Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evidence On Insects Likely To Continue: (Westerfield Trial "Creeps" Along At An Ant's Pace!)
Union Trib ^ | June 29, 2002 | Alex Roth

Posted on 07/28/2002 8:56:21 PM PDT by FresnoDA

Evidence on insects likely to continue

Trial winding down; closing statements may be this week

By Alex Roth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

July 28, 2002

Expect to hear more evidence about insects as the David Westerfield trial enters what could be the final week of testimony before jury deliberations.

On Tuesday, prosecutors are scheduled to call Dr. M. Lee Goff of the University of Hawaii as their final rebuttal witness in a trial that has lasted 23 court days. Goff is a forensic entomologist and the author of "A Fly for the Prosecution: How Insect Evidence Helps Solve Crimes."

Whether Goff will be the final insect expert in the case – jurors have already heard from three witnesses with expert opinions about the behavior of insects on human remains – is unclear. Westerfield's lawyers have said they will take at least a day to present evidence to rebut the prosecution's rebuttal.

The trial will not be in session tomorrow because the lawyers and judge are scheduled to hash out the legal instructions that will be read to the jury after the close of testimony. The instructions guide jurors on the law to be applied in the case.

Given the time estimates of the lawyers, it seems likely that closing statements won't come until Thursday, or the following Monday at the earliest. So far there haven't been any Friday sessions in which the jury was present to hear testimony. The judge said the jury will deliberate Mondays through Fridays.

As the case winds down, the battle of the insect experts has emerged as perhaps the final arena in the murder trial. Westerfield's lawyers say the insects found on 7-year-old Danielle van Dam's body prove that it couldn't have been dumped until after Westerfield was under 24-hour police surveillance.

Danielle was reported missing from her home Feb. 2, and her body was found by volunteer searchers Feb. 27 in a remote area off Dehesa Road near the Singing Hills Golf Course in El Cajon.

The defense called two entomologists who testified about blowflies on the girl's body. Westerfield's lawyers say the experts' testimony proves that the remains couldn't have been dumped until mid-February. Westerfield was under constant police surveillance beginning Feb. 5.Photo

The prosecution countered with a forensic anthropologist who said the body's extreme mummification might help explain why blowflies weren't able to access the remains immediately.

Westerfield, a self-employed design engineer who lived two doors from the van Dams in Sabre Springs, is accused of kidnapping and killing Danielle. He is also accused of possession of child pornography, which the prosecution claims shows that he had a sexual interest in girls.

Prosecutors said the pornography – some of it depicting violent sexual attacks against young girls – was found on Westerfield's computers and on computer disks stored on his office bookshelf.

In a trial of numerous shifts in momentum, legal experts say prosecutors scored a significant blow last week by calling Westerfield's son as a witness. Neal Westerfield, now 19, testified that the computer child pornography in the house was his father's, not his.

Earlier in the trial, the defense presented a computer expert who testified that Neal Westerfield might have been the person who downloaded some of the pornography.

"This is a young man who clearly cares about his dad and has a good relationship with him, so he has no reason to say anything bad," said Peter Liss, a Vista criminal defense lawyer. "He was just truthful."

In this respect, the defense's strategy of trying to blame the son for the child pornography in the house appears to have backfired. Criminal defense lawyer Robert Grimes said the jury is likely to view Neal Westerfield as "basically a nice young college kid" who testified honestly.

Westerfield's lawyers chose not to cross-examine his son. They will indicate this week whether they will call any witnesses to try to refute his testimony.


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: danielle; daniellevandam; kidnappig; kidnapping; molestation; pedophile; vandam; westerfield
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 741-758 next last
To: cyncooper
I beg your pardon, cyn. They wanted to start with Goff last week and his schedule conflict delayed it until tomorrow.

Nice try though. You ought to sign up for the prosecution team to help them mislead as much as possible.

101 posted on 07/29/2002 10:26:38 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Mrs.Liberty
My thoughts are with you. I'm working too, but at home.

Look at it this way. Our evenings have been beautiful and you can enjoy that later. :)

102 posted on 07/29/2002 10:28:15 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: shezza
two to three weeks!!!

