[cyncooper]

why is it OK to demand that the police check out all of the people who have had any access at all to the Smart household (i.e.,handymen, real estate folks, milkmen, you name it), but it's NOT OK to tell the VanDam jury about all the strangers of shockingly questionable credentials that this nutty couple trolled for at sleazy bars in the middle of the night & invited into their home for group sex? What's the difference

Because if someone is ever arrested in the Smart case and that person goes to a trial by jury, the evidence against the defendent will be presented and not the whole investigation of who they looked at and disgarded as suspects.

[juzcuz]

I agree--

Questionable strangers should have been checked. Anyone who had access to the home. While the primary witness has long been cremated, It's not too late for the defense to compare those found fibers. Comparisons should be made to clothing worn by the pizza eaters -(if their outfits still exists).

[UCANSEE2]

Because if someone is ever arrested in the Smart case and that person goes to a trial by jury, the evidence against the defendent will be presented and not the whole investigation of who they looked at and disgarded as suspects.

Thank you Cyncooper. You have just stated what we all have been saying all along.

IF the police in the Danielle case had done what the police in the Smart case are doing, we wouldn't be having these type of threads.

The Danielle case, the police found a perp, then investigated evidence to support that.

In the Smart case, they are investigating evidence and will use the pertinent evidence only to support their case against the person that evidence points to. They will then arrest that person, based on an overall objective investigation.

SO, once again, Thank you.

[leilani]

"Because if someone is ever arrested in the Smart case and that person goes to a trial by jury, the evidence against the defendent will be presented and not the whole investigation of who they looked at and disgarded as suspects.

Are you saying that defense attorneys should only have the right to point out what police departments/prosecutors have already chosen to present to a jury? That's friggin' scary, sorry. And tell your story to Richard Jewell & the poor junkie MSNBC all but electrocuted for the Smart crime, while you're at it.