"...No one actually knows where Danielle was killed..."
Then it doesn't appear to stand as evidence to support your contention?
My contention wasn't about murder site, but about an intruder that left no physical evidence of himself. Not even the dogs tracked him conclusively.
People think it *must* be the parents because there is no physical evidence left by the intruder, but it isn't a forgone conclusion that any will be left.
Especially in a compromised crime scene with incompetent investigators.