[iicarJohn]

Yes. That is the way of the world in our modern era. Not quite what some "Founding Fathers" might have had in mind? Clearly it is the mindset of far too many, our Commander in Chief being a supreme example ... with just a bit too much power wielded a bit too broadly and with a fair bit of ignorance that is supported only by his belief in some supreme being who surely has to be a bit perverse ... if "he" or "she" or "it" exists! A reminder that it's a good thing we are only discussing cars here!

Run-on sentences aside, there is a huge semantical problem in the concept observed rather sartorially (I hope) by "phila3885". Cars are not "guilty" of anything whatsoever. It is only a person who can willfully mislead or ignorantly communicate (or fail to communicate) something that he or she cannot know without further study. When we place a simplistic label on a car, bias and innuendo become forefront in the minds of many and at least some begin to stop paying attention. At that point, "study" becomes more difficult.

I've already asked for further data and have had a couple of very nice personal messages that would seem to indicate that more information might be forthcoming. Until that information comes to one of us and is shared, I would encourage one and all to stop blowing smoke, muddying the waters, whatever your favorite obfuscation metaphor happens to be.

I might add that it is often that a photo or even a specific item of information that is recorded, such as an engine number for example, is really only a "snapshot" of a moment in time. So, it can be of use to simply verify an engine number as being still in a car. Not all information has to be "new". Sometimes information can be part of a continued collective observation. We are in the investigative stage. We are not ready to call a jury. And it is no murder trial in any case.