Skip to comments.
TALE OF TWO LAWERS (Feldmand vs. Dusek) DEFEATED and DECIETFUL.(VD's SKATE FREE TO SWING AGAIN)
Yahoo ^
| August 22, 2002
| Yahoo
Posted on 08/22/2002 11:32:19 PM PDT by FresnoDA
DEFEATED and DECIETFUL
TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: 180frank; assjackals; bleach; blood; bugs; childporn; childpornconsumer; drunk; fibers; fresnodamissya; guilty; hairs; horndog; knobs; lies; motorhome; mummification; prints; rapemovies; scratches; sweat; tears; truth; vandamswingers; westerfield; westerfieldrailroad
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,741-1,760, 1,761-1,780, 1,781-1,800 ... 1,821-1,831 next last
To: agarrett
"Or did you not intend to apply it to "everyone"?Well, not everyone here is defending a convicted pedophile.
To: demsux
Jimmy Ryce's parents could have met him at the bus stop, he would be alive today. Throw them in jail?
Adam Walsh's mother coul'd have kept him by her side at the store, instead of leaving him in the toy department alone. Should she be in jail?
The woman last week whose son drowned in a swimming pool in Miami should have been watching him instead of doing dishes. Guilty?
To: Luis Gonzalez
I don't know the specifics regarding any of those cases.
I do know that the Van Dams did NOT protect their children...ignored the alarm, showing that the perimeter was breached, TWICE.
They thought enough to shut the open doors, but didn't even check to make sure that their child had not wandered out? Or that an intruder had entered?
Let's also not forget that BVD invited TOTAL STRANGERS from Dad's to go to her home that night...
At a bare minimum, it is negligence.
To: demsux
Actually what Liugi just did at ya was a form of slander ... indirect, but a slander. Raising your presumed position on unrelated issues to taint your arguments. A weakazoids tactics.
The exiled Cuban community is so fiercely insular and opinion monolithic, perhaps Luigi is unschooled in making an argument on point without misdirection.
Anyway, Luis should learn to a stronger debater and not slip to a weaklings tactics.
1,764
posted on
09/04/2002 3:13:48 PM PDT
by
bvw
To: bvw
Thank you for confirming my thoughts.
BTW, I think ALL of the instances that he mentioned, involved the child being OUTSIDE of their home.
To: Guenevere
Guenevere, well, it was when his niece was testifying. He just seemed to have the strangest, angry look on his face. And he was blinking alot. (Maybe he was just angry at himself, for bringing her up at questioning in the first place - ?)
JLO
1,766
posted on
09/04/2002 5:36:19 PM PDT
by
JLO
To: UCANSEE2
UCANSEE2, When I earlier mentioned his facial expression looked guilty, was when his niece was testifying. He had more expression at that time that I'd seen before or since. He looked angry. Now, looking back, maybe he was angry that she was lying. At the time, I was thinking he was angry with himself for bringing her into this when he was first questioned.
I also watched saw his expression when the verdict came in; it was more expressionless than when his niece was talking. His verdict expression to me was that he looked scared (and who wouldn't be) and seemed to be blinking a lot.
I still believe he didn't do it. How does it work now, as far as starting an appeal, if you don't have any money left for a good lawyer?
JLO
1,767
posted on
09/04/2002 5:52:01 PM PDT
by
JLO
To: JLO
Hire Jimmy Rockford, or someone like him, and find out who really did what that night...
To: TheSpottedOwl
Spotted Owl - sure hope you're right and his innocence is quickly proven!
JLO
1,769
posted on
09/04/2002 6:50:52 PM PDT
by
JLO
To: agarrett
agarrett, I couldn't agree more with what you say.
So, how can this get changed for future cases? Or, maybe even more importantly, this one?
JLO
1,770
posted on
09/04/2002 6:59:23 PM PDT
by
JLO
To: pinz-n-needlez
and ignore that he never presented a piece of evidence that shows DW had contact with her the weekend of her death. That would have been impossible to do since DW was under police watch 24/7 long before she was dead.
To: demsux
I am curious about the VD's burglar alarm. There are all kinds of alarm functions. If my alarm goes off, the police come to check things out (unless I call & give my code # & tell them everything is OK) Were the VD's not hooked up to a monitoring company so the alarm just made noise & then stopped? Or were they just using the On Watch feature that makes a beep if a door or window is opened?
An unmonitored alarm is not much good, especially if you ignore it.
To: JLO
I still believe he didn't do it. How does it work now, as far as starting an appeal, if you don't have any money left for a good lawyer? I am not a lawyer, so I may not be totally accurate, but my understanding is that if DW wants to appeal, that Feldman must do so. I.E. the lawyer is responsible for continuing to the end of any appeals, money or not.
To: Ditter
Apparently, it was not monitored by a security company, however it would beep and light up if a door/window was open.
It was lit up TWICE that night, but no one checked on the kids!!!
Additionally, DVD attached magnets to some of the contact points in order to "determine whether the door could be "jimmied" open"...this, apparently makes the code chip freak out, making it impossible to log the times/dates of entry/exits.
BTW, they also have a sixty pound dog
To: demsux
Did you hear his testimony about why the house was too busy to turn the system on? Not in those words but that was the gist of it.
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Nope, hadn't heard that.
Monitored or not, we KNOW, via the PH and TRIAL, that the VD's were aware of two breaches of the system (lights that indicate a breach were alit) that night, yet did not check on the kids.
What was their rational for not having it monitored?
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
I just don't buy DW entering their house...if it were shown that Danielle left the house and DW snatched her, it would be much more believable.
To: demsux
I don't understand what you mean about the code chip, but never mind. I have heard the dog described as a puppy or young dog. Even tho he/she weighed 60 lbs it doesn't mean that the dog was a watch dog. A young non agressive dog might not bark especially if it was accustomed to strange adults in the house at all hours. It may have been taught (punished) not to bark in those situations.
There is no doubt in my mind that the VD's were neglectful parents & into their own pleasurable lifestyle. The fact that they fixed up the garage for a party place shows they were trying to keep their behavior from the kids, but they were too stupid to realize that kids are smart & curious & they will figure things out. I'll bet the older boy was already on to them. Now of course, the cat is out of the bag.
To: demsux
Now I'm not sure..we could probably look it up. Any of us care enough too :-pI thought they didn't pay for a company to monitor the system because they had 3 kids, a dog and were running in and out all the time?
To: Ditter
That garage thing was so STUPID...I wonder if they are going to even bother to recognize why they need to stop doing that?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,741-1,760, 1,761-1,780, 1,781-1,800 ... 1,821-1,831 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson