If you were around posting during the Ramsey, Runnion, VanDam, Smart, and Peterson case, you know i pinned them all, right down to a timeline for Westerfield. God that case sucked me in. Some vital hours of employment were lost then LOL.
Luckily for me the Anthony case has bored me to tears. Although one that should be carefully studied. I think the family magnetics is facinating. I just cannot stomach Cindy or George for that matter. I sorta like Misty. She's grown on me. Never liked the Ramsey's not for one minute. Dispised their attitude and distaste for LE. I couldn't understand people with their money wouldn't have done everything in their power to find out what happened to their daughter. IMO their guilt was apparent from the get go, right down to Patsy Ramsey wearing the same outfit the night before when police arrived. -ahhh but I am getting off topic. I learned from Lou Smit, who many of you here dispise that crime scenes are what they seem in most cases, unfortunately Lou factored in a stun gun theory that couldn't be proven, so for him, his crime scene has been obscured by the truth, that even so it wouldn't have proven there was an intruder, only that a stun gun could have been used in the crime. This case is much more simplier in the fact that there was NO elaborate cover-up, no bowls of fruit left out on the table, no duct tape, rope, ransom note, etc. This case speaks for itself. There was even less evidence in the van Dam case. No fingerprints of Westerfield's found in the home, no evidence of him being there at all. Yet Danielle's bed was empty the next morning. When an intruder enters a home to abduct or murder a child, they usually don't leave evidence, it's when things are added to a crime scene that the real murderer is trying to point to someone else. We don't have that in the Cummings case. Simplicity. Open door blocked, missing child.