THE OTHER VAN DAM STORY(New article from San Diego will have V.D. PR machine will be in overdrive!)

Talk show host Rick Roberts made headlines with his KFMB-AM radio show about Damon and Brenda van Dam’s allegedly swinging lifestyle. But he wasn’t the only radio personality—or media outlet—to cast a critical eye on the backstory of the Danielle van Dam kidnapping case.

John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou, whose John and Ken Show airs weekdays from 3 to 7 p.m. on Los Angeles station KFI-AM, devoted three shows to the case, even traveling to San Diego to broadcast from the van Dams’ Sabre Springs neighborhood. The week before that, they were the first to cast aspersions on the van Dams, a full day before the Roberts broadcast.

The Millennium Children’s Fund had just announced a $10,000 reward for information leading to the safe return of Danielle. Fund administrator Douglas Pierce had visited with the van Dams, and the next day he called a press conference in Los Angeles at which he voiced suspicions about the couple’s behavior. For an hour, Pierce blasted the van Dams for their apparent lack of emotion and general rudeness to him.

“I don’t know how much was true and how much was hysterical, but that’s what made it fascinating. We tried to unravel it on the air,” Kobylt says. “In retrospect, I think he did peg their personalities very well—the lack of emotion, the detachment, the obsession with the media message—and perhaps he got the vibe that they live a different life than most people.”

As soon as Pierce finished on-air, John and Ken introduced their next guests: an angry Damon and Brenda van Dam, who lambasted Pierce as a nut case. “We had scheduled them in advance, but when they heard Doug was on the show, they canceled, only to change their minds right before show time,” Kobylt says.

After the interview, John and Ken picked apart the conversation and spoke critically about the van Dams’ lack of emotion and their defensiveness about questions pertaining to their own behavior and actions the last night Danielle was seen. The next day, the swinger story broke in The San Diego Union-Tribune—furthered that evening on San Diego radio by Rick Roberts.

“It’s a very dramatic story,” says Kobylt. “Everybody got obsessed with it pretty quickly... We have a pretty fair audience in San Diego—we’ve even made it into the top 10 on occasion—and we started getting calls from people who live in the neighborhood and know the van Dams. As a result, it might as well have been in L.A. I tend to look at the whole [Southern California] area as the same, anyway.”

(By press deadline, the van Dams could not be reached for comment by San Diego Magazine.)

While the van Dam case has been duly covered by most of the mainstream media, the Star tabloid stoked the flames of controversy with a front-page banner that screamed, “The new JonBenet—what Danielle’s mom and dad are hiding.” Inside was a two-page story headlined, “Tragedy of little Danielle—and the dark sex secrets her parents are trying to keep hidden.”

Quoting the proverbial unnamed sources “close to the probe,” the Star reported that later-arrested suspect David Westerfield “was aware of the van Dams’ sexual activities and had approached Brenda about hosting a sex-swap party in his house.” The Star said Brenda had admitted to police “that the couple belonged to a swingers’ club called Club CB” and that sources say she “flirted outrageously and danced with Westerfield” the Friday night Danielle disappeared. “He [Westerfield] knew that Brenda and her friends were sexually involved, and he wanted to be part of the action, but for whatever reason, he was not invited by Brenda to accompany her and her four friends back to her home that night for more partying and sex,” the Star says it was told by a source.

"As far as me trying to be dishonest or trying to hide past statements..it sounds like to me that you may have dealt with someone in the past who has done that to you..well, I won't. "

Oh, my, you are a barrel of laughs this morning, aren't you? I invite folks to witness the Kim-meltdown in this thread. First, my post to you:

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

Kim, for umpteenth time, the AWOL charge was a typo in the first place. It never existed. It only appeared on the internet. I know you'd like it to be real, but it's not. I gather you chose not to call the SDPD about that? Some folks did, plus his ex brother in law also says it never happened.

681 posted on 5/1/02 8:46 AM Central by MizSterious

A careful read of the above post reveals that I said that I'd told Kim about the nonexistant AWOL charge for the umpteenth time, not that I'd told Kim about the brother in law. Now for the rest:

To: MizSterious

UM, I don't recall you ever pointing out a quote from the brother-in-law to me about the AWOL charge, so that is your FIRST time addressing it to me... not the UPTEENTH, as you so joyously posted. Regardless, got a source?

691 posted on 5/1/02 9:25 AM Central by ~Kim4VRWC's~

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

RE: #691 to Mizsterious "UM, I don't recall you ever pointing out a quote from the brother-in-law to me about the AWOL charge, so that is your FIRST time addressing it to me...

