If this is because of meth, then it's the first time I ever heard of someone abducting a child for money, drugs or ignorance. Two towns in Iowa yesterday were sights of attempted abductions.
Welcome to Websleuths, LaborDayRN and cindersoot!
:welcome:
Welcome to Websleuths, LaborDayRN and cindersoot!
:welcome:
I like this timeline a lot better, but can't accept that their grandmother would not recognize it was two other kids.
The family took polygraphs.
Thank you Pensfan! I do enjoy reading everyone's insightful posts. This story has really touched my heart.
Agree, but what if he was still holding back somebody big that LE wanted? He had reduced his sentence in stages. Maybe he thought he could reduce it further and the person LE wanted knew it was being discused? (Just brainstorming.)
But she initially said 11:30. Maybe she thought she was mistaken and changed it to 12:15 after LE got the video and saw two bikers going by - and couldn't be sure or not if that was them. So her last sighting by her own eyes was 11:30 and she is just assuming the same thing LE is after seeing the video. I think that is more likely than changing her story for other reasons. If we go with 11:30 - everything else fits. Maybe. I don't know.
The family took polygraphs.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-io...ostpones-drugs/story?id=16870546#.UBMmV458vzIMorrissey had previously reached a plea deal in relation to the case, The Associated Press reported, but had backed out at a July 12 hearing because he was not prepared to go to jail.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ecent-events/2012/07/27/gJQAWfUxDX_story.htmlCook said Morrissey had been expected to accept a plea agreement July 12, the day before the girls vanished, but decided not to do so because he was not ready to go jail. She said prosecutors had shaved his sentence from more than 45 years to 30 years and then to 10 years, with a mandatory five years behind bars, because of his cooperation.
Misti was asked to take another as the first one was inconclusive. She has not been officially cleared by the second.
Dan walked out on first one. I am not sure if he took a second.
Polygraphs are just a tool. Not anything conclusive can be obtained from a polygraph alone. They generally couple the polygraph results, with statement analysis and body language and evidence.
So, just because a family member takes a polygraph, does not exclude them as a possible POI.
What does that mean? Would police have moved the bikes, leaned them up against the fence, then put up crime scene tape and investigated? Unless police are bumbling through the crime scene, wouldn't they have left the bikes where they were found while they investigated the area?
But she initially said 11:30. Maybe she thought she was mistaken and changed it to 12:15 after LE got the video and saw two bikers going by - and couldn't be sure or not if that was them. So her last sighting by her own eyes was 11:30 and she is just assuming the same thing LE is after seeing the video. I think that is more likely than changing her story for other reasons. If we go with 11:30 - everything else fits. Maybe. I don't know.
I think she originally said 11.30 then changed to 12.15 to tie in with the cctv footage.
I just pray these little girls come home soon.
Misti was asked to take another as the first one was inconclusive. She has not been officially cleared by the second.
Dan walked out on first one. I am not sure if he took a second.
Polygraphs are just a tool. Not anything conclusive can be obtained from a polygraph alone. They generally couple the polygraph results, with statement analysis and body language and evidence.
So, just because a family member takes a polygraph, does not exclude them as a possible POI.