I agree he was probably there for the whole day yesterday, probably made his way there under cover of darkness after he ran over his brother's body when fleeing the scene the night before.
But, he, "was missed?" I don't get why that would be the natural assumption. Does it mean to imply that the boat had been overlooked as a possibility during a search during the day? That the police could have had him if only they'd looked while they were searching that street? (Thus, that the police didn't search
correctly?)
Because that to me simply sounds like an attempt to look for something, anything, which can be used to criticize the police. No other reason. I don't believe that the details that have been officially released lead to either that assumption or that criticism.
As others have said, during the press conference around 6/7 last night when they announced that the quasi-lockdown was being lifted, they made it clear that the focus remained on Watertown and that the search perimeter there would be continuously expanded, that folks in Watertown were free to leave their homes but should remain vigilant. It was shortly after that press conference when the guy checked his boat, on a street which hadn't been searched previously.
Are we at the point where we expect our law enforcement members to just KNOW things, to just be able to instantly solve major cases by some sort of whacked osmosis? Geeeze, cut them a break. At least give them time to explain their actions in detail before crucifying them.