Replies

I've followed these threads pretty closely and have my two cents to offer.

The blood/DNA in the MH and on the jacket have not been explained away. They could be from previous visits/contacts but very damning.

I give no credence to the fiber evidence. Unless a match is made to some exotic fiber that is present on both the victim and the accused, the occurrence of common fibers in meaninless.

The early morning trip to the dry cleaners is suspect but I wonder if these items were used/present in the crime why not just discard them?

I don't see the porn as a factor. From my understanding of someone who 'is into' children I would have expected a lot more than the few that were questionable and the one movie clip that appears to have been unquestionable.

The dogs not detecting Danielle's scent in the MH or SUV and the dogs not detecting DW's scent in the VD home.

And the bug evidence making it highly unlikely that DW had an opportunity to dispose of the body.

All in all, if could not with a good conscience convict the man.

Thank you for sharing your analysis!

My impressions are based on a general reading of these threads - the things that would stand out to me as a juror. I'm very glad I'm not on the jury!