Replies

The Van Dams, Brenda and her son and her daughter, were brought into his environment.

The sinister bleach, remember? "Anybody knows that if you use bleach it will knock out DNA!" Did you know that? News to me. So suddenly David's sinister because he was using bleach. This isn't sinister, it's doing laundry after coming back from a 3-day weekend.

We know fibers get picked up from the floor and plopped out to the floor (as per Susan), and they get into the laundry and they transfer and they transfer and they transfer. They could not make a common fiber source. They could not make a conclusion of David. NOt one fiber in the entire case did they say did NOT come from a common source, except for those from which DAW was explicitly excluded.

Photo of interior of Mr. Westerfield's residence. Some pretty interesting clues in it. LE said they set things up to photograph it the way they wanted. Linens and things folded on dryer. Who folded that? There's no evidence DAW folded them.

Gas receipts entered into evidence...who do they belong to? Neal went and bought gas on 4th. Exhibits A, B, C, D, E--and here they are out (pointing to photos). Wait a minute, in K, here's "Damon and Brenda and a phone number"--who wrote that? Oh, Brenda.

Dusek said there was a dyed blonde hair in the motorhome. He said it belonged to Danielle L. Who else had dyed blonde hair? If Brenda had been in the motorhome, would she tell you?

We know kids bleed, anyone with a child knows kids bleed. You've got bandaids everywhere.

YOu claim you only met this man, dirty dancing. You claim he wanted to meet your girlfriend, but you leave YOUR number instead of the girlfriend. Would any of you do that?

Shezza, I dont know about anyone else, but I am glad for your running commentary and thoughts....I have not been following this case very well, so rely heavily on these threads and everyones thoughts and commentaries...Shezza, what you have been saying, much reflects my own feelings about this case, only you are able to better state the case than I ever could...

What really bothers me, is the bug evidence, how it just about seems to eliminate DW from having dumped the body....and it bothers me tremendously how the prosecution expects us to believe that DW somehow got into the VanDam house, in the dead of night, without leaving any DNA trace anywhere, and without setting off some sort of an alarm, no matter how small....

Danielles hair, blood, and prints could possibly be explained by transference, by Danielle actually having been there previously, selling her GirlScout Cookies...

DW must be convicted only if by believing that beyond any reasonable doubt, the prosection has proved its case, that he is indeed the kidnapper and killer of Danielle...I just dont think they have proved what they needed to...

And it just seems to be, that once a prosecutor gets his grip on what he surmises to be the guilty person, no amount of evidence to the contrary, will ever convince him that he is wrong...I have seen prosecutors on TV, who when given absolute proof, that someone they convicted was really innocent, and that person is released from jail, the prosecutor, instead of being honorable and admitting his error, just keeps on yapping about how he is sure he was still right, even tho proved wrong...

I am glad I am not on this jury...what an awesome decision is theirs to make....if DW really is guilty, yet they acquit him, and he goes on to kill again, how terrible must be the guilt they would feel...if on the other hand, if he is innocent, yet they convict him, an innocent man suffers for something he did not do, and worse yet, the actual murderer of little Danielle is still free, on the loose, and apt to commit such a heinous crime again...

Altho I will not go so far as to blame the VanDams or actually say that perhaps they are guilty of some accident or such that contributed to Danielles death, still I am appalled that such people carry on such a dangerous lifestyle, while they have precious children to raise...

And by bringing what may be virtual strangers into their home, with the intention of sexual encounters, I cannot help but believe it is within the realm of real possibilities, that someone involved in that 'swinging' did harm to little Danielle...

It always appalls me, when parents are willfully negligent towards their childrens safety...I lost one of my children to disease, something over which I had no control...there was nothing I could have done to prevent him from falling ill or dying...so it just hurts me terribly, when I see parents be so careless when it comes to their children...certainly, inviting relative strangers into ones home, to engage in sex, is a dangerous activity at best and puts at risk all those in that home...How any parents can be so foolish, so careless, is beyond me and saddens me....

I have rambled on long enough here...just really wanted to let all here know, that I greatly appreciate all the input, and say thanks to all those who have worked so hard to bring to light all the facts, and also thank those who have tried to analyze what those facts may mean...