If you can't see the results so far of the Prosecution's case, their lack of proving what DUSEK said he would prove in the opening statement,the witnesses so far that have admitted to changing their stories, The latest being the LE on today, that after being asked to actually READ his notes, changed his story, if you can't see that this leads to the possibility that the police arrested the wrong man, then you would appear to have a completely closed mind. You are apparently reacting to others saying you have already made up your mind. And you have, haven't you ? You haven't even allowed the defense to finish their case. You had this attitude before Prosecution finished, and I believe, before they started.
Most of us here waited to see if Prosecution had some proof that would convince us DW was the culprit. Had they, I know I, and suspect others, would have not had any problem with saying, "we were wrong, the guy is guilty".
If DEFENSE provides PROOF DW could not possibly have done this, WILL YOU ADMIT YOU WERE WRONG?
I know you are just trying to make your point to someone who was pre-convinced against the defendant, but you've also inadvertently pointed out just how upside-down our system of justice has become.
Not only have we lost the presumption of innocence, we have even passed the point where the defendent must prove his innocence; he must also then beg for mercy from those who still demand (in spite of the proof of innocence) that he be hung.
I recently sat on a jury of which several women conceded there was a great deal of "reasonable doubt", yet they insisted that the benefit of that reasonable doubt should be in favor of the prosecution, contrary to the simply written jury instructions and definitions. Fortunately, they weren't willing to spend additional days in deliberation.
A question for you, UCANSEE2 (because you have quite a handle on this case). Have you given any thought to the possibility that Danielle was murdered because she came in on the orgy and the members freaked out and they all decided she "had to go", or that Danielle had actually been *involved* in the sex orgies and was making noise about telling someone, or the possibility that Westerfield was present at the orgy, too, but was so stinking out of it that they decided to put the onus on Westerfield with the hope he wouldn't remember anything "he did" becoming the most likely suspect? Something truly smells about this case AND the Smart case as well. I think these sex scandals are related in some way; maybe there are high officials (police included) in San Diego who are also members of this swing club and that the porno bust months ago produced some snitches who got immunity to tell all. I mean, isn't it a co-inkydinky that all these sex scandals (Danielle, Smart, Chandra Levy, the priests, the previous porno bust a few months ago and *now* the international porno sting) are clustered together?
Just some food for thought..