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.

[spectre]

"Even the guests that night didn't leave behind anything"..

And don't you ever wonder why?

sw

[KnutCase]

"Even the guests didn't leave anyting behind"??????? Welllll now, somebody other than DW (his DNA was excluded), somebody left lots of unknown DNA in Danielle's bedroom as well as "unknown" leaving fingerprints on the bannister. Fingerprints that police didn't follow up on becaused those prints excluded DW and that"s ALL they cared about. They were looking for evidence connected to him, not caring a whit about whether others might be involved. Sad.

[the Deejay]

Sure the guests that night left behind hair,
fingerprints, cigarette butts all over the place.
But LE eliminated them, because they weren't
suspects.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Ah, the magic of steamcleaners.

[KnutCase]

They already had a man in custody. Why look elsewhere?

[bvw]

"I won't get any satisfaction from a guilty verdict, just sadness."

Well, don't worry, be happy! Looks better and better for an acquittal!

[the Deejay]

"They already had a man in custody. Why look elsewhere?"

Too true.

[KnutCase]

Acquittal? Please go on...explain your thoughts.

[spectre]

LOL! And how does a child live in a home with none of her fingerprints in her own bedroom?

sw

[alisasny]

Hey nut.

If the media influence had worked they would have had a verdict in a few hours.

Jurors are holding out an presenting their doubts to the media jurors.

[bvw]

I have no thoughts on matters important, just a passing whimsy, fanned by that request by the jury for audio of of Westerfield's fireside talks with Redden, and also delighted by the Jury's straightforward independence on the matter of Fridays.

[small_l_libertarian]

That is the most convoluted reasoning I have ever heard. He was asked if he went there "for parties or...". He said "I was not invited." How is that leaving himself an out? It's answering the question he was asked.

On another note - I have decided that I think this is the reason the jury asked for the audio tape. They want to hear this "I was not invited" in context. Can't believe I didn't think of it before. (Duhhh.)

[the Deejay]

"And how does a child live in a home with none of her fingerprints in her own bedroom?"

That's another one that bowled me over. Anyone that's
raised kids, knows they leave fingerprints all over the
house. I highly doubt anyone on the jury will question
that in deliberations. None of her fingerprints says,
"Room was wiped down before LE got there."

[Rheo]

Even the guests that night didn't leave behind anything".. And don't you ever wonder why?

I had assumed it was the standard swinger/swapper body condom.

If Jeff Graham was only able to ID 122 out of 350 latents...to whom do the 228 latents belong??

[KnutCase]

Because whoever wanted to remove the perp's fingerprints could only be sure by removing ALL fingerprints? Makes sense to me. I'm sure Danielle didn't do the wipe down. Had to be somebody else. Why do I ask these questions and expect logical explanations?

[bvw]

There are conscious and sub-conscious reasons for everything. The Jury may have actually asked for the tape for that particular little quote, but subconsciously, surely, they wanted to hear the big buddha himself.

[the-gooroo]

Exactly! Also, remember BVD said they looked through all of the closets for Danielle? I'd like to know how she did that without leaving a fingerprint on those mirrored doors!

[the Deejay]

For those that want to "split hairs" the statement
of "I was never invited" means so much. In fact,
so much so, they'd give DW the death penalty for
such statment.

On the other had, the slip ups the vdams made, which
were more damaging, are skipped over. Ever notice
that?

[gigi]

When I heard the jury asked for the tape, thats the first thing I thought of. The jury wants to check the "never invited" statement since Dusek called it SO SUSPICIOUS in his closing.

[small_l_libertarian]

I know - these folks that are so anxious to send a man to his death on almost no evidence scare me.