[JudyB1938]

Sorry. Just got back from doctor's. No, I didn't embellish. Ask anybody on this thread if I am exagerating.

That's just the tip of the iceberg, and (like you) many of us are wondering the same thing ... why it wasn't brought out in court. However, one explanation is that Judge Mudd refused to allow any evidence into trial that reflected badly upon the Van Dam's.

Can you tell us WHY?!!!! Nobody's been able to figure that one out yet!

[the Deejay]

"Judge Mudd refused to allow any evidence into trial that reflected badly upon the Van Dam's."

Is that in reference to the diary of Danielle's? Well, even the judge realizes that would make it look like an
"inside job". Apparently, that's how the judge himself
viewed it, too. Prejudiced judge? Why not at all......
...(sarcasm)

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for the reply. I need to read more about this case. If any of you have set up links to the most damning informative sources for the issue you touched on, I'd sure like to reveiw the materials for my own edification.

[KnutCase]

My opinion...because the parents are not on trial here. This was an explanation by someone else (another thread).

[Neenah]

Judge Mudd refused to allow any evidence into trial that reflected badly upon the Van Dam's.

You....are....brilliant !!