Any credibility you had is quickly evaporating, with denials like this Kim. The standard Clintonian "I don't recall" defense is also the favorite of the VanDams, you know. I can't say that the brother-in-law was given as the source, but you were clearly urged to contact LE yourself, if you wanted confirmation that AWOL charge was an error.

Just for the record, I do distinctly remember it clearly being pointed out to you and couldn't believe my eyes when I read your response to #681 from Mizsterious.

701 posted on 5/1/02 1:05 PM Central by theirjustdue

To: theirjustdue

. I can't say that the brother-in-law was given as the source, but you were clearly urged to contact LE yourself, if you wanted confirmation that AWOL charge was an error.

Yikes...I can see yer confusion!! Yes, she and a couple of others said the awol charge was a mistake and I DO agree that she suggested I call san diego myself. I don't believe she's brought up the brother-n-law claim to me. My apologies for the confusion.

702 posted on 5/1/02 1:31 PM Central by ~Kim4VRWC's~

To: theirjustdue

PS: I was replying to her about the brother-n-law "I don't recall you ever pointing out a quote from the brother-in-law to me about the AWOL charge "

That changes the whole thing if his family etc. are actually coming out and denying it. I stand corrected of this was pointed out to me by mizsterious NUMEROUS times. If so, my apologies.

703 posted on 5/1/02 1:37 PM Central by ~Kim4VRWC's~

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~;Mizsterious;Amore

"PS: I was replying to her about the brother-n-law "I don't recall you ever pointing out a quote from the brother-in-law to me about the AWOL charge "

To fully understand my reason for calling you on what I perceived as your feigning of ignorance about the bogus AWOL claim, we need to go back to your #643 to AMORE, where you again brought it up, having been told several times to contact San Diego LE if you still doubted it was in error. Your #643 to Amore follows:

"That's the same questions I had, when they erased the AWOL charges, the porn charges etc.. Granted the AWOL charge is a military matter, and only military can enforce their own rules and regulations..it's just all weird.

IMO, you are parsing in using the Brother-in-law excuse, because the real issue here is your seemingly disingenuous slipping of the bogus AWOL charge back into these threads, as if it were fact.

704 posted on 5/1/02 2:29 PM Central by theirjustdue

So, let's see: in #681, I pointed out that you continue to make the same erroneous statements despite the facts coming out. In #691, you try to weasel out of it by ignoring the meat of my statement, and focusing on the brother in law (I'd never posted about the brother in law prior, but we'd often mentioned the phone calls to the courts and to the sheriff's department--the charge was a clerical typo, Kim. Use your own phone and find out for yourself!). Then, when Freeper "theirjustdue" pointed out your disengenuous posturing, you tried to feign "confusion" in #701 and #702. Nawwww, you wouldn't lie, then try to cover it up...not Kim....

Did you know, for example, that the step-father of Jahi, the 2 year-old boy who is "missing" is facing charges for possession of Marijuana...(plural).

Uhmmm....he has a few other charges other than Maui-Waui....the VD PR Team really knows how to pick em'.....

TIERAY JONES FAILS POLYGRAPH TEST

( 05-02-2002 ) - Eighty U.S. Marines have joined the search of a San Diego landfill for clues to the disappearance of a missing South Bay toddler. But authorities say they have found nothing substantial in their search for 2-year-old Jahi Turner.

alt Turner was reported missing by his stepfather, Tieray Jones, one week ago today. However, investigators are now discounting the stepfather's story.

The San Diego Union-Tribune is reporting that authorities believe Turner may not have been abducted from a Balboa Park playground as Tieray Jones reported.

Investigators found inconsistencies in 23-year-old Jones' story, and results from a lie-detector test indicated deception.

He told police he left the boy alone in a playground for about 15 minutes while he went to get a soda from a vending machine about 150 yards away. When he returned, he said, the boy was gone.

But the Union-Tribune reported that evidence technicians found no fingerprints from Jahi on the playground equipment, such as the swings or the slide, indicating the boy likely had not played there recently.

Homicide detectives questioned Jones extensively on Wednesday, and for the first time confronted him about inconsistencies in his story.

Apparently, Tieray Jones is no stranger to police investigations and has a relatively extensive criminal history.

10/1997: Trespassing Conviction
12/1997: Trespassing Conviction
5/1998: Marijuana Conviction, Cocaine Possession Plea Bargain
6/1998: Failure to Appear
12/2000: Marijuana Conviction
1/2001: Probation Violation
6/2001: 10 Week Jail Sentence
7/2001: Burglary and Theft Charges (Dropped)
12/2001: Marijuana Possession (Case Pending)
5/9/2002: Due in Court in Maryland on Marijuana Possession

Investigators in Maryland have also confirmed that Jones has been questioned about a murder that happened in August of 2000. At this point the case is still unsolved, but Jones is still one of many possible suspects.

