If Terri didn't do it...
Why would she lie about her whereabouts that day?
We are looking at this in retrospect, though. People do dumb, stupid things. I love the bumper sticker that reads "You can't fix stupid."
If she was having an affair or hooked on meth or going to buy weed and she didn't owe her dealer any money, then at the time, she may have felt compelled to lie to protect a secret, honestly believing it had no bearing on Kyron's disappearance.
Now, the nature of the secret may not be as devastating to her life as she once believed it would be but, IMHO, it's not about the secret anymore. It's about the lie. Especially if she's innocent, the lie casts into doubt all the truths.
Why would she refuse polygraphs/fail one/walk out of one
I'm still confused about what happened with the polygraphs, but this could be due to any number of reasons. The reports seem to agree that she failed a specific portion, either a question, or a specific set of questions. DY and KH have vocally stated that Terri failed her polygraphs, but they've also vocally stated that they believe Kyron is alive. If Terri had knowledge of his death, and she failed that portion of the polygraph, I don't believe Kyron's bio parents would continue to assert that he is alive. Also, DY's and KH's belief that Terri had an accomplice and their comments about her whereabouts that day, lead me to believe that's the portion of the test Terri failed.
In my mind, I believe all the confusion, lies, and evidence is about where Terri was that morning, not necessarily about whether or not she harmed Kyron. If she did, the the lie detector tests showed it, I believe DY and KH's pressers would give off a different tone.
Anyway, I believe when Terri reached those questions in her polygraph, she may have either anticipated failure or was somehow signaled failure, and she walked out for whatever reason.
Why would she be on facebook that evening he was missing and act as if everything was
fine?
It's difficult to read tone and emotions over the Internet. IMHO, it's impossible to know how she felt while posting on the 'net.
Why would Denise Young say she felt Terri was involved at the moment she heard the
news?
When I hear this, I always come back to, "But you let this woman raise your child for all these years..."
Why wouldn't Terri call Denise herself and inform her instead of letting the school notify
her?
She could've been calling police or someone locally -- it seems like there was a lot going on simultaneously, and LE requested someone go back to the house.
Why would she have tried to have her husband murdered?
LE have a landscaper that never came forward on this information. He only relayed this information after LE contacted him; we don't know his background, his motivation, or under what conditions he relayed this story. There is, obviously, no other evidence of this plot or Terri would be in jail. Why tell now?
She only lawyered up after a botched sting, her husband left her, filed a RO against her, and took her daughter. After all that, I think she finally figured out LE were no longer "on her side."
Why would law enforcement state publicly that there was no danger to other children in
the community?
Perhaps it's what they believe.
and lastly
HOW ON EARTH could she stare blankly and have no reaction to the question "Where is Kyron?"
Perhaps her lawyer told her to look down and say nothing if approached by a reporter.
I realize that list is incomplete, as this is all we have to go on in this very tight lipped investigation. And I realize that on and individual basis, many of those questions can be explained away. But its the totality of the questions that lead to one conclusion: Something is very wrong here.
I would like to preemptively state that neither I, nor anyone else I am aware of is trying or advocating in anyway that Terri Horman be sentenced and punished according to our laws before a verdict is rendered. Therefore, I am not circumventing in any way her presumed innocence before a court of law states otherwise. So yes, she is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. And what I write is not in any way negating that, nor denying her that right.
Based on what we have, I believe it could go either way -- her being on anti-depressants could explain away half the behavior many see as problematic, and her having an affair, and lying about it, could explain the rest, IMHO. Or she could be guilty.