Child killer has proclaimed innocence in cards, visits

San Diego Union Tribune ^ | 1/3/03 | Alex Roth

[Freedom2specul8]

side note: they had the warrant necessary to take hair samples etc... so what would have happened if he had tried to leave before they took the samples.

Can they take their sweet time in taking the samples?

[Freedom2specul8]

Good evening..

I don't think that's flimsy at all. It sounds logical, really. They have to give and take on some issues.

[DoughtyOne]

Good night and good morning. It's still night here, snicker. Thanks for the additional comment. TAke care.

[Freedom2specul8]

Yeah, I'm about 2 and 1/2 hrs past my bedtime.. I should have waited until tomorrow to watch those videos. ~grin~


G'nite!!

[DoughtyOne]

Heh heh heh...

[EllaMinnow]

Except he did it before I posted ANY comments. At that point all I had posted was the SDUT article.

[EllaMinnow]

DW: ...but I understand that there are flaws in every system.

OTT: We all make mistakes.

long pause

DW: Everything in your lifetime [committed???] comes back to bite ya, you notice that?

OTT: Eventually.

DW: Isn't that amazing?

DW: People that you love, that you support, that you give your life to, if you make a mistake, that mistake becomes your mistake, for the rest of your life as an indicator of the person you are. You know? And it's just, it's hard to put it...

OTT: But you know what, there are ways to remedy that.

DW: OK, but if you're not an intelligent person...

OTT: I think you are intelligent.

DW: I'm only intelligent, I'm only intelligent in certain directions, ok? I'm not intelligent in all directions. And I tend to do what I want to do. And that's not a good thing at times. It makes me forceful, it makes me successful, it also makes me...

OTT: Weak?

DW: Weak in other ways.

DW: So, do you understand what I'm saying.

OTT: Yes I do.

DW: OK. Can you turn off the tape...

[cyncooper]

I have Fox News on and, when announcing what stories they would be discussing this hour, they said they'll play the Westerfield tapes (I would say a safe assumption would be excerpts).

[Ditter]

The Van Dam's *have* regrets & they feel guilt. Any parent who has ever lost a child for *any* reason, have regrets, even if that child was a grown person fighting a war on the other side of the world, the parents feel regretful. (Why did I let him join the army, for instance) If he is killed in a car accident, (why did I let him go out that night) If he dies of a disease (why didn't I find a better doctor, sooner). The fact that the Van Dams didn't show their regret on national TV doesn't mean that it wasn't there. It is one of the many powerful emotions involved with losing a child. **They will not escape it!** Does that make some of you out there feel better?

[Amore]

I think the Van Dam's are pretty reprehensible too. That doesn't make Westerfield any less guilty. Westerfield killed her & if the Van Dam's were ax murderers instead of immoral degererates, Westerfield would still be guilty of killing Danielle.

Yep, that's been my view for some time.

[Ditter]

You have been more closely involved in the Westerfield VD threads than I. Where did the idea come from, that if you thought Westerfield was guilty that you also thought the parents were blameless? That is simplistic thinking. One does not follow the other in my mind & I have been insulted by the insinuation that it does.

[Amore]

It's because Kim & Valpal were staunchly defending the VD's for weeks & weeks, and saying we didn't have any proof the swinging allegations were true. I thought that much rumor probably had to be true (hence, I was once on "the other side").

Funny thing, several here who took the swinging rumors as truth now vehemently refuse to believe the plea-bargain "rumor" has any basis in truth!

(and once I switched sides, several of my original FR friends on the DW threads decided I was the enemy too)

[cyncooper]

vehemently refuse to believe the plea-bargain "rumor" has any basis in truth!

Well, I hope the mantra that it was only a rumor that he failed a polygraph can finally be put to rest. I heard a portion of the tape last night and when the police were explaining to DW why they knew he had something to do with Danielle's disappearance, the polygraph was mentioned (as in, paraphrase, "your trip, the polygraph, ...").

[TheSpottedOwl]

I believe there may have been some question about police interview tactics. Perhaps an agreement was made not to challenge all evidence if certain parts were withheld. It may also be that certain evidence may have been embarassing to the parents and the police opted not to reveal it all in order to spare them, thinking they had plenty without it. This may be pretty flimsey, but sometimes things come up that preclude certain evidence from being aired in court.

After the Rampart scandal, I tend to disbelieve until I see a smoking gun. Take OJ Simpson, for instance. Until the infamous Bronco chase, I thought he was being railroaded. I personally would rather judge someone innocent until proven guilty, either by evidence, or the person's own actions after the fact.

All I can say is that my gut says there's something rotten in Denmark...This whole case stinks to high heaven. Oh, and the best lies always contain a grain of truth.

