Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Frustrated Prosecutor Dusek Swats At Final Bug Expert: Westerfield's Soon Will BUG The Jury....
Court TV ^ | August 2, 2002 | Harriet Ryan

Posted on 08/01/2002 10:25:00 PM PDT by FresnoDA

Frustrated prosecutor swats at final bug expert

Photo
David Westerfield, seated in court Thursday, faces the death penalty if convicted in the slaying of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam.

SAN DIEGO — David Westerfield was sitting in the defendant's chair, but forensic entomology was on trial Thursday.

Prosecutor Jeff Dusek, whose seemingly unshakeable case against Westerfield for the murder of Danielle van Dam has been jostled by this tiny, somewhat obscure scientific field, poured out his frustration on the last of three insect experts to testify for the defense.

Like his colleagues before him, forensic entomologist Robert Hall of the University of Missouri told jurors that the age of bugs decomposing Danielle's remains suggests Westerfield could not have dumped the 7-year-old's body along a roadside last February.

Dusek, with sighs, long stares at the ceiling and a tone that often mixed disgust with disbelief, railed against Hall's methods and the inexact nature of the field, in which experts given the same bug samples and weather data can differ in their conclusions by days and even weeks.

In one exchange, Dusek asked bitterly, "If you give an X-ray of a suspected broken arm to four qualified experts, would you expect them all to read it the same?"

"I don't know. I'm not a radiologist," replied Hall, whose mild-manner and stammering answers contrasted sharply with the prosecutor's intensity.

Three of the nine certified forensic entomologists in North America have testified in the case, as well as a local expert who is well-respected but not certified. They each offered slightly different ranges for the first arrival of insects at the death scene. Most placed them in mid-February.

"How can everyone come to different numbers in your field?" Dusek demanded.

Hall said "biological variation" in the insects led to some differences in results, but he claimed there was an overwhelming and unusual "concordance" among the experts that Danielle's body was first infested in mid-February, when Westerfield has an air-tight alibi.

"My conclusion would be the estimates are more consistent than inconsistent," said Hall.

"Are you saying close enough for a murder case?" Dusek shot back

"No — ," Hall uttered before Judge William Mudd ordered him not to answer the question further.

Some of the jurors, who have heard days of testimony about maggots, blowflies and puparia, seemed bored by the exchange while others continued taking detailed notes. One male juror seemed to sympathize with Dusek and shook him head in agreement as the prosecutor became impatient with Hall's long-winded answers.

Hall may be the final witness the panel hears. Westerfield's lead attorney, Steven Feldman, said the defense will decide this weekend whether to call one more witness, a forensic anthropologist to testify briefly about the time of death issue. If the defense does not call that expert, lawyers will deliver closing arguments Tuesday. If they do, he will testify Tuesday and arguments will begin Wednesday morning.

Westerfield, a 50-year-old engineer who lived two doors from the van Dam family in the upper middle class suburb of Sabre Springs, faces the death penalty if convicted. Someone snatched Danielle from her canopy bed during the night of Feb. 1. Searchers found her body Feb. 27 on the trash-strewn roadway about 25 miles from her house. Her body was too badly decomposed to determine when or how she died, but prosecutors theorize Westerfield raped and suffocated her and then dumped her body during a meandering 560-mile road trip in his recreational vehicle the weekend after her disappearance.

The trial initially focused on significant trace evidence implicating Westerfield, including Danielle's blood, fingerprints and hair inside his RV, and on child pornography on his computers. But the insect testimony has dominated the later part of the trial. Dusek called his own bug expert Tuesday, but that entomologist made basic math errors in his calculations and ultimately gave findings that did not neatly fit the prosecution's theory.

Hall estimated that the first flies colonized Danielle's body, a process that can happen within minutes or hours of death, occurred between Feb. 12 and Feb. 23. Police began round-the-clock surveillance of Westerfield Feb. 5.

Hall also dismissed the prosecutor's suggestion hot, dry weather in February quickly mummified the exterior of Danielle's body, making it initially inhospitable to bugs. A forensic anthropologist testified for the prosecution last week that the flies and maggots may only have arrived after scavenger animals opened her body, skewing the insect evidence found at the scene.

Hall, however, said such a scenario was unheard of in forensic entomology.

"I'd expect fly activity to occur almost as soon as the body presented itself," said Hall, whose father, also an entomologist, wrote the textbook "Blowflies of North America. "

"Partial mummification has little or no effect on blowfly colonization," he added.

During his cross-examination, Dusek alternated between dismissing the field outright and delving into the most minute details of forensic entomologist's work. He quizzed Hall about each of the different formulas the scientist had merged to determine the growth rate of maggots and pointed out that one approach, when taken alone, indicated Danielle's body could have been dumped in early February when Westerfield's whereabouts are unaccounted.

Hall acknowledged Dusek was right, but said taking into account the other data sets yielded the most accurate result.

Dusek also grilled Hall about the lack of insect activity in the head area. Hall and the other entomologists said bugs are usually drawn first to the ears, eyes, and mouth, but Danielle's remains showed infestation primarily in the chest cavity. The prosecution contends this supports their mummification theory, and Hall admitted he could not explain why the insects stayed clear of the head.

Westerfield seemed to follow the testimony intently, leaning close as his defense lawyers conferred on questions for Hall. Brenda and Damon van Dam, Danielle's parents, sat in what have become their usual seats in the last row of the small courtroom.



TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: bugguys; daniellevandam; davidwesterfield
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 741-745 next last
To: connectthedots
Dusek's overdone cross-examination only served to underscore the desperation of the prosecution

I don't beleive the jury is going to care what the demeanor of the lawyers was in evaluating the evidence. I know I wouldn't.

