This is my first post but I have been reading through the threads, have familiarised myself with the rules so hopefully my post is okay.
From the info that has been released by the police, correct me if I am wrong, what we know for sure is that NB dropped her children at school and that Willow and the phone ended up on/near the bench. The only evidence of her being in the area at all are witnesses, and this was in the top field and not in the vicinity of the bench? Have they appealed for dash cams or cctv for her entering the area? Not doubting the witness of course or suggesting she wasn't there at all, but to me an entry can tell as much as an exit/non exit.
I did find the addresses on company house interesting, don't think can share though as NB isn't listed on them? I don't think it suggests anything untoward to be clear, but just reiterates that she was familiar with the area- as also evidenced by her other public accounts. Not that it perhaps means much, I do wonder whether as with car accidents familiarity can sometimes cause more of a risk than somewhere new- JMO of course.
The discussion about the clothing, I have a long length gilet (I describe it as such as its allegedly ankle length but comes to my knee area as I'm pretty tall), just my experience even at that length it can impact on movement a bit, albeit makes tripping over it seem less likely, MOO. I think that's partly why cam footage of entering would be useful though, what someone wears when they leave home isn't necessarily what they wear on their walk, seems the witness was a fair distance away but 100% accuracy on knowing what she was wearing in the field would perhaps be useful- unless they do know this by means they haven't released. I certainly add items of clothing on once out of my car like hats, gloves, whatever else.
It is all very perplexing, more so as of course and rightly the police don't release everything.