An
article in The Courier today with Nicola discussing the police.
She mentions:
"From day one, I was being told that it was being treated as a homicide, without any evidence or a body.
Is it acceptable to then remove resources so that you can’t view CCTV, that you can’t put the identities of the people you are trying to look for because you don’t have the resources?
That’s not the police officers on the ground, that’s at a far higher level."
The article describes the family manning the calls due to lack of police resources .... then finishes by asking anyone with information to call the police incident room number

No mention of the family's own numbers at all.
But has this changed again from the other day ?
The other day, the MSM carried interviews where it was said that it was
definitely not the lack of resources BUT
incompetence and
betrayal.
Now we are back to
lack of resources.
It is an unusual case, in so much as if Corrie left the horseshoe area unseen by any of the cameras, then he would have had to do so in a vehicle.
In the horseshoe area there were three vehicles (no idea of the times these vehicles departed or even arrived. Or indeed if they were parked there to begin with and then departed).
If he was in one of these vehicles, then there is (publicly at least) no idea of the direction they travelled in after they departed Bury, or there ultimate destination.
So, where would you begin a "mass public search" for him ?
The only "clue" there is, is that his phone pinged in Bury and then pinged 28 minutes later it pinged in the Barton Mills area.
But this "pinged data" closely matches the route (and time) a bin lorry took, which also departed the same area as Corrie did.
If Corrie and his phone were in that area together, it doesn't necessarily mean they are both still there together. He could be anywhere.
If only his phone was in that area and it had been transported in the rubbish, then Corrie could again be anywhere.
Trying to establish whether he got into one of those vehicles "unwillingly of willingly" would be a start, but they don't even know if he'd arranged a to meet one of those vehicles or not.
He could for example have gone to meet a vehicle "willingly", but then been taken "unwillingly".
His phone dumped into a bin and then taken anywhere. In such a case, where would you deploy a "mass search involving the General Public" ?