You forget that David Westerfield left no physical evidence in the Van Damm home. And he walzted in past their dog also. It was hair/fibers in his dryer and the print in his motorhome he was convicted on, not anything found in the victim's home. And his was a spur of the moment crime, not well planned.
My point in finding some physical evidence like a photo to prove his alibi (I wasn't very clear) is to deny him the speculation and additional fame he will receive because even though there is no proof he did it, there is also no absolute proof he didn't.
I don't want the scumbag capitalizing on that unproven negative. Because he will and it chaps my behind. I resent this puke being able to sell his filthy obsession (and he can factually state his alibi is only circumstantial and his family has financial reasons to now go along with this, so no more pictures will surface).
If his alibi/innocence was proven rather than circumstantial, then the media would be forced to dismiss him for the perverted crank he is, but since questions can reasonably be raised, they gonna help him make a buck and take their cut.
Danielle wasn't killed in her own home.