Hoosierfan72
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 14, 2020
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 10,217
Agreed, especially when you couple this with TNs pleading early on for the public to ask the sheriff about the condition of the bike. I've always wondered why that was so important to TN early on, and if this was the same narrative TN was hearing (bike crashed, potential animal attack) it would make sense. Also, our tight-lipped CCSO made a point to publicly say an animal attack was "very unlikely" - which could have been a way to address this narrative without tipping his hand re: evidence. Within a couple of days, the narrative emerged of a possible kidnapping for ransom (per the reward and video plea from BM).Yeah that is odd about the message sent to the former church. I mean, I don't really find it odd to send a prayer request or something to the former church since they were members as of just two years ago and sounds like they were very active. But I guess I assume it would come from their family (maybe it did?) but the details about a crashed bike and mountain lion are odd. Perhaps the bike WAS crashed - details haven't been released by LE officially about the bike - but they have been pretty adamant it's not an animal attack from the start. It's almost like someone wants to get a certain narrative out there MOO.
JMO, I think it's a reason why the details about the bike ride, condition of the bike, timeline, etc. haven't been shared even though this is still a missing person case. If we assume the animal attack narrative came, directly or indirectly, from BM (which, I think is a reasonable assumption, albeit one that we can't know for sure) and the changing narrative is due to changing assumptions that were made in good faith, that's one thing. But if the changing narrative is due to lies that were being told early on (that were quickly refuted), I think this becomes a big problem for the person who was driving the narrative. MOO.