Two or THREE weeks? Where are you getting "three" weeks?

103 posted on 07/29/2002 10:29:17 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
believe the prosecution theory is bug activity delayed until animal activity took place, opening the body up and making it attractive to insects at that time

The body was already "opened up"...Haskell made a very valid point, that the human body's natural orifices ARE A PRIME area of entry for insects, mummified or not.

104 posted on 07/29/2002 10:30:13 AM PDT by demsux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
...to help them mislead as much as possible.

I'll leave that to the defense.

105 posted on 07/29/2002 10:30:40 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: demsux
You are referring to a statement of mine. Remember the natural orifices of the head were not entered by large amounts of insects.
106 posted on 07/29/2002 10:32:19 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
YOu're right. Mea culpa. I meant to say 2 weeks to 18 days. Sorry to cause you confusion.
107 posted on 07/29/2002 10:34:10 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Sorry, I didn't see who connect was quoting...will refrain from this type of behavior
108 posted on 07/29/2002 10:34:11 AM PDT by demsux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: shezza
Sorry to cause you confusion.

No confusion on my part. Feb 2 plus 14 days = Feb 16 which was Faulkner's date, correct? You are the one who stated "three weeks" which is a 21 day period.

109 posted on 07/29/2002 10:35:42 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I see you couldn't defend your claim of only a one day delay, so you jump to a pointless remark.

It's sort of like the pictures of the marks on Westerfield's forearm. Could you remind me again of what the prosecution proved with those "ominous" pictures? I seem to have missed it.

Yessiree.....you would do well with Mr. Dusek.

110 posted on 07/29/2002 10:36:52 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: demsux
...will refrain from this type of behavior.

Please quote away. I just didn't want connectthedots to think you thought he said it. No prob.

111 posted on 07/29/2002 10:36:55 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I said no such thing. Disagree all you want. And I reserve every right to disagree with you, which I do most of the time. :o)

Hugzzz & Kizzezzz!

(Just kidding!)

112 posted on 07/29/2002 10:38:29 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
They wanted Goff there thurs, but he couldn't get their till mon. (friday didn't count) am trying to figure out..how many court days are involved in your discussion with south.
113 posted on 07/29/2002 10:40:20 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
It's sort of like the pictures of the marks on Westerfield's forearm. Could you remind me again of what the prosecution proved with those "ominous" pictures? I seem to have missed it.

I don't believe the pictures of the marks on DW's arms were brought into trial. Just the PH, iirc. I don't believe they entered them due to lack of forensic evidence. I've not commented on them.

As to my "pointless" remark. You think Dusek is misleading, I think Feldman is. And never the twain shall meet.

114 posted on 07/29/2002 10:40:21 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
their = there
115 posted on 07/29/2002 10:41:11 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Too busy to "play" in fres's sandbox today... Hope to see ya onight.
116 posted on 07/29/2002 10:41:55 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
tonight.
117 posted on 07/29/2002 10:42:11 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
No confusion on my part. Feb 2 plus 14 days = Feb 16 which was Faulkner's date, correct? You are the one who stated "three weeks" which is a 21 day period.

Oooooh, semantics, is it? Okay, try this equation. Haskell said she could have been put there as late as Feb. 21. She disappeared the evening of Feb. 1. How many days is it from Feb. 1 to Feb. 21? I get 20, which is almost 3 weeks. So I should have said, according to your literal interpretation, "two weeks to 20 days," not "two to three weeks," right?

118 posted on 07/29/2002 10:43:59 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
They wanted Goff there thurs, but he couldn't get their till mon. (friday didn't count)

I don't think Goff could get there today, not until tomorrow. Thursday was a full day with Rodriguez anyway, who was foundation for Goff. So my reckoning is Goff delayed one day--Monday to Tuesday.

No big deal, Feldman may or may not get his surrebuttal witness.

119 posted on 07/29/2002 10:44:42 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Just the PH, iirc.

Yep........The PH is a great place to mislead and legally plant ideas that can taint potential jurors.

It is still misleading and very wrong when a man's life is in the balance.

120 posted on 07/29/2002 10:44:51 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 741-758 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson