I note the police are backing off the hoax angle a little too.

The interviews with the three detainees, who were kept separated throughout the search and the interviews, apparently didn't yield anything that could be used to bring charges of inciting public panic, or they would have been arrested on suspicion and formally charged.

In this morning's newspaper, in an AP article by Rachel La Corte, it was noted that ". . . an all-day search of the men's two cars turned up no sign of explosives", and "[t]he men told CNN they paid the toll, but that the attendent was confused about whether they had" (it was at 1:00 AM). The native-born American citizen's immigrant father, interviewed about his son's 17-hour detention, is quoted as saying: "'I feel like we don't have freedom here anymore. Anybody can call anybody to make any kind of accusation. And the authorities treat you like a criminal.'"

Well, apparently at least one of them got his phone call.

OK, it's important to follow up on suspicious activity. It's not OK to then try to find another explanation that blames the victim for a jump to a conclusion that turns out to be off the deep end. Why must it be a hoax? Maybe the lady in Georgia needs a hearing aid.

I understand that everybody is on edge. That doesn't justify the assumption of guilt.

Does it occur to anyone that they might be innocent until proven guilty? Or is this a new version of DWB: Driving While Bearded?

Regards--
Mary Anne