Oh ... also the
prosecution must provide the body of evidence going beyond any reasonable doubt that Westerfield murdered Danielle. The standard of "evidence that hasn't been explained away" is far to low. Even if the evidence wasn't "explained away", the evidence itself may not be compelling to demonstrate murder by Westerfield.
In this case, for example, one interpretation of the currently unrebutted expert bug testimony is that another person was involved, at least to dump the body. In that case Westerfield would have to be acquitted, in my opinion that is uninformed as to CA law, because the other party may have committed the murder and Westerfield's involvment incidental.
So then the evidence is true per the prosecution's presentation but Westerfield is resonably doubted to be the murderer.
But suppose he's guilty...you wanna let him out on the streets....whether it be him or hs son....they are both complicit....I know the law...was in it...I also know what a horrible job some agencies do with crime scenes...Someone screwed it up...