Those discrepancies can be largely explained though, Gromit, I feel - you would have been better positioned if you had highlighted that at the outset, as I, for one, read a more serious underlying follow-up against the police. It must have been one hell of a case for them as I wouldn't think that this part of Wales is a hotbed of crime, and not on this scale or pressure to achieve a "result" so quickly.....
Mondays abduction triggered a Child Rescue Alert and neighbouring forces and ports etc would have been on the lookout for a light grey van.
You say that is because the witness was a child. Do you think that adequately explains that descrepency? Do you believe a 7 year old cannot tell the difference between pale grey and dark blue? 7pm was past sunset on monday, but it was not dark.
The light would have been fading fast and it would have been more a recollection after the event, Gromit. Do you honestly think that kids at that age would be looking at the vehicle thinking "what's she doing, the vehicle is a blu?e Range Rover, licence number xxxxxxx?" Good grief.
Those are the only witnesses the police have. If you are saying their evidence is unreliable, then so will a defence lawyer. It has already been established that April has been in Bridger's LandRover before, so it will not prove anything if Her DNA is found there.
Let the legal process decide that, Gromit. As has been said many times, we have no idea what they are sitting on except that to get the CPS to agree to charges, they must have something.
Dot you are missing the point bridger was apparently known to all the local children so why did they not just say she went in Bridgers car? Something is not quite right!!