What do you do with this? Would you convict a man -- any man -- of kidnapping, let alone murder on that evidence. I'm an old prosecutor (who has never defended a crook) and yet that gives me pause.
There are at least 3 scenarios possible:
1. Westerfield breaks in while Mrs. VD is out partying and Mr. VD is [unknown], kidnaps girl, takes her to RV, kills her, then leaves her in RV and goes to bar to socialize with Mrs. VD and friends to establish alibi. Then after bar, he drives to desert and disposes of body. Problems: Where is Mr. VD? Westerfield would have to be REAL cool customer to commit such a murder and go off to bar, not knowing when little girl might be discovered missing.
2. Westerfield goes to bar and socializes with Mrs. VD and learns of forthcoming 'adult party'. Realizing that this means that VD's and their 'guests' will be incommunicado in the garage, Westerfield enters house, takes girl, etc etc. May explain why Mrs VD "can't remember" dancing with Westerfield, while he does. Why didn't parents lock house and turn on burglar alarm if they knew (as they did under this scenario) that they would be "occupied" in the garage? Again would require Westerfield to have the nerves of a cat burglar to pull it off (going into small house with 6 adults in proximity).
3. Westerfield is either at adult party with Mr and Mrs or is called to it after they (or guests or some combination) kill (perhaps accidentally) little girl and Westerfield agrees to dispose of body. This would make Westerfield an accessory after the fact but put him in difficult spot without some corroboration of parents' involvement. This would explain all physical evidence but not make Westerfield guilty of murder. Charge could be designed to turn Westerfield. This also explains the bizarrely aloof behavior of Mr and Mrs.
One thing (one thing?) we don't know (or at least I haven't seen) is much about timing, i.e. what time does Westerfield arrive at state park versus when Mrs. leaves the bar with 4 "friends". None of these scenarios are satisfying to me and there are none I would want to try and make a murder conviction on -- without more.
One thing for sure this case will take the OJ slot for the foreseeable future.
sw
I agree on the time-issue, meaning, we don't know too much of the timeline of when DW suppsedly left with Danielle,
and where did he go first?
If what I have read is correct, he paid his $$ at Silver Strand State beach Sat AFTERNOON,
then once the park ranger came and gave him his balance, he freaked and went to the desert, where, the next day, he got stuck in the sand.
WHat time did he leave home in the RV? Did anyone in the neighborhood hear him leave in the RV?
Where did he go BEFORE he arrived at the state beach?
I am reposting a post from the 760KFMB (Rick Roberts radio station) message board
that asks many questions we are all wondering about (when I guess we should instead be out searching):
"There are way too many questions and too many different stories. I wondered about the alarm also.
They were always seeing the blinking lights on the alarm and closing doors but not turning the alarm on or locking the doors?
If DW came in before 1:30 when did he leave and where were the parents?
How did he know the alarm wasn't on? Why did he not worry about getting caught in the house or throughout the whole night?
When DvD tucked in Danielle did he close her bedroom door?
When BvD went to shut the kid's doors was her daughters door already shut or open?
What about when they went to wake her up?
Were the people that BvD and her friends hooked up with at the bar and brought home strangers?
Did their daughter sleep walk out and then she was taken?
Was she running away or going to look for parents?
Where was her father sleeping when the dog woke him up needing to go out?
If the dog can't bark how does he wake him up?
If the door was open why did he have to let the dog out?
Did they go to bed at 3am and what time did they wake up?
Was it before the boys got up (7am) or when the friend came to play(9am)?
From Interview with Local "8" Damon starts to say Why didn't they check on the kids to see if they might have wondered out or why the doors were open?
Were they with their company at all times during the "get together"?
Did DW have any relations with any of the women or men who went to the Van Dams?
Was he over there and something went wrong so he did the getting rid of while
others cleaned at the house then came up with a story "you were never there" "it never happened" then he
gets blamed and takes the fall? Did he and Brenda dance at the club together?
Who is lying? People at the bar had to see if they did.
Was DW's rv at his house? If not why wasn't there evidence in his SUV?
Did anyone have any bruises or scratch marks?
Do they only have specks of blood? Why do they think she is dead?
If there had been a trail of blood why didn't anyone see it that night before going to sleep or in the morning?
How did he get in without anyone seeing?
If her door was shut did he open any of the other doors waking up the boys looking for her?
How was it so easy for him to get past the parents, get a silent alarm, a dog that doesn't bark, and carry the girl home without anyone knowing. "
And, I will concur with Luis that there has been no (to my knowledge) official report of the VD's "lifestyle", or their "garage with the indoor locks" - just some news from some unidentified so-called LEO and some disc jockey named Roberts.
The only other corrobating thing that could be said to show the VD's lifestyle is that apparently they were asked specifically about it on LK Live and when interviewed by Newsweak and Thyme magazines they didn't deny the allegations, just said their lifestyle was "irrelevant".
I also agree with others that if they indeed DID live a lifestyle like that hypothesized, I believe that they SHOULD be held accountable. 1 - for giving knowledge of where three small children lived to perverts and drug users and 2 - for not adequately protecting their young children...like not checking on them until 9 in the morning, for example.
That being said, I would like to add a couple of things I found strange. Having seen them myself on Fox News, I can verify them myself.
1 - the little girl was CONSTANTLY wearing this neck choker thing. I know several 7 year old girls who like these, none of them wear them constantly. It looked odd, like a biker tattoo or a dog collar.
2 - Danielle looked oddly developed for a 7 year old. Most of my friend's daughters did not get (sorry for the language, but that's the way they describe it in the health textbook) "breast buds" until age 11 or 12.
Someone else noticed this on one of the threads and said it might be due to molestation.
If that's true, perhaps there is more to this story. (And Luis, if I still lived out in CA, I would be combing the canyons with you. There are so many wild animals out there, I can't see how a 7 year old could survive for long.)