Prosecution witness challenges findings of defense 'bug expert'
Posted on 07/30/2002 3:58:51 PM PDT by FresnoDA
Prosecution witness challenges findings of defense 'bug expert'
|
|
|
July 30, 2002
M. Lee Goff, an entomologist and chairman of the Forensic Sciences Department of Chaminade University in Honolulu, said his review of the crime scene photos, morgue photos, weather reports and other evidence suggest that Danielle's body was exposed to insects as early as Feb. 1 and no later than Feb. 14.
"We're working on an estimate. We're not running a stopwatch here," Goff said. The defense has contended that there was no way Westerfield could have placed the victim's body where it was found in the East County community of Dehesa, because he was under close surveillance by police beginning Feb. 5. Goff was called to the stand to rebut testimony from two forensic entomologists called by the defense who testified that Danielle's body could not have been exposed to insects any earlier than mid-February, nearly two weeks after Westerfield came under police surveillance. Westerfield could face the death penalty if convicted of the kidnap and murder of Danielle. He also has been charged with possession of child pornography. Danielle was reported missing from her family's Sabre Springs home on Feb. 2. Her body was found in a wooded area near El Cajon on Feb. 27 after a massive search drew national attention. Westerfield, who lived two doors down from the van Dams, became an early suspect in her disappearance.
Insect evidenceWhen Danielle's naked body was found, investigators took extensive photos of it and its surroundings, then put bags over her head, feet and hands and wrapped the body in a sheet to preserve any evidence.Law enforcement officials called in forensic entomologist David Faulker to study the signs of insect infestation on the body to try to gauge when Danielle had died. But lead defense attorney Steven Feldman argued in his opening statement that scientific evidence would prove his client could not have killed Danielle. As it turned out, the prosecution never called Faulker to the stand and he was called by Feldman as a defense witness. Early in the trial, San Diego County Medical Examiner Brian Blackbourne testified that the girl could have been dead from 10 days to six weeks when her body was found. Faulkner testified July 10 that his analysis of the life cycles of the insects found on Danielle's body showed it wasn't available to insects until sometime between Feb. 16 and 18. On July 22, a second defense expert, Dr. Neal Haskell, testified that Danielle's body couldn't have been exposed to flies any earlier than Feb. 12.
Insect rebuttalProsecutors began rebutting the defense insect evidence on Thursday by calling Dr. William C. Rodriguez III, a forensic anthropologist for the Department of Defense, who testified that Danielle's body was in "an advanced state of mummification" that would have delayed insect infestation.On Tuesday, Goff reiterated testimony about insect lifecycles presented by the previous experts: You can calculate how long a body has been exposed to the elements by gauging the age of the maggots – fly larvae – growing on the body. Flies are quickly drawn to dead bodies and will lay batches of eggs on them. The development of the eggs into different stages of larvae and adult flies is then affected by temperature, humidity and other environmental factors. Using charts of known development rates, a forensic entomologist can look at the age of maggots found on a body and, factoring in the weather, can calculate when the eggs they hatched from had been laid. Generally, the warmer the weather, the faster the insects develop. Goff, author of "A Fly for the Prosecution: How Insects Help Solve Crimes," said he calculated the "post-mortem interval" date from the maggots on Danielle's body using temperature records and charts from a 2000 fly study. He said Faulkner appeared to have made his calculations using a chart of insect development from a study that used 80-degree temperatures, far higher than the rates in the San Diego mountains in February. Haskell appeared to have calculated his dates assuming that the activity of the "maggot mass" on the body would have raised the temperature of the mass, speeding up their development. In both cases, Goff said, the other entomologists estimated that the maggots would have developed much faster than he did, giving a much later date for the exposure of Danielle's body to the elements. Goff was scheduled to resume testifying – and to face cross-examination by the defense – after a lunch break.
Fiber evidence
A series of shirts and other orange-colored items brought to the San Diego Police Department crime lab were made from either nylon, cotton or a polyester-cotton blend, criminalist Tanya DuLaney testified. "Did the fabric of any of these items consist of acrylic in any manner?" assistant prosecutor Woody Clarke asked. "No," DuLaney replied. Prosecutors called DuLaney back to the stand in response to defense suggestions that investigators could have inadvertently cross-contaminated the two crime scenes with the orange acrylic fibers, which became a key piece of prosecutor evidence linking Westerfield with Danielle's body. On June 25, police criminalist Jennifer Shen testified that an orange acrylic fiber tangled in Danielle's plastic necklace at the time her body was found was similar to orange acrylic fibers found in laundry inside Westerfield's home and on bedding in his bedroom. On July 24, lead defense attorney Steven Feldman introduced into evidence several still images from television that showed police investigators wearing orange or orangish shirts as they entered and left Westerfield's house on Feb. 4 or 5. In response, the district attorney's office identified all of the police and search-and-rescue personnel shown in the photos, collected anything orange-colored they were wearing at the time and gave the clothing to the crime lab. That evidence consister of two orange long-sleeved shirts, an orange short-sleeved shirt, four reddish polo shirts, an orange rope, an orange strap, a black-and-red backpack, an orange hat and an orange dog vest, DuLaney said. Under microscopic and infrared examination, none of the fibers taken from those items contained any acrylic material, DuLaney said.
