Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: UCANSEE2
Allow me to 'clue' you in. It would be totally against the PATTERN demonstrated by the SDPD to have asked the kids that question. Anything information/evidence that would have ruled out DW as the perp was PURPOSELY IGNORED or DISCARDED.

Was the defense lawyer under the same obligation to ignore and avoid investigating ?

1,252 posted on 07/23/2002 3:43:42 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1211 | View Replies ]


To: VRWC_minion
Was the defense lawyer under the same obligation to ignore and avoid investigating ?

NOPE.

By the time DW was allowed to even contact a lawyer, everyone in the neighborhood(with 1 or 2 possible exceptions) was being overwhelmed with the BIG CROWD of onlookers,gawkers, and the PRESS. Particularly the John and Ken show. They had already convicted DW on the spot.

This is my guess as to the status of things.

(1)Parents spoke to the cops, children weren't asked about the MH.

Since everyone believed the MEDIA and the COPS that DW was guilty, and this is such a HIGH PROFILE, HIGH EMOTION case, any child that could have said he was in the MH or he saw Danielle in the MH wouldn't be let NEAR ANY DEFENSE INVESTIGATOR by the parents no matter what.

Are you aware that the DEFENSE wanted to go to the VAN DAM home to do their own SEARCH, their own TESTS?

As defense, DO THEY HAVE THE RIGHT to do something like this, in the name of FAIR and EQUAL justice to defend their client? TO ensure a FAIR TRIAL?

ANSWER THAT ONE QUESTION, please.

1,346 posted on 07/23/2002 4:56:00 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1252 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson