Van Dam Case Witness Challenges Findings Of Defense 'Bug Expert': But...His Testimony Don't Add Up..

Union Tribune ^ | July 31, 2002 | Jeff Dillion

[small_l_libertarian]

If you mean the jacket liner, no, she did not mention it as far as I remember. It's the wrong color orange for Shen's orange fibers, anyway. I did look at the jacket photos on a different computer screen, and the jacket liner doesn't look orange at all on that one - it looks just medium brown.

[Jrabbit]

Just to clear something up. Tanya Dulaney testified on 7-9 in the mid-afternoon session during cross by Feldman. The fiber in the necklace was described by her as being dull orange. Others were described as bright orange. I don't know if it means anything or not. Feldman thought it was important, he asked her about it.

[small_l_libertarian]

I think we posted our "wrong color orange" comments at the same time. I don't think the two fibers in the comparison photo are the same, and I don't think either of those fibers came from DW's jacket.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Compare DVD and BVD's on-camera "grief" to the tears and emotion of Samantha Runnions mom.

Absolutely, yet some will tell us that we cannot judge another's demeanor when grieving.

HOGWASH !!!!! Damon van Dam was not grieving when questions were asked of him in order to help police find his daughter.

Brenda van Dam was not grieving when she wanted to know about book deals and while sitting in "make-up" before appearing on camera.

OHHHHHHHHHH.......don't get me started.

[the Deejay]

It'll only take one juror with a keen eye to notice this. (They will have that photo in the jury room.)

[VRWC_minion]

I'm not to sure on the colors on my screen because the gloves on the guy holding it looks bluish and I imagine they are white. It just seemed interesting to me that on the last go around the defense tested everything that looked orange and that the jacket never came up especially in that it was described as being orange.

[Jaded]

And run afoul of the folks selling the company line? You're joking right?. Jobs are hard to come by. It amazes me though this constant spin. How after Goff's disaster could it have been called a coup for Dusek? What trial are these people watching? Who writes their scripts?

If you listen to RR, some one will call in with a question about evidence or something, a completely mis-represented piece of testimony. He fawns all over them and tells them how wonderously smart they were, and why didn't Feldman catch that. Makes a big production about compiling a list of questions for River to research in court. Sheesh. What a shill.

[the Deejay]

"I don't think either of those fibers came from DW's jacket."

Neither do I. I don't think the lining of that jacket is close to being "similar", let alone the color.

[cyncooper]

I was just reading Shen's cross exam from Feldman and found this regarding the time the fiber came to be in her hair:

Q. WITH REGARDS TO THE FIBER THAT WAS -- YOU POINTED OUT TO THE JURY THAT MR. CLARKE HAD A WHILE BACK ON THAT WAS ON THE NECKLACE?

A. YES.

Q. THAT WAS WRAPPED AROUND THE NECKLACE, IS THAT RIGHT?

A. IT WAS ACTUALLY TANGLED IN THE HAIR AND THE HAIR WAS TANGLED ON THE NECKLACE.

Q. HOW LONG COULD THAT FIBER HAVE BEEN THERE?

A. WELL, I THINK THE FIBER CERTAINLY COULD HAVE BEEN THERE FOR AS LONG AS THE BODY WAS IN ITS RESTING LOCATION. THINK IT'S UNLIKELY THE FIBER WAS THERE FOR MUCH PRIOR TO THAT BECAUSE IT WAS TANGLED IN SUCH A LARGE WAD OF HAIR ON THE NECKLACE. SO I THINK THAT THE FIBER GOT ONTO THE HAIR ON THE NECKLACE AT SOME POINT CLOSE TO WHERE IT WAS WHERE THE BODY WAS PLACED WHERE IT WAS FOUND.

Q. ARE YOU GUESSING?

A. I THINK THAT IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION.

Q. IS ANOTHER REASONABLE INTERPRETATION THAT THAT FIBER HAD BEEN WRAPPED AROUND PREVIOUS TO THAT TIME, AND THAT DANIELLE HADN'T BEEN MOVING FOR A WHILE?

A. SHE HADN'T BEEN MOVED? THAT CERTAINLY IS POSSIBLE.

Q. IF SHE HAD BEEN KEPT IN A PARTICULAR LOCATION, SAY FOR TEN DAYS, IT COULD STAY THERE, COULDN'T IT?

MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. YOU NEED NOT ANSWER.

BY MR. FELDMAN: Q. ASSUME HYPOTHETICALLY THAT THE BODY WASN'T PLACED IN ITS ULTIMATE RESTING LOCATION UNTIL APPROXIMATELY FEBRUARY THE 16TH AND FEBRUARY THE 18TH.

A. OKAY.

Q. AND ASSUME THAT FOR A FEW DAYS OR SEVERAL DAYS BEFORE THAT THERE HADN'T BEEN MUCH IN THE WAY OF MOVEMENT OF THE BODY. COULD THE FIBER HAVE BEEN THERE?

MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. FELDMAN:

Q. HOW MANY DAYS PRIOR TO FEBRUARY THE 16TH, IF YOU HAVE AN OPINION, COULD THAT FIBER HAVE BEEN PLACED OR LOCATED WHERE ULTIMATELY YOU IDENTIFIED IT?

MR. CLARKE: SAME OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU MAY ANSWER THAT, IF YOU KNOW.

THE WITNESS: IF THE VICTIM WAS NOT MOVING OR PARTAKING IN ANY NORMAL ACTIVITIES AS FAR AS PERSONAL HYGIENE, THEN CERTAINLY THE FIBER COULD HAVE BEEN ATTACHED AND REMAINED ATTACHED THROUGH THAT TIME.

BY MR. FELDMAN: Q. AND IF ON YOUR HYPOTHESIS WITH REGARD TO YOUR ANSWER, ASSUMING ALL OF WHAT YOU'VE JUST ARTICULATED IS THE CASE, HOW LONG COULD THE FIBER HAVE BEEN --

MR. CLARKE: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Now, Feldman throws in his theory about Danielle arriving at Dehesa later in February. But note how she reaffirms and he seems to concede to her opinion that the fiber did in fact come to be in the hair at or very near the time of Danielle's death. (Note his "Danielle wasn't moving" question)

A further aside is he doesn't really challenge that the fibers match except for the standard "they could or could not have a common source" disclaimer.

[the Deejay]

That's why I call it "Rag Radio." The credibility in RR's program isn't worth listening to. If they stuck to facts & evidence, he wouldn't have a program. Too many people like to debate innuendo & speculation.

[cyncooper]

Again, prosecution trying to connect dots that aren't even there.

Better alert Feldman because he hasn't challenged the fact that the fibers are similar in every way whatsoever.

Only thing he's disputing is source--whether they all came from the same source and trying to throw out that the source didn't belong to DW.

[VRWC_minion]

IS what your saying is that if the "hair/fiber" ball was formed early than her abduction then its less likely she was killed on the 12th ?

[Bluebird Singing]

Holy cow, I think you're right - that explains the difference in the background color. Highly suspicious (I'm really thinking deceitful, leaning towards evil)!

[cyncooper]

We may not haev any idea what the orginal's look like. The examiner would have seen orginal's in microscope.

You are correct. There was a great deal of microscopic examination of the orange fibers. The photos available to us on the internet mean nothing.

[truth_seeker]

This is the fiber comparison photo I keep seeing. Those two fibers do not look the same to me. They don't look like the same color, width, texture, etc. I just don't even know what to think about this photo.

Correct me if I am wrong. Doesn't the defense have access to these types of evidence? Is part of the defense's job to check and verify evidence?

Unless I'm hearing this all wrong, I seem to get an implication that the evidence is false, or mis-interpreted. Then, the defense misses the falsification, and/or the mis-interpretation?

Then, the good folks on FR find it? Too bad the good folks at FR didn't get the information to Feldman, in time for him to bring it up on cross-examination.

Or maybe the defense did their job, checked the evidence, found no falsification or mis-interpretation, so didn't bring it up on cross-examination. (Meaning good folks at FR are wrong about this)

In any event, it is probably too late, to re-introduce the topic in sur-rebuttal.

[Jaded]

I don't believe Defense automatically gets any of the evidence. They do get copies of reports that come back to Prosecution. If they get samples they have to pay for independent testing, which in many cases is a great deal more expensive that what the state pays for the same test.

[connectthedots]

Again, prosecution trying to connect dots that aren't even there.

At least the prosecution isn't trying connectthedots.

[HoneyBoo]

Uggh. I couldn't agree more. However, I didn't sense this bias until about the end of June. Until then, RR was pretty even-handed. But then, over the course of one weekend everything seemed to change and it's been nothing but DW is guilty all the time. Did you notice that? It was as if they had gotten new marching orders.

[Krodg]

That is scary!!!

[It's me]

Keep those Golden Comments coming! I love them!