Meanwhile, searchers continue digging through a landfill for clues in Turner's disappearance. On Thursday, detectives got some much needed help from the Marine Corp.

""They're using those large motor scrapers there to excavated from the area that they're concerned to look into. We're hauling it out of there, spreading it out in a systematic way. We're using the track hoe to spread it even thinner. I would say the refuse is probably 18 inches thick right there, and then it's raked out just all by hand," said landfill manager, Gary Gobel.

Also, in a statement released Wednesday, police say the woman they spoke with on Tuesday, who was allegedly the woman Jahi's stepfather, Tieray Jones saw at the park, is not the right person.

"Investigators now believe that we have, in fact, not identified and spoken with the woman Tieray Jones described as being in the park last Thursday with two children. We now believe that the woman we did contact was not in the location Mr. Jones described the woman he saw as being."

Police are asking the woman and any other witnesses who were in or around the park to come forward and contact them at (619) 744-9521.

Police currently have no suspects in Jahi's disappearance.

At the time of his disappearance, Jahi had been living in San Diego for less than a week in off-base Navy housing near the park. Before April 21, he was living with his grandmother in Maryland.

Hundreds of volunteers have been trying to help any way they can in the search for Jahi, from searching the canyons of South Park and Golden Hill to passing out flyers with Jahi's picture in the streets of downtown.

If you would like to help in the search for Jahi Turner, call (619) 570-1070. Volunteers are meeting at 8 a.m. at the San Diego Moose Lodge, located at 1648 30th Street in Golden Hill.

Jahi Turner is described as:

Light-skinned African-American
Approximately 30 inches tall
Approximately 30 pounds
Black hair

Turner was wearing a blue, long-sleeve Winnie the Pooh t-shirt, blue nylon pants with an orange drawstring and gray tennis shoes at the time of his disappearance.

Anyone with information on the case is urged to call the San Diego County CrimeStoppers' anonymous tip line at (619) 235-8477 or the SDPD at (619) 531-2000.

Police Department spokesperson Dave Cohen said that informants could be eligible for a cash reward of up to $1,000.

And local resident, David Curry, is offering a $10,000 reward for the person who safely returns Jahi to his family.

Curry also gave $1,000 to Jahi's mother to help with expenses.

LOL...you haven't been on this board too long, have you? But thank you for a milestone in my life, being called a FEMI-NAZI, which could not be further from the truth. When I speak on THIS case, and THIS case alone, I'm referring to the people who are obsessed with trying to implicate the parents in this. I have a point of view, obviously, and am waiting to hear evidence. I see nothing wrong with that. My problem is with people who have already "damned" the Van Dams, who I feel very, very sorry for.

Hildy...the van Damned (!) side of the aisle have observed behavior by both Brenda and The Demon which do not correlate with the actions observed by typical parent/victims of such a horrendous event.

The wishy-washy public statements, hiring of media consultants and Public Relations teams, before the "SEARCH TEAMS" we even assembled is another subtle hint to SOME that the VD's alibis, statements and actions just don't add up....

Now...I for one have kept an open mind about this case, from day one....

I don't know David Westerfield....and if he is in fact the murder, and if he acted ALONE, then HURRAY...the correct perpetrator is in jail, and the evidence will create a cascade of proof to convict him. I also support the Death Penalty, and again, if the river of proof is clear and deep, then Westerfield's next semi-permanent address should be San Quentin.....it will then be liberal appointed and liberal ruling judges who control his true death penalty phase however..

On the other hand.....

If David Westerfield is a "dufus"...(which I suspect!)...and was a patsy for an organized group of "swinging smooth operators"...then that needs to come to light...

Like many on this forum....I am troubled (yes Amore, troubled) by the rush to judgment which "eliminated" the VD's AND their late night house guest from the suspect list.....

Otherwise, there would not have been a GAG order issued.....since the GAG order has done nothing to prevent information about Westerfield to come out....but it has in fact DRIED UP any details or information about Brenda and The Demon.....

So....that is why I for one, (as well as others) continue to keep a eye on the case, and especially on the VD's......

I am a RR capitalist.....don't care how much money someone earns, inherits, wins...whatever.....so if the VD's are flush, and it was simply time to buy another family beater to run out for groceries....what ever.....BBBBUUUUUTTTTTT.....

If the used the proceeds from the Murder of their daughter's search fund to line their own pockets, then again, that is a sign of LOW CHARACTER...and such lack of scruples again makes me highly suspicious of their ultimate motives.....

Big insurance payout on Danielle??? I can not say for sure...without compromising sources....so I will retract that it is known publicly that the VD's had a Life Insurance policy for $100K on each kid, as is only rumored on the San Diego forums.......

