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 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 741-745 next last
To: All
Well, folks, I tried to hear/see what was going on in the court room today via Court TV & muting the hosts. However, I saw/heard very little of the court room & tried to get a handle on which side was getting their court instructions to the jury entered.

All I was able to figure out (and not surprisingly) is the judge knocked back just about every instruction the defense wanted in.

If any of you caught more of the decisions/discussions, could you please post a brief rundown? I would appreciate it very much. Thanks.
161 posted on 08/02/2002 1:58:50 PM PDT by the Deejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: spectre
Make him take a dance class with you, or entice him to do so. I'm sure you can figure out what will motivate him. I would suggest a Nightclub Two-step class since it is a very easy dance to learn the basics and once he realizes how sensuous dancing is, he may get hooked.
162 posted on 08/02/2002 2:00:01 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: I. Ben Hurt
Well, it is said that a person has to be really careful. Get rid of one demon, and a legion will replace it.
163 posted on 08/02/2002 2:02:30 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
"He may get hooked"...By someone like ..Brenda? Denise? Barb?...LOL!!!

sw

164 posted on 08/02/2002 2:04:02 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: spectre
Because it seems like there a several people with higher levels of education, I think those individuals will have lived life long enough to realize that you can't trust the media to get things right and some of them may have had experiences with the legal system to understand you can't really trust prosecutors and judges to be fair.

I think DW will be acquitted after a relatively short deliberation; a day or two at most, but maybe only a couple of hours.
165 posted on 08/02/2002 2:05:02 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
That may be exactly what happened.
166 posted on 08/02/2002 2:07:11 PM PDT by I. Ben Hurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: bvw
It is indirect circumstantial evidence and it has been very reasonably explained.

Great post, right on target.
I think what further proves this circumstantial evidence point is that Dusak himself ADMITS that theirs is a case based mostly on circumstantial evidence of felony murder, when he was stating why there could not be a lesser charge.

167 posted on 08/02/2002 2:13:49 PM PDT by alexandria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
"I think DW will be acquitted after a relatively short deliberation; a day or two at most, but maybe only a couple of hours."

I think so, too. I am thinking, it will take them less than a day to deliberate.

168 posted on 08/02/2002 2:14:53 PM PDT by the Deejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: spectre
Samantha and Cassandra, which have nothing to do with this case, or any other case.

Personally, I don't think the judge should have even mentioned it (twice) to *this* jury.
169 posted on 08/02/2002 2:19:59 PM PDT by the Deejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots; the Deejay
Alright! I'll be praying you guys are right...thanks for the encouragement..:~)

sw

170 posted on 08/02/2002 2:20:43 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: spectre
I'm writing you guys quick... Before my server goes out again... I've been having major problems all day. I'll get back later, after all the rain passes.
171 posted on 08/02/2002 2:36:20 PM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: spectre
When I first discovered CTV, I really liked Nancy. Little did I know. I soon learned better. However, there are a lot of people out there who are just like I was - they don't know how deceptive and biased she is. The first clue though should have been she is a FORMER PROSECUTOR (I think). And I wonder how many people SHE railroaded! I know for sure she sure wants to do it now.

13th Juror indeed! If those jurors watched her, she just may get her wish! However, I am hanging on to the thread that they seem to be intelligent and analytical people.
172 posted on 08/02/2002 2:48:11 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
The first clue though should have been she is a FORMER PROSECUTOR (I think).

She is. The first time I ever saw her was years ago when I had Court TV and lived in another state. Court TV was showing a trial of a man who killed his wife (he was convicted) and the prosecutor was Nancy Grace!

I believe she lived and practiced in Atlanta.

173 posted on 08/02/2002 3:08:36 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
However, I am hanging on to the thread that they seem to be intelligent and analytical people.

#1: I don't believe for a minute that the jurors are violating the court's orders.

#2: You guys are watching and hearing different opinions and are able to form your own despite that.

#3: One can be intelligent and analytical and believe DW committed the crime based on the evidence presented.

174 posted on 08/02/2002 3:12:41 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: bvw
DITTOs to your whole assesment.

IMO: There are government employees involved in this case who need to swing(in the literal sense) for what they have done, and CA law makes it possible if it can be proven.

The truth will out.

175 posted on 08/02/2002 3:16:44 PM PDT by Yeti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Your #3 ... True.

You'll notice I didn't add "and acquit" to my statement in regards to their reasoning ability. Although I do hope the jury and I agree as to what is proper "reasoning". :0)
176 posted on 08/02/2002 3:21:36 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
Nancy must be developing Alzheimer's, she forgot the bleach and steam-cleaning the MH.

Rumor has it that Nancy Grace has evidence that David Westerfield drove his entire motorhome into a giant vat of bleach to destroy evidence.


177 posted on 08/02/2002 3:31:28 PM PDT by pyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
Judy, Judy, Judy :)

Think way back to the Clinton years and how Nancy Grace "defended" him.. It was downhill from there for Nannie. She's just another version of Susan Estrich.

sw

178 posted on 08/02/2002 3:31:38 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: pyx
"Rumor has it that Nancy Grace has evidence that David Westerfield drove his entire motorhome into a giant vat of bleach to destroy evidence."

BAWHAHAHA!!!



179 posted on 08/02/2002 3:33:53 PM PDT by the Deejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: pyx
And Nancy Grace knows ALOT about bleach...meow..:~)

sw

180 posted on 08/02/2002 3:35:59 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 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