No Decision From Westerfield Jury: Deliberations Continue Tuesday, August 13, 2002

KGTV ^ | August 13, 2002 | KGTV

[FresnoDA]

No Decision From Westerfield Jury

Jury Could Take At Least A Week, Experts Say

Posted: 5:30 p.m. PDT August 12, 2002
Updated: 5:47 p.m. PDT August 12, 2002

SAN DIEGO -- Jurors completed a third day of deliberations without reaching verdicts Monday in the trial of David Westerfield, a former Sabre Springs man accused of kidnapping and killing Danielle van Dam.

	WESTERFIELD TRIAL Share Your Thoughts About The Case Get The Verdict: Sign Up For Breaking News E-mails Westerfield Trial Jury Questionnaire VERDICT COVERAGE Verdict coverage of the David Westerfield trial will air live on Channel 10 NewsChannel 15 and will be live streamed on TheSanDiego Channel.com DANIELLE VAN DAM 1994-2002 Watch Danielle Video Montage E-mail: daniellevandam @yahoo.com Send mail to: P.O. Box 501515 San Diego, 92150

The six-man, six-woman panel was handed the case Thursday after more than two months of testimony.

According to search warrant affidavits made public after six months under seal, Westerfield admitted to police that he dropped off bedding and other items at a Poway dry cleaners two days after Danielle disappeared.

The warrants and affidavits had been sealed since shortly after the girl's mother discovered her missing from her bed the morning of Feb. 2. Last week, the 4th District Court of Appeal ordered the documents unsealed.

Westerfield, 50, a self-employed design engineer, is charged with murder, kidnapping and possession of child pornography.

	Jury Has To Consider Question Carefully

He could face the death penalty if the jury finds true a special circumstance allegation that the murder of the 7-year-old happened during a kidnapping.

The trial, which started June 4, included 23 days of testimony, 98 witnesses and 199 court exhibits.

Trial observers say the deliberations could come down to DNA vs. bugs -- DNA evidence that the victim was in the suspect's motor home versus testimony from defense forensic experts who said bugs on the girl's body indicated it had been dumped while the suspect was under police surveillance.

The alleged swinging lifestyle of the victim's parents, Brenda and Damon van Dam, also could factor into the jury's verdict.

Defense attorney Steven Feldman told jurors forensic evidence involving bugs on the victim's body proved it was "impossible" for his client to have dumped the body beside an East County road, where it was discovered Feb. 27.

The defense claimed throughout the trial that Westerfield was under tight surveillance by police and the media beginning Feb. 5, three days after the Sabre Springs girl was discovered missing from her bed.

 

SURVEY
	What decision do you think the jury in the David Westerfield trial will reach?
	Guilty on all three counts Guilty of kidnapping, murder Guilty of possessing child pornography Not guilty on all three counts Hung jury
Results | Disclaimer

Westerfield was arrested Feb. 22.

Prosecutors contend the defense did not represent accurately the information provided by experts who study insect infestation of corpses.

Physical evidence -- including Danielle's blood on Westerfield's jacket and fingerprints, hair and fibers found in the defendant's motor home -- point to Westerfield's guilt, prosecutors said.

Feldman said the prosecution presented no evidence that Westerfield had ever been in Danielle's home. He noted that her parents testified to holding sex parties in the home, and said one of their house guests might have committed the crime.

Feldman also suggested that Westerfield could not have maneuvered his way through the darkened van Dam home the night of Feb. 1 without anyone hearing him seizing the 58-pound child.

[Jaded]

The Moral of this story is: Never ever leave your hose out.

[small_l_libertarian]

Indeed.

[alisasny]

So your spidey sense would let you allow a guilty freak go free?

[alisasny]

OH NO i am going straight to jail, my hose is out on my driveway all summer. Or will they come after me after I actually put it in the garage..after all that would be abnormal.

[Rheo]

Dusek's opening is all run together, but Feldman's is spaced

That's funny and true.

[VRWC_minion]

I agree, even though he is guilty. Anyone that has been part of a couple uses we. It becomes habit.

