Hi guys. I am a long time lurker here and have a topic that I have wanted to start for a while but never have. This case is pretty convoluted with real evidence, staging and incompetent police work all muddying the waters. Is there anything about this case that doesn't make sense to you, that you just can't fit no matter how you look at it? I thought it may help if we hash it out and someone else may have a way of looking at it you haven't considered before. For example, the ransom note troubled me for a long time. I am RDI but I couldn't understand why they would write it. Why not just ring the police saying "We woke up and our daughter is missing"? Surely that would have the same effect without the possibilty of the RN being traced back to them? I read other people's ideas on it but nothing clicked for me. Then I read something and it fell into place - the RN points outside the house (I think it was SuperDave but not 100% sure). If you call the police with a missing child, they search the house, they investigate the family. If you call with a ransom note, they start looking outside the house, outside the family. I'd like RDI, IDI and fence-sitters to post. It would be great if we could work on this together.