Trial's end in sightAt the start of today's session, Superior Court Judge William Mudd told jurors that there will be no testimony on Wednesday, but that testimony will resume Thursday and could conclude on Monday."It appears to me that next week you'll hear closing arguments and be in deliberations," Mudd said. The judge said that he had not yet decided whether to sequester the jurors during deliberations. Mudd also warned jurors not to read or view any material about the Westerfield case or the Orange County kidnap-murder of Samantha Runnion, in which the girl's mother blamed a previous jury for failing to convict her daughter's accused murdered in a previous sexual abuse case. "The fact is the case is not similar in any way, shape or form," Mudd said. |
That might work better than the case he's presented so far.
Only when cataloguing evidence---before the fiber was cleaned. The fiber turned out to be the same bright orange as the others.
You are correct, there were a couple other orange fibers that did not match at other places--one was wool, I believe.
See - I really do think about all angles in this - I don't see things only one way.
They will argue that item(s) tying Danielle to DW left those fibers. What are those items? DW isn't saying. But the quantity of orange fibers in his home indicates that is where the item came from and he hasn't provided the item to the police---they did check an afghan which did not match.
I looked at the pictures, they don't look the same to me. I am no expert, however.
DW lied to police.. It was not a spur of the moment.
Sorry, Since you did say you didn't think anyone caught it, let me inform you. Someone did, and brought it up. Someone brought up the obvious, that DW had CHANGED his plans and what he was discussing with police at the TIME of the CONVERSATION was about events that were SPUR OF THE MOMENT.
So, the original poster that brought it up was making an attempt to take a comment OUT OF CONTEXT to try and prove DW lied, and you just did the same thing.
What are these BRIGHT ORANGE fibers from ?
Shen (June 25) displayed the necklace to the jury and showed the approximate place where the wad of hair and fiber were.:
Q: BASED ON THE LOCATION OF THAT HAIR ON THE NECKLACE, CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR THE JURY, PLEASE, OR ARE YOU ABLE TO DESCRIBE FOR THE JURY THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION WHERE THAT ORANGE FIBER WAS LOCATED?
A: VERY APPROXIMATELY.
MR. CLARKE: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO ASK THE COURT'S PERMISSION FOR THE WITNESS TO STEP DOWN IN FRONT OF THE JURY, GOING TO HOLD A WHITE BOARD BEHIND IT SO IT CAN BE OBSERVED MORE EASILY FOR HER TO POINT OUT THAT LOCATION.
THE COURT: SURELY. YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
MR. CLARKE: PERHAPS YOU COULD STAND HERE, MISS SHEN, IF YOU WOULD. COULD YOU INDICATE FOR THE JURY THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THAT ORANGE FIBER WHEN YOU FOUND IT.
THE WITNESS: I FOUND THE FIBER TANGLED OR KNOTTED INTO THE HAIR IN THIS AREA ON THE NECKLACE.
THE COURT: CAN YOU FOLKS OVER HERE SEE?
JUROR NUMBER 7: NO.
THE COURT: OKAY. DO IT ONE SIDE AND THEN THE OTHER.
THE WITNESS: IN THE AREA WHERE THE HAIR IS CONCENTRATED IN A LARGE CLUMP, THAT IS WHERE I FOUND THE ORANGE FIBER. IT WAS TANGLED IN THE HAIR IN THAT AREA.
Also, there was a sidebar about Shen being allowed to give her opinion on how recently the fiber came to be there and the judge allowed it.
Kim....maybe he had planed to go earlier in the week and nobody wanted to go.....as the week progresses he decides he's not going.....Friday night comes and he can't pickup anybody.....says the hell with it....i'm going to the desert for the weekend....In his mind it was spur of the moment.
When i was single this scenerio (not the picking up women part LOL!) happened alot....
You've probably seen the excerpts I've posted in the past of all the tests that were done and that testimony is there. I haven't personally seen pics, though.
Hope that helps!
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.
