Posted on 09/16/2002 1:46:27 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
Death
You're kidding!!!
I don't know what brought this on, but you do not want to go there with me.
Not on California's death row they won't. He will be in protective custody from day 1. Not to mention, there are about 500 other scum bags on death row, who committed murders at least this bad, and many of them worse.
While I've heard about child molesters/killers being set upon by fellow inmates, the Dahmer case is not an example of that.
Dahmer was killed along with another inmate who had killed his wife (Jesse Anderson). Dahmer and Anderson were the two most notorious killers in prison in WI and the guy who killed them---they were all three on a work detail team together that day---was after the notoriety of killing the two famous guys, thus gaining fame himself.
I can only remember that his first name was Chris but don't remember his last name. (So much for his attempt at fame)
Nope.
The van Dams were adults and entitled to engage in whatever lifestyle they chose, said this juror.
My cable has reverted to delaying our coverage instead of the live coverage. I would think that I will therefore be able to see these juror interviews later.
Well, she's still here so you better move along.
REASONABLE DOUBT was abundant in this trial. It's a sad day. Indeed it is. Maybe some day we'll know the details about what's behind all this.
I think a major issue on appeal will be the judges instructions that said if the jury found that DW murdered her, they must also find that he kidnapped her and vice versa. Quite frankly, there was no evidence that DW was ever in the VD home AT ANY TIME. Then there is the problem with the defense being denied access to the alleged scene of the crime, i.e. the VD residence. One should not be too surprised if the kidnapping conviction is reversed on appeal.
The judge's refusal to allow the defense to present third-party evidence may also be a basis for appeal. There were certainly a lot of other people who had easier access to Danielle than DW.
Certainly there was some circumstantial evidence against DW and there was some physical evidence as well. However, what the prosecution never proved was when and how the evidence got there. Then there were the bugs.
The jury found that DW did kidnap and murder Danielle and a jury verdict cannot be lightly dismissed or disregarded; so maybe DW did murder her. But maybe he didn't.
If DW is innocent (yes, I know he was found guilty; but juries have been wrong, especially when prosecutors are dishonest and try to hide evidence that tends to exonerate the defendant. It happens all the time and the prosecutors just hope it isn't discovered later.), he does have one thing going for him. His case has drawn such wide-spread publicity that one or more investigative journalists will have the time and interest to dig into all the evidence and discover the real truth. If he actually did murder Danielle, one would assume more evidence will be uncovered that confirms the jury verdict. The sooner this happens, the better.
I suspect some jurors might eventually have reservations about their decision, especially if they learn of facts hidden from them by the prosecution or evidence disallowed by the judge.
If DW is actually innocent, there is one lesson everyone should learn. Never cooperate with the police in an investigation and certainly do not talk to them without your attorney's presence, especially if no one has been arrested for the crime. If the police can't find the real criminal and the public is demanding results, guess what? You may just become the focus of all their attention because they need an arrest and they don't have anyone else. If DW had not agreed to let the cops inspect his house, vehicles, or other property, the cops could not have gotten a search warrant unless there was some evidence that DW had been in the VD home. There was no possible basis to establish probable cause without such evidence.
In this case, maybe a hung jury would have been the best result and would have allowed for another trial and more developement of the evidence. There were so many unanswered questions.
On the other hand, if DW actually committed the crimes, he should fry. If he didn't, I think more evidence will eventually come to light that proves he is innocent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.