"As for Danielle, you were the one who was comparing apples to oranges - a primary crime scene where the victim was killed and the body was found, compared to a secondary crime scene where the victim was simply abducted. Big difference in actions involved."
Right. That's what I was hinting at in my earlier post. The Danielle case is not an example of how an intruder can enter a home and not leave evidence b/c Valpa1 didn't establish (and can't b/c we don't know where she was killed) the fact that Danielles case was comparable to that of the JBR case. Once again, you stated it more clearly. It's still apples and oranges, even if we don't know where Danielle was killed. Thanks.
As for the stats Valpa1 quoted those are national statistics that include all sorts of factors not present in the JBR case - it's a misapplication of statistics to make a point.
Well, not knowing where she actually died is just a matter of a few yards difference - whether in his bedroom or in his motor home, parked outside.
I can deduce that her live handprint on the headboard of the motorhome bed means she was alive in there, but I've always felt that's where she died because of the blood stains.