Judge Mudd Refuses Sequester Plea: Westerfield Jury Verdict In Sep? (Aug. 16th Verdict Watch)

Union Trib ^ | August 15, 2002 | Jeff Dillion/Steve Perez

[CAPPSMADNESS]

Well, it is unusual. The only other explanation I can think of is that perhaps, as her body was small and lean, and if animals had opened up sufficient areas, the fluids evaporated in the dry air, rather than seeping down into the ground. I have no experience with such a case, though, and it still seems to me there would have been at least some drainage from the pelvic area. *CAPPSMADNESS: What do you think?

I think that if the animals would have "opened the corpse up" prior to putrification, then the body could not have been at the site as the defense wants us to believe, wonders, you sound very knowledgeable in this field, without grossing everyone out, think about the natural occurances that occur post-mortem. The bacteria in the body would have started degenerating the tissues within a very short time after death.

I have read about the condition of the body, it was in good enough shape to see bruises, and internal organs (that which remained). I cannot fathom how the defense can expect anyone to believe that the child was placed there shortly after death. If she were "opened up" during the early stages of decomp, then that would expalain the green bottle flies -not to mention that the body would have been in a far more advanced stage of decomp then it was. But if the child was decomposing for 2 weeks (and protected by the mummification)there would be NO GBF's.

[small_l_libertarian]

I cannot fathom how the defense can expect anyone to believe that the child was placed there shortly after death.

Do you mean the prosecution?

[John Jamieson]

Excellant question. Was the "boy friend" already in SD when Danielle disappeared? I have always wished someone had questioned that guy.

Maybe he really wasn't an old boy friend but a local internet porno ring member, and maybe Damon didn't really take him to the airport. Cover (up) story?

TOO MANY PEOPLE NOT TALKING.

[wonders]

Well, fibres can certainly useful, but I wouldn't class them in with DNA and forensic entomology, particularly when the fibres are not sourced. This is especially true in a case, such as this one, where it is known that the accused and the victim were in physical contact with each other within days of the crime allegedly committed.

We know Danielle and Westerfield are inextricably linked, whether he did the deed or not. They have been linked together by hair and fibre evidence by virtue of:

(1) the cookie visit

(2) the "tail feather fest" on the evening/night of Feb 1, when fibre transfer was possible (Locard theory of transfer)

(3) DW soon became he prime suspect in this case, with LE all over Danielle's stuff and DW's stuff.

The question is: do the fibres and hairs show they were linked before (yes), during (?)or after (yes) the "abduction"? We need to find fibres which prove "during" if DW is guilty.

Before the alleged abduction: Yes, there must be linkage, as we know there was the cookie visit within days of the "abduction". There was also possible transfer during the "tail feather fest" at Dad's on the evening/night of the "abduction".

During the alleged abduction: Aye, there's the rub! This is what we really want to know!

After the alleged abduction: They are linked simply by virtue of DW being a suspect. Once that happens, particularly if he is the prime suspect, more and more linkage occurs. At this point, fibres may be shed and/or transferred by LE (and their search dogs) which are "after the fact."

What I am (we all are) searching for are fibre links which definitively point to linkage between Danielle and DW DURING the alleged abduction. So far, I have not found such, but not for lack of trying!

So I'm not so nearly set on any fibre evidence as on DNA and the bugs.

[CAPPSMADNESS]

Big OOPS!!! of course you are absolutely right, that is in fact what I meant......

I am a bit sleep deprived tonight so PLEASE FORGIVE!

[small_l_libertarian]

I was just confused - no sleep here, too. Nothing to forgive - I agree with you completely.

[hoosiermama]

Maybe he from the mob? or maybe he wwas involved in Adam's death? or maybe he's an ol' lover? or maybe....?

[small_l_libertarian]

Wow, what a great post! That was a very good explanation.

[the-gooroo]

Thanks guys. I don't mean to be a pain but do you happen to know who testified to this? I'd like to go find the transcript since I missed this part of the trial. No big woop though if you don't remember.






.

[small_l_libertarian]

Great post, NG. It is SOOOOOOO telling that Dusek dropped Faulkner like a hot potato when he reached the "wrong" conclusion.

[small_l_libertarian]

I'm pretty sure it was never in the trial (should be self-explanatory). I think I read it in an article at the SignOnSanDiego site. It was after they had already used other dogs that didn't find anything, I think.

[hoosiermama]

Hope the jury members are thinking as clearly as you present the material. Great post!

[KnutCase]

They took the dogs to several homes in the immediate vicinity, but as I recall they had used Danielle's undies and were looking for a trail on Danielle. I do not know if they used the dogs to sniff out DW's scent in the VD home. If they did not, they are damn poor investigators. However, it was stated by the prosecution that no DNA or "other evidence" pointed to DW being in the VD home. Does that help answer your question???

[wonders]

The bacteria in the body would have started degenerating the tissues within a very short time after death.

Agreed all the way!

In fact, I agree with everything you say (please search and read all my posts on this thread, to get a better idea of where I'm coming from, if you like).

This leaves only two logical conclusions: the child was killed around Feb 14- 18 and left there at or very shortly after death OR something weird was going on, like the body was frozen or something.

Lastly, it's wonderful, and such a welcome relief, to meet you, another person who has dealt with dead bodies lying in open and understands. So glad I had the privelege to meet you!

[domestice]

Very well said!

[FresnoDA]

BREAKING NEWS FLASH

DUH-KNEES CRACKS UNDER

INTENSE HUMP DETECTOR ANALYSIS

New Revelations Could Break Westerfield Case.....

Wide Open....

(Posted with permission of Registered...FDA)

[NatureGirl]

I see what you mean. I posted something here earlier today:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/734265/posts?page=175#175

about a much simpler method of moving fibres from one person to another. I don't think that dancing with someone would be the first (obvious) thing that I would look at.

And, following that thought, when I think back to my youth, I can think of a very straight-forward way of fibres getting from Brenda to DW to his bedding...he passed out on the bed in his clothes. He told Redden in the interview that he'd had a shot of something - something he normally didn't do, and had to leave because previous experience had shown that he might fall asleep in the bar, if he'd had too much.

[wonders]

Oops, there's a third possibility: She was killed around Feb 14 - 18. Animals came, flies came, putrefaction happened, the gases built up, the fluids found their escape (you know how all that takes place, no need to gross out everyone else)and THEN the body was moved to Dehesa and left in approximately the same position as in the first location. That would be soooo weird, though.

[sunshine state]

What a great post! It's a keeper.

[small_l_libertarian]

a very straight-forward way of fibres getting from Brenda to DW to his bedding...he passed out on the bed in his clothes

You are so smart! That is brilliant!