Replies

and the fact that he had (as I understand it) categorized, stored kiddie porn

They didn't show the alleged kiddie porn to the media, but my recollection is that the questionable stuff amounted to less than 1% of an extensive collection of run of the mill T&A porn. Also, there is some question whether all of it was the defendant's, given his teen aged son had access to the machine and was actually using it while his dad was downtown being grilled by the police.

As an entomologist who has studied forensic entomology, and my understanding of the entomological data, it seems almost 100% to me that the girl was put whre she was found while DW was under constant surveillance.

Obviously, this jury doesn't hold entomology in very high regard.

BTW, what was the nature of the DNA found in his motorhome? Hair? Skin? Blood?

I'm no expert, but my recollection is that the strongest piece of evidence was a spot on Westerfield's jacket that matched Danielle's DNA, but was not verified to be blood (not sure how that's possible). Also troubling were also some strands of hair and a couple of fingerprints that were in the motor home. It seemed to me that, if he had done the crime in the motor home or used it to transport the body, there should have been a lot more of such evidence. Also, there are possible alternative explanations, such as the kid trespassing some time in the fall of last year, or even the real perp (or Ott and Keyser — San Diego's finest, don't you know) doing a frame up.

So, I don't think it was proven that Westerfield did it. Nor was it proven that he didn't. But I'd sure love to know who did, how, and why!

So if what you are telling me is accurate, Westerfield may not have even been guilty of collecting kiddie porn? One report I saw made it sound like he had tons of it stored on CDs with labels and all. If he indeed collected kiddie porn (as opposed to having some accidental crap in the trash he collected), it could be used to prove a mindset, but otherwise the porn is of little importance to the question of who murdered the child.

BTW, in order to even discuss this, you have to block out from your mind that this was an innocent young child that was hurt and murdered. There is nothing more infuriating in the world if you let yourself think about it too much. It seems weird that our whole country is discussing Calliphorid larvae and lawyers and locks and motorhomes, when that is what is at the bottom of it all. Abortion is the same way. We talk about laws and restrictions and rallies, and can scarcely allow ourselves to think about what it's all about.