TALE OF TWO LAWERS (Feldmand vs. Dusek) DEFEATED and DECIETFUL.(VD's SKATE FREE TO SWING AGAIN)

Yahoo ^ | August 22, 2002 | Yahoo

[FresnoDA]

TALE OF TWO LAWYERS......

DEFEATED and DECIETFUL

[bvw]

Nancy Grace twaddle! When G-d gave out brains, you musta thought he said trains because, dit-dit-dither, you only gots one track to run on. Now go stand in the corner for fifteen minutes for wasting everyone's good time with regurgitated calumnity. Face the corner, please!

[bvw]

As I remember the jury saw the holes -- not the cutout, but the hole -- in the jacket and the polaroid of the cutout. The cutout was destroyed or lost during forensic testing.

[TheSpottedOwl]

*Now, he's going to go join all the other "innocent" men in jail*

A statement like that is almost funny. Yes Luis, sad but true. Lets hope, unlike some men who spend 20 years behind bars until their innocence is finally proved, DW will have his proven quickly.

[Ditter]

I usually ignore people who insult me & call me names but in this case I'm making an exception. I have not gotten ANY information or ideas from Nancy Grace (she is the blonde clinton loving bit*h, I hate her) . In fact I didn't know who she was until last week. I have gotten all my information from FR, (transcripts mostly). How you people could look at DW & see a nice sweet innocent guy that you would like to cuddle with, is more than I can understand. There is something missing in your street smart department.

[bvw]

Westerfield was NOT a lonely man without friends, nor a violent man in any way. Those are vicious and vile misinterpretations on your part. You see what you *WANT* to see.

[Freedom2specul8]

I figured I'd better go back to testimony...tis easier. I don't think Soriano's testimony was very clear. He said he preserves samples in a variety of ways. That is where I was coming from. Do you interpret it differently? Maybe the actual testimony isn't as clear as I thought.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/020624_am1.html

snip

Q THAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE THE NEXT THING I ASK YOU. WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT IS OF INTEREST TO YOU, A POSSIBLE BLOODSTAIN, A HAIR, A FIBER, AND SO ON, WHAT STEPS DO YOU TAKE TO PRESERVE THAT, JUST TALKING IN GENERAL NOW?A OF COURSE THE DOCUMENTATION, AND THEN AFTER DOCUMENTING, THEY ARE, IF NEEDED, WILL BE PLACED IN APPROPRIATE PAPER BINDLE AND THEN LABELED APPROPRIATELY. AND DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE CASE, SOMETIMES THEY'RE NORMALLY PACKAGED WITH THE ITEM OF EVIDENCE

snip

Q YOU SAID NORMALLY THEY ARE PACKAGED WITH THE ITEM OF EVIDENCE. ARE THERE OTHER MEANS TO PRESERVE THEM AS WELL?A OH, YES. YES. IF THE STAIN OR THE SUSPECTED ITEM IS -- REQUIRES FURTHER TESTING, AFTER IT'S BEEN APPROPRIATELY LABELED AND PACKAGED, THEY ARE THEN PLACED INTO A FREEZER PACKET WHICH IS THEN SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED TO THE PROPERTY ROOM FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS.

snip
Q WITH RESPECT TO THE CUTTINGS OF THE POSITIVE PRESUMPTIVE BLOODSTAIN AREAS, CAN YOU TELL US WHERE THEY WERE LOCATED AND WHAT NUMBER THEY WERE ASSIGNED.A SURE.THE FIRST STAIN THAT I TESTED WHICH WAS LABELED 94D-1, THAT WAS LOCATED ON THE FRONT RIGHT OUTSIDE MIDDLE LAPEL AREA OF THE JACKET.THE NEXT STAIN LABELED AS 94D-2, WHICH WAS LOCATED ON THE FRONT RIGHT OUTSIDE AREA OF THE JACKET NEAR THE SHOULDER.AND THEN THE THIRD STAIN, 94D-3, A STAIN THAT WAS LOCATED ON THE BACK OF THE LEFT COLLAR OF THE JACKET.

snip

Q IN ADDITION TO THE CUTOUTS THAT YOU THEN PRESERVED FOR LATER TESTING?A YES. WHENEVER WE EXAMINE ITEMS OF EVIDENCE, IF POSSIBLE, WE TRY TO LEAVE OUR IDENTIFYING INITIALS ON THERE, WHICH IS ON ONE OF THE BRAND NAME TAGS OF THE JACKET.

snip

A YES. FOR ALL THE PHOTOGRAPHS. FOR ALL PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF THESE STAINS, THEY WERE TAKEN AFTER THE TESTING.Q ALL RIGHT.BUT BEFORE OR AFTER THE MATERIAL WAS CUT, IF YOU RECALL?A TO TEST THE STAIN I DID A -- I CUT A SMALL PORTION OF IT. SO I DID CUT INTO THE STAIN PRIOR TO TAKING ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF IT.

