- Joined
- Dec 28, 2021
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 13,577
I was reading the horrible story of the murder of 7 year old Danielle van dam in the US, by a neighbour who abducted her at night from her bedroom.
A witness stated that the side door was left open and "the prosecutor Jeff Dusek theorized that Westerfield might have entered this way; he emphasized, however, that the prosecution did not have the burden to demonstrate how the kidnapping was done, only that it was done."
And ETA that no forensics at all of the murderer were found in the house from where Danielle was abducted.
Moreover, in other cases of children murdered by a stranger, that stranger was most often than not a convicted pedophile or at least after they investigated them they found images of child abuse on their computers. So CB should have been looked at way more closely in the first days after MM's disappearance. It is not an excuse they they knocked on his door and he was not there!! They should have fully investigated all known pedophiles in the vicinity the days after MM was gone. Now 10-15 years after the crime there will be no forensics from the crime scene...be that CB's or whoever else's van, jaguar, home.
Mark Rowley 2017: That has been one key line of enquiry. The reality is in any urban area, you cast your net wide
and you find a whole range of offences and sex offenders who live nearby and those coincidences
need to be sifted out; what is a coincidence and what could be linked to the investigation we are
currently dealing with and just like we do in London we have been doing in Portugal so offences which
could be linked have to be looked at and either ruled in or ruled out and that’s the work we have been
doing.