Officer: During the course of our investigation, the resident here, his name came up, as someone who had contact with the family. We've talked to him. He is cooperating with us. He's talked to us yesterday, he's talking to us today. We had some things we wanted to check in his house. He allowed us to go into his home and we are doing some things to process the scene and possibly eliminate him as a suspect." Source
Second, there was an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune the same day, where another officer says something quite similar:
"This is a process of elimination," said Dave Cohen, a spokesman for the San Diego Police Department. "We have gotten some information and we wanted to take a little closer look at his vehicle and his residence." Source
And from the motion filed in court (available on the U-T site as a pdf file):
"Detective Alldredge's affadavit was relied on to establish probable cause for search warrants 2783D and 27818 to search Mr. Westerfield's home. 27813 for Mr. Westerfields clothes. In his affadavit, Alldredge misrepresented statements by Brenda Van Dam that were relied on to supply probable cause for the issuance of the search warrants. Because the affadavits were sealed, documents may only disclose the specifics of the misrepresentations in camera."
So, from this, it appears Brenda said something, but that Alldredge might have altered it or exaggerated it. Bottom line, it looks like someone did point the police in a certain direction.
Thank You. I have stated this over, and over , and over. Brenda pointed them at DW, and the police took what she said and like all other statements they recorded, they somehow got them wrong (LIED) and based on this, they got a search warrant. THE SEARCH WARRANT should be disclared FALSE and all EVIDENCE obtained thrown out of court.