Tis true, I did accurately call FDA names and I retract none of them. His primary motivation is titillation of his readers.
But it was weeks ago and a different thread.
Spectre.....seems that this question was posed to you above, and by the VD apologist rules, I can not answer...boo hooo....it is so easy dashing their vapid arguments.....so, you can have at it......
FresnoDA!!!
Please point out posts where I have name called.
The more contact the prosecution can show between the suspect and the victim's family the better it is for the prosecution to show means and opportunity.
The scant relationship attested to by the Van Dams does not benefit them or the prosecution of the alleged killer of their daughter. They have no self benefiting motive to lie to make the relationship appear less and lying in such a manner could harm the hoped for conviction.
They have a real and plausible motive to lie and make the relationship appear more extensive to create a greater appearance of means and opportunity.
However, they are not engaged in the rational, self benefitting latter, but same claim they are engaged in the irrational self harming former.
I think they might be doing neither, but telling the simple truth, that there was a simple, shallow, casual neighborhood aquaintance and no more.
As for the dancing dispute, I have two working theories, one BVD was "toasted" and can't really remember if she danced with him or not, but thinks/hopes/wishes not. Two, that Feldman has come up with some real rotters/barflies who are willing to perjure themselves for money, fame, attention, or to feed some grandiose delusion of their own.
I do not discount the theory that BVD did have an illicit relationship, unkown to her husband, but we will never know because the defense won't go there. Not only do father's kill children to punish the mother, but so do ex-boyfriends and spurned lovers.