Expect to hear more evidence about insects as the David Westerfield trial enters what could be the final week of testimony before jury deliberations. Posted on 07/28/2002 8:56:21 PM PDT by FresnoDA
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.
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.
In my years here I have found that a common characteristic of many of those who do bear grudges is that eventually they get banned or leave with malice and become Anti-Freepers -- a persistent community, and a persistently whining one.
Long-term Freepers don't bear grudges (or at least don't show the ones they do bear very often).
I remember watching her give that testimony and she paused as if counting in her head before she gave her final answer. So, it didn't sound like a number she just pulled out of a hat. I would love to know those additional meetings too and would love to know why it was not pursued.
I mean no disrespect to your wife, however, you are saying that in 'your' home, no one can assume that the clothes on the bedroom floor were worn. So, should I therefore assume that your wife throws all the clean laundry on the floor?
I wonder what those 17+ hours were like for that poor little girl?
I have mentioned before that you seem to ask questions.
I ask questions myself when I get on a thread. But I bother to read the threads, catch up, learn about the subject.
As to is it easier for someone to spend hours arguing with you, and providing you with the information so you can continue the discussion, rather than ask you to go study up first, well, guess what ?
The links are there. Others have spent the time to read them. Why do you not want to?
You say you read DW's version of events and that is what you have determined the case/scenario on.
I think you should not be bothered then when people who have evaluated MUCH MUCH more , have difficulties discussing things with those that know very little about the case, but want everyone else to accept their opinion as fact.
Are my opinions only valid if they encompass everything on ever written ?
Your opinions are just that. Usually the more information they are based on, the more valid they are. The more others acknowledge and respect them.
That is a fact of life.
Now you want to criticize me or others for saying you are IGNORANT. Sorry, you are.
I am ignorant. I do not know ALL in this case. But, I have spent the time to learn much,much more than you have.
Now, sometimes the best way to help someone is to treat them the way they treat other people. Then maybe they see what they are doing.
Here goes:
Is there something I posted about the scenario that is wrong ?
What Scenario. Could you explain in detail? I don't have time to read it, explain it to me.
I believe I read somewhere that Pfingst's district had a very high rate of convictions/arrests, compared to others.
So, it would seem to be a profile, Arrest someone, find the evidence or make it up, and make sure you convict em, no matter what.
The IRONY is that by concentrating on this, they seem to have the highest CHILD ABDUCTION rate going on , especially lately. Maybe because they keep arresting/convicting the wrong people?
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.