Quote Originally Posted by Omegstrat6 View Post
In the interests of fairness, I've just read that the Chief Constable has stated that, given their knowledge of Nicola Bulley's "specific vulnerabilities", the case was designated high risk from the start and 40 officers have already visited 300 plus premises and interviewed over 300 people. The implication being that they have not been solely focussed on the "drowning" scenario. He is either ar se covering in the light of criticism on social media and the press or else he is telling the truth and the issue is one of communication failings. I totally get why some circumstances of any investigation are not made public and I understand that too much public speculation and interference can only hamper investigations but maybe the lesson here is more clarity from the Police in their statements? (mind you, he didn't seem to address criticism of their ability to secure the forensic integrity of the bench area)
It was pointed out by a serving Police Officer on another site how far down the line with a missing person do you go before turning it into a possible criminal investigation and all that goes with it (ie bringing forensics into the picture) Although with these latest revelations, perhaps this should have happened sooner rather than later.