Judge Mudd Says Sequestering Of Jury Possible: Van Dam case has jurors facing more Mad-Dawgging!!

Union Trib ^ | July 30, 3002 | Alex Roth

[FresnoDA]

Judge says sequestering of jury possible

By Alex Roth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

July 30, 2002

The judge in the David Westerfield trial rejected another defense request to sequester the jury but said he still considers it "a possible option."

Superior Court Judge William Mudd said he didn't think it was necessary at the moment but has asked the county to prepare "a back-up contingency plan" just in case.

Westerfield's lawyers have asked several times for jury sequestration, and they renewed their request yesterday. Lead defense lawyer Steven Feldman said he worried that the jury might be affected by the publicity in the Samantha Runnion kidnap-murder case in Orange County.

Feldman cited comments made by Samantha's mother about Alejandro Avila, the man charged with kidnapping and killing the 5-year-old girl. In an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," Erin Runnion blamed her daughter's death on a jury that acquitted Avila of child molestation charges two years ago.

Feldman said he worried that jurors in the Westerfield case might hear about the interview and feel pressured to convict his client, who is charged with kidnapping and killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam of Sabre Springs.

The judge said he would remind jurors about news coverage they should avoid. He also said he talked to them about sequestration last week after receiving reports that someone in the media followed some of the jurors to their cars and wrote down their license plates.

"They're a hearty group and they didn't appear to be intimidated by what occurred, and I continue to believe in their integrity," the judge said yesterday.

With the trial in recess for a day, lawyers spent yesterday discussing legal instructions to give to the jury before they begin deliberations. It seems likely that testimony will continue into next week.

Prosecutors are expected to finish their rebuttal evidence today, at which point the defense will put on evidence to rebut the prosecution's rebuttal. One possible defense witness probably won't be called until Monday, Feldman told the judge yesterday.

[Jaded]

SDPD lay in wait for him as of 2/3.

He returned 2/4

As of 2/4 around 2:30 PM David was in their presence for 28.5 hours for interrogation, shower and trip.

On 2/5 they began intense surveillance 24/7.

He was arrested in the late morning of 2/22.

Been in custody ever since.

[bvw]

Well Dusek's experts have already said that the minimum date when she was dead is before she died, so what exactly is a minimum? Will Dusak say "Yeah, but ignore that minimum ..."

[John Jamieson]

HEY DUSEK, THERE"S STILL 7 EXPERTS LEFT,

and they are getting closer to what you want.

[VRWC_minion]

So, you are actually saying that without GOFF stretching the time the body could be there, that Prosecution has such a weak case they are afraid they will lose?

No, but the defense that Westerfield couldn't have left her is up for grabs and no longer impossible according to expert testimony.

[John Jamieson]

"Most likely" to me means the middle of his stated interval, not the extreme.

[VRWC_minion]

She said; "ENTOMOLOGISTS ARE MORE ABLE TO COME CLOSER TO THE TIME OF DEATH THAN AN ANTHROPOLOGIST."Which is why the mummy guy was giving such large ranges and because of that the FR experts made fun of him. His science doesn't "allow" such a close estimate.

[John Jamieson]

"no longer impossible according to expert"

This has to be a breakthrough in the case.

NOW DW MIGHT HAVE DONE IT!

[VRWC_minion]

Most likely" to me means the middle of his stated interval, not the extreme

Even when the most likely is the minimum range ?

[John Jamieson]

His science didn't even allow a possible estimate!

[John Jamieson]

Huh? I think you're talking apples, and I'm talking oranges. Goff's "minimum" is merely based on the fact that he refuses to speculate on the availablity of fly's to the body. I'll bet if we read his books, he says that they get there pronto. And, Feldman has been reading his books.

Going back to the TV now. It's been fun! Hang in there.

[It's me]

The neighbor who saw the boy in front of his own house two weeks or so ago said he didn't cross the street but looked like he wanted to so she helped him. ******************

Let's fix that with the truth: The neighbor who saw the youngest Van Dam boy in front of her house. Said she saw the boy run across the street to get a ball and she was afraid for him crossing the street again to get back to his house so she helped him back across. She also stated that she saw no one outside watching the little boy.

[bolthead]

Goff made the four calculations, two for Singing Hills and two for Brown Field. Then, before being cross-examined, he essentially said that the Singing Hills calcs were worthless because of only having max and min readings and of having to utilize a median. Of the Brown Field calcs he further stated, before being cross-examined that the 16.1C calc, which has a start date of 9 Feb, was the best.

His numbers were + or - one day. Thus his best calculation shows an earliest date of 8 Feb, while Haskell's earliest date was 12 Feb. I fail to see how adding four days to Haskell's earliest time actually helps the prosecution that much.

And as noted, this is still before cross-examination.

[It's me]

if she's a liar they are going to exploit it to the max and prove it at EVERY opportunity in front of the jury. Their client's life is at stake. If they could have proved it they would have. They can't.

---

I think they did prove it. Numerous times.

[UCANSEE2]

Let's fix that with the truth

Darn it. That OLD TRUTH. Every time someone comes up with the TOTAL STATEMENTS, the TRUTH, they prove the VD's have lied, and that the speculation that some posters have is TRUE.

Darn pesky old truth. Outa be banned!

[bvw]

Blocked by the Judge.

[UCANSEE2]

No, but the defense that Westerfield couldn't have left her is up for grabs and no longer impossible according to expert testimony.

Well, I agree with you V. I don't think and never have believed it was IMPOSSIBLE. Just that it was VERY UNLIKELY. That 2 out of 3 experts saying it is highly unlikely falls in the reasonable doubt. That if you count that as reasonable doubt, then the other evidence which also is a long reach can be dismissed.

The lack of any evidence showing him coming in the home when the VAN DAMS themselves INSIST that is where she was (and therefore the Prosecution)means the jury has to find him NOT GUILTY.

[FresnoDA]

P.S. Why is this thread on "General Interest" rather than News?

Uhm....I posted this thread....and since there was not a Threadjackal or Carnivorous animal section......it fell under General Interest....

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Of the Brown Field calcs he further stated, before being cross-examined that the 16.1C calc, which has a start date of 9 Feb, was the best.

His numbers were + or - one day. Thus his best calculation shows an earliest date of 8 Feb, while Haskell's earliest date was 12 Feb. I fail to see how adding four days to Haskell's earliest time actually helps the prosecution that much.

Bingo bump

[bvw]

Is there a "Nancy Grace Law"?