Replies

If he was home and did the deed as late as 12:30 he had time to go to Dehesa and come back.

I don't think this fits the scenario because I believe the insect expert will testify for the defense that Danielle's body was first exposed to insects much later than February 2, 2002.

An speculated scenario might have Danielle's body stored somewhere temporarily for several days or weeks and then dumped at Dehesa later on so it would be found.

Speaking of which; What was the position of the body under the tree ? Was it propped up against the tree as though Danielle were sitting there, waiting expectantly ? Was the body carefully laid on its back as though placed in a sleeping position with her hands folded on her chest ? Was the body found sprawled as though it had been flung ? These questions are not answered that I can recall from testimony I read.

Danielle's body being found nude and her pajamas and underpants being found in her bedroom seem to tell me that Danielle was taken from her bedroom or home completely naked, inspite of her parents insistance she was wearing something. I really find it impossible to believe that a naked young girl being brought out into the cold night air would not complain. From that, I would guess that Danielle was definately not sleepwalking and was either unconscious when she left the house or dead.

Aside from the DNA found within Danielle's bedclothing not matching DW; A drunken 50 year old who does not appear to be in the best of physical condition, who has absolutely no past history of violence or pedophilia, does not know the layout of the Van Dam house, who leaves absolutely no trace of his presence including a failure by tracking dogs to pick up his scent within the Van Dam house, carrying a dead or unconscious body down a (curving ?) staircase in the middle of the night without steadying himself or making a sound would seem to exclude David Westerfield.

Another thing that bothers me is the blood evidence found within the motorhome. One single drop of blood ONE QUARTER INCH ROUND.

That's pretty small -- about half the width of the fingernail on my small finger. That's very small !

Take a piece of paper and mark a red dot one quarter inch round and place it in a room near a wall and walk around the room trying to see this dot. The blood on the lapel of DW's jacket is also troubling. A one and three sixteenths inch LONG stain seems to indicate a SMEAR. There is no other dimension given, ie. WIDTH. In otherwords, the blood on the lapel was only a drop and might have been BRUSHED to cause it to have that length. The cutout of the bloodstain on the green jacket on the LEFT could have easily been a single drop smudged to form its dimensions. But no detailed discussion is available, that I can recall. Again, there appear to be perfectly innocent explanations for the TWO DROPS of blood being present. If Danielle were playing around the motorhome on a previous ocassion, then even a sneeze could very easily deposit a drop of plegmn covered blood in the motorhome. How old was this quarter inch drop of blood ? Why didn't the tracking dogs pick up scent from this drop of blood when they were in the motorhome or was it that this quarter inch drop of blood was so old, that its scent was essentially absent ?

And the green jacket could have been draped over a chair when Danielle and her mother and brothers went over to DW's home to sell cookies. A bored young girl waiting for her mother to finish yacking with a neighbor, picking at scabs or whatever (not impossible to imagine) could easily produce a drop of blood and smudge it on a jacket. Again, there are completely innocent and plausible explanations for the blood evidence. But these again are total speculations and it will be up to the defense to offer such explanations or others in a convincing manner to the jury.