Posted on 07/31/2002 9:20:15 PM PDT by FresnoDA
In fact, there is more chance that Danielle was taken by space aliens, than that anyone at all entered the VD home without permission and took her.
Why don't they at least make it POSSIBLE by saying she walked out and DW took her from the roadside or the park.
At least that is the story told at Fort Jefferson where he was imprisoned.
Muhammad= mem vav khet mem dalet = 40+6+8+40+4 = 98
I beleive as I think a fair majority on FR do, that DW did not kill DVD.
So, my question is...
What would you do about the child porn charges? (I understand that we have not been privy to the questionable images, but going on assumption that they really are child porn)
1.) Return a not guilty verdict maybe because they were gotten on bogus assumtions made by LE and DA.
2.)Return a guilty verdict because they were found in his possesion.
I understand the arguements that they might not be his or were planted but if you would be so kind and just assume they are his and are child porn.
muhammad = 13 + 21 + 1 + 13 + 13 + 1 + 4 = 66
Now can you find a literary or historical reference to the phrase 'your name is mud' prior to 1860?
I would question this assertion.
But, still, if forced, I will say that unless someone could show me where Mr Westerfield intentionally paid somebody something to obtain these images, not just accidentally strayed into them...
if they could show me that he actually had viewed these images, not just by accident they were included in a huge pack of porn for which he paid $3.50...
Show me that he knew he had it, knew the people in it were underage, and knew it was illegal to have it.
Show me that porn was a part of his life, that he made profits from porn which I assume DAMON DID DO...(!)
Also one would need to assume that the law which would make just a passive viewer of porn, not a creator or seller of it, is constitutional.
You would also have to prove that the search warrants allowed such a fishing expedition, and that they were not obtained by fraud and lies which in fact they were.
If Westerfield is convicted, the Bill of Rights is on the trash heap. Wonder if Zimbabwe might want to buy a good used Constitution, doesn't look like we'll be needing it here any more.
Your calculation uses just the ranks in the alphabet, like M is the 13th letter, etc. It has no tradition of equalizing things based upon their numerical letter equivalency, which in Hebrew goes back 3000 yrs.
Show me why the same saying is common in German, in fact German immigrants brought it to America, where it was translated into English. There the word for mud = schlamm, but "Sein Namen ist Schlamm" is still said...Was there a Dr. Schlamm that treated Goethe or someone?
Sure makes me wonder how much of this "science" is actually "wannabe Science". I think the jurors will realize these "experts" although well meaning can not possibly be correct. The other eviedence looks like it will convict DW. Hopefully this will set back these bug doctors and send them back to studying how bodies are affected by low humidity and such. Most studies on bugs were done in the east where the climate is much different.
You ask us to assume too much that is up for grabs.
Maybe I'm just reading too much of my opinion into what I think a majority here feel about DW's guilt or innocence. Or maybe those who feel he is innocent are the loudest or most frequest posters to these threads.
Maybe I should revise the question slightly.
How's this...
If the jury finds DW not guilty of the charges related to the abduction and murder of DVD. Then how do you think the jury should find on the child porn charges?
If I were on the jury, and I concluded DW didn't do it, I would let him off on the porn charge, if nothing else, out of sheer contempt for the state.
I would venture that this is the answer, imo.
As to the child porn, I don't know without seeing the evidence (thank heaven).
It will be interesting if anyone on the jury decides to share some insights with the public after their service is over.
He should still sue San Diego up the wazoo for conducting an illegal fishing expedition into his affairs just because he happened to live near where a crime happened.
They had no evidence of motive, and they took advantage of his good nature and willingness to help solve this high profile case.
As for parlor tricks, would you believe that if you took my phone number and added the digits together it would produce the identical sum as the phone number for the Kmart in Simi Valley?
LOL
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.