Read my prior threads on my reasons for believing she did not play there.
There is no evidence presented that any child ever played in this RV.
Based on the evidence presented there is only fingerprints, blood like substance and hair root in RV. There is none, zilch, nada evidence of any child let alone Danielle ever being in the RV to play.
There was crossed testimony under oath that (1) the RV was parked in the neighborhood and near the playground at various times and (2) that the RV's door was at least sometimes left unlocked. That is known as indirect evidence. Common sense is the glue that allows one to stick a child in the RV for the purpose of assuming innocence -- which is what if a juror acting in good faith and duty you are under sworn oath to do.