Not once, have any one of the posters who feel him guilty from the start, responded to the questions.
While the innocent until proven guilty folks have posted scenerio after scenerio (some bizarre, yes) but the guilty folks won't even tell us how...prosecution wouldn't either.
You know, I have noticed this. The FIRECRACKERS jump in, tell everybody how wrong they are, then when asked to back it up, answer a few questions, they ignore you.
They then go on to run around and DEMAND that YOU and I give answers, provide PROOF, but they never will, they just go on to another subject, or jump on another poster.
A new one for the THESAURUS !
FIRECRACKERS = A bunch of noise and sparks, a little fire, but mostly smoke, and then after a while, they are gone.
1. When and how did David Westerfield kidnap Danielle? 2. When and how did David Westerfield murder Danielle? 3. When and how did David Westerfield dispose of Danielle's body?
That isn't entirely fair. The prosecution has presented theories that are sufficiently specific, and some evidence to back it up. While I side with the people who suspect DAW is innocent, there have been some scenarios posted that reasonably point to Westerfield as the perpetrator. Let me try to answer them, then.
1. Kidnapping - when? Obviously, on the night of Feb 2. The alarm lights and open doors provide windows for someone to access the house. The implication, clearly, is that Westerfield is that person. How? By entering through the doors. As a neighbor, and one who had just recently seen BVD at the bar, he may have known enough about their habits to know they would be otherwise occupied. A risk, certainly, but perhaps manageable.
2. Murder - when? Either immediately or during his trip. There's sufficient time during his trip to commit a murder. How? Uncertain, but most likely suffocation. That was, as I recall, the ME's suggestion. The presence of fibers indicates at least some struggle, and those fibers are (at least tentatively) linked to DAW.
3. Disposal - When? Again, during the trip, as he was under observation afterwards. The bug testimony makes this look less likely, but if you accept only his bit about the 16th being the earliest date, you can still go backwards and get to the 2nd-4th. How? Well, by dumping her there, and getting extremely lucky that no one found her for so long.
Again, I don't actually agree with these theories, but they're clearly the ones the defense is putting forward, and that I assume most VDAs agree with. Also, I don't follow the trial as much as some people here do (this is my main source of info on it, in fact), so feel free to correct any errors.
Drew Garrett
That's not entirely accurate.
There is one poster who did respond. I won't mention this posters name --out of regard for her recently-departed theories: "Two drives" and "Plastic mattress cover".
She's prolly wondering how she got on that side of the fence ...
The best we ever see is someone whining, "but there's bloooooooood somewhere...."
I think it's part of the Transcript Reading Disorder syndrome.