But many murders happen in Florida -- only one of them, as it turned out, had anything to do with the death of C Anthony. It is undoubtedly the case that thousands are dying in the Mexican border town, and that not only those involved in narco-trafficking are now among the victims. It's that next step, taking for granted that those murders NECESSARILY connect to this disappearance (not that you're doing this, Kimberlyd125!), that bothers me. It's a false syllogism:
1. D Hartley disappeared in Mexico.
2. Many people disappear and/or are murdered in Mexico by the drug cartels.
3. Therefore, D Hartley has been disappeared/murdered by drug cartels.
I'm not sure how we get to #3 in the absence of the usual sorts of detailed hard evidence required in a murder case (if indeed that's what we're talking about here), except by pure supposition, which I think TH's testimony pretty much amounts to for us (strictly IMO of course). And when I think about other cases in which a partner/spouse has disappeared under suspicious circumstances it seems to me that intrepid Websleuthers have rarely been so charitable. The difference is Mexico. But that takes us back to the logic problems sketched out above.
I hope we do know, someday. This case gees me up, for some reason. It's like watching someone make the same mistake over and over again, and telling her/him "NOOOOOOO!" and not being heard.
Anyhoo, off to work. Apologies for the ramble.
best,
s