From gitana 1, snipped from a long post:
"I'm sorry, I totally disagree with you. I think the family's reactions are super important. Maybe not to finding these two girls but to many other cases.
I have been sleuthing for years. I have been following missing kids cases for much longer than that. Making connections, noting reactions, etc., is very key to determining what direction to go in.
For example, comparisons with many other cases and different family's demeanor, was a long discussion on the Isabel Celis thread. I argued and do believe that her parents stoicism is not necessarily a sign of guilt. I gave several comparisons, like to Elizabeth Smart's dad.
No, noting, discussing and cataloging how the families react is very important to me and helps me learn what to look for and what not to focus on.
I do not believe that discussing the family's reactions is disrespectful or hurtful to finding the girls. If it bothers anyone, I would suggest moving on past."
BBM
I, too, have been researching/investigating missing and unidentified persons for many, many years. I am not a newbie, I have dedicated decades of my life doing this.
I understand how "noting, discussing, and cataloging" a family's demeanor can be helpful IF there is some thought that family dynamics played a role in either the missing person having run away, or a family member actually being involved in the disappearance. I in no way mean to imply that a family's demeanor is not of interest in some cases. If a family member refuses to cooperate, or gives conflicting stories, or otherwise seems to hinder an investigation, it would be ridiculous NOT to talk about it.
But how does that apply in any way to this case? Please, can anyone tell me how being snarky about someone giving their "smiliest" interview helps us better understand how two girls seemingly vanished.
I am not going to mention this again, I guess it's all been said.