The judge in the David Westerfield trial rejected another defense request to sequester the jury but said he still considers it "a possible option." Posted on 07/30/2002 7:13:26 AM PDT by FresnoDA
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.
I just got back so have missed most of Goff. But regarding DW didn't do it, I just started reading yesterday's hearing transcripts.
Here is DEFENSE to Judge Mudd:
MR. BOYCE: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF HOW SHE GOT THERE. I MEAN FOR ALL THEY KNOW THAT SOMEBODY COULD HAVE ASKED HER DO YOU WANT TO GO CAMPING FOR THE WEEKEND, AND SHE ENDED UP IN THE MOTOR HOME. WE DON'T KNOW. THERE'S BEEN NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED.NOW, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEIR THEORY IS UNREASONABLE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S -- BUT I'M SAYING THERE ARE OTHER THEORIES OUT THERE. I'M SAYING THIS -- THERE IS NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED AS TO HOW SHE GOT WHEREVER SHE WAS MURDERED.
Maybe she ended up in the MH because she was invited??? HMMMMMMMMMMMM
Not evidence, mind you, just interesting...
I don't think you could have said it any better. AND it applies to both 'sides' of the fence.
Is that the way you do tax returns?
Absolutely. I wouldn't take posistions more agressive (or less) than my client would be comfortable with.
Shoo fly don't bother me, shoo fly don't bother me
However Judge Mudd said that the parents had not given permission for Danielle to be in Westerfield's possession, so no matter how she came to be there--whether he took her or enticed her--it is kidnapping.
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.