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.
When you mentioned the absence of fluids under the body, my ears perked up and I immediately made an association between the moisture needs of the flies. I'm thinking it'll be curiosities like this that'll move the jurors to draw a potentially incorrect conclusion.
Dread, look at underlined testimony..dissection occurred.
Wonders---, Indeed, his testimony changed between PH and the Trial.
PRELIMINARY HEARING
http://members.cox.net/jeneal/PrelimTranscripts/PVW311.txt
12 Q WERE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW LONG SHE'D 13 BEEN DEAD? 14 A WITHIN A BROAD RANGE, YES. 15 Q HOW DID YOU MAKE THAT DETERMINATION? 16 A WELL, JUST EVALUATING THE DECOMPOSITION AND 17 THE OTHER -- THE ANIMAL ACTIVITY, REALLY. IT'S 18 CERTAINLY CONSISTENT WITH THE THREE-AND-A-HALF WEEKS 19 SHE'D BEEN MISSING.
http://members.cox.net/jeneal/PrelimTranscripts/020311p1.txt
1 Q. At what point, the 11th -- I mean how far do I go 2 before you say no, I guess is what I'm really asking? 3 A. Well, the body is decomposed and mummified. It 4 certainly has been out there weeks. I don't think it's one 5 week. I think it's more than one week. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. Two, two and a half, three, three and half. All 8 of those would be consistent.
TRIAL
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/20020605-9999-pm2.html
A. WELL, THE BODY WAS OF A YOUNG WHITE FEMALE IN A 26 STATE OF MARKED DECOMPOSITION. IN ADDITION TO THE 27 DECOMPOSITION, THERE WAS EXTENSIVE ANIMAL FEEDING ON THE BODY. 28 SO A LOT OF THE TISSUE ON THE BODY WAS MISSING. AND THE FACE 3711 1 WAS INTACT, THE SKIN WAS MUMMIFIED OR JUST DRIED, BUT THE 2 FEATURES WERE STILL QUITE RECOGNIZABLE. 3 THE HAIR WAS PRESENT AND RECOGNIZABLE AS BLONDE AND 4 FAIRLY LONG. HOWEVER, FROM BELOW THE COLLAR BONE, THE ENTIRE 5 FRONT OF THE BODY, ALL THE SKIN AND THE MUSCLE, SOME OF THE 6 MUSCLE EVEN WAS MISSING BY THE ANIMALS
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/20020606-9999-am1.html
Q: WERE YOU ABLE TO GIVE US A BALLPARK ESTIMATE ON TIME OF DEATH FOR DANIELLE?A: WELL, JUST LOOKING AT THE BODY, IT WAS CLEAR TO ME SHE HAD BEEN DEAD FOR A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD OF TIME. AND JUST LOOKING AT THE BODY ALONE, NOT TAKING ANY CIRCUMSTANCES INTO CONSIDERATION, I WOULD SAY FROM TEN DAYS TO POSSIBLY SIX WEEKS
Q: WHY DO YOU SAY THAT, DOCTOR?A: WELL, IT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF TEN DAYS OUTSIDE IN THE ENVIRONMENT TO GET THE EXTREME DEGREE OF MUMMIFICATION AND HAVE THE PUTREFACTION GO THROUGH MOST OF ITS PROCESS AND THEN SORT OF DISAPPEAR SO THAT THINGS LIKE THE LIPS WERE ALREADY, WERE NOT SWOLLEN, THEY WERE SORT OF BACK TO NOT NORMAL SIZE, BUT THEY HAD RECEDED. WE SEE THIS IN CASES WHERE BODIES ARE FOUND IN THE DESERT, FOR INSTANCE. I KNEW IT WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF TEN DAYS. AND THE MAXIMUM, WELL, THE HEART AND THE LUNGS WERE STILL IDENTIFIABLE AND, IN FACT, I WAS ABLE TO DISSECT THEM IN ALMOST A NORMAL FASHION. SO IT WASN'T A LONG TIME; IT WASN'T MONTHS. SO IT'S SUBJECTIVE. IT'S AN ESTIMATE. THAT'S MY ESTIMATE.Q: AND THAT IS FROM THE TIME OF THE AUTOPSY YOU'RE COUNTING BACK TEN DAYS OR SIX WEEKS?A: UNTIL THE TIME I EXAMINED HER ON THE SCENE BASICALLY
Actually, his testimony did not change, per se. As I said earlier, three and a half weeks is within the range of ten days to six weeks. It all depends on how the lawyer asks the question what the answer will be, you see. The questions often "lead" the answers. One must watch out for that in a trial.
Any of you smart folks here who know more about this than I do have a take on this?
possible scenario:Danielle VanDam dies(possibly unintentionally)on the second floor of her home. The (allegedly) grownup VanDams freak out,and move the body inside the dog bed. The dog,doing her job,and protecting the girl,jumps the VanDams. Damon pops the dog on the head,hard enough to stun the dog,and start the dog's nose to bleeding.The body is then removed to parts unknown,inside the dog bed.
Okay,punch holes in it-there have to be at least a few there.
Freeper wonders remembers this being mentioned in testimony.
I was trying to think like a juror. IMHO, every anamoly ought to have a simple, natural and straightforward explanation. Something like this would scream to me if I were on the jury, i.e. there must be an explanation.
If I were sitting there, I would assume that the body had to have released fluids and since there were none where she was found, the body had to have been moved.
If I were leaning to a "guilty" verdict, I would have assumed that the body was moved by a predator, perhaps drug out of a garbage bag or something.
If I were leaning to a "not guilty" verdict, I would have figured she was killed, decayed elsewhere and then moved by the perp.
I might also figure the absence of fluids would indicate that the body wasn't "there" opened-up for very long - thus explaining the shortage of flies.
I wish the jurors could chat on a forum with the witnesses to get their questions answered... sigh
The ME said 10 days - 6 weeks (10 days - 42 days) and the mummyologist said 28 - 42 days
how much experience has haskell had with mummification? I did not hear that portion of his testimony.
Thanks to mommya.....we got this timeline
http://www.courttv.com/trials/westerfield/timeline/time_of_death.html
Blackbourne, Rodriguez and Wecht's (a defense expert) dates overlap. (1st - 6th)
haskell, goff and hall, overlap with each other. At least one of the bug guys, I think hall is the guy from missouri hasn't seen a body in the condition Danielle's body was in.
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.