And those dry, matter-of-fact comments he attributed to MK are really weird. Sure doesn't sound like they came from a youngster who was scared out of her mind.
I cannot believe that MK, reportedly so close to her sister, would be so matter of fact or wait more than a few minutes to alert the parents if she was scared or worried. A 5 or 6 year old, maybe, NOT a smart, 9-year-old.
With officers on the way, Smart ran across the street to a home where there had been an attempted abduction years before. Moving through "a blur," Smart warned his neighbors to check their children, he said.
But....further in the article, it says ...
"But remember," Dinse continued, "at the very beginning, these officers were trying to determine what sort of case they had."
What is it? Ed is running around the neighborhood , telling people to check their kids...and THE CHIEF OF POLICE is saying they were trying to determine what kind of case they had????
What??? Did Ed tell the police E. had been taken by a man? Taken by a man with a gun? Did he say it may have been an attempted burglery? If it was an attempted burglery, would Ed run to the neighbors and tell them to check their children?????
Dinse..Ed...Dinse....Ed...this thing gets more confusing every time a new point is made in the press.
Looks to me like Ed was interviewed by the SLCT, and then Dinse was intervieewed. Why wasn't the story the same? What was the purpose of telling the "sitting in the car with the engine running" for? New evidence? This article has a wealth of information.