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.
I understand his theory. There is no evidence of it. If there was, you can be sure they would have presented it.
You are right. Sorry for spitting absolutes. It would make his case very hard to win.
This is a common mistake that everyone who reads my theory makes. Look slowly at what I am saying. He abducts her at 3am, he takes her in the SUV to his RV at 3:20 am, he then rapes and kills her there in the bedroom without ever starting the engine, he then takes her body from the Rv and puts her back in the SUV at about 4:20 am. He then drives to Dehesa to leave her off at about 5:05 am and finally he returns home with his SUV at about 5:50 (about 10 minutes before sunrise).
He then takes a short 1 hour nap, wakes and begins the day he explained to the police.
Please reread. See my post again above.
I know. And a good lawyer can make a difference on a jury. Just like a good salesman.
However, if you think the Prosecution is there to represent 'the people', then you are going by the concept, not the practice.
As I said before if a conspiracy then all bets are off. However, I would hope the atty is smart enough to bring it up. But if conspiracy how did anyone get the fingerprints ? That one really bugs me. Did someone take the rehydrated hand to the RV ?
Here is the way it works. Cops arrest you, with or without a warrant, valid warrant or not. Doesn't matter. You are screwed from the beginning. If you pay enough money, you can get your way, unless it is a high profile case. Then you hope your attorney can fight his way over some things and the jury decides in your favor. No matter what, you are broke and screwed for life.
That is the way it works. Just ask any one who has been through it on the side of either having been convicted, or tried but not convicted.
Really, I am curious. No one seems to have a logical explanation for how he did that.Apparently Dusek meant to tell us how that was accomplished but so far he has not done so. This is a big hang up for me concerning DW's guilt. Do you think this lack of evidence of DW entering the house will be a hang up for any of the jurors?
Unfortunately they are not educated enough in that area to see why that is a problem.
Fibers, but checking testimonay now
No excrement, urine in MV at terrified death release.
My children go to bed with empty bladders.
No blue paint to become accumulated under her nails.
It was my assumption she bit her nails and would not likely have anything under them. What is theory to explain blue paint ?
He had on a black leather jacket that night.
Thanks I didn't know that. Where is that point made ?
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.