Skip to comments.DANIELLE'S DEATH MAY REMAIN MYSTERY: (30 Days Ago, Van Dam Case Broke! Details Now Being Revealed!)
Posted on 03/03/2002 7:49:10 AM PST by FresnoDA
CAUSE OF GIRL'S DEATH COULD REMAIN MYSTERY
| Police say they may never know how Danielle van Dam died, or when. The seven-year-old girl disappeared from her San Diego home February first. Authorities are now confirming that a child's body found by volunteer searchers Wednesday is that of the missing child. The district attorney says an autopsy performed confirmed her identity yesterday. The identification was made through dental records because of the condition of the body. Medical examiners are trying to determine the cause of death, but Police Chief Dave Bejerano says it's possible that we'll never know how, or when she was killed. A neighbor has been charged with kidnapping and murdering her. Authorities say they found the girl's blood on his clothing and in his motor home. He has pleaded innocent.
I could ask if I knew what that has to do with anything.
BTW, he has gotten no new information since he first told me of this weeks ago. As I said, sometimes contact with fellow LEOs is few and far between because of the round-the-clock shifts that they work. His friend (source) works in another city and PD.
You seem to be confusing the history of chokers ( a new name for an old piece of jewelery ) with symbols of bondage.
During the Victorian era, nearly every woman of quality owned an expensive black velvet ribbon, from which to hang their costly heirloon cameo.
The S&M stuff got popular in the '70's, which is recent history. Don't let the fact that the freaks stole a tradition confuse you about the origins of that tradition.
One peice of jewelery you SHOULD take exception to is the nose ring. Throught history - until now, that is - the nose ring was a symbol of slavery. Freemen didn't wear them. Yes, in Briton 1,000 years ago, white male slaves wore the collar. Not females.
Unless they fall asleep in the living room. And a lot of dads don't have much to say about how their children (especially the girls) dress. Mom makes all those decisions. As we have seen, Mom marches to a different drummer and probably was quite lenient when it came to the children. That may not be your choice or my choice of how to raise a child, but it doesn't mean she was raising a child for bondage games, either.
My children never wore jewelry, but some little girls do; and it doesn't mean a thing about their moral character, or the moral character of their parents. And some kids get very attached to certain things and beg to take or wear them to bed. An indulgent dad might not want to put up with a scene about it.
I would never put a child to bed wearing a necklace, but this necklace is woven on flexible elastic and is not a choking or strangulation hazard for a 7 year old. Earrings are another matter. I would think that they would hurt (mine do) but I know people who never take them off. My children were not allowed to have pierced ears either.
If this is a club are there "dues"? Money for drugs and toys and to buy silence?
If the van Dams weren't invloved in all this the case would be a lot simpler, lo, there probably would have been no case at all IMHO.
We reap what we sow.
1. The parents acted inattentively, inappropriately and negligently towards their children on the night of her disappearance.
I have been married for 30 years and have five daughters. My wife has never left me or the children to go drink and dance at a "roadhouse" ever. Every child was always personally tucked in bed and checked on every night. To do any less would have been to have acted negligently on their behalf.
2. The 'affect' of the parents has been highly unusual under the circumstances.
The father has never appeared distraught or even mildly anguished over his daughter's disappearance and murder. At times he seems to smirk with a callous smugness. The mother alternates between pseudo grief and a genuine love for notariety. They strike me as a most unusal couple and as a most unusual set of parents.
3. There seems to be significant differences in the stories told by the mother and the defendant.
Although I have little doubt of his guilt, the behaviour and suggestive background of the parents would appear to have negatively impacted the safety and security of their children. I believe there is a real concern here that a promiscuous lifestyle may have placed all their children at risk. 4. The defense may reveal a great deal more information about the parents at trial.
That's curious....I haven't heard anything about that possibility; and given this lifestyle, it certainly imposes that risk, as well, that the husband wouldn't be the father.
Somewhere, I heard one of the van Dams say that Danielle was a heavy sleeper and most likely thought it was her father carrying her, instead of the perp.
OTOH that the van Dams also said that Danielle "sleep-walked"...
These people had an answer to most everything, except the "swinging" question. I'm sure their PR team would have advised them to come clean on that, if they WERE...but they're not!
I hate them anyway, but they are also extremely unhealthy.
Not to worry: After spending the afternoon jousting with you ladies, I've been thoroughly defanged.
My Hubby must be an exception.
What exactly is this suppoed to mean, Kim?
You have exhibited a lot of nastiness here but if you are insinuating that I am lying, you have crossed the line of smugness into really ugly self-righteousness. Being a know-it-all has never flattered anyone and you are no different.
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.