The whole Earhart being captured by the Japanese theory has a few too many holes to be entirely plausible. It is known the US and, possibly, other Allied nations, were actively monitoring Japanese communications before and during the war. It seems highly unlikely Japanese troops would stumble upon and seize Earhart and not at least report the seizure to higher command and the report subsequently be intercepted by the US. If so, there would be a record of the intercept and it appears there is not; likewise, the Japanese were rather scrupulous about record keeping and even if a capture report were not intercepted, at lest some record would likely have been found by the US as they examined captured documents. It would be understandable neither the Japanese, who might have feared disclosing too much about their prewar activities or possibly inciting anti-Japanese feelings in the US, would want to make public the capture of Earhart nor would the US as it might tip their being able to intercept and decode Japanese communications. But it seems unlikely, after the war, for the US to continue to cover up a possible Earhart capture since there seems to be no real logical reason to do so. The whole theory just leads to too many unanswered questions...
<O>
__________________
__________________________________________________ __
|