Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Mudd Refuses Sequester Plea: Westerfield Jury Verdict In Sep? (Aug. 16th Verdict Watch)
Union Trib ^ | August 15, 2002 | Jeff Dillion/Steve Perez

Posted on 08/16/2002 6:39:20 AM PDT by FresnoDA

Judge denies defense motion to sequester jury

By Jeff Dillon and Steve Perez
SIGNONSANDIEGO

August 15, 2002

Judge William D. Mudd addressed counsel on a motion by defense attorney Steven Feldman regarding media access to jurors in the trial of defendant David Westerfield at San Diego courthouse, August 15, 2002. Westerfield is accused of the kidnapping and murder of seven-year old Danielle van Dam from her Sabre Springs home, last February.  REUTERS/POOL/Dan TrevanArguing that media coverage was creating a "lynch mob mentality" that could pressure jurors to return a guilty verdict, the defense attorney for David Westerfield today asked the judge yet again to sequester the jury.

While the jury completed its first week of deliberations without a verdict, Superior Court Judge William Mudd denied the request and a related motion to "pull the plug" on television and radio coverage of the courtroom proceedings, but agreed to set aside a private room for jurors to take breaks. Defense attorney Steven Feldman had argued that reports suggested jurors felt like they were under siege, unable to leave their deliberating room, go to lunch or walk home without being watched or followed.

"We have no assurance that they are not be intimidated ... by the presence of the media," Feldman told Mudd during a morning hearing. "We can think of only one fair resolution to that: Get the jury out of harm's way."

 

'Broccoli heads'

He cited an incident earlier in the week in which radio talk show hosts from KFI-AM 640 in Los Angeles broadcast from outside the courthouse, waving stalks of broccoli around and reportedly calling jurors "broccoli heads" for being unable to return a quick guilty verdict.

Westerfield, 50, could face the death penalty if convicted of kidnapping 7-year-old Danielle van Dam from her family's Sabre Springs home on Feb. 2 and killing her. Jurors are in their sixth day of deliberations.

Lead prosecutor Jeff Dusek disagreed with Feldman's interpretations of the jury's complaints.

"Whether or not any guilty verdict in this case would be based on a siege mentality or the meida I think is pure speculation and utterly false in this case," Dusek said.

What the jurors had complained about was being watched all the time, he said.

"That hardly equates to being under siege," he said.

 

Trust in the jury

Mudd dismissed most of Feldman's concerns, saying that the jurors had only asked a bailiff to keep reporters a little bit farther away, though an alternate juror reported that he or she had been followed to his car.

Media coverage has diminished since the jurors began deliberating, the judge said.

"The synopsis programs on the two local TV networks are not in place," he said. "The talking heads are doing nothing but speculating about what the jury may or may not be thinking."

Mudd said there were no signs that jurors were being harassed by the public, especially since their names and faces haven't been publicized.

"We've all sat here and picked this jury, know their makeup and know their dedication to this cause," Mudd said. "I would prefer to think that any verdict they make in this case would be based upon the evidence."

Sequestering the jury also wouldn't protect them from any public reaction to the verdict, Mudd said.

 

'The activities of a few'

"The tragedy is, the majority of the people in this courtroom are abiding by the court's orders and working very hard to insure they, meaning the media, do not cause something to occur that is going to cause a mistrial," Mudd said. "Not all of them feel that way as is very apparent with the activities of a few."

Mudd took aim at two radio program hosts from Los Angeles who he previously described as "idiots."

"I suppose it's entertainment out of LA. I hope it stays in LA," he said. "The shows those two gentlemen put on made the court incredulous as to what they were attempting to do."

Mudd also announced:

 



TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,481-1,5001,501-1,5201,521-1,540 ... 1,741-1,743 next last
To: hoosiermama
no problem
1,501 posted on 08/18/2002 6:36:44 AM PDT by pinz-n-needlez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1350 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
When someone says "Click Here".....I do not, because I never know where here is. Please identify "here" for me. If I don't know where here is I'm not going to here. I know this sounds like Abbot and Costello, but I'm serious. Here may not be someplace I want to go...unless I know where I am going if I go to here. Thanx for helping me out.
1,502 posted on 08/18/2002 6:45:47 AM PDT by KnutCase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1493 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
What's with the phone call to Van Dam's that came in on the 16th while the phone was tapped? If Damon was out in the desert, that means Brenda took the call. I seem to recall Feldman asking Brenda about that and Mudd wouldn't allow it.
1,503 posted on 08/18/2002 7:03:36 AM PDT by Bluebird Singing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1399 | View Replies]

