Replies

Well Hildy, there are two camps here and most have followed the case since day one and feel they have a good idea of the facts and misinformation. Then someone (anyone not just you) comes along and acts like they know everything, it can cause a little friction. When these threads hit the news instead of chat all kinds of people jump on with misinformation and both sides here have to continously respond and IMO it gets tiresome.

There are people who have filed and researched every piece of evidence, and some very intelligent discussions have taken place. IMO this case has taken on the form of a us vs them event, with cheering and booing and lines drawn in the sand. I think it will get back to normal after about 10 years when the trial will be replayed in everyone's mind like the Superbowl 10 years ago.

As for why so many people think DW is not guilty (not necessarily innocent)my guess is a number of things, first the pd were quick to focus on DW and exclude other possible suspects, then with past cases in SD, Stephanie Crowe etc and the mudslinging at SDPD for their alleged violation of rights and questionable conduct, doubt is cast. Throw in the Vand Dam's less than forthright statements, the drinking, pot & swinging and you have more chance of doubt.

I don't think anyone want DW to get away with anything, I think they just truly believe the case was not proven and someone else is still out there.

When I approach a new person or dog, I do it cautiously and slowly, giving them time to get used to me before I take any sudden movements or confrontations. I think it might be wise to wade into the water here slowly instead of jumping in head first, once people are used to you, they are more likely to repond cordially,
JMHO
rs