Replies

What you posted sounds reasonable, however, the truth is the death of a child results in a divorce very often. The parents instead of growing closer, in their grief usually do just the opposite for any number of reasons.
I am disgusted by the defense attorney. His dramatic speeches about the parents are designed to draw the attention of his obviously guilty client.

Yes, the parents are messed up and bad role models that is true. It is also true that the physical evidence points to the accused.
Both can be true, the parents are lousy and Westerfield is a murderer.
I don't care if they left the kids alone in the house and has affairs with half the world. That does not give the creep the right to kill the poor little girl.
Why defense attorneys are allowed to demonize everyone else around them is beyond me!

You've already assuming that he's guilty....there certainly hasn't been any evidence of that presented on the court case I'm watching. There may be in the future, but it seems that they're off to a very slow start. Even the rumored evidence seems weak so far.

Since you've presumed Mr. Westerfield to be guilty (even before you've heard all the evidence, from both sides), you must have inside knowledge which we haven't seen. So, could you please share with us how Westerfield could be in the house, yet leave no hair, skin flakes, sweat drops (apparently) or fingerprints? Can you explain how this large man could hide in that closet shown on Court TV and a number of websites? And how, pray tell, could he get past the dog--the dog we now know from the 911 tapes not only can bark, but can bark very loudly? It's a large dog, ladyinred.

Some of us--certainly that would include me--think that either Westerfield did not act alone, or that someone else, perhaps one of the pervs invited to the home by the parents did it. All of them had greater knowledge of the house layout than Westerfield. Any one of them could have remained behind or slipped back inside once the lights went out.

Wouldn't you rather see the right person fry? I would. Execute the wrong man, and you still have a child-killing perv walking around loose. Not very helpful to anyone, is it?

It's called 3rd party culpability. Showing that there was access for anyone. Feldman is doing his job with what he is bringing out, possibility of other intruders. The same way Dusek wants so pick and chose pieces of the whole puzzle. Why is it okay to not tell the whole truth or not show the all the facts?