Posted on 08/13/2002 10:12:33 PM PDT by FresnoDA
SIGNONSANDIEGO STAFF
and WIRE SERVICES
August 13, 2002
The fourth day of deliberations in the David Westerfield trial has ended with no conclusion by the jury. The jury will resume deliberations Wednesday morning at the San Diego County Courthouse. Earleir today, jurors asked to hear Westerfield's only recorded explanation of what he was doing the weekend 7-year-old Danielle van Dam was kidnapped.
Superior Court Judge William Mudd said he was granting a request from the jury for a tape recording and transcript of the taped interview Westerfield gave to police interrogation specialist Paul Redden on Feb. 4, two days after Danielle's disappearance.
During the interview, Westerfield makes a reference to "we" as he describes his meandering trip through San Diego and Imperial counties on Feb. 2 and Feb. 3.
"The little place we, we were at was just a little small turnoff-type place," Westerfield said.
Westerfield, 50, could face the death penalty if convicted of murder, kidnapping and a special circumstance allegation that the killing of Danielle van Dam occurred during the commission of kidnapping.
He is also accused of the misdemeanor possession of child pornography.
Jurors are in their fourth day of deliberations.
Mudd's disclosure came during a 10 a.m. open hearing on a request from KFMB-AM 760 to let River Stillwood, an assistant radio producer for talk show host Rick Roberts, back into the courtroom to cover the trial.
"She's out and will remain out and will not be permitted in for any live proceedings... because she is the representative of an individual who takes great glee and delight shoving it in this court's face," Mudd said.
Mudd ejected Stillwood from the courtroom on Thursday after asking her to tell him who told Roberts about the details of a Wednesday exchange between Mudd and the attorneys in the case during a sealed hearing.
Stillwood told Mudd that she didn't know who gave Roberts the information. On the air, Roberts later said he had received a call from a source in the courthouse.
The court is conducting an internal investigation, but cannot compel Roberts and Stillwood to name their source, Mudd said.
Stillwood can still sit in the pressroom and watch the video feed of any court activity, Mudd said.
KFMB was welcome to send someone else to sit in the courtroom, so long as the person was representing the radio station and not Roberts, he said.
KFMB's attorney Joann Rezzo argued that the disclosure did not violate the defendant's right to a fair trial. She also argued that Stillwood didn't give him "the source of the leak" because she didn't know who it was.
Before Mudd made his ruling, he invited comments from prosecutor Jeff Dusek, who managed only a wry remark.
"My inclination is to comment, but on advice of counsel, I I will submit," Dusek said, gesturing to his fellow prosecutor, Woody Clarke.
Defense attorney Robert Boyce told Mudd he was concerned about the integrity of proceedings. "They broadcast it, they knew what they were doing," Boyce said.
He called it "just another effort to sensationalize these proceedings."
Mudd told the media attorneys he welcomed the opportunity to make a "full and complete record" of his decision to eject Stillwood.
In his comments, Mudd made it clear he was still angry with KFMB television's decision to include a high school yearbook photo of Neal Westerfield during a telecast of the son of the defendant's testimony. Mudd had ordered that no television or print images of the adult, who is now 19, be transmitted.
The judge's inclination was to ban both the station's radio and TV representatives from the trial.
"Frankly, they seem to be the two networks in this community that just don't seem to get it," he said.
However, after his wife advised him to "sleep in it, " he gave the matter "serious thought," Mudd said.
He quoted a line from a Supreme Court decision in 1976 involving a press restraint issue in Nebraska.
" The extraordinary protections afforded by the First Amendment carry with them something in the nature of a fiduciary duty to exercise the protected rights responsibly--a duty widely acknowledged but not always observed by editors and publishers," Mudd said. "It is not asking too much to suggest that those who exercise First Amendment rights in newspapers or broadcasting enterprises direct some effort to protect the rights of an accused to a fair trial by unbiased jurors. "
Mudd said he was troubled by the host's decision to broadcast the information, knowing it was from a closed hearing.
The judge wasn't impressed by the host's justification that the general public was already aware of the issue, and that Stillwood was ignorant of the source.
He said the host wasn't conducting a search for the truth, but a grab for ratings. He also took the opportunity to lash out at "idiots from LA talk stations," who broadcast an afternoon program from a media compound outside the County courthouse. He said the members of the talk station were "acting like teen-agers" in front of the courthouse.
The judge acknowledged he could not control such behavior but could control his own courtroom.
The judge said officials from KFMB must be taking "great glee in shoving it in this court's face."
Fred D'Ambrosi, news director for KFMB-TV and Radio, said his television station showed only a high school yearbook photo of Westerfield's son.
"We didn't shoot him in court, which was the judge's order," D'Ambrosi said.
Regarding River Stillwood, D'Ambrosi said the issue was important because of the First Amendment and a free press. He added that he was not in charge of the Rick Roberts program.
"We're just trying to report the news and uphold the First Amendment," D'Ambrosi said. "If (Mudd) can ban River Stillwood, he can ban anybody." The news director suggested that the judge was angry because he didn't like the story that was reported.
D'Ambrosi said he had never spoken to Mudd, and called his reading of the situation "totally inaccurate."
Mudd said he had done a 180-degree turnaround on the issue of allowing cameras and reporters in the courtroom since deciding to allow Court TV to cover the trial live.
Really, Minnie???????? Ya think???? It wouldn't be a surprise?
Wow...........no one has thought of that yet.
Talk about taking my comments out of context. The last thing a CPA should do for his client is to even let him think about cheating. There are plenty of ways to lower taxes and plent of ways to increase them. Cheating is one of the ways to increase them while getting a long rest. In fact I have an ex-cpa friend who will be spending the next 70 months with his clients on an all expense paid vacation. That kind of risk is not only immoral its stupid.
The true evaluation of risks comes into play when one may want to take a posistion on a tax issue that the IRS is not likely to agree with. There are many such issues that the IRS has been wrong on and will continue to be. In that case their are various authorities on which one can take a posistion that is completely legal but may require one to fight in court over in order to pervail.
If you look back at the bets we made regarding "who will be the foreman?", you will see that I WON...assuming that it is the old military guy.
Do you want the truth or do you want to feel good?
Those , on both sides of this case, that post regularly to these threads are the EXCEPTION.
Most of the public in the US and most people on F.R. (who do not read or post these threads regularly) BELIEVE DW is GUILTY.
When you read the news, or see something on TV about the TRIAL, or watch CTV, You are not allowed to see anything but the ANTI-DW parts. The questioning by DUSEK of witnesses where they give answers that look bad for DW.
The cross exams where it is shown that that evidence is wrong, math incorrect, etc. ARE NEVER SHOWN to the PUBLIC.
CTV cuts away from anything but PROSECUTION'S SIDE OF THE CASE.
Nasty Grace does it repeatedly. She will have 'guests' and as long as they agree with her, she lets them talk. If they don't she interrupts and goes to another guest.
MOST PEOPLE in the US don't have the TIME, or EQUIPMENT to follow the case like we have.
I can understand Billy-Bob's view, because that is all he has seen is the ONE SIDE.
The MEDIA is only presenting the PROSECUTION SIDE of this case.
That is one reason I try to understand people that are new to the thread. Sometimes we luck out and get some that have used 'common-sense' and see through the smoke and mirrors that the SD LE/DA are using.
This is WAG THE DOG.
FIRST the media, LE,DA went on a campaign of getting the public to accept that DW WAS GUILTY. Now, they follow up with this confused mess they call a trial to try and back it up.
They know if they somehow succeed, NO ONE WILL CALL THEM ON IT, because they have the backing of a majority of the public and the media.
AS long as you have the MEDIA behind you, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU DO. YOU WILL GET AWAY WITH IT!
BTW, I think they'll acquit on the kidnap/murder charge, don't know about the porn.
This is likely good for DW. CPAs generally look at the facts and the numbers and not as likely to be swayed by emotion.
I usually agree w/ him on other threads.
Today, however, he came out with his "opinion" --totally at odds with the evidence, he didn't have the slightest acquaintance with the facts.
He took some heat for his clueless posts. Well deserved IMO.
Yep...worked for the Clintons too.
Speaking as a CPA, Westerfield is guilty based on the facts and the numbers.
Ya beat me to it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.