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

CourtTV ^ | August 8, 2002 | CourtTV

[sawsalimb]

How very, very odd that there is no 35mm photographic record of the spot and that the forensic specialists said they were told to only use polaroid.

Why on earth,in this day and age,is the San Diego PD still even bothering with polaroids? Is thare some sort of tamper-proof requirement for photographs used in evidence?(That would be my guess as to a possible explanation,btw). Otherwise,if fast photos are needed,do what everyone else does and get a digital camera. Used in conjunction with 35mm(or large format film),to provide a tamper-resistant archive of negatives,digital pictures of a crime scene would strike me as being a lot more efficient and effective than a Polaroid. I'll add that the reason I really like my digital camera is that it's not nearly as sensitive to lighting conditions as my 35mm-the digital camera will cheerfully take pictures in low light that the 35mm would never take,without using a flash,or other supplemental light. Anyone have a good take on this?

[Krodg]

Where did you hear that about the dogs? I am very interested in this. Thanks.

[Kerensky]

How very, very odd that there is no 35mm photographic record of the spot and that the forensic specialists said they were told to only use polaroid.

A man's life will hang on a tiny speck of poorly documented evidence.

[mouser]

i have a memory of it but cannot remember if someone on a thread brought it up or if it was in testmony i will keep looking but i am not the best at finding things in the testmony infact i am perty bad but i keep trying

[sawsalimb]

A man's life will hang on a tiny speck of poorly documented evidence.

Indeed it will. The problem that I have with this is that the evidence could very easily have been documented properly. When something that easy to do isn't done,and it isn't done by people who are supposed to be paid to do things right,my hackles rise.

[Politicalmom]

I believe the photographer testified that he usually uses a 35mm, but WAS TOLD TO TAKE POLAROIDS of this evidence.

Smells rotten, to me.

[Kerensky]

I believe the photographer testified that he usually uses a 35mm, but WAS TOLD TO TAKE POLAROIDS of this evidence.

Using a Polaroid camera with a closeup lens?

[Politicalmom]

I don't remember. All I remember is that it is impossible to tell what kind of stain it is, whether drop or spatter.

The defense was unable to enlarge or focus the picture any more.

[Kerensky]

The Jury is going to pick the evidence to pieces.
It is NOT a slam dunk for the Prosecution.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

I invite anyone to go here and read about the case of Dale Akiki in San Diego just 7 years ago.

Read how a desperate DA tried to convict a man that had actually been accused of killing a giraffe in front of children on church grounds (among other things).

Read about how this poor falsely accused man spent 2 1/2 years of his life in jail without bail.

Read what politics can do to an innocent person.

But also read that an intelligent jury cleared him of all 35 counts in 7 hours.

Imagine being falsely accused and then spending 2 1/2 years of your life behind bars before the trial finally ends.

Incidentally, it was the longest trial in SD history and there appeared in the end to be not a single basis for it.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Oops......Correction, the accusation was about 13-14 years ago. The linked information is dated 1995.

[John Jamieson]

I think it was before she was found, but long after they had her DNA from her underwear.

[John Jamieson]

Here in Texas, a mom and stepfather spent 5 years each, of dual life sentences and lost their sons because a jury found them guilty of killing their 5 year girl. 5 years later a Dallas reporter proved she had been attacked and killed by a dog.