As to your first bullet point, I noticed that you didn't post the last paragraph of my previous post where I point out under what circumstances I felt that someone could remember with clarity events that had transpired years earlier, which was the reason for my anecdote in the first place. If I can remember something from that long ago, it is reasonable to assume that others can, too. That is the meaning of a "memorable event." Just because Terry Hobbs can't remember things doesn't mean that others don't.
Next, you mention that the girls were young, 13 and 11, at the time. So were the "softball girls" whose testimony was accepted at the trial. IMO, they were seeking attention, but these women are now testifying from the perspective of adults about past events. I tend to believe adults over giggly tweens any day. Remember Salem, MA?
As to your next point, they didn't know until much later that TH was denying having seen the boys. They were young at the time, as you pointed out, and didn't realize that their information was important. When it became public knowledge that Terry was denying having seen the boys, they came forward with their information.
Sharing the information with Echols' investigators seems natural to me. The police were no longer investigating, and the defense team was. Who's to say that they didn't go to the WMPD, only to be shot down as Pam Hicks Hobbs was by Gitchell when he told her not to mess up his investigation when she tried to give him information that didn't support the prosecution's theory?
With the Rico statement (who, BTW, was an adult who realized immediately that what she saw was important), the time frame she gave of between 6:30 and 7:00 makes it possible for the boys to be seen by the neighbors at 6:30 and Ms. Rico at 7:00. No one was looking at a clock. The girls were waiting for a ride to church which is what gave them their time frame. I don't recall Ms. Rico citing any particular reason for her time frame. Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that she could have been off by a little either way.
Just because Jamie said that she saw Ryan at school the next day doesn't necessarily mean that Ryan had attended school. He could have gone by to get his assignments. She didn't say that she saw him in class or anything that explicitly implied that he was in attendance at school. She said that Ryan told her that the police had found the bodies. Since cell phones were not that prevalent in '93, it seems to me much more logical that Ryan had come by the school after the bodies were found for his assignments and happened to see Jamie and talk to her because she was a friend and he was upset.
As to your last bullet point, I see no great conflict here. Ryan simply didn't remember Mark asking him to look for Chris before they went to court. The important thing to Ryan was his court date. Just because he didn't mention that Jamie was with him (as she says she was most days) doesn't mean that she wasn't. Basically, at least to me, they are telling the same thing.
