Replies

"But then, the "lead investigator" contradicts himself, and states the neighbor, who had visited the place that weekend, is still under suspicion."

Not once in that article does it even insinuate that the neighbor had been in that house this past weekend.

If you continue to adhere to the story that a wild orgy had gone on (please provide any link to a credible, substantiated news report) after Mrs. van Dam came home that night, you must also be aware that the neighbor in question, according to the very runours that you are clinging on to, was not in the house that weekend! He wanted to be part of the 'orgies", but no one would invite him.

I have provided verification for everything that you have questioned, now all you have to do is provide us with the news release that puts the neighbor in the van Dam's house between 9 PM of the night in question, and 10 AM the next morning.

Here's a hint, on the very article that you posted (post #792), it says that the police brought in specially trained dogs to see if these dogs could detect whether this man had indeed been in Danielle's bedroom. He's still a free man, guess the dogs found nothing.

I've searched for the link to the article that claimed Westerfield was briefly present that night, but have been unable to find it. I did read it, however. But even if the article (I'll post it if I can find it) was 100% wrong, one fact remains: No one is ever completely cleared of a crime until the case is closed! Any policeman saying that knows better, and probably said it for public consumption. My law enforcement relative remarked that even after the case is closed, facts can come to light that might implicate a different perp. He thinks that it's most likely that they want everyone to feel comfortable going about their lives (and no doubt lifestyles)--it's when they're "comfortable" that they get careless.

Luis, I think we can clear up at least two disturbing factors, thanks to an article in today's L.A. Times. One is the question of where Westerfield was on the night in question. According to the article:

Westerfield was at the same bar that night but was not among those who accompanied Brenda van Dam home, police said.

My original source was obviously wrong, which might explain why it couldn't be found. Often erroneous stories are simply removed from news sites.

The other is the question about the high-dollar public relations firm--lots of us asked, where the heck did they get the money? The Times reveals that their services were donated.

Source