No Decision From Westerfield Jury: Deliberations Continue Tuesday, August 13, 2002

KGTV ^ | August 13, 2002 | KGTV

[spectre]

"Even the guests that night didn't leave behind anything"..

And don't you ever wonder why?

sw

[KnutCase]

"Even the guests didn't leave anyting behind"??????? Welllll now, somebody other than DW (his DNA was excluded), somebody left lots of unknown DNA in Danielle's bedroom as well as "unknown" leaving fingerprints on the bannister. Fingerprints that police didn't follow up on becaused those prints excluded DW and that"s ALL they cared about. They were looking for evidence connected to him, not caring a whit about whether others might be involved. Sad.

[the Deejay]

Sure the guests that night left behind hair,
fingerprints, cigarette butts all over the place.
But LE eliminated them, because they weren't
suspects.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Ah, the magic of steamcleaners.

[KnutCase]

They already had a man in custody. Why look elsewhere?

[bvw]

"I won't get any satisfaction from a guilty verdict, just sadness."

Well, don't worry, be happy! Looks better and better for an acquittal!

[the Deejay]

"They already had a man in custody. Why look elsewhere?"

Too true.

[KnutCase]

Acquittal? Please go on...explain your thoughts.

[spectre]

LOL! And how does a child live in a home with none of her fingerprints in her own bedroom?

sw

[alisasny]

Hey nut.

If the media influence had worked they would have had a verdict in a few hours.

Jurors are holding out an presenting their doubts to the media jurors.

[bvw]

I have no thoughts on matters important, just a passing whimsy, fanned by that request by the jury for audio of of Westerfield's fireside talks with Redden, and also delighted by the Jury's straightforward independence on the matter of Fridays.

[small_l_libertarian]

That is the most convoluted reasoning I have ever heard. He was asked if he went there "for parties or...". He said "I was not invited." How is that leaving himself an out? It's answering the question he was asked.

On another note - I have decided that I think this is the reason the jury asked for the audio tape. They want to hear this "I was not invited" in context. Can't believe I didn't think of it before. (Duhhh.)

[the Deejay]

"And how does a child live in a home with none of her fingerprints in her own bedroom?"

That's another one that bowled me over. Anyone that's
raised kids, knows they leave fingerprints all over the
house. I highly doubt anyone on the jury will question
that in deliberations. None of her fingerprints says,
"Room was wiped down before LE got there."

[Rheo]

Even the guests that night didn't leave behind anything".. And don't you ever wonder why?

I had assumed it was the standard swinger/swapper body condom.

If Jeff Graham was only able to ID 122 out of 350 latents...to whom do the 228 latents belong??

[KnutCase]

Because whoever wanted to remove the perp's fingerprints could only be sure by removing ALL fingerprints? Makes sense to me. I'm sure Danielle didn't do the wipe down. Had to be somebody else. Why do I ask these questions and expect logical explanations?

[bvw]

There are conscious and sub-conscious reasons for everything. The Jury may have actually asked for the tape for that particular little quote, but subconsciously, surely, they wanted to hear the big buddha himself.

[the-gooroo]

Exactly! Also, remember BVD said they looked through all of the closets for Danielle? I'd like to know how she did that without leaving a fingerprint on those mirrored doors!

[the Deejay]

For those that want to "split hairs" the statement
of "I was never invited" means so much. In fact,
so much so, they'd give DW the death penalty for
such statment.

On the other had, the slip ups the vdams made, which
were more damaging, are skipped over. Ever notice
that?

[gigi]

When I heard the jury asked for the tape, thats the first thing I thought of. The jury wants to check the "never invited" statement since Dusek called it SO SUSPICIOUS in his closing.

[small_l_libertarian]

I know - these folks that are so anxious to send a man to his death on almost no evidence scare me.