Skip to comments.
Westerfield Closings Set For Tuesday, 8-6-2002: More Revelations Continue "Out" Of Jurors Sight!
Court TV ^
| August 6, 2002
| Harriet Ryan
Posted on 08/06/2002 6:40:14 AM PDT by FresnoDA
|
 |
 |
 |
The defense for David Westerfield, left, opted not to call a last forensic witness, clearing the way for closing arguments Tuesday morning. |
|
 |
|
|
By Harriet Ryan Court TV SAN DIEGO After two months and 116 witnesses, jurors in the capital murder case of David Westerfield will hear closing arguments Tuesday. "We'll be ready to rock and roll tomorrow morning," Judge William Mudd told lawyers Monday. Defense attorneys for Westerfield, who is accused of kidnapping and killing his 7-year-old neighbor Danielle van Dam, had considered calling a forensic anthropologist as their final witness. After weekend discussions, however, they decided to rest their case, defense lawyer Steven Feldman told Mudd. The judge imposed no time limits on the arguments Feldman and prosecutor Jeff Dusek will make, and closings in the trial, which included 199 exhibits and weeks of complex forensic testimony, could stretch into a second day. At the hearing Monday, Feldman made yet another attempt to have the panel of six men and six women sequestered during deliberations. He cited front page articles about the case in the local paper as well as an article about swinging in San Diego magazine. "The land mines keep growing, Judge," he told Mudd. As he had before, the judge denied the request and said he trusted the jury to follow his instructions about avoiding media accounts of the case. Westerfield, 50, faces the death penalty if convicted of Danielle's slaying. The second-grader was abducted from her bedroom last February. Searchers found her naked body on the side of a road three and a half weeks later. Prosecutors claim Westerfield sexually assaulted and suffocated her, but the defense says forensic evidence indicates she was dumped after the defendant was under police surveillance. |
|
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940, 941-960, 961-980 ... 1,061-1,065 next last
To: Greg Weston
Greg, the OJ trial was a joke..Judge Lance Ito was a poster boy for incompetence. They hung poor Mark Furman for using the N word, to begin with.
The evidence of the 911 phone calls Nicole placed, showed OJ had one hell of a temper. He got rid of the evidence at the air-port, lied about the cut on his hand, said he broke a glass in the bathroom. He lied about being asleep when the driver came to pick him up...his car was missing from where it was supposed to be parked, and he FLED in the Bronco with a disguise and some money. Don't forget, he had a motive.
I'm sure I missed alot...but wasn't the DNA quantative and convincing?
Compare and contrast, Greg...
sw
941
posted on
08/06/2002 7:23:27 PM PDT
by
spectre
To: the Deejay; MagnoliaMS
Yup, he said "Susan LeLac" alright! LOL! It's Susan Lelek. It's been on San Diego channel 10. Same @ssholes who photo-ed Neal against the courts' order.
To: dread78645
He said Susan's full name a few times.
To: Neenah
Innocent, Neenah, because the prosecution has not made it's case IMO. He wasn't a stranger to the family, had contact with them, had no known history of being a Pedophile and prefered adult women. No motive.
There were others who were there, in the house who could have harmed Danielle, equally as drunk and far more out of control than DW was.
As soon as they fingered Westerfield, they stopped investigating the others, and there were unidentified prints in that house...but none were his.
sw
944
posted on
08/06/2002 7:30:37 PM PDT
by
spectre
To: spectre
Feldman, with the help of his assistants with plan their strategy to address the lies of Dusek and the lack of evidence that prevents a finding of 'beyond reasonable doubt' and Feldman will rip Dusek a new one, and may not even need to consult his notes very often. Feldman may have seen a bit disjointed today because there was so much that Dusek lied about that he may have had some difficulty in deciding what to go after first.
To paraphrase that socialist preacher Tony Compolo (one of Bill Clinton's 'spiritual advisors' after Clinton admitting to having sex with Monica), "It's Tuesday; but Wednesday's coming."
To: spectre
Thanks, spectre.
946
posted on
08/06/2002 7:32:23 PM PDT
by
Neenah
To: Neenah
Not guilty/Innocent. Way too many loose ends and huge holes in the prosecutions' case, from the onset.
To: the Deejay
I appreciate that, Deejay.
948
posted on
08/06/2002 7:36:21 PM PDT
by
Neenah
To: Neenah
Not guilty. (Way too much reasonable doubt).
949
posted on
08/06/2002 7:37:43 PM PDT
by
Lucky
To: Neenah
Hi, Neenah. I would vote not guilty because of reasonable doubt. And I do admit to being biased. I never believed the VD's from the moment I first saw them, especially about the events of that night. Also, I have never figured out how DW was supposed to get in and get her without alerting anyone or the dog. Then there is the DNA on her blanket that is not DW's and the unid'd fingerprints in her room etc. I could go on but it would take all night!
950
posted on
08/06/2002 7:37:49 PM PDT
by
Jrabbit
To: connectthedots
Felman was tired. But he better be tanned, toned and ready tomorrow. It's his final shot.
The Jury will be more apt to listen to him in the morning. Dusek took them on one heck of an emotional rollar-coaster ride today..describing how he thought Danielle spent her final hours.
sw
951
posted on
08/06/2002 7:38:15 PM PDT
by
spectre
To: connectthedots
"Feldman may have seen a bit disjointed today because there was so much that Dusek lied about that he may have had some difficulty in deciding what to go after first."
You know, in the hundreds of trials I've followed, this is the first time I've witnessed an attorney actually stand in front of the jury and LIE. Out & out LIE. I could hardly grasp it.
Attorneys will sometimes mis-state things, but usually correct themselves. Dusek even managed to mix up the two Danielles.
To: KnutCase
I think you are dead on..........I think Feldman is a pretty good actor. He knew the jury was tired. He knew Dusek had the best of the day and no way was he(Feldman) going to *talk and shout* to half asleep jurors.
Feldman knows exactly what he is doing every minute. TMO
953
posted on
08/06/2002 7:40:14 PM PDT
by
BARLF
To: spectre
Feldman was angry with how Dusek conducted his closing argument. Tonight, after taking a bit f time to cool down Feldman and his staff will get to work and when Feldman gets up to bat in the morning; Feldman will hit it out of the ball park.
To: BARLF
You bet Feldman knows what he's doing every minute. That's why he gets the big bucks. Plus, he knows his cases better than Dusek knows his.
To: BARLF
Right on!... Feldman knew he had to shake up the jury and do it quickly. Tomorrow morning they will be all ears, paying attention to him. Just part of the job....
To: connectthedots
"Feldman will hit it out of the ball park."
Watch out, Padres!! Feldman will be up at bat tomorrow! LOL
GO, FELDY!!
To: the Deejay
...this is the first time I've witnessed an attorney actually stand in front of the jury and LIE. Out & out LIE. I could hardly grasp it. Could you please back up this assertion?
To: the Deejay
Dusek made up things. He was staging out the horrific details of the horror Danielle might have experienced, and I'm sure some of it may have happened...HOWEVER, he didn't have proof of it.
He really went over the top, when he pretended that DW went into Danielle's room, grabbed her by the arm and said "COME with ME! You just COME with ME"!
That is evidence? That is overacting!
Oh, then he goes on to say "it doesn't matter how DW took her, he just did". Brillant...more evidence?
sw
959
posted on
08/06/2002 7:44:46 PM PDT
by
spectre
To: UCANSEE2
Thanks for clearing that up. Sounds like he was trying to get some major points in front of the jury and will come back tomorrow and finish things up.
960
posted on
08/06/2002 7:45:08 PM PDT
by
Krodg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940, 941-960, 961-980 ... 1,061-1,065 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson