And too the trucker should have told him instead that he did give his wife a ride to the diner and that was the last he seen of her, because that would have gotten him off the hook.
You raise good questions.
The only thing I can think of is that, as the trucker, if you lie about it by saying you dropped her off somewhere, you have to come up with details ... which means you have to lie more and you potentially get involved in a web of lies, especially if the police start asking you stuff. How long she was in the truck with you, where it was you dropped her off, what she was doing when you last saw her, what time it was, etc., etc. Then the police go investigate that place and find out there's never any witness account or any evidence whatsoever of such a woman with such a description - or even the trucker himself - ever having been there. People come and go at truck stops all the time so such an eyewitness account of a person is tenuous at best, but if there's nothing at all for the cops to go on in such a situation, it is going to potentially raise an eyebrow in the direction of the trucker who said he dropped her off (when there's zero evidence that he did so). Instead of just being a guy who (claims he) doesn't know anything, you become a key witness, you're admitting yourself to be someone who is thought to be potentially the last person to have seen a missing person.
By completely denying everything, the trucker is getting himself more involved with Russell but LESS involved with the police. I think that's a trade he's willing to take.
From the trucker's perspective, he's not interested in being "off the hook" from Russell or getting away from Russell - he's interested in extorting Russell for tens of thousands of dollars. He knows he's going to be in contact with Russell in the near future anyway to get the money. But by denying the incident for the time being - and opening his truck up to show the cop that there's no evidence of any kidnapping - he DOES get off the hook as far as the cops are concerned, and that's all he cares about.
In short, I think in some ways it could be argued that it's just easier, simpler, less-time consuming, and more practical to just deny ever having seen her or Russell. He's not worried about Russell - as far as the trucker's concerned at that point, he's got Russell exactly where he wants him.
reply
share
Jared-Fogle-Sucks
13 years ago
Agreed, the trucker had no reason to stop if he didn't want to. No witnesses, no recordings of anything, Barr could easily deny that he ever even met Russell's character (which he did).
reply
share
RoadSideAssistance
11 years ago
This is a very insightful post.
*spoilers*
The police were never in on it as evidenced towards the end so they did not want to get involved in any way shape or form with the police. Not to mention all the missing individuals that the one deputy points out. If one random trucker all the sudden seems to admit that he dropped her off, now police start questioning and investigating. They have a lead to go back to.
Nobody ever saw the girl getting dropped off, nobody saw her leave, it's odd to think she just left, there was never any phone call made for the service truck, etc.
Now you're going to go back to the guy that dropped her off and start posing questions in a different way to see if he can get himself caught in lies. The minutes he does, he's f'd.
reply
share