I don't believe it is incorrect info. And the LAIP makes it clear what Harshman said. The van he saw was an old, white van. The burned van was orange. Do you really think serial burglars only own one van?WEll, well, this is a problem in the timeline if he is trying to claim he saw her with the burglars and was shoved in their van on Dec 28th.
That van was found burned out on THE DAY AFTER Lacey was reported missing. So that was three days before this new claim that she was forced into the van on the 28th.
Spitulski investigated that van in December 2002, which was found the day after Laci disappeared and was less than a mile from the couple's home.Former investigator says key evidence wasn't properly investigated in Scott Peterson case
In an exclusive interview with ABC News, a former California Fire official says key evidence wasn't properly investigated in Scott Peterson caseabc7chicago.com
So whatever it is that was just linked above is incorrect info.
Everything I have read about the witness to her supposed kidnapping says he reported the tip on Dec 28th---and he has seen the kidnapping 3 or 4 days earlier.
Harshman said he had seen the posters with Laci's photo. I think his focus was on Laci and he said it appeared she was under control of the men. The Detective who interviewed him asked him if he saw her dog and ignored his report/
There is now expert testimony that Conner was alive in early January.
JMO
MPD Sergeant Cloward received a call from Tom Harshman, a former reserve police officer for the Martinez Police Department, who called to report that on December 28, 2002, he saw a pregnant woman with a scared look on her face alongside a road with two men and an older white van. (98 RT 18510–18511.)