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.
sw
Watch it, JJ..you are sounding as "kinky" as the last bug expert. I know, it tends to rub off :~)
sw
sw
No, Mrs. Blowfly, it's too cold out there I'm gonna stay snuggled in my warm bush call me when it's spring and warm enough to forage.
I tend to believe that had the numerous dogs that was used in this case proved Westerfield to have been in the vD house then that evidence would have been extolled from roof tops. Now, since the doggies didn't hit anywhere,that just means you can't rely on mans best friend to know crap.
Selective evidence?
Now, if a cadaver dog can't be trusted to do his job under the easy conditions, what good are they are all? Did we get some other "expert" to give a percentage of hits and misses on this particular dog? Good dog or Bad dog?
Nope, got to prove the doggie had a nasal cold to me, first. You'd think DUSEK would have thought of that..:~) He's probably kicking himself!
sw
UCANSEE2, I have a question...where did the Damon paintball scenario come from?
Thanks
Is that a way of over looking the fact DW was not scented in the vD house? We can't have that glaring fact presented as fact now, can we?
Q: WE SAW YESTERDAY I THINK TWO DIGITAL MOVIES, BUT I COULD BE MISREMEMBERING. WHAT WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DIGITAL MOVIES THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO REMOVE FROM ALL OF THE COMPUTERS, IF YOU RECALL?A: OTAL NUMBER OF THE MOVIES WERE APPROXIMATELY TWENTY. I THINK ABOUT TWENTY-SIX HUNDRED DIGITAL MOVIES.Q: AND OF THOSE, HOW MANY WERE QUESTIONABLE?A: QUESTIONABLE, IF I MAY REFER TO MY REPORT AGAIN, THE FIRST PAGE.Q: FIRST PAGE OF THE 4/18 REPORT?A: YES, SIR. THIRTY-NINE.
Q: YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE C.D.'S I THINK UPON WHICH RESIDED SOME OF THESE FILES. A: YES, SIR
A: THE DIRECTORY OF THE C.D. AND ALSO THE HEADER OF ONE FILE THAT HAS THE DATE EMBEDDED.Q: I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS THE DATE?A: I BELIEVE OF THAT ONE WAS 11/27/2001.
(1)I said that the new neighbor was more reliable than the pizza partiers. The new neighbor stuck to his story. The pizza partiers kept changing theirs. Which people are you referring to that took the stand for their friendly neigbhor of 5 yrs?
Most of the volunteer searchers and most of the police investigators.
There isn't one that I can discern, either---just proximity, I guess. Or outright planting? But how to explain the acrylic fibers are long and the orange an unusual shade? I would think if police dept. apparel was shedding frequently a fiber analyst would often come across such fibers.
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.