Westerfield attorney's begin defense: Dusek STUNNED by Defense calling for Keith Stone. Barb next?

Union Trib ^ | July 2, 2002 | Union Trib

[Politicalmom]

And why didn't the dogs indicate she had been INSIDE the MH?

I assume he didn't climb into the hatch to kill her...(/sarcasm)

[UCANSEE2]

My point is that it is extremely unlikely they would have gotten there in any other way than during the abduction and murder. That makes the issue of when rather moot. This is the most intelligent response I have seen yet to this issue. Thank you.

However, can you see that if Danielle got into the MH, say THURSDAY, and had a slight nosebleed, that she could have left her prints, hair, and blood in the MH.

As others have stated, why didn't the dogs HIT on the MH if she had been there so recently?

[Jaded]

For the sake of argument, Dusek did say he would show. It's not over yet.

[luvbach1]

That is the overwhelming evidence.

I know you were being sarcastic, but I believe it is just that.Their presence can't be explained away except by unbelieveable scenarios.

[Jrabbit]

Glad you're here,cat slayer! Did we ever figure out about Keith Stone or Pete?

[Rheo]

Sold cookies to him at his house 2 times...the week of her disappearance and the previous year.

As far as her parents allowing her to cross the street, today we heard her brother, Dylan, age 5, just did...we also heard reference, brief before sustained, that Mark Rohr, DW's neighbor had to rescue on of the VD boys from something.

We don't truly know yet how often she actually was out with supervision.

[Jaded]

I've said before if Dusek can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it and how, I'll jump over the fence. So far with what we've seen, I'm pretty comfortable.

[Rheo]

And why didn't the dogs indicate she had been INSIDE the MH

Ummmm....the same reason the dogs didn't alert to DW being in the VD house???

[John Jamieson]

Bunny, all the evidence against him HAS BEEN PRESENTED. It is all right to decide he's innocent now! If you think he's guilty, I'm with you, YOU should wait until ALL the evidence is in.

[luvbach1]

No need whatever to apologize. Sarcasm is ok (if you did it I didn't notice). I only dislike snideness or personal attacks. You did neither.

[UCANSEE2]

I have been repeatedly condemned for having an opinion. THAT IS MY POINT.

You have not, at least on this thread. You said you knew for a fact that DW was a CHILD MOLESTOR, and when asked for proof, you won't answer. That is not an opinion, my dear. If you said you believed that DW is guilty, that he did it, and tried to show how and why, others would counter with their beliefs and their reasons for those beliefs. You give no one a chance to argue at all. You stroll in and tell everyone THEY ARE WRONG, YOU ARE NOT WRONG. (I can point to where you did this, if you like) You refuse to listen or evaluate any information, all you do is demand others prove what they say, while refusing to do anything but say you have proof.

This is why you are having a difficult time. I enjoy people who contribute NEW information. If you have any NEW information that proves one way or the other WHAT HAPPENED,I would love to hear it.

[Rheo]

Nope...everyone else heard Keith....I heard Pete....it was Pete!!!hopefully, we hear more from Detective Muler or the Stone witness.

Keith wouldn't have committed perjury, would he?

[UCANSEE2]

Post 199, tactic of avoiding the issue.

[185JHP]

Sounds to me like they were operating in "take away reason and accountability" mode...

[fatima]

Guity if all the evidence of the DA is true but I have questions. This is my first trial reading online and I still do not understand how he got in and got out and got the God bless her,little girl into his car and then into moter home and then did the rest,God rest her soul.

[John Jamieson]

so why not him?

Why not any of a dozen "convicted" sexual offeners in the area?

Or, the sexually aggressive lezbo, Barbara?

[Jrabbit]

Absolutely not.( These are fine,fine upstanding pillars of their community.) I was pleased with the defense today, even with the DA's witnesses. I especially enjoyed the bird sex lady.

[UCANSEE2]

But I have not yet heard the proof that I hear exists about other suspects. That is still a myth.

Fair enough. If you go back to the Trial transcripts, since you say you have read them, or if you want to go back on these threads, there is testimony that police found PRINTS in the VD home, on the bannister rail,in The Bedroom,that DO NOT MATCH DW, DO NOT MATCH any of the VD's or their party guests. The police made no attempt to follow up on whose prints these might be, they admitted to it in testimony, and when asked why,said because they weren't DW's.

[luvbach1]

Bunny is right. FR is not a court of law.

[Politicalmom]

A child climbing into a motorhome is NOT an unbelievable scenarion. I have had kids in my very own RV parked in front of my house.