Skip to comments.
Westerfield Jury Reaches Verdict DEATH
o
| Joe Hadenuf
Posted on 09/16/2002 1:46:27 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
Death
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660, 661-680, 681-700, 701-704 next last
To: Palladin
I really think it will be a loony from So-Cal. He's got a wide, wide field to pick from, that's for sure.
661
posted on
09/17/2002 1:57:43 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: Valpal1
Murder requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Perhaps you in your life have never seen a healthy person one day, dead the next from unknown causes but I have.
Where did Danielle die and how?
The coroner made a reasonable guess, even a very reasonable guess, but absent some other strong evidence of murder, you are right, I would not be convinced that Danielle did not die of accident or natural cause short of murder, even if and while she was kidnapped.
662
posted on
09/17/2002 2:02:32 PM PDT
by
bvw
To: dread78645
I can see how the prosecution would have asked him first because they used him in the past. But during discovery found out that he wasn't qualified in this type of a case. I believe that criticizing them for rejecting his interpretation was spin started by the defense. That jan15 date wasn't as important as to show that the skin DID make a difference. Basscleff liked to quote me from another thread..it has to do with margin of error...how much do you give the bug guys?
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
But during discovery found out that he wasn't qualified in this type of a case. I believe that criticizing them for rejecting his interpretation was spin started by the defense. A Forensic Entomologist would be used in any case where the body was exposed to insects. If it was in an enclosed building, it's doubtful critters could get to it.
So the body would almost have to be outside. Faulkner testified 196 times, how is it that he is now somehow un-qualified ?
Basscleff liked to quote me from another thread..it has to do with margin of error...how much do you give the bug guys?
I'm comfortable with Feb 14th-18th; Goff's Feb 9th seems to be a strech to save him some credibility.
The range :
Goff 9th - 14th
Faulkner 16th - 18th
Haskell 12th -14th
Hall 12th - 18th
To: Dr. Scarpetta
Inmates will carry out the sentence before the state will. Never happen. A prisoner on death row is safer than any of us on the outside.
665
posted on
09/17/2002 2:34:53 PM PDT
by
Melas
To: Illbay
Damner was given fifteen consecutive life terms or a total of 957 years in prison. Big differnce. Death row is another animal. With slight state to state variations, death row inmates spend 23 hours a day in a cell, alone, and are never in a position to make physical contact with other inmates. Voice contact is as close as they get.
666
posted on
09/17/2002 2:37:35 PM PDT
by
Melas
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
I believe Danielle died in her own bed. That is why her PJ's were laying on the floor... If some one took her with other PJ's on, wouldn't they think to get rid of all the clothes not just Danielle's but their own too. The Van Dam's were so high and/or drunk they could not have been thinking straight. I think they invited some one home that night and now have to cover themselves... Do you think their life style would be questioned a lot more if that were the case? They would be in big trouble... they know this.... I do not believe David Westerfield killed Danielle.. You can't put him in the house, but some one else was there, find the owner of the prints and DNA you have your killer..
667
posted on
09/17/2002 2:40:36 PM PDT
by
just me
To: bvw
Your mode of discussion seems to be to put words in other's mouths and then proceeed to twaddle and twerk for words never said except by yourself. We can all see that you are very practised in talking to yourself, but what besides a the lark of a jester do you add to the thread?Huh? I guess quoting from YOUR OWN POSTS counts as putting words in your mouth, and drawing logical inferences from your refusing to even acknowledge that Danielle was murdered is not something you think is acceptable. Geez, I'll bet Westerfield is kicking himself for not having you help his defense!
To: Palladin
I suppose the Save-Dave crowd thinks it was not murder because it may have been suicide. UH-HUH! Thanks, Palladin!
To: NYCVirago
The cause of Danielle's death in
indeterminate, yet on circumstance the ME ruled it homicide -- yet that does NOT mean a murder beyond a reasonable doubt, and Danielle may have died -- within the extends of reasonability -- either accidentally or by some strange natural cause.
A murder conviction requires proof of that murder beyond any reasonable doubt, and that is not had here in the case of Danielle van Dam, in my opinion formed by having had closely followed this case since January.
670
posted on
09/17/2002 3:24:14 PM PDT
by
bvw
To: bvw
So now you know better than some forensic death examiner who examined her? Okie dokie...
To: FreeTheHostages
So, once again, sorry to disappoint, but its our criminal justice system, not you, that decides the truth about guilt or innocence on the planet Earth. (Take heart. There are plenty of other jobs here on Earth available.You're showing evidence of being a drooling moron.
Did I ever say I "decide" guilt? No, I deny that any human or group of humans can "decide" guilt. You've taken the fact that we have a system for figuring out who is guilty, and made it a system for deciding who is guilty. The guilty are guilty without needing a court to say so (and no, I'm not denying the presumption of innocence), and so are the innocent. They are what they are regardless of what any other person decides, simply because of what they actually did.
BTW, your Heaven bit is just as stupid as the rest of your comments. It's exactly the reverse of the truth: here on Earth, things are as they are regardless of what some authority decides, and if an authority decides so and so is guilty when he isn't, they're wrong. Period. On the other hand, in Heaven all truth comes directly from the Authority there, since reality changes in the wake of His Word.
To: just me
People like you who don't let the facts get in the way of what they "know" are just bizarre to me.
673
posted on
09/17/2002 4:09:21 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: Mean Maryjean
Death?! ... Ho-Hum...he'll be a very old man, or will have died in prison, looooong before the state of CA is finally ready for this man's execution.Look on the bright side, at least he wont be taking any of your family members on a ride in his motorhome..
To: FreeTheHostages
So, once again, sorry to disappoint, but its our criminal justice system, not you, that decides the truth about guilt or innocence on the planet Earth. ... Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven...
To: A.J.Armitage
Absolute-truth BUMP
To: FreeTheHostages
God judges the courts of the USA just like any other land. They, like all other organs of government, are servants who must render an account unto God. And if these servants follow silly self made rules that thwart heavenly justice, even if they are anchored in such an august document as the US Constitution, God will still require that account. He will not excuse on the basis of "the Constitution said I had to do it."
To: marajade
It was the examiner who said the casue of death was indeterminate. The "homocide" finding was based on circumstance -- those circumstances do not preclude a reasonable although much less likely possibility of accidental or natural death. That is all I have said.
678
posted on
09/17/2002 4:36:23 PM PDT
by
bvw
To: demsux
I am curious as to what you make of the reports of the plea bargain agreement that has made it into the papers today. Shortly before they found Danielle's body, apparently Westerfield was prepared to offer them the location of the body in return for life in prison. This was the piece of information that finally got me thinking that Westerfield really did it. I'm curious as to what you think about that story.
Drew Garrett
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
You are correct..it could have been a nose bleed, but there was no adequate proof it was there by innocent means. For whatever it's worth, I would want to know how a single spot on a jacket, supposedly produced by a bloody murder, could have been there by guilty means. Jackets are garments; they can go many places. The inside of the vehicle is another question. If no child ever went in there (but why? if he had a perverted jones for the sight of little kids, wouldn't he want kids to come in there?), it does point a more accusing finger at the vehicle being involved somehow in foul play.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660, 661-680, 681-700, 701-704 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson