What made her circumstances different enough, or what happened to her between 1986 and 1988, that she decided not just to leave but to become someone else entirely?
The alternatives that suggest themselves are various: an experience during the missing eighteen months that made returning under her own name impossible or dangerous; a gradual conviction, during those months, that she wanted the clean break that a new identity would provide; the discovery of *The Paper Trip* or some similar guide, followed by a decision to act on it; an encounter with someone who introduced her to the possibility and the method.
None of these alternatives is supported by documented evidence. They are possibilities. They are the kinds of things that investigators and journalists and the families involved have speculated about, and they are the kinds of things that will never be confirmed.
The locked box is the most compelling piece of evidence about her interior reasoning, and it does not explain itself. She kept the documents. She kept the notes. She warned her husband away from the box but did not destroy it. Whether this represented an inability to fully commit to erasure, a desire to leave some trace of what she had done, a precaution against some eventuality she imagined, or simply the ordinary human tendency to preserve important papers — it is not answerable from the outside.
—
## Both Families After the Identification
The resolution of the investigation created a new situation for two families that had not previously known of each other’s existence.