But, let me explain something I experienced after reading deposistions. When you read a transcript its almost impossible to detect the tones, the hesistations etc that you hear during it.

141 posted on 08/02/2002 1:09:11 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
I would have voted the same way - but can you give me a hint to the basis of your acceptance of reasonable doubt in that case. I want to be able to relate your mindset to this case. For example - John and myself were on the same side you were for OJ - not proven - but we are not on the same side here - what was so different about that case for you?
142 posted on 08/02/2002 1:10:07 PM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Very true. And it's amazing the detail that gets left out!
143 posted on 08/02/2002 1:11:08 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson; Mrs.Liberty
Yes, JJ. Feldman said she was "less than objective"...AFTER he called CTV and Nancy Grace "biased".

Mudd is living in lala land if he trusts that the jurors can't be influenced by the media.

Let's say I'm a Juror, I'm home RIGHT NOW...I tune into Court TV and listen to the chronically constipated Voice of Beth Karas, being "less than objective" concerning this case. MUDD!!!

sw

144 posted on 08/02/2002 1:11:12 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Thats pretty close to what Feldman said and I got a kick out of the Grin :)
145 posted on 08/02/2002 1:12:40 PM PDT by gigi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: mommya
How do you perceive Feldman?

I cannot watch him but he comes across as a gentleman and a very skillfull attorney who is working on multiple levels at the same time.

Also his mind is very quick which can be a problem because he may go to fast for some to keep up and it may him to open a door to an area before he should have.

If I were to use cartoon charachters, Feldman=Bugs Bunny, Dusek=Porky Pig.

146 posted on 08/02/2002 1:13:11 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Mrs.Liberty
Do you think there is something the jury hasn't heard ?
147 posted on 08/02/2002 1:13:41 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Yes!
148 posted on 08/02/2002 1:14:58 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: mommya
what was so different about that case for you?

Too long to explain and I have to go right now but its basically the sum total of the liklihood of all the evidence occuring. Taken individually I would agree with you but taken in total I cannot.

It would be like someone winning the grand prize lotto twice in one day.

149 posted on 08/02/2002 1:17:33 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
I don't beleive the jury is going to care what the demeanor of the lawyers was in evaluating the evidence. I know I wouldn't.

Actually, it is very appropriate to consider the demeanor of the players in a trial as part of the testimony. This is the very reason that on appeal, the opinion of the finders of fact (i.e. the jury in this case) are given great weight.

All this said, if the jury comes back with a jury verdict, an appeals court could very well reverse any conviction and either order a new trial or grant an outright acquittal. There simply does not seem to be enough evidence that would permit a reasonable person to conclude that DW committed the crime without making the decision based on emotion.

150 posted on 08/02/2002 1:19:00 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
Stop it!! You're making me jealous. My husband has always apologized and tried to make up for his lack of desire to go dancing..he buys me stereo's for every room, a BOSE surround sound system and forces me to buy CD's, saying "music is your life"...I missed out on the dancing, but the trade off was worth it...:~)

sw

151 posted on 08/02/2002 1:20:19 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
POssibly, but I also thikn they could get caught up in the media feeding frenzy and misinformation.
152 posted on 08/02/2002 1:21:42 PM PDT by Mrs.Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA
That is a very good pic of Westerfield. He doesn't look creepy to me.
153 posted on 08/02/2002 1:34:00 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
That's the problem, the Jury is hearing Rick Roberts and his fans, and Nancy Grace and her selected fan letters...no.. they have heard more than they should as to what the verdict should be.

So,they will play it safe and go for the conviction..unless they plan on living in seculsion the rest of their lives. It will be easier to explain WHY they convicted him, than say they ignored the blood, hair and fibers. They will ignore the forensics and no evidence of DW in the home. They will take the path of the least resistance.

Could be a hung jury if a couple hold out, but not just one..it will take more. I reluctantly say "conviction".

sw

154 posted on 08/02/2002 1:35:51 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: spectre
...the Jury is hearing Rick Roberts and his fans, and Nancy Grace and her selected fan letters...

Why say you this?

I believe the jury will abide by their oath and the orders of the judge.

155 posted on 08/02/2002 1:42:58 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: spectre; Politicalmom

Nancy - when she was a little girl



'Exorcist' priest visits in Atlas

156 posted on 08/02/2002 1:43:23 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion; John Jamieson
Did you follow the OJ trial at all? There was overwhelming physical evidence and motive that could not be explained away, even if you come up with the most ridiculous conspiracy theories possible. OJ walked because his lawyers got the dumbest jury possible, they did not deliberate the evidence at all.

Now I have been following the Westerfield threads and your contributions, and have come to believe that Westerfield didn't do it, because of the small amount of physical evidence and weak motive. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

157 posted on 08/02/2002 1:52:56 PM PDT by ThreeYearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I say it, because the Jury is human, and I don't believe they are free from outside influences. You think I want to be right? I wish to G-d I were wrong. Just knowing about Samantha and Cassandra will make them that much more inclined toward a guilty verdict.

Samantha's Mom was on Larry King pointing the finger directly at the 12 Jurors who let Avila off to go on to murder her daughter. Will these Juror's feel the pressure? I think so.

sw

158 posted on 08/02/2002 1:54:15 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
Didn't work, did it? (the exorcism)
159 posted on 08/02/2002 1:56:40 PM PDT by I. Ben Hurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
BAWHAHAHAHAHA!!! Gosh, I wish you could e-mail that to her with our "regards"...you know, "Won't you be our 13th Juror..let us know how YOU feel?".

sw

160 posted on 08/02/2002 1:56:59 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 741-745 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson