Woman missing after reporting seeing a toddler on the highway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are traffic cams in the area. Someone on websleuths posted a link to the video.

You can see her get out of the car and go around to the drivers side. Some people on websleuths say they can see multiple people in the video but I only see her. It does appear she does walk off away from her car.

https://streamable.com/a3afw5

She goes around to the drivers side? I didn't watch the video.

Why do we think she wasn't hit by a car? Maybe the person who hit her, took her to hide the evidence.

The luring theory just seems so far fetched. Human traffickers target specific types of people, they don't set traps for random men and women on the highway without knowing what type of person will stop.

yes. The odds were strong that the first car to stop in the dark would be a highway officer and not some random pretty woman.
Also, 99% of people would just call and not stop (which would trigger an officer to be sent to the scene).

The "lure theory" makes no sense. She stumbled upon something bad.

I think more people would actually stop for a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the video show police showing up w/in 3 mins of the car on the video stopping on the side of the road. Assuming that car is hers (hasn't even verified yet AFAIK) it seems insane that someone could vanish in 3 mins .

I just went down a rabbit trail on a Facebook group and people are slowing down the highway video, adjusting contrast, etc.

Apparently there is shadowy movement that indicates that she walked around to the passenger side of her car and then encountered another person or persons and there was a lot of movement indicating an altercation. Presumably she was pulled off into the woods. Of note, there are houses not too far behind the woods that border the side of the highway.

So hopefully the police know more than they are saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are traffic cams in the area. Someone on websleuths posted a link to the video.

You can see her get out of the car and go around to the drivers side. Some people on websleuths say they can see multiple people in the video but I only see her. It does appear she does walk off away from her car.

https://streamable.com/a3afw5

She goes around to the drivers side? I didn't watch the video.

Why do we think she wasn't hit by a car? Maybe the person who hit her, took her to hide the evidence.

The luring theory just seems so far fetched. Human traffickers target specific types of people, they don't set traps for random men and women on the highway without knowing what type of person will stop.

yes. The odds were strong that the first car to stop in the dark would be a highway officer and not some random pretty woman.
Also, 99% of people would just call and not stop (which would trigger an officer to be sent to the scene).

The "lure theory" makes no sense. She stumbled upon something bad.

I think more people would actually stop for a child.

The video shows her riding down the shoulder of the road for a half mile or more with her hazards on. So the working theory is that this was her second time around (that she saw the kid, got off on the next exit and looped back a second time). I'm not sure how many people would do this.
Personally I would just call and I think most people would.

[Anonymous]

Most people would pulloff the road and immediately call 911 if they say a child wandering near an interstate (and apprently NO other motorists did??) and not loop around/exit 2x, not call your brother's gf, not ride the shoulder for a mile like she, allegedly, did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most people would pulloff the road and immediately call 911 if they say a child wandering near an interstate (and apprently NO other motorists did??) and not loop around/exit 2x, not call your brother's gf, not ride the shoulder for a mile like she, allegedly, did.

yep, the whole thing is really odd--

So she saw the kid, got off at the next exit, crossed the interstate, went back in the opposite lanes, got off again, crossed over again and cruised down the shoulder for 1/2 mile looking for the kid? ALL before calling the police?

The police arrived 3 min after the call so I don't think this would give her time to do all the looping around for the second pass. So she looped and started the second pass prior to calling. Who does this? It's odd. Again, most people would just call 911 right away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people would pulloff the road and immediately call 911 if they say a child wandering near an interstate (and apprently NO other motorists did??) and not loop around/exit 2x, not call your brother's gf, not ride the shoulder for a mile like she, allegedly, did.

yep, the whole thing is really odd--

So she saw the kid, got off at the next exit, crossed the interstate, went back in the opposite lanes, got off again, crossed over again and cruised down the shoulder for 1/2 mile looking for the kid? ALL before calling the police?

The police arrived 3 min after the call so I don't think this would give her time to do all the looping around for the second pass. So she looped and started the second pass prior to calling. Who does this? It's odd. Again, most people would just call 911 right away.

What are the highways setup like in Alabama? I’m assuming it’s not as busy as I-95 and easier to exit and hop back on.

I think if you saw a child and saw no one else stopping you’d circle back. You’d also probably wonder if you saw what you saw and go back to check again.

I don’t think it’s odd to call a friend/relative at that hour when you see something that uncommon as a child wandering the highway alone. You’d never know what the parents would say - like you touched their child or kidnapped their child so having someone on the line is helpful.

Overall. Imagine this happening to you at night unexpectedly. You’d be shocked to see a kid wandering or wonder if you really saw what you saw.

[Anonymous]

What’s on the other side of the trees? If it’s houses or land, another road, someone could also easily park there send a kid down and hide in the trees, and then get back up without being seen with the person kidnapped. The tire tracks could’ve been from a concerned passerby for her car since her door was open.

[Anonymous]

I agree that she probably stumbled upon something bad, rather than being lured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people would pulloff the road and immediately call 911 if they say a child wandering near an interstate (and apprently NO other motorists did??) and not loop around/exit 2x, not call your brother's gf, not ride the shoulder for a mile like she, allegedly, did.

yep, the whole thing is really odd--

So she saw the kid, got off at the next exit, crossed the interstate, went back in the opposite lanes, got off again, crossed over again and cruised down the shoulder for 1/2 mile looking for the kid? ALL before calling the police?

The police arrived 3 min after the call so I don't think this would give her time to do all the looping around for the second pass. So she looped and started the second pass prior to calling. Who does this? It's odd. Again, most people would just call 911 right away.

Years ago, I was driving and saw what I thought was a body in the road. It was dark and I was unsure, so I turned around as soon as I could, looked from another angle and still wasn't sure. I turned around again and got close enough to confirm it was, in fact, a body. Another car drove over the body and was stopped. It was then that I called 911. When people see things that shouldn't happen (a child alone on a road or a body) it takes some time to grasp what's actually happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people would pulloff the road and immediately call 911 if they say a child wandering near an interstate (and apprently NO other motorists did??) and not loop around/exit 2x, not call your brother's gf, not ride the shoulder for a mile like she, allegedly, did.

yep, the whole thing is really odd--

So she saw the kid, got off at the next exit, crossed the interstate, went back in the opposite lanes, got off again, crossed over again and cruised down the shoulder for 1/2 mile looking for the kid? ALL before calling the police?

The police arrived 3 min after the call so I don't think this would give her time to do all the looping around for the second pass. So she looped and started the second pass prior to calling. Who does this? It's odd. Again, most people would just call 911 right away.

Driving on a highway at night, you see things quickly and not clearly. She may not have been sure what she saw, but thought it was a child alone and decided to go back and verify before calling.

[Anonymous]

Her apple devices will help them trace whether she circled back, etc.

All the pics of her in the article show her wearing her apple watch, which is trackable; why would it be in her purse? Give the passing trucker's description of a man in the gray car leaning into her car, I'm guessing he took off her apple watch (trackable) and put it in her purse. It hopefully has prints on it.

[Anonymous]

DH and I were driving late at night in rural VA and saw a cow ambling down the shoulder of the road. We called 911 to report as we slowly drove past. If we had seen a child, I know we’d have pulled over immediately while calling 911.

[Anonymous]

How is all this known about her flashers, looping back around, walking around her car, etc.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is all this known about her flashers, looping back around, walking around her car, etc.?

Highway/Traffic cam video has been released

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It says the family wants to know why no amber alert. One criteria for an amber alert is a suspect and or a tag/license plate. They have neither so that’s why one wasn’t issued. Just an fyi in case others are wondering too

She is an adult and not eligible for an Amber Alert. Her family is wondering why an Ashanti alert, which is for adults, was not issued.

All those alerts require the person to be in a car. Amber, Ashanti and Silver

I’m not saying that is a good idea I’m just explaining.

MPD frequently issues Silver Alerts with no mention of a car.

No they don’t.