If I were the jury I'd want to here his response to the simple question was he ever in the Van Dam residence and his seemingly evasive and clintonian sounding answer "I was never invited."

[small_l_libertarian]

Whoops, didn't mean to hit "post" so quickly. Yes, it's weird, because it's the affidavit for the warrant specifically concerning his computer(s) that mentions something Brenda told the police. That has just seemed weird to me, ever since the affidavits for the warrants were unsealed.

[KnutCase]

I have a pocket edition of The Constitution that I've carried with me every day for at least the past 15 years. Remember the old commercial "don't go anywhere without it"? I'm not as bad as my screen name might indicate. I tell people I'm the sanest person in my household. (Forget to tell them I live alone)

[small_l_libertarian]

Haven't you seen that quote in context? He was asked by Redden if he had ever been in the van Dam house "for a party or ..." and he replied "I've never been invited." He was answering the question as asked.

Dusek badly misrepresented this quote in his closing.

[VRWC_minion]

Someone snatched her. Why do you think someone needs to leave any evidence in such a short period of time ? I can open a door without leaving a print and I don't shed much. I don't get this objection but I understand your issue.

[the Deejay]

Gotcha. Yeah, ran "together" that way, too.

I meant the reporter didn't put spaces in
Dusek's the transcript.

[demsux]

I believe if you look at both openings, they are the same...Dumsek's.

Still looking for feldman's

[ItsOurTimeNow]

Oh yeah, I paid the price all right. Now I just talk slower. LOL

[Blue Screen of Death]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

Not to worry, around here someone will correct you even if you are right.

[dogbyte12]

I would let a guilty freak go free if for example, there were strangers in the house that night, a dog, a family, an alarm system that was conveniently disabled, and no evidence of the suspect in the house. I would let him go if the bug expert the prosecution itself hired, and has used in over 200 cases, stated that the bug evidence proves he couldn't have dumped the body. It is reasonable doubt. People have looked alot more guilty than Westerfield, and have turned out to be innocent.

This is a capital crime here. The i's must be dotted and the t's crossed. There are too many holes in the case.

Danielle didn't deserve to die. Her parents are amoral creepoids though. With all the shenanigans in that house, the idea that a man who had never been in there, was drunk at the time, and was able to pull this off without leaving any trace of his presence, even failing to alert the dog, is very questionable to me. It doesn't pass the smell test.

If every one of the Van Damm's swinger friends had been properly cleared, I would look stronger at being positive Westerfield is the guy. The police stuck to him first, fast, and with blinders on. You don't have an orgy in the house one night, and expect the police to do otherwise.

If Westerfield didn't do it, I would look at people who were involved in the orgies in the house, who then were kicked out of the group. They would have been familiar with Danielle, the dog, and the layout of the house and security system.

[rolling_stone]

One other neighbor apparently was also missing..but he didn't leave his hose out...

[Bluebird Singing]

Did you notice that within the question he was asked if he ever went to any barbeques (or something close) at the Van Dam's to which he replied......"I was never invited." Did you notice?

[bvw]

There is only one context for somefolk -- Westerfield killed Danielles in a most heinious fashion and abandoned her little body in the desert.

[gigi]

I checked the statement DW made to Redden and this is how it goes.

Redden: Now have you ever been in the Van Dam's house? For any reason, whether parties or have they ever been -

Westerfield: I have never been invited.


I hardly find that suspicious. He was just answering the question as it was asked. Talk about twisting things to fit!!! Doesn't sound to evasive or Clintonian to me.

[ItsOurTimeNow]

"Why do you think someone needs to leave any evidence in such a short period of time ?"

But, according to Dusuck's closing statement, it wasn't a short period of time. Dusuck wants us to believe that DW "lurked" in Danielle's room...or somewhere else in the house...or something...he doesn't quite know yet...until the party goers left and the vD's went to beddy-bye.

A 220 pound, drunk, sweaty man is going to quietly hide out in a little girl's bedroom for over an hour and NOT LEAVE A SINGLE TRACE?!