautious.
I do think that KB and PF were not in a relationship, though, or rather, it could be a "pro form" relationship covering something else, on both sides.