Whereas if the person who says they saw J being forced into a van* called 911 immediately, LE may have had half a chance of successfully chasing down the van. *Remember, J's mom is the one who told the media that someone witnessed a struggle near the vehicle. LE has stated that they haven't been told that same story by anyone themselves. This is a problem and is probably relevant in some way. My initial response to this conflict is that the family (and witness) know more than what they've revealed publically too. They must have their own theory based on something they know - an existing danger or involvement- at least, it sounds that way to me. One of the things LE has stated, besides the van is the van, is that they believe J is acquainted with her abductor. We know whoever it is wasn't after money. They wanted Jessica. Why? If not a stranger perv/control/sex type abduction, why Jessica? If you knew her why take her knowing she has a three year old son? Why? If she owed someone money, they would have taken the money left behind in her purse too. I've not seen proof but it's been said that she testified or was going to testify in some kind of fraud case. Was that coming up soon? How serious of a crime is involved I wonder. What about the charges of marijuana mishandling against the guy who was supposed to be running the medical marijuana dispensary in the area. Could she and bf have had anything to do with that? Maybe they are witnesses of what was really going on (even if one of them had been involved in the operation). Would they or she have been willing to tell all in return for immunity?