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

Skip to comments.

VAN DAM MURDER VERDICT [VERDICT IN: GUILTY!]
ABC radio

Posted on 08/21/2002 10:03:52 AM PDT by wallcrawlr

I just heard this at noon.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: horndog; kidnapping; molestation; vandam; westerfield; westerfieldrailroad
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940941-960961-980981-999 next last
To: ItsOurTimeNow
Well, YourTimeIsPast, I see that you continue to engage in that silly "divide and conquer" strategy that works only on the weak-minded here.

A person with a modicum of intelligence, however, realizes that no single piece of evidence did the trick, that it was all the evidence taken together that allowed 12 ordinary men and women, citizens of the State of California, to conclude the man was guilty.

You'll see just HOW MUCH they were convinced of the evidence, ALL TAKEN TOGETHER, if they sentence him to death.

941 posted on 08/22/2002 10:05:44 AM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 938 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Anyone who tries to marginalize the extent of this horrid crime has my utter contempt, with extreme prior prejudice.

Here, here. Well said. And there's been plenty of that too. They don't just come up with fanciful theories on why Westerfield's not guilty: they struggle to minimize the horrific circumstances of her death, to minimize the porn on his computer, etc. etc. They don't just minimalize the extent of his involvement, the minimize the crime too.

For shame, citizens.
942 posted on 08/22/2002 10:07:04 AM PDT by FreeTheHostages
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Ass-clown,

My post was in reply to marajade's post:

"They had blood DNA evidence... That isn't enough?"

My illustration was that, no, that isn't enough.

Reading comprehension fails you, I see.
943 posted on 08/22/2002 10:07:52 AM PDT by ItsOurTimeNow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 941 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
How silly. See, you have an explanation for the blood -- something DW did not have. That was the problem with his defense......
944 posted on 08/22/2002 10:18:32 AM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 938 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
You my dear are the one who claimed you had very good reasons for your "views" and when I said that my feeling that Westerfield was a pedophile differed with your views, you claimed I was a bigot. Your intolerance for differing opinions shows who is really the bigot. Name calling is always the sign of a bigot and small thinking. And by the way, who is trying to marginalize this horrible crime? I have stated my opinion that Westerfield, based on the evidence of his child pornography viewing, is a pedophile. You think he is not a pedophile. As a result, I am a bigot and have marginalized this crime? Your analysis is the very reason that if I were convicted of a crime of which I was innocent, I would chose a trial by judge rather than a jury of my "peers". Your analytical skills leave much to be desired.
945 posted on 08/22/2002 10:22:18 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
Your analogy of a cousin in your car is poor. There would be a legitimate reason for the cousin to be in your car. In the case at hand, there was no legitimate reason for Danielle's blood to be in the motor home or on DW's jacket. Context is everything.
946 posted on 08/22/2002 10:22:45 AM PDT by BoomerBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 943 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
huh?
947 posted on 08/22/2002 10:23:06 AM PDT by nonstatusquo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 944 | View Replies]

To: BoomerBob
Context is everything.

Good point. Evidence always exists in context. And unlike people, who often have a motive to fib, a jacket with Danielle's blood on it travelling in the air from Westerfield's hand to the clerk at the drycleaning store -- that inanimate object doesn't have a motive to lie.

Let alone a motive to apologize and rationalize for a child rapist/murderer.

I think people here think it's fun to take things out of context and play what-if and imagine themselves in the put-upon roll of innocently accused. I wished they'd take their fantasy games to some fanatsy website and not disturb the tormented soul of Danielle. They don't want the evidence in context. They want Rube-Goldberg level complexity, twists and turns that fascinate the eye. Their hearts do not truly seek justice.

I pray for all the prosecutors and police that work so hard on these cases and I pray for the wisdom of juries to see evidence as this jury did: in context.
948 posted on 08/22/2002 10:29:13 AM PDT by FreeTheHostages
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 946 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
I think the emotions of the jurors had regarding the porn overwhelmed their collective sensabilities and reasoning related to bug evidence.

I believe the highly publicized amber alerts that became prominent during this trial had a lot to do with his conviction. People had a sense that citizens were fighting back against this dasterdly crime--and winning!--and here was this jury that could also do their part.

If DW did just breakup with his girlfriend, it does not surprise me that he would wonder around for a day or two in his motor home. A guy that likes relatively slim, big-busted women does not all of a sudden take a sexual interest in a little girl. It make no sense to me.

The fact that DW just broke up with his girlfriend made me think all along that DW, in an anxious, depressed state, may have taken actions normally not typical of him. A few weeks ago, former FBI profiler Candace DeJong (I think that's her name--she's excellent and appears on FNC), said that child molestation breaks across all lines of society. It's even possible for an older man, for example, who's never acted on it before to be quilty. I was surprised by that and I thought of DW.

