Replies

I must say that I really appreciate the back and forth dialiogue between everyone since the jury diliberations started. They have been very informative to me and the tone was much more conducive to more people posting than during the trial.

Up until the diliberations started I was undecided how I would vote if I were to have that burden placed on me. I must say though that after the closing arguments and the discussions on this forum the past couple of days, I would, no NO WAY, be able to vote him guilty.

tone was much more conducive to more people posting than during the trial.

Hmmmmmm.......I wonder why things are so different right now. Some new folks here and some old folks absent. Hmmmmmmmm.

Too many loose ends not nailed down. PA did not present rock solid case. No evidence of any kind at Vam Dam house, i.e., Danielle's bedroom, linked to DW. If prosecution cannot in any way put a suspect at scene of crime, how in hell can you in good conscience put that person to death? I don't care what went on in the DW home regarding computers. Doesn't matter if DW cannot be linked to visiting Van Dam house on night she disappeared. Gotta give me more proof. Fact that none of the dogs could find scent in MH would indicate that she was not there that weekend. Ergo...DW cannot be placed in Van Dam home + Danielle cannot be placed in MH = Reasonable Doubt. Can I get a good argument from anyone on this ???