Posted on 07/11/2002 6:47:45 AM PDT by FresnoDA
While there has been concern that those of us who think the prosecution is doing a fine job of presenting their case don't understand the rules of law, maybe it would be wise to consider the huge chorus of "Not Guilty" yesterday after Bug Guy's testimony.
They are entitled to their opinion and others with another POV to theirs. I shall not smugly imply that others don't comprehend such.
This is not directed just to you John.
Could a drunk in a blackout enter a home they were never in and be so stealthful not to disturb anyone? Driving home, almost a habit, automatic, while blacked out, I could understand. Abducting and killing a girl is another matter.
interesting point.
longjack
T.S. How did a DRUNK to the point of BLACKOUT man get into the VD home, kidnap/kill the girl, and get her out without anyone, the dog, Damon, the boys, noticing, and while NOT LEAVING ONE SCRAP of TRACE EVIDENCE.
I mean, otherwise, I would be with you. I could see due to the motions and such, but how can you explain away what I asked?
Stealth Ninja Dave
Not films, not Videotapes, .... ZIPDISKS, disks that have tons of files ( image files) that are compressed.
There were some CD's with MPG files. Just wanting the facts straight.
I realize the interview with the Det. Redden was redacted (They told us that, and it abruptly ends)--which means we don't know that he was cut off from talking about the woman, just that the judge may have determined the jury was not to hear it. There are lots of things a judge won't allow into a trial based on relevancy, prejudice, etc. But you can bet if he gave a plausible explanation as to how, when or why Danielle got in the MH it would not have been excluded.
Since anybody not strictly following the "Van Damnation" party line gets called an apologist, I'll take a shot at the car thing. I am not an apologist, but have already been called one. It doesn't hurt, so I'm coming back for more.
A sizable fraction of people now lease their vehicles. A Fact. Leases expire. A fact, also.
How about if Damon's van lease expired in April? In order to continue to have a vehicle, he leased another vehicle; a BMW. Or maybe he bought a late model used BMW, on time payments like most purchasers do.
What is so sinister about that scenario? Which model of BMW? Is there some kind of class envy issue, whereby his type of vehicle renders him suspect?
I don't have answers to these points, but neither do the regulars on this thread, who keep repeating and repeating RUMORS, until they take on a FACT-like quality.
So I guess it is fair play to provide plausible explanations; at least as plausible as the aggregate of same, to explain the forensic evidence presented against DAW.
It seems like you think that if the defense can't explain everything, then DW must be guilty. I'm a little confused as to the fiber evidence, too, and really wonder how it got into the places that it got to. The prosecution claims that it got there because DW took her into the MH. The search dogs say otherwise. The defense doesn't know how they got there. But the lack of an explanation of the fibers on the part of the defense does not reduce the burden of proof and burden of production for the prosecution.
I think all of us wish the prosecution had their man, but there is a complete absence of evidence to link DW to the kidnapping and murder of Danielle.
Just my opinion, based on what I have seen and heard.
Just type SANDIEGOCHANNEL.COM in your browser. I didn't see any that were released TODAY. They were all pretrial motions.
IF R.... can show you different, that would be nice.
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.