Replies

On the Danielle case, he claimed Westerfield had just moved into the neighborhood a month or so earlier--among many other completely bogus statements.

I know those words were written about John Walsh, but they seem to describe many of the popular pundits. Last night I was listening to some of the Van Dam pundits on O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.; and I can't believe how much they have wrong.

I really don't know if David Westerfield is guilty, or not, at this point; but I do know that there is no "overwhelming" DNA and forensic evidence linking him to the case. The so-called experts that are hired by the TV shows mischaracterize testimony and even misidentify witnesses as to whether they testified for the prosecution or the defense. No one calls them on it.

Fwiw, I have a friend who is not a Freeper and who has recently gotten into following this. She has read some of the threads here, and she has read other things she's found on the internet. She ain't dumb.

This is her take so far:

He knocked her out at some point but took her to the desert to rape (maybe for the 2nd or 3rd time) and kill her.. that is why he had to take the blankets to the cleaners after the desert but still did wash before the desert too. that would explain the "we" factor.. she was still alive and maybe even playing nice a little (hence the conversation some people heard from the RV)

I told her that she would be completely disemboweled if she ever tried to post that up here.

Still, she isn't dumb. She has pretty good instincts.