Take one more read of this article Hildy.....it really hits close to my opinion, and I believe others on the FR......

Not a DW apologists.....just not ready to swallow the WHOLE hook-line-and sinker....

FresnoDA

Danielle’s Death - Child abductions do not, for the most part, occur at random.

By Rabbi Daniel Lapin, president of Toward Tradition, a Seattle-based national pro-family coalition of Jews and Christians. March 12, 2002 8:50 a.m.

little girl is dead, left under a clump of oak trees in the backcountry east of San Diego. Many have seen her murder as a warning, applicable equally to all mothers and fathers, that child abduction occurs by random chance.

On March 1, a day after the body of Danielle Van Dam was identified, the San Diego Union-Tribune published a heart-rending account of parents and school counselors trying to explain to children how it could happen that seven-year-old Danielle was kidnapped and killed. "Mommy," a boy was quoted as saying, "I don't want anyone to steal me." Counselors advised parents "to listen to their children's fears and acknowledge them."

The unstated assumption of much of the press coverage of the tragedy has been just this: Children are afraid, counselors and parents are stumbling to find something comforting to say, for what happened to Danielle could as easily happen to any of our children. Since the grim discovery was made, the nation has absorbed the message that Danielle's death was an event without explanation or reason.

Or was it?

On the morning of February 2, Danielle was found to be missing from her bed. The man who has been arrested for her murder is 50-year-old David Westerfield. Reportedly a child-porn enthusiast, he is a neighbor of Danielle's parents, Damon and Brenda van Dam. That night, says the accused kidnapper, he and Mrs. Van Dam had been dancing at a local bar. Mrs. Van Dam denies dancing with Westerfield, but she does admit being out till 2 A.M. without her husband. Nor do the Van Dams deny the stories reported in Newsweek, stories that say they are active "swingers" with a taste for wife swapping. The Van Dams say their lifestyle has "nothing to do" with Danielle's abduction.

Let us be clear. This horrible death can be blamed only on the man who kidnapped Danielle. But if the Van Dams are indeed "swingers," if Mrs. Van Dam was carousing without her husband until rather late, then these parents — who deserve our sympathy no matter what their follies and vices may be — will have something in common with the parents of many other abducted children, beyond the bare fact that they have lost a child. For these terrible events do not, for the most part, occur at random.

The National Institute for Missing and Exploited Children supplies the figures. In 1997, 24 percent of abducted children were abducted by strangers. About half, 49 percent, were kidnapped by family members, typically a divorced parent. Another 27 percent were kidnapped by an acquaintance.

In other words, 73 percent of abducted children suffered that fate due in part to lifestyle choices their parents made: the choice to divorce, or to befriend sleazy characters. When the media, by ignoring these data, give the impression that child kidnapping could happen to any family, the wholesome no less than the unwholesome, we are once again being grievously misled.

This same notion — that a certain kind of misfortune, in choosing victims, makes no distinction between wholesome and unwholesome — animated the AIDS scare of the late 1980s. Back then, the media and AIDS activists asserted that the disease was about to erupt among the population of heterosexuals who are not abusers of intravenous drugs. It never did. AIDS, it's now acknowledged, is a killer with a marked preference for people who engage in particular activities: anal sex and needle sharing.

It does occasionally happen that an unknown drifter will invade the life of an upstanding family and steal and murder their child. That is what happened to 12-year-old Polly Klaas, abducted from a slumber party in Petaluma, California, in 1993. It is what happened in 1981 to six-year-old Adam Walsh, whose father, TV host John Walsh of America's Most Wanted, initiated a campaign to place photos of missing children on milk cartons and junk mail. That well-intended campaign has supported the misconception that children go missing by chance. The brief biographical sketch of the missing child never indicates the family dysfunction that likely contributed to making the abduction possible.

Random kidnapping is not what happened to Danielle van Dam, and the fact is worth considering. For our actions have consequences — often unintended, often for future generations, often tragic — and parents would do well to remember this.

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.

Front Pages

The Other Van Dam Story

CB Swing Club...is that where they learn how to swing the mic on a cord, inside of a Tractor Trailer????

"Breaker...this is the Damon, have you got yer ears on, come on, over?"

The poor dear, laughing out loud 24 hours a day. Perhaps she'll stop the riotous cacaphony when DW is aquitted.

Doc....while Susan W. maybe a fine looking "person"....get a grip...and remember that if she is one of Brenda's "close friends" as she describes them........eeewwww....

Need less to say....Susan W. if part of the VD swing set, may not be the prim and proper type she appears.....

I won't say it......L#@ !!!

Danielle’s Death - Child abductions do not, for the most part, occur at random.