Like you, I am not totally convinced of his innocense, but I am convinced the prosecution did not actually prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; not even close. This is one case in which a hung jury may have been the best result.

Entirely agreed!

949 posted on 08/22/2002 10:34:22 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: FreeTheHostages
Actually, Henrietta wrote that sentence to me and claimed I was bigoted because I think Westerfield is a pedophile and she does not think he is. Because I think Westerfield is a pedophile she has claimed I am a bigot and have "margainalized this crime". How is that for analytical thinking? If ever accused of a crime for which we are innocent, chose a trial by judge, otherwise we are subject to the whims and crazy theories such as Henrietta's.
950 posted on 08/22/2002 10:34:32 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 942 | View Replies]

To: Peach
I accidentally posted to you and meant to post to Henrietta. Sorry.
951 posted on 08/22/2002 10:36:27 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 945 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
Well, there are hospital records to back up your claim about how the blood came to be in your vehicle.

DW offered no explanation or witnesses to place the victim in his MH in an innocent fashion. The jury drew a coclusion about it. GUILTY.
952 posted on 08/22/2002 10:41:20 AM PDT by Valpal1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 938 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Oh, Illbay - a rereading of the posts show me that I did indeed respond to the correct person. You jumped in on a disagreement I was having with someone else about whether Westerfield is a pedophile. I think he is. The other person thinks he is not. For having a difference of opinion, I have been accused of being a bigot. And now you are trying to tell me that I have tried to marginalize the crime and used a host of lovely little adjectives to try and describe my view. A previous post had it just right - nothing you write in the future will be considered with any degree of seriousness.
953 posted on 08/22/2002 10:42:12 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Sorry, you're thinking about someone else. That wasn't me.
954 posted on 08/22/2002 10:42:48 AM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 945 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
Sorry, YourTimeIsPast, the game's over. Stop continuing to twist facts to suit your latest fever-dream. You and all your ilk have continually tried to deal with the evidence in PIECE-MEAL fashion.

It doesn't work like that. No single bit of evidence convicted this monster. It was everything taken together, which so overwhelmed the defense team--who apparently are mental midgets compared to the, *ahem*, geniuses who make up the pro-Westerfield faction on FR--that they simply couldn't answer it all. They couldn't explain it away, try as they might.

And you must remember: They were unable to pull the same snow job as you people were on FR, because the evidence was THERE in front of the jury.

They had it all. Something you'll NEVER have.

Not that this will stop you from your ongoing delusion.

955 posted on 08/22/2002 10:47:19 AM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 943 | View Replies]

To: Peach
If ever accused of a crime for which we are innocent, chose a trial by judge, otherwise we are subject to the whims and crazy theories such as Henrietta's.

Wrong. A jury will get it right. 12 heads are better than 1. I would trust a jury over a judge any day. All this just takes common sense: any silly idea one jury has can be shot down by the other 11
956 posted on 08/22/2002 10:49:15 AM PDT by FreeTheHostages
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 950 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Illbay - what is it I've said or done that has so upset you? I AM NOT part of the Westerfield is innocent contingent. I think he's guilty and should fry. Were you meaning to post to someone else? It's happened to me, and I just don't understand where your post came from regarding bigotry, etc.
957 posted on 08/22/2002 10:50:24 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: Peach
No, that's not why I called your comments bigoted. You seem to think that those who think DW innocent are somehow supporting kiddy porn and pedophiles. That is an intolerant and bigoted remark.
958 posted on 08/22/2002 2:38:20 PM PDT by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 937 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Actually, Henrietta wrote that sentence to me and claimed I was bigoted because I think Westerfield is a pedophile and she does not think he is. Because I think Westerfield is a pedophile she has claimed I am a bigot and have "margainalized this crime". How is that for analytical thinking? If ever accused of a crime for which we are innocent, chose a trial by judge, otherwise we are subject to the whims and crazy theories such as Henrietta's.

I think you've mixed up a couple different posts, here....I never talked about "marginalizing" anything.

Carry on....

959 posted on 08/22/2002 2:41:30 PM PDT by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 950 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
I don't recall the defense in this case ever asking for a change of venue.

You are absolutely correct & bvw is wrong. Again.

I said all along Feldy would never ask for a change of venue and he didn't. He wanted the trial there because of all the publicity that came out about the VD's swinging lifestyle. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he sure got a lot of mileage out of it.

960 posted on 08/22/2002 2:50:57 PM PDT by Amore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940941-960961-980981-999 next last

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.

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