[Henrietta]

Oh, yeah, the "system" worked...it proved that innocent men can be railroaded, and that juries are just rubber stamps for corrupt judges and prosecutors.

I am sick at this verdict.

[Peach]

You haven't been paying attention - Danielle's blood on his jacket, in his motor home and her fingerprints in his motorhome, small hand scratches on his arm, etc. The evidence is strong, your defense of him is weak. Glad you think defending pedophiles is worthwhile.

[ItsOurTimeNow]

I'm with you Henrietta.

No one proved how Danielle died
No one proved how DW killed her
No one proved how DW got her out of her house
No one proved how DW disposed of her body
No one proved DW is a pervert
Not one shred of evidence of DW being in the Van Dam house
Unidentified fingerprints were never sourced
Fibers were never sourced
Fibers were never dated
The scent dogs never "hit" DW being in the VD house
The scent dogs never "hit" Danielle being in the motorhome

yet, despite all this...the jury is going to send a man to his death.

[connectthedots]

I am sick at this verdict.

So am I. There is no rational basis for this verdict. I am not saying DW couldn't have been involved in Danielle's death, but the evidence just isn't there. This verdict is a travesty and based on nothing more than emotion.

How could they possibly convict DW of kidnapping? Where is the evidence of it? There seem to be a number of grounds on which to base an appeal, and I pray that the verdict is overturned and DW is at least given a new trial.

There should now be no doubt in anyone's mind that you never, ever, talk to the cops without a lawyer. If they don't have a subpoena or a warrant, tell them to immediately get off of your property or you will charge them with trespassing.

I think DW will get a new trial, and I don't think he will have any problem getting legal help for the appeal.

[SirAllen]

Geez! Are you people the same ones that said OJ was innocent? If there were anywhere I'd want to select a jury pool from it WOULD have been free republic, but you guys are really scaring me now.

The evidence does not lie. The man was guilty. The jury made the correct decision. For those that say otherwise...I hope you never serve on a jury becuase justice would never see the light of day.

[connectthedots]

This case is a perfect example on how a judge can manipulate a jury verdict by excluding relevant evidence, commenting on the testimony, and abusing his discretion in the way he handles objections. Mudd was not impartial at all in this case. He did everything he could to insure DW was convicted. Whether DW actually killed Danielle, or not, the system did not work; the prosecutor and the judge worked the system against DW and did society a grave injustice in doing so.

I don't know what is worse, that they knew they were doing it and don't care, or they don't even realize it.