Comment #1,504 Removed by Moderator

To: Hildy
I think "hate" is too strong a word. Don't inflate your ego so much. I prefer to save strong emotions like hatred for people who train suicide pilots to fly into buildings full of people. No, I would say I find you annoying, but not so much because of your viewpoint on this trial. It's how you express it. You show virtually no respect for those of us who feel differently. It should be no surprise--to you or anyone--when your utter and complete lack of respect is met with contempt.
1,505 posted on 08/18/2002 7:20:37 AM PDT by MizSterious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1324 | View Replies]

To: Rheo
Click on their comment portion you wish to copy...right mouse click and copy, then go to the place you wish the comment to be and right click paste. 1409 posted on 8/17/02 11:53 PM Central by Rheo
1,506 posted on 08/18/2002 7:26:59 AM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1409 | View Replies]

Comment #1,507 Removed by Moderator

To: BARLF; Rheo; KnutCase
Thank you Rheo! I did it, I did it.........Rheo you are a great teacher.
Oh, this isn't the HTML sand box? Sorry guys! ;))
1,508 posted on 08/18/2002 7:31:35 AM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1506 | View Replies]

To: fatima; All
Hildy,I hate to tell you but this is The Twilight zone ,so anything you say or type will be used against you,most freepers do not post here .Why, because Westerfield groupies own these threads,if you post,know that you are on Free republicand JR owns this and the rest can go the heck to the back room.I want to here what you have to say.

Has anyone else noticed that at some times fatima's posts use very simple sentence structure and contain many errors (which she blames on limited English) and at other times she is very coherent? I wonder who she actually is.

1,509 posted on 08/18/2002 7:50:09 AM PDT by Dave_in_Upland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1407 | View Replies]

To: Bluebird Singing
Brenda's PH testimony:
YOU MENTIONED TO MR. DUSEK -- MR. DUSEK JUST ASKED YOU WHETHER YOU HAD GIVEN LAW ENFORCEMENT PERMISSION TO TAPE-RECORD YOUR TELEPHONE. DO YOU RECALL THAT QUEST A. I DO
Q. DO YOU RECALL AT SOME POINT IN TIME, AT LEAST UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME FORM OF EITHER PHONE TRAP, PHONE TRACE OR PHONE TAPS ON YOUR TELEPHONES? A. NO.
Q. DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION TO APPROXIMATELY THE 16TH OF FEBRUARY 2002, DO YOU RECALL GETTING A TELEPHONE CALL, A MESSAGE CONCERNING YOUR DAUGHTER?
MR. DUSEK: OBJECTION, HEARSAY, BEYOND THE SCOPE, THIRD PARTY.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, I'LL HEAR YOU AT SIDEBAR.
(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF PUBLIC RECORD.)

1,510 posted on 08/18/2002 7:59:31 AM PDT by clearvision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1503 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
I think there is another aspect too. Many of us have spent months listening to this trial, educating ourselves, following the threads. Many of us have started out indifferent, or possibly believing the police had the right guy. Many of us have sat in revulsion while we watched the prosecution lie, pervert testimony, and watched the judge allow this perversion of a trial to continue. Many of us have spent hours trying to marry the prosecutions case to the guilt of Westerfield, and it just isn't adding up.

Then we have someone come onto the post and essentially tell us we are stupid, and that we should have to prove that Westerfield is guilty. I guess these type of posters have forgotten they live in the US. The burden to prove guilt is on the prosecutions head. It is not the burden of the accused to prove innocence.

So a hint to some of these type of posters would be to go thru past threads. Most of us who believe this case is weak at best, have laid out over and over the inconsistencies. And even though many of us feel that Westerfield is probably innocent, we have more than proven the reasonable doubt in this case.

1,511 posted on 08/18/2002 8:02:18 AM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1507 | View Replies]

To: ican'tbelieveit
Many of us have spent months listening to this trial, educating ourselves, following the threads.

You posted this earlier on this thread at #279:

And the "rape video" is animation which the US Supreme Court has ruled is not a crime.

On what do you base this assertion?

Why does Feldman argue in his closing that the rape videos are of real girls? Why does he tell the jury that the females in the videos are not under eighteen and therefore not illegal? Why would age enter into his argument if the videos were "only" animation?

From Feldman's closing argument:

THE SAME WITH THE MPEGS, FRANKLY. I'M SORRY, MY SLANG. THE RAPE VIDEOS THAT YOU ALL, ALL OF US HAD THE EXPERIENCE WITH. IF THOSE FEMALES ARE OVER 18, THERE'S NO CRIME. END OF DISCUSSION. GROSS, OKAY. DISGUSTING, OKAY. INAPPROPRIATE, OKAY. ENOUGH TO SHOCK YOU, OKAY. ENOUGH TO BIAS YOU, DEFINITELY. ENOUGH TO PREJUDICE YOU AGAINST MR. WESTERFIELD, ABSOLUTELY. THE PLAN. BUT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CONSIDER BIAS, PASSION OR PITY OR PREJUDICE. OBJECTIVELY, THOSE PICTURES DON'T DEPICT FEMALES UNDER THE AGE OF 18. PERIOD. LOOK. AND I'M NOT ENCOURAGING TO LOOK FOR ANY PURINE INTEREST OR ANY INTEREST. THAT'S BAD ENOUGH. BUT WHAT THEY DID WAS TAKE TWO OR THREE VIDEOS OUT OF THOUSANDS AND CLAIM THIS IS A TRUE AND ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF MR. WESTERFIELD.

-SNIP-

WAIT A MINUTE. IN THE THOUSANDS OF DOWNLOADS WE FOUND A VIDEO OR TWO OR FIVE OR TEN THAT MAYBE PROVE THE POINT. SO BY THAT LOGIC, ANY OF US WHO MAY POSSESS ANYTHING LIKE THAT ARE GOING TO GO OUT AND KILL CHILDREN. RIGHT? ISN'T THAT THE LOGIC?

-End Excerpt-

Also note, it is not "rape video" singular, it is "rape videos" plural. Two or five or ten per Mr. Feldman.

1,512 posted on 08/18/2002 8:14:54 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1511 | View Replies]

To: clearvision
February 16th

muffled voice -- "I know the location of your daughter"
"Damon is that you?"
muffled voice -- "who's Damon?" (mumbling sounds "you stupid .....")
"Oh yeah... oh please, please tell me"
muffled voice -- "look on Dehesa Rd."
"Oh thank, thank you"
click
1,513 posted on 08/18/2002 8:15:18 AM PDT by clearvision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1510 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Thought you'd be interested in my post #1512 putting to rest the notion that the rape videos were animations.
1,514 posted on 08/18/2002 8:16:46 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1512 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Possibly before using that particular quote from me, you should have followed the whole situation I was replying to.
1,515 posted on 08/18/2002 8:17:13 AM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1512 | View Replies]

To: fatima
WOW
1,516 posted on 08/18/2002 8:26:21 AM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1460 | View Replies]

To: ican'tbelieveit
Hello!

Pardon me if I am wrong, but exactly HOW MUCH information exists regarding the porn found on Westerfield's computer? The reason I am asking is that most/all of commercially purchased "rape" videos and "barely legal" videos consist of ladies of legal age (who appear younger due to certain physical aspects) and bad acting where the supposed "rape" victim actually ends up enjoying the ordeal. I think it's kind of hard to base our judgements on what they were/were not as none of us have ever seen them, and we only have the TV spin and testimony to go by.

btw.... I am not a "porn" fan or anything, but I have done some volunteer work with some area churches/agencies to try to rid some stores of true rape and child porn, and there is a fine line, albeit it is only a legal one and not a moral one.
1,517 posted on 08/18/2002 8:26:21 AM PDT by CAPPSMADNESS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1515 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
It's come up before. Don't know off hand. Don't have transcripts memorized.
1,518 posted on 08/18/2002 8:28:41 AM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1477 | View Replies]

To: CAPPSMADNESS
I also have a problem with the group of people who will crucify Westerfield over having pornography on his computer, some of it deleted years ago, some of it on a cd buried behind books, some of it his son's (admission by son).

But these same people have NO problem with the Van Dam's having living pornography in their garage's on the weekend.

1,519 posted on 08/18/2002 8:29:52 AM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1517 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
But is it blood?
1,520 posted on 08/18/2002 8:30:22 AM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1488 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,481-1,5001,501-1,5201,521-1,540 ... 1,741-1,743 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson