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.
Thank you! I have been reading the transcripts but never noticed the link at the top for the witness lists (DUH!). You have made my life much easier.
I agree JJ!
Never, in the history of trial testimony, is fiber evidence testified to as a "match" by the witness. Lawyers can and will use the term, though.
Wait and see what Dusek says in closing. He used the term "match" in his opening, I believe.
This is from Feldman's questioning of BVD at the PH...this is the THIRD time that Feldman tries to "refresh" BVD's memory on the subject of inviting Bill Libby to Dad's "because his wife is out of town".
It appears that Feldman is using Bill Libby's police interview to impeach BVD.
Something happening there...maybe BVD figures that DVD prefers Barb, so she needs to find a "date" for the night.
Maybe Barb has to find the date for BVD, so that Barb can have DVD...
I have lots of questions about Bill Libby...he and damon planning to go snowboarding at Libby's cabin, BVD inviting Libby to Dad's "because his wife is out of town", Libby heading up the donation campaign, LIBBY NOT BEING CALLED BY THE PROSECUTION (to tell us about the cancelled trip, the phone call, etc.)
11 A. YES, I DID.
12 Q. FROM WHAT LOCATION?
13 A. I FOUND AN ORANGE FIBER IN THE FRONT PASSENGER14 SEAT. I FOUND SEVERAL FIBERS ON THE REAR SEAT, AND I FOUND15 ORANGE FIBERS ON THE REAR PASSENGER ARMREST.
6 A. I FOUND THAT THE FIBERS REMOVED FROM THE BLUE TOWEL7 TAKEN OUT OF THE S. U. V. WERE SIMILAR IN ALL THE WAYS THAT I8 TESTED TO THE FIBERS TAKEN FROM THE PILLOWCASE ON THE9 DEFENDANT'S BEDDING AND TO THE FIBER TAKEN FROM THE NECKLACE10 FROM AROUND THE VICTIM'S NECK.
But Danielle has same fibers on her body ? What a coincidence.
Did she take a bath that night anyone ?
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.