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.
If I were Danielle's father, and I had even the slightest inkling that David Westerfield had killed my daughter, he would be dead and I would be on trial for his murder.
[And if I were Fred Goldman, O.J. would have been dead in June of 1994.]