Skip to comments.SEX OFFENDER PROFILES: (Westerfield and the van Dam case!)
Posted on 03/22/2002 9:04:21 AM PST by FresnoDA
Preferential Child Molester
Preferential Child Molesters have a definite sexual preference for children. Their sexual fantasies and erotic imagery focus on children. They have sex with children not because of some situational stress or insecurity but because they are sexually attracted to and prefer children. If this individual does not act on his urges, then he is not a child molester.
Situational Child Molester
Situational Child Molesters do not have a true sexual preference for children, but engage in sex with children for varied and complex reasons. This type of molester may engage in sex with a child, ranging from a once-in-a-lifetime act to a long-term pattern of behavior. The more long-term the behavior is, the more difficult it is to distinguish from a preferential molester. Members of lower socioeconomic groups tend to be over represented among situational child molesters.
An area of increasing attention is that of adolescent offenders. This type of offender can fit the characteristics of the preferential or situational child molester. Adolescent (or younger) offenders should always be viewed as past or current victims of sexual abuse. This may include psychological sexual abuse, inappropriate exposure to sexually explicit materials, and/or the repeated or inappropriate witnessing of adult sexual activity.
Question: Are all child molesters pedophiles?
A pedophile is an individual who prefers to have sex with children. A person who prefers to have sex with an adult partner may, for any number of reasons, decide to have sex with a child. Such reasons may include simple availability, curiosity, or a desire to hurt a loved one of a molested child. The sexual fantasies of these individuals do not necessarily focus on children.
Question: How does the abuse occur?
Abuse occurs in a wide range of situations and settings. For long-term abusers, often, the child molester will court the child with attention, affection, and gifts. Just as one adult courts another during a dating process, the pedophile seduces children over a period of time by gradually lowering their sexual inhibitions. Sometimes the molester will tickle, wrestle, or hug the child in the presence of others first, adding legitimacy to the activity that will occur later in private. Often a child feels guilty or ashamed of the abuse. Children may feel that a short amount of uncomfortable feeling is worth the amount of attention and affection and perceived care they receive from the molester.
Excerpted from Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis by Kenneth V. Lanning.
Actually....how would Damon do when analyzed by the same criteria.....just wondering.....
But you hit on the most troubling part of this whole picture. "How can DW prove his where-a-bouts"? Maybe he can. We don't have the trial yet. WE do know he was stuck in the sand, and the hounds were off and running with "she's buried in the sand, we'll never find her"....uggggh
But let's take a look at Damon. HE can't prove what he did between the time he claims he put the children to bed and the time Brenda and friends came back.
If this had been an ordinary family environment, none of what could have happened to Danielle in her own home would have EVER been given the time of day.
BUT....I don't think DW will get off IF he really did do it. OTOH, maybe Feldman and his team have already solved the mystery for us. Going to be a great trial!
He had plenty of time before wifie got back to do "whatever" without a witness.
Hey, my first attempt at ADVANCED HTML. WooHoo.
That is certainly my suspicion too. IF they were in fact having an affair, they might have talked about a lot of things, maybe including what he found on his son's computer? One post on the SDU-T site actually stated that the zip disks were the son's--but I can't verify that on the web, so I relegate it to the "theory" pile. (Apparently, the U-T publishes more in the print version than they do on their website--I've seen maybe 6-7 articles referenced as being in the U-T that are NOT on the website. Ah, to have the paper version....)
So many flaws in this case, but this one is a biggie. How did she end up where she did? Why (that word again!) were there no traces of Danielle, nothing, not so much as a skin flake (apparently) in the SUV if that's how he transported her?
Unless toxicology comes up with something. I know some have postulated that perhaps someone drugged her, and od'ed her accidentally. I don't know that they've released the reports yet? Might not release them to the press in any event, because of the gag order, though. In any event, since the child seemed to have no wounds, etc., you're right: it looks more accidental. It would have to be an OD or suffocation, I'd think.
"OR they just think we all are stupid."
I don't know about Brenda, but I thought Damon seemed arrogant enough to think that he's smarter than anyone else. (Bet he's a liberal--liberals often make that mistake!)
Yes, I did notice that! In fact, so much about these two people remind me of the Clintons! (Including their lemming-like apologists! No matter what ugly new fact comes out about them, there's always someone who will have a rationalization for it--just like Clinton!)
I pray that Feldman is able to interview the two boys in the house. They were witnesses, weren't they? Even to the point of when they were put to bed.
Golitely, do you remember which poster used to put a "Lemming Alert out, complete with a big picture"...? Was it Don Morgan or Doug from upland?
I never felt part of FR untill I was issued my VERY own "Lemming" alert post...~sw~
(1) They were definite alibi witnesses who could place DW elsewhere when crime committed; or
(2) some other category such as persons who would flatly contradict, falsify, and impugn what had already been said by Van Dams or other persons who DID testify...
Apparently the witnesses in question were not very clearly in those categories, and the judge quickly wrapped it up, before perhaps it could be determined whether the witnesses proposed would or would not, fit one of those two.
Unless the prosecution can present VASTLY more incriminating info against DW than we have been told they have...and Unless the doubts arising inherently from the various stories of the VDs and the wide-open opportunities for anyone at all incl their other guests, to have committed whatever was committed...
AND UNLESS THE VERY SERIOUS REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE CRIMES WITH WHICH DW IS CHARGED WERE EVEN COMMITTED AT ALL can be resolved, ...
Then this case is over before it begins, and ought to be dismissed.
Again I say, there is as far as any of us sharpies knows, far more than enough reasonable doubt that the crimes WERE EVEN COMMITTED AT ALL, to require the judge to simply dismiss the charges against some specific fall guy who has been picked up.
I rather think the judge already had his mind made up, in any event. Amore has said the way he worded his statement about being convinced of Westerfield's guilt was probably according to the law. However, we watch quite a few of these trials on Court TV, and I don't believe the judge said that even in the OJ trial--and everyone including the judge thought he was guilty. (Speaking of the judge before Ito, who was, at best, kind of flaky.) I do agree with Amore, though, that if he deviated from form, it could be devastating to the prosecution.
I've posted some interesting articles over here, including one wondering if a fair trial is possible. (The columnist gives opinions on both sides.)
Then this case is over before it begins, and ought to be dismissed.
Given the climate of hysteria in SD, this seems very unlikely. The only way DW would be released would be if the fingernails yielded someone else's DNA based on the 6 markers that are ususally done. (Remember in OJ, one of Marcia's arguments was that they didn't have enough blood to allow defense to do all of their OWN more detailed testing. Racial profiling aside, this was part of the doubt.) IMO, if it's not his it will be inconclusive. The six markers can and will be challenged. They will not trade David unless there is someone else.
After reading on a different forum, there are apparently more than a few parents in SD that think SDPD doesn't have the right guy and are worried that some one's still on the loose.
Now for the rumor mill. There seems to be people of the opinion that the reason SDPD zeroed so quickly is that there are some PD involved in CB's. Birds of a feather. No to the extent that it's a "conspiracy" it's more just ignoring stuff. Exculpatory 3rd party evidence.
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.