Posted on 07/28/2002 8:56:21 PM PDT by FresnoDA
Thats exactly what I remember hearing. Yet Rodriquez was trying to make it sound like she was really mummified all over so therefore bugs couldn't get in until (2/14-18?)when some animal came and opened her up pulling out her entrails.
I believe the point of Rodriquez's conclusions were to leave a bigger window.
I.E. by specifying that forensic entomology could not be 'precise' and leaving a window from before Feb 1 until after she was found, he was trying to be inclusive of what Prosecution wanted and what Faulkner had already said.
To me, he looked like me made fool of himself and his craft.
A totally uneducated,inexperienced 6 year old could have said Danielle died sometime after she was abducted and before she was found. AND BE 100% CORRECT!
Yeah, but this guy wanted to be 120% correct, so he added the two weeks before her disappearance...oops
I have been Freeper for over 4 years and have seen lots of folks come and go. Rarely have I ever flammed anyone and then only because obviously deserved comment.
Yes, exactly they are the pros at using Inductive Profiling. Which is? The process of profiling criminal behavior, crime scenes, and victims from the known behaviors and emotions suggested by other criminals, crime scenes, and/or victims. Inductive Criminal Profiling is generally the result of some kind of statistical analysis, or finds it's reasoning in cases outside of the case at hand.
As opposed to Deductive Profiling which is the careful forensic examination and behavioral reconstruction of a single offender's crime scene.
After the offender's behaviors have been reconstructed, the crime scene characteristics are analyzed, and the victim characteristics are analyzed. From those combined characteristics, a profile emerges with the characteristics of the individual who could have committed that specific offense, with that specific victim under the conditions present at that specific crime scene.
Let me get the ground rules down on this these van dam threads. Its ok for someone to kid a "Westerfield did it poster" by likening him to a jackal but its not ok for same poster to use self depricating humor to exagerate his teenager's and younger children's lack of tideness. Thanks, I get it.
Yes, you did. Thank you. I don't see what you raised as fatal to it though.
Remember, the cops had a warrant which specified they were looking for ROPES, HANDCUFFS. You have to be specific on a warrant. You can't just make up whatever hits your fancy.
In hindsight, after the arrest of the 2 members/operators of the LOCAL #510 CHILD PORN RING of SD/Poway, and the news article saying that ROPES,HANDCUFFS were found, it makes it look like they were onto these guys, and assumed DW was one of them.
THE QUESTION IS, where they right or wrong?
For those that say DW had CHILD PORN. First, not proven, Second, if your neighbor gets killed, and you have a bullet but no gun, Can we just hang you for it ?
Is this in his opening statements? I'll try to find them and read them. I assume this was day 1.
He would know more than me obviously, but I believe the simpler answer to the various questions that that scenario raises is that she was dumped by Westerfield during the same morning.
I do however thing its absolutley possible his driving around was directly connected to his eliminating evidence.
Do I get paid a big fee like those other guys?
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.