[Lanza]

The case would have been a slam-dunk. Hey, here's a slam dunk for ya. How about the prosecution show the jury some evidence like um... fingerprints in the VD house on the door no one locked, Danielle's room, maybe a neighbor who saw DW carrying a screaming child away from the VD's house, and how about some dna from DW under Danielle's nails (you know those scratches even judge mudd considers not evidence). Oh, I forgot, they don't have any of that.

[spectre]

No one seems to be able to come up with any idea how DW was supposed to have entered the house and taken Danielle without any noise or fingerprints. But how can a Drunk person be so "smooth"?

So we have those who say "she was asleep", those who say "he killed her first" and those who say "we don't know", but he did. But from almost day one, the Van Dams covered how Danielle might not have woken up when she was carried out of the house saying "she may have thought it was her father carrying her"..

I say, if he didn't do it, then we have to consider all the other possible suspects, and they all originate from inside that home..unless she walked out, which Damon and Brenda covered from day one, saying "she sleep-walked". The Van Dams seemed to be one step ahead of things.

But in Duseks opening statement to the Jury, he promised that he would show how Westerfield took this child and how he murdered her. We wait.

sw