Could caravan lady have called her DIL at 9.20ish and her DIL been out on errands, so It took time for her to get to the area to recognise whose dog it was, then called the school, who then rang Paul. It probably wasn’t the first time caravan lady had seen a stray dog and she may not have been thinking straight if she‘d got to be somewhere and didn’t give it much thought as she’d knew her DIL was going to come and look. Some people aren’t reported missing for a lot longer and as much as two hours seems a long time in reality it isn’t. I can’t imagine for one minute caravan lady would think it would turn out as it has, especially if she’s lived there years and nothing like that has happened before and she just may not have a suspicious mind.
I agree.
I’m not blaming caravan lady at all.
I just find it strange that the police haven’t mentioned that there is a 80-90 minute gap which is unaccounted for.
Initially it was implied that the dog and ‘phone were discovered at 9.30am and Paul was informed and rushed up there.
They never stated he didn’t get there until 10.50am which makes me wonder if that is correct or is it another friend mixing it up again.
Missing 10 minutes and not seeing her in the river/vicinity is very different to missing 80/90 minutes and not seeing her.
I don’t think there is anything odd in caravan lady walking her dog before an important appointment. She would’ve worked out how much time she had before she needed to leave which wouldn’t have allowed her time to start searching, etc. I also don’t think she was wrong to leave Willow there. Imagine if she’d have taken her home and then gone to her appointment, it would have caused even more confusion.