Q SO ALL OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE POST CUT. I'M SORRY. WHEN I SAY ALL, I BETTER BE MORE SPECIFIC.120-E, 120-D, 120-C ARE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN POST CUT.A THEY WERE TAKEN AFTER THE TESTING WAS DONE, WHICH WAS A CUTTING OF IT. THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN, AND THEN THE STAINS WERE CUT OUT FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING.
snip




http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/020624_am2.html

[Ditter]

Did his ex-girlfriends say DW drank too much & became violent? Didn't all his female companions leave him because of this?

I have a friend who married a nice kind considerate man who, after marriage got drunk & tried to beat her to death. Doesn't this bother you? Do you still want to cuddle DW, or was that someone else?

[Freedom2specul8]

WRT: your #1721 Oh please..

Is that always gonna be the standard reply when ya can't deny?

[Freedom2specul8]

Just to clarify..The xgirlfriend said he was forceful once....and that he became withdrawn, depressed, unhappy and quiet when he drank.

[Freedom2specul8]

Oh yeah, she left him because of his drinking problem.

[Freedom2specul8]

I left off my smiley face. :) Ooopss...

He was a horndog bvw..his own MAMA said so..gotta be true. :)

[bvw]

No. No. No. (And so what? That's neither here nor there.) No, I cuddle with my wife.

[bvw]

There isn't a man alive who isn't a horn dog, and those as says otherwise are worst of 'em.

[agarrett]

I could not have voted guilty, had I been on the jury

  I could have, which is somewhat disturbing, since I doubt that he did it. But just try putting yourself in the jury's shoes.

  First off, they didn't get to see all the extra information we got - all the stuff that was excluded from the trial, as well as plenty of additional discussion and sources. To take a single example, we poured over the mummification evidence presented by the anthropologist, and pulled in dozens of other articles as well. If I'd only had the court expert's testimony to go on, I'd probably be confused over the issue. It took a fair amount of additional work - mostly provided by other people on the list - before I thought I understood the process there. The jury did not have access to that.

  Second, they did have access to the media. While I suspect they tried to keep to their oath, and not research the case on their own, I am certain they did see some news about the case in passing. The vast majority of news sources were very convinced of Westerfield's guilt, and I have to think the jury realized this. If I thought every one else believed Westerfield was guilty, I'd begin questionning my own doubts, and wonder if there was something obvious I was missing. This is, I'd say, backed up by the fact that the jury twice requested they be sequestered. They probably recognized the same thing in themselves - which, I grant, speaks highly of them, and actually mitigates the whole point to some extent.

  The final thing, and the one that would likely sway me, is the sheer amount of pressure. The jurors were known, and especially after the Samantha Runnion case, they had to know just how much they would suffer if they'd found Westerfield not guilty. There was little doubt but that they personally would feel repercussions, and possibly even vengeance. Yes, some people will stand for what they believe even against that. But, if you're divided - not sure one way or the other - the consequences to you can certainly push you towards conviction.

  Knowing what I do, I think Westerfield was not guilty. But, putting myself in the jury's shoes, I really don't know which way I'd have voted. It's not a pleasant thought.

Drew Garrett

[agarrett]

Would you care to point out the places where I called "everyone" names?

The majority of the pedodefenders that populate these van Dam threads wouldn't have been convinced of guilt, even if they would have been present at the time of the murder.

  Was "pedodefenders" not supposed to be an insulting name? Or did you not intend to apply it to "everyone"?

[agarrett]

The jury saw the actual cutots of the spots on the jacket. I'm pretty sure they were in a baggie... ?? Or do you know different.

  I was under the impression the cutouts were destroyed in testing. I'll look and see if I can find a reference - hope others will do the same. If the actual evidence was still around, than the photos become much less important.

Drew Garrett

[Freedom2specul8]

Would your mama call you a horndog? I think you have a different definition for horndog than some of us do.

HORNDOG: A female companion seeking male who has little impulse control and is prone to alcoholism. Alcoholism is not a requirement to be a horndog. Horndogs tend to be non-trustworthy and often cheat on their spouses. Alcohol could easily be the other woman.

[Freedom2specul8]

Thanks for looking Drew. According to that particular transcript...even though they were cut for testing, they were still in tact for the photos. The photos were taken after testing...

[Freedom2specul8]

new thread outside of smokey room.

[bvw]

My mama would be more polite. She would say "Boys will be boys."

Westerfield's mother was careless in her remark on that, and surely as careless in what she meant by it. I can't seem to sway you from this dead-end "presumption of guilt" mind-set you have persisted with in this case. It is -- like playing the victim, victimology, most difficult to throw off once established and thus by that difficult and divinely aided act of throwing it off to walk and see as a free man or woman.