[TheSpottedOwl]

DW: ...but I understand that there are flaws in every system.

OTT: We all make mistakes.

long pause

DW: Everything in your lifetime [committed???] comes back to bite ya, you notice that?

OTT: Eventually.

DW: Isn't that amazing?

DW: People that you love, that you support, that you give your life to, if you make a mistake, that mistake becomes your mistake, for the rest of your life as an indicator of the person you are. You know? And it's just, it's hard to put it...

OTT: But you know what, there are ways to remedy that.

DW: OK, but if you're not an intelligent person...

OTT: I think you are intelligent.

DW: I'm only intelligent, I'm only intelligent in certain directions, ok? I'm not intelligent in all directions. And I tend to do what I want to do. And that's not a good thing at times. It makes me forceful, it makes me successful, it also makes me...

OTT: Weak?

DW: Weak in other ways.

DW: So, do you understand what I'm saying.

OTT: Yes I do.

DW: OK. Can you turn off the tape...


Wow. Wonder if he's talking about how he regrets hooking up with Brenda and company? Yes, every bad judgement call comes back and bites you on the ass. I'm open to the fact that he is actually guilty of murder, but I'm going to need more proof than that...

[DoughtyOne]

Well I do think it's important that we wait to condemn people until the evidence is in, not inuendo, not rumors, not some fifth generation story that may be embelished or completely fictitous.

I want to be fully supportive of police officers. I also want to be fully supportive of defendant's rights within reason.

Interrogating someone for 48 hours straight without representation present is very problematic for me. It goes way beyond individual rights, even though they are very important. A good officer knows you don't push the limits on constitutional rights because it's the best way to make sure a guilty person goes free. These guys ran the risk of blowing this case bigtime.

Thinking people see what these guys did and extrapolate the theory that this goes on all the time. Does it? Sadly I think it goes on more than most of us are willing to admit.

The police have a tough job. They have to extrapolate meaning. Those extrapolations may be accurate. They may be falacious. If they are falacious, and they get carried away, their actions may jeopardize the case.

When I was a kid I participated in one incident of vandalism. A bunch of similar vandalism had taken place, so the investigating officers were convinced that I was responsible for it all. That was a natural assumption. It was also a major screwup. It lead them to target me and let the actual perps get away with their acts.

I had picked an old lock. You could pick old locks with a screwdriver or a butter knife. These guys equated this with picking some modern locks. I tried to explain the difference and that I didn't know anything about the more modern locks. They were sure I was lying.

It is VERY dangerous to accept the theory that miniscule bits of evidence are proof positive of anything. A few pictures of girls 13 and above are not proof someone is a pedophile involving seven year olds, let alone a brutal murderer capable of mutilating or burning a young child's body.

At this point I believe that Westerfield is guilty. I also believe that group dynamics have created a situation where certain existant and non-existant evidence has been misinterpreted to buttress certain things that may be true, but were not in fact proven by the materials sited for that purpose by members of the public.

We all like to speculate. I think that's okay as long as we recognize the implications of what is proven and the reality of what isn't.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Your point about the vandalism is something that I've brought up to my kids, repeatedly. Screw up and you'll get hung for things you didn't do. It's true.

I also support law enforcement, lord knows they have a difficult job. However, you can take anything at all and turn it into something else. It is very difficult to defend yourself against some allegations. Why didn't he keep quiet until he got a lawyer? Maybe because he didn't take it seriously? 48 hours of interrogation is plain wrong.

I just have this nagging feeling that something is missing in this case. I happened to see David Westerfield on tv at his sentencing, and stared at him trying to find something in his demeanor that would indicate guilt. Nada. Some speculation on my part: is he protecting someone else? Who on earth would you give your life up for?

[DoughtyOne]

The only other person living in his house. His son. That thought has crossed my mind before.

Who in their right mind would subject themselves to 48 hours of interrogation without an attorney? Either it would be an egomaniacal killer (in this instance), or a person who was completely innocent.

Thanks for your comments.

[TheSpottedOwl]

We don't know a lot about his son. It seemed to me that DW was pretty forthcoming and cooperative with the police. A person capable of killing a child wouldn't have a qualms about keeping quiet and letting someone else take the blame for his/her crime.

[cyncooper]

We don't know a lot about his son.

We know he was ruled out as the perp. Air tight alibi, for starters.

It seemed to me that DW was pretty forthcoming and cooperative with the police.

He basically admits he did it on the tapes. He was forthcoming up to the point of revealing where she was.

A person capable of killing a child wouldn't have a qualms about keeping quiet and letting someone else take the blame for his/her crime.

One crime he was charged with was possession of child pornography. He sat silent in court as he attorney tried to leave the implication his son was the viewer and downloader of that material.