MUDD MAD! Threates To Close Westerfield Trial To Media-Reports Of Mad-Dogging!!!

Yahoo News ^ | July 25, 2002 | Yahoo

[FresnoDA]

MUDD MAD!!!

Wed Jul 24, 8:33 PM ET

Judge William D. Mudd admonishes the media about attempts to photograph Neal Westerfield, son of defendant David Westerfield, as the son left the courtroom during a break in his testimony Wednesday afternoon, July 24, 2002, in San Diego. The judge had ordered the media not to film the teen. David Westerfield is accused of the kidnapping and murder of 7-year old Danielle van Dam from her home in February. (AP Photo/Pool, Dan Trevan)

[cyncooper]

That's why I won't read them.

I still have managed to avoid reading those things...

[juzcuz]

I thought about fingers gripping on the skin surface as well. However, if I remember right, the thumb placement (implication) in the photo is not normal to a gripping thumb, which would go out from the other fingers.. The arc on DW's forearm skin did not look to me like a gripping right/left hand or a gripping bite. I thought about being stuck in the sand the with motorhome, etc. I'm not familiar with mechanics and how such skin scars can happen from equipment, etc.. -So I wondered about that-

[Rheo]

It is very strange that on 1/27 they arrest a man who is part of a pedophile network...5 days later a little girl disappears and unidentified prints are found in the house..the family is allowed back in before the crime scene techs are finished...and are told they can clean??

Then another guy is arrested on 2/15 and they find her body 12 days later and don't run an unidentified hair found under her through any offender databases??...there were more people in the area involved in that sting..it was going on while this case was happening...13 known sex offenders in the immediate area and they don't do this?

What in the hell is wrong with that picture??

[FresnoDA]

I don't write um Maam, I am just a musician...(Typed While Wearing Blues Brothers Sunglasses!)

[spectre]

Thru out this whole case, the one thing we can be absolutely CERTAIN of, is these marks on DW's arm that were photographed, amounted to nothing to do with Danielle or they would have used it against him.

sw

[185JHP]

There are degrees of evil. People who don't even pretend to do what's expected of them, are telling you something about themselves. The vDs were beyond even the banality of "comfortably numb" - they went to a theme park!!! Welcome to a nightmare! I thought Patsy was a snarky mom - 'til I saw the antics of the Brenda!

[Freedom2specul8]

Not always...remember judge mudd didn't allow all evidence to be shown to the jury cuz it would have created prejudice against the defendant. Don't you think that's odd? Why not just use ALL of it?

[Freedom2specul8]

I liked the list from UCANSEE2.. some of it is fuunnnny...

[spectre]

I have seen my own husband come in from doing the yard work, after moving branches and taking the bags off of his riding lawn mower, with what could easily look like scratches, or bites. (I can vouch for him)..Anyway, digging out of the sand was frustrating and difficult.

For any skeptic out there, that this evidence was GOOD and not used in court, because it was too prejudicial to DW...I can only laugh at the suggestion.

sw

[Jaded]

First of all I think MOST civil suits are stupid and irresponsible. I think the change in the behavior of the "victim's family" has been quite odd. IMO, the parents of the VICTIM know much more than they are telling. Remember the affidavits were embellishments of lies that Brenda told.

So are we to be silenced? Are we not allowed to ask questions? Are we not allowed to think for ourselves? Should we only be spoon-fed media pap? If so, then what is Free Republic doing up and running? We are not behaving like normal sheeple.

Did you read the page I asked you to?

[afraidfortherepublic]

The law doesn't always make sense.

I think the actual quote is, "The law is an ass." I have forgotten who said that; perhaps someone can come up with th name.

[Lanza]

All evidence is "prejudical" against the defendant right? I would think the scratches were considered not to be evidence by the judge if he didn't allow it.

[Jaded]

that was the porn thing. feldi side-stepped and got smacked.

[spectre]

Yes, that would be only common sense. Can you just imagine having actual scratches and/or teeth marks and NOT using it as evidence? I can't. The case would have been a slam-dunk.

sw

[juzcuz]

Great graphics- I love it!
I wish I could do such things, I don't know how yet.. I'm still a child at this... My point is, if you look at your own graphic you see (the thumb) as off center not evenly placed in context to the other four fingers. The fingers shown in DW's LE pictures show a complete symetrical arc (practically evenly spaced) of scars on his arm, again that is different from you have shown me....

[demsux]

Those scratches looked like some kind of chain bit him

[pyx]

WHAT EVERYONE is missing is that these 2 guys were just the TIP OF THE ICEBERG. It says they arrested other people in SD but didn't give their names. Did they even GET THEM ALL, that were involved in this &@!*^#@ RING ??????

ANYONE of their 'CLUB' could have taken Danielle, tortured her, left her to die, say in an abandoned house, then took her out to DEHESA RD when convenient.

Think about it !

Yes, well that may be all well and good but, how can we work some sort of scenario into this where David Alan Westerfield or David Neil Westerfield is somehow involved. < /sarcasm>

[Lanza]

The case would have been a slam-dunk. Hey, here's a slam dunk for ya. How about the prosecution show the jury some evidence like um... fingerprints in the VD house on the door no one locked, Danielle's room, maybe a neighbor who saw DW carrying a screaming child away from the VD's house, and how about some dna from DW under Danielle's nails (you know those scratches even judge mudd considers not evidence). Oh, I forgot, they don't have any of that.

[dread78645]

"The law is an ass."

"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, "the law is an ass, a idiot." - Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist (ch. LI)

[John Jamieson]

Danielle was dumped right about the time the second perp was arrested 2/15. It could have been the day before or the day after. Either way, it could very well be that Danielle was captive to this creep and disposed of when the going got hot. These dates have to mean something.

I sure don't think that DW has been proven guilty BARD, but if the DNA in the RV is not innocent, then he was part of this ring and may have transported Danielle to others. The DA needs to stop and start over using all the available evidence and tie all these loose ends together. I want the killer(s) caught, not a show trial.