Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: bvw

Danielle van Dam — Victim of "Alternative Lifestyles?"  by Chris Weinkopf (Pt. 1)
FrontPageMagazine.com ( www.frontpagemag.com/columnists/weinkopf/2002/cw02-13-02.htm) | February 13, 2002

MAYBE, JUST MAYBE it was a total stranger who abducted seven-year-old Danielle van Dam from her San Diego home almost two weeks ago. Some thug could have picked her parents’ house at random and snuck in during the middle of the night, evading detection despite the home-security system. Somehow, the intruder could have found his way up to Danielle’s bedroom and removed her against her will—again, without being noticed.  Then again, maybe not......

The practical realities and crime statistics—less than 1 percent of the 800,000 children reported missing in the U.S. last year were abducted by someone unconnected to the family—suggest otherwise. Yet to judge by the initial coverage of Danielle’s disappearance on national TV, one would think her kidnapping had to be the exception to the rule.

The story, as first told on The Today Show, Good Morning America, The Early Show, Larry King Live, and America's Most Wanted, mirrored the account of Danielle’s parents, Brenda and Damon: Brenda was out partying that Friday night with friends at a San Diego nightspot. Damon put the kids to bed around 10. Brenda and her pals showed up around 2:30 and joined Damon for some pizza. The friends then left, and Brenda and Damon went to bed without first checking in on their daughter. They didn’t discover that she was missing until 9 a.m. Saturday morning.  As usual, the story behind the story has been available mostly outside the establishment media—on the Internet and talk radio.

Last Friday, San Diego talk-show host Rick Roberts presented his listeners with an alternative scenario for what might have happened. According to his "reliable" source "high in law enforcement," the van Dams are "swingers," and not in the dancing sense. They engage in "lots of wife-swapping," and reportedly did so in their garage the night Danielle disappeared. According to rumors circulating like mad on local talk shows and Internet bulletin boards, the van Dams lock their garage from the inside during their swingers’ parties to make sure Danielle and her two brothers don’t stumble in on the festivities.

That would explain why the van Dams might have failed to notice an intruder breaking into their home and walking off with their child. It also provides a motive for neighbor David Westerfield, the only suspect thus far identified by San Diego police. According to the rumors—which are, it should be noted, only that—Westerfield was a frustrated, would-be swinger who wanted to attend the van Dams’ soirees, but was denied admission for lack of a partner.

There’s more to the Westerfield angle: He saw Mrs. van Dam at the bar earlier in the evening, where, he claims, they danced (which she denies). He also high-tailed it out of San Diego and into the desert the next morning, which was enough to make police suspicious. So far, they have searched his home, where they found child pornography, and seized two of his vehicles, but they haven’t sought his arrest.

It’s easy to speculate by connecting the dots: At the nightclub, Westerfield might have learned about the orgy planned later in the evening. Mindful that Danielle’s parents would be distracted, he could have used the opportunity to sneak into their home and take her, thereby satisfying his perverted sexual appetites and exacting revenge against the van Dams for not including him in theirs.

13 posted on 03/05/2002 2:45:50 PM PST by FresnoDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: FresnoDA
That is a very good article, and raises a lot of good points. Where do we draw the line for "sexual preferences?"

It used to be as described in the Bible: one man, one wife. I've seen Freepers who approve of the "swinger" lifestyle alleged to be practiced by the van Dams--and we've all read articles from radio stations and foreign news sources stating that the orgies in fact included homosexual activities. Do we draw the line there? Then how long before, as some here worry, little children will be included as "valid" sexual preferences?

I know some will say it's no one's business. But a little girl died last month because of someone's "sexual preferences." How much of a part was played by the parents' alleged lifestyle, we don't know, and might not know for some time. Maybe none at all. But it does beg the question: where do we, as a society, draw the line?

49 posted on 03/05/2002 4:03:13 PM PST by MizSterious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson