Westerfield's Fate In Hands Of Jury: VERDICT WATCH BEGINS in Van Dam Murder Case

CourtTV ^ | August 8, 2002 | CourtTV

[FresnoDA]

Jury's hands After two months of hearing evidence, jurors have begun deliberating the fate of David Westerfield, who is accused of kidnapping and killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam

[VRWC_minion]

If Westerfield, wouldn't he have a lot more than 80 images of child porn on computer?

Why? I have a problem with this logic on two basis. First, the idea that a certain quantity is needed. Second, that steps were not taken to keep stuff off the computer. It is possible to download stuff directly to a CD. The fact he had any at all doesn't mean that is all he had.

I don't know much about computers, but it seems to me that someone on another thread sais you can get porn e-mailed to you at random?

I know its possible to have someone send you a picture and not know what it is until its too late and already on your computer. However it takes a special step to save that picture in a folder designed for it and it takes another special step to copy it to a CD. It is certainly possible for someone to unwittingly do this but when the images are viewed 1-5 times, when they are stored in special folders and when they are copied to disk the likelihood is very slim.

This leads to an interesting way of thinking that the Westerfield is innocent crew use. They individually prove that each specific piece of evidence could have an innocent explanation even thougfht the sum total makes it improbable. For example, if I had porn on my computer stored in special folders and copied to CD's and my wife found them I could maybe get away with one or two stroed in a temporary file but if she also found that I accidently viewed each one a number of times and i accidently stored it in a special folder and I accidently backed those files up, she would not likely believe me.

[itsahoot]

The computers at the drycleaning place might have been down
for part of the day(the part of the day that one clerk is referring
to),and been back up the same day.

BS, the experts could nail that down if they chose to, so the question becomes;
Why they did not, put this to rest. They certainly worked hard enough on Westerfields computers.

[cyncooper]

The receipt issue is being confused. It has all been presented to the jury and it is clear Westerfield went to the cleaners twice on 2/4.

[itsahoot]

I am willing to bet that if the VD's sue after the trial is over

I am willing to bet they won't expose themselves to discovery, by bringing a suit.

[Eva]

You seem to forget that the judge had both Brenda and Damon called in to show them all the pictures before they were allowed back into the court room, so that they would be prepared for this and not show emotion. This was not the first time that Brenda saw these pictures.

[Greg Weston]

Please don't confuse the Westerfield cheerleaders with the facts.

[Eva]

They were talking about the jury sequestering on court tv yesterday and it was speculated that the jury had asked to be sequestered and that it was turned down, so the jury set their own time schedule and refused to release it to the press, so that they would not be hounded.

[Jaded]

Nope. Hate to disappoint you.

[itsahoot]

Mudd should be removed from the bench. Not tomorrow or the next day.

This show will be replayed after the 9th gets through playing around.

Mudd is MUDD

[itsahoot]

The Ashcroft Justice Dept. is putting a good deal more resources into pornography and obscenity investigation/prosecution than the Reno Justice Dept. It would be a good idea for producers and users to maintain a low profile for the next 8 years.

Don't you just wish.....Shucks that would bag a Clinton for sure
and they aint going there. Bank on it.

[Eva]

I was using my son's computer for about twenty minutes and had at least four e-mails from porn sites. He said that they send it all the time after you register for certain sites like rock music downloads.

One time I got one of these and called my husband in the room to see it and instead of just looking at the lead in, he clicked on it. The site automaticly appeared on my desk top and even after I deleted the site it reappeared everytime I turned on my computer. It took me about a week to get rid of the thing.

[Valpal1]

A defamation suit against DHP exposes them very little, as it restricts itself to the statements he made publicly about the diary/journal.

Introduce the evidence that he said what he said, introduce the journal, which manifestly contradicts his statements about it. Trial over.

The don't have to go into their personal lives on this.

A civil suit against DAW for wrongful death, would be a different kettle of fish.

[Valpal1]

I have read several articles, one or two in National Review about the Ashcroft JD opening the $$$ spigot for this. Also, Reno's JD prosecuted no-one in this arena for eight years. The Ashcroft JD already has dozens of prosecution going (as early as 6 mo of taking office) and hundreds of investigation ongoing.

They are pursuing obscene pornographers, etc.

[Eva]

A civil suit against Westerfield would be a waste of time. He has nothing left to take.

[itsahoot]

The don't have to go into their personal lives on this.

If you are a lawyer, I will defer to you on this issue?

However seems they would have to produce all the diary or explain
why they can't. May not be as easy as all that.
Besides there may be wittneses that were not allowed at this
trial that may be able to reveal new evidence. Big risk IMHO

[Valpal1]

It would be done for vindication, not $$$.

Do you think OJ's former in-laws got anything from the judgement against OJ?

I do not believe this will occur except in the unlikely event of a not guilty verdict. I think this jury will hang and that the DA's office will re-try it. If they get a second hung jury, they will quit trying, and then the VD's will sue for wrongful death.

If he is found guilty, (also not likely, IMO), then they will only sue if the verdict is overturned on appeal.

[bvw]

Never, ever, defer to a lawyer, or a medical doctor, or a an accountant when you own life is on the line. Make sure you understand what is going on to the maximum extent you are able given your intellect and physical strength.

And on the law in cases like this where people are learning about the law, also do not "defer" to a lawyer. The law is not beyond the understanding of the kind of people who able to get to and post to Free Republic, moreover you have a duty to G-d and country to make yourself familiar with that law and legal reasoning.

And on public forums like these, let no one claim "well I'm an expert" for everybody is learning thus to try and force a viewpoint on the rest of us by that resort is absolutely a deficiency of wit and ability to explain yourself without resort to the e'er misleading g-ds and idols of prefessionalism.

[Valpal1]

Producing the diary is easy, it does exist, as do the photocopies provided to the defense in discovery. They asked for and received it and did not use it. They could have used it and called DHP to testify to his viewing of it. But they didn't. The rational conclusion is that it did not say what DHP says it did.

I am not a lawyer, just another crank who reads the law.

This is one reason I believe he is a nut. He made a very libelous statement about an easily checked fact.

If the entries are not there as he publicly stated, what is his defense? He has none, except that it was the act of a delusional belief.

There is a reason the media started avoiding him and his statements. The same reason the defense didn't use his "testimony". He's a loon.

[Valpal1]

Absouletly the best advice. Well said. Kudos!

[rolling_stone]

Maybe the judge in his infinite wisom wouldn't let the diary come into evidence. Something turned over in discovery doesn't mean it is admissable, only that it might lead to admissible evidence.
JMO.