Deliberations Resume Friday, 8-9-02 In Trial Of David Westerfield (VERDICT WATCH CONTINUES!)

CNN.com ^ | August 9, 2002 | CNN

[L,TOWM]

If I were on that jury, I would have been in acquittal mode from the moment that LE admitted that the original search warrant was obtained on, shall we say, embellished statements. Conviction after facts like this come out under oath start our justice system down the path that leads to Bulgaria, circa 1985.

[Eva]

I heard Feldman remark during the closing arguments that the questionable saved pornagragphy had not been viewed for over a year.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks guys. Interesting comments.

[small_l_libertarian]

And if they just appeared to be young girls 15+

I don't KNOW that this is the case, but when you combine what the police computer guy testified to in the prelim (he didn't see any prepubescent children in the images) with what Feldman said in closing ("Go ahead, look at it. Look at all of it - turn to any page and look."), the defense is not scared of the porn. I don't think it's really (serious) kiddie porn. Just an inference I'm drawing, but I think it's a supportable conclusion at this point.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

the state did not come anywhere close to proving that he did.

I think the State's case stops at the van Dam's door. They have not presented a shred of anything that places DW in the home or an indication that he abducted Danielle.

Kidnapping must be proven or murder can't be. Has kidnapping been proven?

IMO, Jeff Dusek suggesting that we just have to believe that he got into the house undetected and got her out of the house somehow is asking way too much. It is the key to everything they claim happened subsequently and the key doesn't fit the lock.

[MizSterious]

"The fact that the blood drop on the jacket was never properly photographed and that the forensic specialists were instructed to not use 35mm is about as suspicious an act as I can fathom."

Yes, it is. Add to that the fact that they decided (who decided? It was never said) not to fingerprint the offensive cd and zip disk cases. Why would that be? And what about the other fingerprints that were never id'ed? Never even tried. What about the fiber tests? Why not do the important ones that would have said "match" or "not match" instead of "similar"? Lots of questions about LE on this case, not limited to the actual evidence. The behavior of Otts and Keyser, the "leaks" of false information to the media--phewwwwww, something smells kinda rotten in SD.

[small_l_libertarian]

Me, too. There is no way on this earth I would back down and let anybody be convicted on such flimsy evidence.

[DoughtyOne]

Well, I'd be driving the innocent porn angle if it was my defense. That they seemingly didn't troubles me.

[small_l_libertarian]

It is the key to everything they claim happened subsequently and the key doesn't fit the lock.

I'd like to nominate this for a "Golden Comment."

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

something smells kinda rotten in SD.

Yep......the stench has only gotten worse with time.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks Eva.

[sawsalimb]

Am I the only guy who orders items once in a while, they arrive, then I never take a look at them?

I mentioned that CD of topo maps that I bought. You know how I came to own it?

It was in the bargain bin for $18.99,and I figured it was a pretty good deal. I bought it,took it home,and popped it into the computer. I then printed out the half dozen maps of the area I was interested in,which is the area where I go deer hunting. And then tossed the CD on the shelf,where it sits to this day. I have no idea what else is on that disc-maybe I ought to look?

[small_l_libertarian]

But Feldman DID do that. In closing arguments, he challenged the jury to look at all of the porn. He wouldn't TELL them to look at it if it was really that bad.

[Krodg]

I would think that most people having an affair, wouldn't want witnesses. DW would be the only defense witness with actual knowledge and IMO it would have been a mistake to have him take the stand about that. Besides, Brenda would deny it, so you have he says/she says.

[DoughtyOne]

I think most people can identify with your and my comments. That's why I made mine. Some of these things can be explained away under normal human circumstances, that most people can indentify with.

[MizSterious]

For those who refuse to believe a parent would abuse a child, now we have this horrific news from CNN--



45 children removed in Web porn ring bust
August 9, 2002 Posted: 11:05 AM EDT (1505 GMT)


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- U.S. and European law-enforcement officials have arrested 20 people who sexually abused their own children and traded photographs and tips over the Internet, the U.S. Customs Service said on Friday.

The cross-border sweep removed 45 children from their abusive parents, 37 of them in the United States, Customs said.

Authorities say the parents traded photos of themselves sexually abusing their own children and shared tips in online chat rooms.

Half of those arrested lived in the United States, while the rest lived in Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, England, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Sweden and France.

Details of the operation were set to be announced at a press conference at 11 a.m.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/09/internet.porn.reut/index.html

[DoughtyOne]

I haven't followed the case closely enough to know that. Glad to hear it. Thanks.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Besides, Brenda would deny it, so you have he says/she says.

This reminds me of something in Dusek's rebuttal argument. Did you notice how often he held Brenda's testimony up as if she were a pillar of honesty?

Every time he said, "Brenda van Dam told us, blah, blah, blah", I wondered if jurors thought as I did.........."So what !!!!"

[JudyB1938]

It was never determined that the stain was actually blood. The test they ran indicated it COULD HAVE been blood. They did not run the test to actually determine whether it was blood or not. I don't know how to explain in scientific terms, but FReepers have gone over this in prior threads.

There was no blood seen on his jacket by the cleaners at any time ... before cleaning or after cleaning. The police picked up the jacket before Westerfield got it back. Lo and behold, "blood" was found on it. One FReeper mentioned that heat destroys DNA, so how could any "blood" DNA have survived the heat of dry cleaning?

As far as the palm print is concerned, they never found any of her prints in the motorhome until AFTER they found her body and rehydrated her hands. Then they went back to check ... and lo and behold, they found a print. Come to your own conclusion. I did. This has also been discussed in detail in prior threads.

The San Diego Police Department has been documented in planting false evidence in prior cases. Discussed on prior threads.

The close personal friend who advised Brenda Van Dam from the beginning is a retired policewoman. The head of a local swinger club is a retired policeman. There's more police & PR firm involvement/friendships that makes one suspicious as to Westerfield's being made a scapegoat and railroaded for a crime he didn't commit.

One of the child pornographers caught by a Swedish crime team lives in the same town as the Van Damns. Another one lives in San Diego, a short distance away. There are videos of them raping little children. Danielle could have wandered outside and been picked up by that porno group. One person was arrested in January, I think it was - and the other person was arrested TWO DAYS after Danielle's body was found. It has been speculated they had to get rid of her to keep from getting charged with her abuse, too.

There's a whole lot more stuff. Too much to go into in a short comment here. Like the blue paint under her fingernails, the dark hair under her body, unidentified fingerprints, unidentified blood, DNA in her bed, etc etc etc. NONE of this can be traced to Westerfield. NOR HAS IT BEEN SUBJECTED TO FORENSIC TESTING. Just some stupid fibers that are common (similar to) in today's WalMart market.

And they ignored the blood on her pajamas and beanbag chair, by the way. They didn't test the spot in the carpet either that Demon VanDam steam cleaned before the police got there. They didn't identify the fingerprints on the outside door or the blood on the cement outside or the drag marks outside. They didn't put her journal into testimony where she has some very telling comments - the type of comments that sexually-abused children use.

But all of that evidence in the Van Dam home can never be tested in the future. They re-carpeted and re-painted the entire house. All evidence is lost forever. We will never know, probably, the real killer of little Danielle.

I believe Westerfield was set up by a swingers group and that he is not just "not guilty" but that he is INNOCENT of this horrible crime.

[DoughtyOne]

Seems to me that Westerfild would have been a very powerful witness. He could have explained away the porn in human terms that most of the jury would have understood. He could have mentioned a more detailed relationship with Brenda and possible incursions into the trailer that would have made it easy for the jury to discount some or all of the evidence there. Having him sit there and respond as any human would, would seem to be a great idea. I wonder what the defense was concerned with, that prevented this.