Arguing 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. Posted on 08/16/2002 6:39:20 AM PDT by FresnoDA
August 15, 2002
Arguing 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."
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.
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.
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:
On July 9, Shen's testimony interrupted presentation of defense witnesses. Shen, a San Diego police criminalist, testified about re-examining a group of fibers she had collected from Westerfield's 4Runner in February.
The orange acrylic fibers, found in various places inside the SUV, were the same color and fabric as a fiber tangled in a plastic necklace that Danielle was wearing when authorities found her body in a hollow off Dehesa Road, Shen testified at the time.
All the fibers looked identical under a microscope and appeared to have the same chemical makeup when tested using infrared technology, she said.
Shen said the fibers seem "most likely to have come from something that was very loosely knit," such as a sweater or blanket.
"You folks are going to deal with my PR person. You're going to leave my bailiff and my clerk alone," Mudd told reporters in the courtroom. "One statement leads to 60 questions that they're not going to answer and neither am I."
Mudd decided to turn the daily updates over to the court's public information officer after deciding that an informal system set up to have a bailiff or court clerk provide updates had failed.
"There was a simple note that they started at 9, they left at 4 left you chomping on bit to get copies," He said. "You're welcome to them, they'll be available as soon as we gett the minute order."
Reporters and members of the public will not be informed immediately about notes passed by the jury, Mudd said. The judge said he had procedure to follow, that includes notifying the attorneys involved in the case about the note and determining the appropriate response.
"This is a capital case and you go by steps," Mudd said.
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.
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.
I am a bit sleep deprived tonight so PLEASE FORGIVE!
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!
(Posted with permission of Registered...FDA)
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.