Prosecution witness challenges findings of defense 'bug expert'
Posted on 07/30/2002 3:58:51 PM PDT by FresnoDA
Prosecution witness challenges findings of defense 'bug expert'
|
|
|
July 30, 2002
M. Lee Goff, an entomologist and chairman of the Forensic Sciences Department of Chaminade University in Honolulu, said his review of the crime scene photos, morgue photos, weather reports and other evidence suggest that Danielle's body was exposed to insects as early as Feb. 1 and no later than Feb. 14.
"We're working on an estimate. We're not running a stopwatch here," Goff said. The defense has contended that there was no way Westerfield could have placed the victim's body where it was found in the East County community of Dehesa, because he was under close surveillance by police beginning Feb. 5. Goff was called to the stand to rebut testimony from two forensic entomologists called by the defense who testified that Danielle's body could not have been exposed to insects any earlier than mid-February, nearly two weeks after Westerfield came under police surveillance. Westerfield could face the death penalty if convicted of the kidnap and murder of Danielle. He also has been charged with possession of child pornography. Danielle was reported missing from her family's Sabre Springs home on Feb. 2. Her body was found in a wooded area near El Cajon on Feb. 27 after a massive search drew national attention. Westerfield, who lived two doors down from the van Dams, became an early suspect in her disappearance.
Insect evidenceWhen Danielle's naked body was found, investigators took extensive photos of it and its surroundings, then put bags over her head, feet and hands and wrapped the body in a sheet to preserve any evidence.Law enforcement officials called in forensic entomologist David Faulker to study the signs of insect infestation on the body to try to gauge when Danielle had died. But lead defense attorney Steven Feldman argued in his opening statement that scientific evidence would prove his client could not have killed Danielle. As it turned out, the prosecution never called Faulker to the stand and he was called by Feldman as a defense witness. Early in the trial, San Diego County Medical Examiner Brian Blackbourne testified that the girl could have been dead from 10 days to six weeks when her body was found. Faulkner testified July 10 that his analysis of the life cycles of the insects found on Danielle's body showed it wasn't available to insects until sometime between Feb. 16 and 18. On July 22, a second defense expert, Dr. Neal Haskell, testified that Danielle's body couldn't have been exposed to flies any earlier than Feb. 12.
Insect rebuttalProsecutors began rebutting the defense insect evidence on Thursday by calling Dr. William C. Rodriguez III, a forensic anthropologist for the Department of Defense, who testified that Danielle's body was in "an advanced state of mummification" that would have delayed insect infestation.On Tuesday, Goff reiterated testimony about insect lifecycles presented by the previous experts: You can calculate how long a body has been exposed to the elements by gauging the age of the maggots – fly larvae – growing on the body. Flies are quickly drawn to dead bodies and will lay batches of eggs on them. The development of the eggs into different stages of larvae and adult flies is then affected by temperature, humidity and other environmental factors. Using charts of known development rates, a forensic entomologist can look at the age of maggots found on a body and, factoring in the weather, can calculate when the eggs they hatched from had been laid. Generally, the warmer the weather, the faster the insects develop. Goff, author of "A Fly for the Prosecution: How Insects Help Solve Crimes," said he calculated the "post-mortem interval" date from the maggots on Danielle's body using temperature records and charts from a 2000 fly study. He said Faulkner appeared to have made his calculations using a chart of insect development from a study that used 80-degree temperatures, far higher than the rates in the San Diego mountains in February. Haskell appeared to have calculated his dates assuming that the activity of the "maggot mass" on the body would have raised the temperature of the mass, speeding up their development. In both cases, Goff said, the other entomologists estimated that the maggots would have developed much faster than he did, giving a much later date for the exposure of Danielle's body to the elements. Goff was scheduled to resume testifying – and to face cross-examination by the defense – after a lunch break.
Fiber evidence
A series of shirts and other orange-colored items brought to the San Diego Police Department crime lab were made from either nylon, cotton or a polyester-cotton blend, criminalist Tanya DuLaney testified. "Did the fabric of any of these items consist of acrylic in any manner?" assistant prosecutor Woody Clarke asked. "No," DuLaney replied. Prosecutors called DuLaney back to the stand in response to defense suggestions that investigators could have inadvertently cross-contaminated the two crime scenes with the orange acrylic fibers, which became a key piece of prosecutor evidence linking Westerfield with Danielle's body. On June 25, police criminalist Jennifer Shen testified that an orange acrylic fiber tangled in Danielle's plastic necklace at the time her body was found was similar to orange acrylic fibers found in laundry inside Westerfield's home and on bedding in his bedroom. On July 24, lead defense attorney Steven Feldman introduced into evidence several still images from television that showed police investigators wearing orange or orangish shirts as they entered and left Westerfield's house on Feb. 4 or 5. In response, the district attorney's office identified all of the police and search-and-rescue personnel shown in the photos, collected anything orange-colored they were wearing at the time and gave the clothing to the crime lab. That evidence consister of two orange long-sleeved shirts, an orange short-sleeved shirt, four reddish polo shirts, an orange rope, an orange strap, a black-and-red backpack, an orange hat and an orange dog vest, DuLaney said. Under microscopic and infrared examination, none of the fibers taken from those items contained any acrylic material, DuLaney said.
Trial's end in sightAt the start of today's session, Superior Court Judge William Mudd told jurors that there will be no testimony on Wednesday, but that testimony will resume Thursday and could conclude on Monday."It appears to me that next week you'll hear closing arguments and be in deliberations," Mudd said. The judge said that he had not yet decided whether to sequester the jurors during deliberations. Mudd also warned jurors not to read or view any material about the Westerfield case or the Orange County kidnap-murder of Samantha Runnion, in which the girl's mother blamed a previous jury for failing to convict her daughter's accused murdered in a previous sexual abuse case. "The fact is the case is not similar in any way, shape or form," Mudd said. |
Post #129
Post #371
Post 349 which is the cross-exam excerpt.
This needs to be part of the list.
Here is a question/answer:
When they can IDENTIFY the source of the BLUE fibers, then we will know why they were on her nude body.
To say they are the EXACT SAME ones that were somewhere at DW's is not true. They were similar. Gee, I don't know, blue is not a very popular color.(/sarcasm)
What I find not clear is that she seems to talk about a few hairs and a fiber on the choker, then about a fiber found in a CLUMP of hair, like it was somewhere else. Can you tell me what DAY of the testimony that was so I can go read it all for myself? Thanks..
I think everyone knows what the burden of proof is in a priliminary hearing,and it appears to this court and to me that the crimes alleged in the complaint have been committed.
There's no question about that. I have reasonable cause to believe that Mr. Westerfield is guilty of them. He will be held to answer.
You may be horrified to learn that I have served on a criminal jury before!
I appreciate you saying you are not putting me down. I know we all get frustrated trying to communicate and of course we all believe that we are being reasonable.
I do feel that I understand very well the fiber testimony and what "similar", "common source" and such mean. I also understand what you are saying---but we do disagree on the implications.
To say the prosecution needs to prove where it comes from means a criminal just needs to dispose of an item used in the crime and any fibers left behind can't be used. Of course, they can be used. There is no reason--common or not--that Danielle van Dam's unclothed body should have the same type of fibers on it found all over DW's environment. Same with the *unusual* orange fiber entwined in the wad of hair. That is my conclusion after hearing the evidence.
Certainly. June 25.
(2)1 fiber on Danielle that COULD be a perfect match. Did it have the root, or was it just partial. How many hairs with the fiber? Was it a HUGE WAD?
(3)Danielle had been in DW's house, and COULD have gotten the fiber in her hair then. Police were in DW's house, the MH, the SUV, tracking orange fibers possibly.
(4)Orange fibers in the MH (right?) Would be coming from DW carrying them from house to MH.
(5) Orange Fibers found around Danielle's body (were there, how many?)
(6) Blue/Grey Fibers ... this is where you can take over.
(7)Orange fibers in SUV. HOw many?
The other evidence is:
2 drops positive for Daneille's DNA, but never proved to be blood. The one by the MH bathroom was obviously not new or the dogs would have HIT on it.
The INVESTIGATOR testified it could be up to a YEAR OLD.
1 partial print in the MH in under the edge of a cabinet. Not found on first examination. Found on re-examination. (to my best recollection)
ONE hair found in sink trap. No attempt to identify if other hairs in sink, or whose they were, or whether Danielle's was first in/last in. Only that this 1 hair was there.
Easily transferred during cookie sale to something in the DW home that eventually could end up taken into MH.
ORANGE FIBERS:
None found on her except for the necklace fiber.
Lots of the blue fibers on her (the body sheet) and one within her hair. Those blue fibers were in his laundry and MH. I don't believe they were in the SUV. Orange fibers in SUV.
The following is not testimony, it is press article.
An orange acrylic fiber was abundant in defendant David Westerfield's home, but showed up only once on the victim, 7-year-old Danielle van Dam— wrapped between the links of a necklace that was still on her neck when she was found. "The long bright orange fibers were significant to me because I had seen a bright orange fiber somewhere else and that triggered my memory," said police criminalist Jennifer Shen. "In the necklace, tangled in hair that was tangled around the necklace was a long, orange fiber."
Same here:
The orange fiber found in van Dam's necklace, Shen testified, was everywhere in Westerfield's home. The witness told the court that it matched 20 to 30 fibers found in Westerfield's washer, 50 to 100 found on top of the washer, another 50 to 100 in his laundry, and 10 to 20 found in the bedding in his master bedroom.
TESTIMONY of SHEN: (caps are testimony, lowercase is CYNCOOPERS remarks)
6 A. WELL, I KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF NYLON THAT IS7 PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES IS CARPET, AND THAT ABOUT TEN TO8 18 PERCENT IS APPAREL. AND IF THIS IS AN APPAREL FIBER -- IT'S9 DEFINITELY NOT A CARPET FIBER. IF IT'S AN APPAREL FIBER, THEN10 IT COULD BE RELATIVELY COMMON, YES.
Q: IT APPEARS IN PHOTOGRAPH C ON THE FIBER FOUND ON DANIELLE'S NECKLACE THERE ARE BLACK SPOTS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM.
A: YES.
Q: TELL US ABOUT THAT.
A: WELL, THE FIBER THAT WAS REMOVED FROM THE NECKLACE, FIRST OF ALL, IT HAD TO BE UNTANGLED FROM THE HAIR AROUND THE NECKLACE, AND IT WAS COVERED IN DEBRIS AND KIND OF GRIME, DARK DEBRIS, SOME SOIL, AND IT WAS DIRTY. SO WHEN I TOOK THE FIBER OFF, I HAD TO CLEAN IT. AND WHEN I DID THAT, I REMOVED QUITE A BIT OF THE DIRT AND GRIME FROM THE FIBER, BUT THERE IS SOME DIRT AND DEBRIS LEFT ON IT. AND WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IN THAT PICTURE IS SOME OF THE DEBRIS THAT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM THE FIBER.
Q: SO NOT PART OF THE FIBER ITSELF.
A: CORRECT.
Then she describes the fiber tangled in hair in a large clump:
THE WITNESS: IN THE AREA WHERE THE HAIR IS CONCENTRATED IN A LARGE CLUMP, THAT IS WHERE I FOUND THE ORANGE FIBER. IT WAS TANGLED IN THE HAIR IN THAT AREA.
Finally, she states that the fiber likely came to be there close in time to her death due to the way it was tangled and the debris from the Dehesa site:
Q: MISS SHEN, I'LL ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. AS FAR AS THE LOCATION OF THAT FIBER IN THE HAIR, TANGLED IN THE NECKLACE, IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO ITS LOCATION AS OPPOSED TO IT BEING, FOR EXAMPLE, IN ANOTHER LOCATION ON THE NECKLACE?
A: THE SIGNIFICANCE I THINK OF THE FIBER TANGLED IN THE HAIR IS THAT BECAUSE IT WAS KNOTTED IN THE HAIR AND BECAUSE THE HAIR WAS KNOTTED IN THE NECKLACE AND BECAUSE THE FIBER IS COVERED IN DEBRIS AND THE HAIR AND THE NECKLACE ARE COVERED IN A SIMILAR DEBRIS, IT APPEARS THAT THE FIBER AND THE HAIR WERE ON THE BODY FROM THE TIME THAT IT WAS PLACED WHERE IT WAS FOUND VERSUS HAVING BEEN PLACED ON THE BODY AT SOME LATER TIME.IT ALSO IS REASONABLE I THINK TO CONCLUDE THAT THAT FIBER CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE BODY AND THE NECKLACE AT OR NEAR THE TIME OF HER DEATH.
OTHR POSTERS COMMENTS RELEVANT TO THE FIBERS:
What is your explanation as to why Danielle's nude body would have those blue fibers on it? She wasn't wearing clothes to retain innocent fibers.
Orange fibers: It was in the 10's in the SUV. Put a big maybe on the RV orange fibers. I've looked hard and can not find a strong statement about orange fibers in the RV.
I think they found 1 blue-grey on her body. The rest were in the "sterile" sheet. Somehow they all fell off a decomposing body into the sheet, or someone brushed against the sheet and then one transferred to her...
MORE TESTIMONY:
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. 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?
I just happened to be in the area of the PH transcripts and thought I would type that out for you. The Judge certainly did use the term guilty.
I went looking for PDvD's testimony about the planned snowboarding trip he had planned for that weekend.
I'll add it here if anyone is interested.?????
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.
