The incident goes to show the propensity of the convicted killer to mess with 7 yr old girls.
PROPENSITY? One incident 12 years ago.
But you don't believe this girl's story, do you? You can't believe her because that destroys your belief the DW couldn't have killed Danielle because he's not a pedophile.
Let's say we believe her story, exactly as it is being told. Now, does that make him a killer? Does that PROVE he kidnapped and murdered Danielle? Why did he kidnap and murder her then?
We are just supposed to accept that this guy who might have committed a slightly perverted act 12 years ago, all of a sudden decided to KIDNAP and MURDER the next door neighbor's child? That he did it on a whim, while drunk, and left not a trace of evidence? Why is is that the 70 other CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTORS in the neighborhood aren't guilty of murder and kidnapping. They are pedophiles, they must also be guilty. Now they don't have the HAIR,PRINT,DNA in their motor home, right. But , they may have a bunch of hair,dna,prints, a foot, and her clothes in their basement. Problem is police locked onto DW and ignored evidence that might lead them to one of these people.
As I said before, the reason I am so adamant about DW being not guilty is because I started off assuming (like all of us) he was the CULPRIT. Then as time went on , the evidence didn't fit, the LIES by the VD's, their friends, the LE's made it obvious.
Ever seen CLINT EASTWOOD in HANG EM HIGH?
This girl has no axe to grind, she is just telling about what happened to her.
OK. I will accept that.
Geez, what a coincidence the Dishonest/Incompetent LE and the Crusading DA managed to find a relative with a strange tale to tell, about TEETH no less. DW is the unluckiest defendant on the face of the planet in the history of mankind.
He may very well be.