[small_l_libertarian]

Yes, and if you believe that it's reasonable that she could have gotten (innocently) into his motorhome at sometime in the past, you have to acquit. I'm absolutely amazed at the amount of smoke and mirrors in this case. DW may indeed have killed DVD, but the state did not come anywhere close to proving that he did.

[L,TOWM]

If I were on that jury, I would have been in acquittal mode from the moment that LE admitted that the original search warrant was obtained on, shall we say, embellished statements. Conviction after facts like this come out under oath start our justice system down the path that leads to Bulgaria, circa 1985.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks guys. Interesting comments.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

the state did not come anywhere close to proving that he did.

I think the State's case stops at the van Dam's door. They have not presented a shred of anything that places DW in the home or an indication that he abducted Danielle.

Kidnapping must be proven or murder can't be. Has kidnapping been proven?

IMO, Jeff Dusek suggesting that we just have to believe that he got into the house undetected and got her out of the house somehow is asking way too much. It is the key to everything they claim happened subsequently and the key doesn't fit the lock.