[carenot]

"Surely Westerfield testified to his innocence at the trial. He could have explained it easily."

I am here late to the case but Westerfield didn't testify.

And the expert wasn't sure the stain was blood. Much less who's it was. Also no blood was found on the comforter.

Why didn't the investigators find any of the little girl's fingerprints anywhere in the house she lived in?

As I said, I am new to the case and have not been reading about it except for yesterday and today.

If I am wrong about anything I said, please correct me.

[JudyB1938]

Amazing at how somebody who's "new to the case" can have so much figured out. Could it mean you are using your common sense instead of relying on the media. Well, THAT'S a given!

[Rheo]

The blood was ID'd as hers.

No blood on comforter..none of her DNA or trace found in shower drain...or mattress pad

No dogs hit in his house or MH or SUV.

All of the unidentified prints in the house..bannister..garage door..slider door..patio table....desk NEXT TO HER BED!

Unidentified 7cm coarse dark brown hair found under her body that WAS NOT run thru the offender database.

The blood in VD garage that was unreportable for DNA...was it bleached??

All the unidentified hairs found in the MH and only the one hair of hers in the sink DRAIN TRAP..anybody checked theirs after moving into a house..(sick)