Replies

So then if he abducted her, he would somehow have to get her to the motorhome, either by taking her in his own car (in the trunk likely), or somehow tying her up in the house and then getting his motorhome back to the house to put her in it. What testimony in that area was presented?

Some orange fibers in SUV. No prints, hair, or anything else. AND IT WAS RETURNED to DW. It was NOT kept for evidence.

There was some testimony that was squelched about some fingerprints being found in SUV. Speculation is, they were Brenda's prints, that she got in the car in the parking lot at Dad's, accounting for orange fibers and the possible fingerprints.

So then if he abducted her, he would somehow have to get her to the motorhome, either by taking her in his own car (in the trunk likely), or somehow tying her up in the house and then getting his motorhome back to the house to put her in it. What testimony in that area was presented?

According to DUSEK, HOW, WHY, WHEN, WHERE don't matter. The GIRL is DEAD, therefore DW is GUILTY. That is all the jury needs to know to decide the case.

DW is guilty of KIDNAPPING/RAPE/MURDER (even though rape is not a charge in this trial, DUSEK said he RAPED HER).

Here is what the JUDGE said. ON the KIDNAPPING and MURDER charges.

If he killed her, he kidnapped her to do so. If he KIDNAPPED her, then he KILLED her. I have already decided he KILLED her, so you must now make your decision based on this.