[JudyB1938]

I don't remember all of the things Mudd refused to be allowed into the record and/or questioned. If people want to know, all they have to do is look up all the times he ruled in favor of the prosecution's "objections" whenever Feldman would try to bring something out in favor of his client.

It is my opinion that Mudd is biased against Mr. Westerfield and has shown himself to be biased at every opportunity. I hope the jury picked up on it.

[DoughtyOne]

There's only so much the jury can pick up on. The evidenciary rulings take place out of their sight.

[the Deejay]

How 'bout the judge "testifying" on an
objection by Dusek, during Feldman's
closing!? It was in reference to the
color of Brenda's sweater.

I've never witnessed anything like that
in court before. Mudd & the entire
prosecution team has had me jumping out
of my chair all through this trial.

[Greg Weston]

I've never seen so much nutbag BS speculation since the OJ trial. So Westerfield "didn't have enough" child rape porno to mean anything. Ridiculous. And 10 zillion other red herrings that don't amount to squat.

It's really a disgrace that some are willing let Westerfield off on child murder because they don't like the kids parents or whatever crazy thing. Absolutely disgraceful.

[theirjustdue]

"It is my opinion that Mudd is biased against Mr. Westerfield and has shown himself to be biased at every opportunity. "

I don't know how they could have missed it, Judy. The sarcasm, glaring and the sustaining of Dusek's objections, before Feldman could even get a sentence out of his mouth, would be hard for anyone to miss, IMO. And the "testimony" interjected by Mudd, that the sweater was red and not orange was way over the top and grounds, in itself, IMO, for winning on appeal, if he's found guilty.

"I hope the jury picked up on it."

I see what you are saying, but it seems to me, that Mudd did a pretty good job of endearing himself to the jury. While some of us see his actions as improper, my fear is, that the jury may think so highly of Mudd, that they will, subconsciously, be inclined to share some of this apparent bias toward the defense and DW.

Personally, I feel there is a chance DW is guilty, but that Dusek didn't come close to proving it beyond a reasonable doubt. What evidence he had, was outweighed, IMO, by the questionable actions and testimony of others and lack of evidence and testimony to support most of his speculative scenarios.

I also feel that other likely suspects were not investigated adequately from day-one and that the focus of the investigation centered solely upon DW much too quickly. This has been heavily argued by many here with opposing views, since these threads first began, but it remains my opinion.

Again, it's JMO and I hope I am wrong in this particular instance, but with the jury not having been sequestered and what I consider, seriously biased media coverage of this case, coupled with Avila's arrest for kidnapping, rape and murder of a child, after being previously aquitted and Samantha's abduction and disappearance, I don't think the jury could have avoided being tainted, in a trial lasting this long - not to mention Mudd's antics - and I don't feel all that confident that DW will be judged entirely on the merits of the case.

Several that are convinced that DW is guilty, have stated, that DW must be the unluckiest defendant in the world. Well, based just on the events I outlined in the previous paragraph, I would have to agree, that DW really has been pretty damn unlucky.