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 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 741-745 next last
To: John Jamieson
FUNNY JJ! LOL
21 posted on 08/02/2002 6:32:59 AM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fnord; John Jamieson; FresnoDA
Blowfly pie and apple pandowdy
Makes the bug guys smile
And the jackals all rowdy,
Blowfly pie and apple pandowdy,
Can't get enough of that wonderful stuff!
22 posted on 08/02/2002 7:09:00 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz
Buggz

I think Dusek, in his summation, will want to dismiss Goff, Haskell, Faulkner, and Hall. I think he'll use Blackbourne and Wecht to try to prove the others as unreliable. The problem with this is, that Blackbourne and Wecht left the latest date of Feb. 16 open as a possible exposure date. I don't think he'll use Rodriquez at all.

So far we have: Rodriquez- Jan.16 - Feb.6 Anthro.
Blackbourne- Feb. 1 - Feb.16 Path.
Wecht- Feb. 1 - Feb.16 Path.
Goff- Feb. 9 - Feb.14 Ento.
Haskell- Feb.11 - Feb.21 Ento.
Faulkner- Feb.16 - Feb.18 Ento.
Hall- Feb.12 - Feb.23 Ento.

If Feldman stands on Feb. 16 as the latest exposure date then he has on his side : Blackbourne, Wecht, Goff, Haskell, Faulkner, and Hall. Six to nothing in scientific favor of DW's innocence.



23 posted on 08/02/2002 7:17:50 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz
Correction: If Feldman stands on Feb. 14- then he has 6-0 favor.
24 posted on 08/02/2002 7:28:12 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz
Six to nothing in scientific favor of DW's innocence.

Pretty good odds, even if Goff is doing the math.

Compare that to no known source for ANY of the fibers, and the high probability that the blue-gray could have come from a vehicle upholstery (like a cop car), spread by one of the investigators from place to place to place as they did the repeated searches. Fibers were collected on several occasions for up to four months (weren't some SUV fibers collected in June?). How can they all possibly be from DAW only considering how many people were at all the sites?

Compare that to no scent or cadaver dogs hitting on either Danielle's scent in the motorhome or SUV OR Westerfield's scent in the VD residence.

Compare that to the huge amount of unexplained evidence that can't be linked to DAW, like the unidentified prints on the VD doors and the bannister and in Danielle's room. And the unidentified DNA on Danielle's bedsheets. And the unidentified prints in the motorhome. And the unidentified red and green and blue fibers on Danielle's body and in her hair and under her nails. And the unidentified black hair found on her body which was not DAW's. And the unidentified hairs from dozens of different people in the motorhome. And the complete and utter lack of ANYTHING of DAW's, fingerprints or hair or scent or DNA or footprints, anywhere near the VD property.

Compare that to the timelines and alibis that keep changing in the VD household. Damon's unsubstantiated and zig-zag trip into the desert on Feb. 16. The mystery dog bed. The disappearing Van Dam Damn Van.

And what are the odds that the jury will collectively possess reasonable doubt? I think some will be stuck on the porn so firmly that no other evidence, all six bug guys included, could sway them from their belief that DAW is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

25 posted on 08/02/2002 7:41:56 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: shezza
(weren't some SUV fibers collected in June?).

No, collected in Feb., examined July 2.

From Tanya Dulaney July 9:

Q FIRST OF ALL, DID YOU HAVE ANY INVOLVEMENT IN THE TAKING OF THOSE TAPE LIFTS?

A YES. I COLLECTED THOSE TAPE LIFTS WHEN I FIRST WENT INTO THE MOTOR HOME AND DID MY INITIAL EXAMINATION.

Q WHEN WAS THAT? WHEN DID YOU COLLECT THESE TAPE LIFTS?

A I BELIEVE THAT WAS FEBRUARY 6TH.

-end excerpt.-

The hair on her body under her arm was determined to be similar with her own.

The dark hair you may be thinking of was found in the soil under her body.

Also, was the search dogs not hitting presented to the jury? I've been asking for that testimony. Any help on finding it would be appreciated.

26 posted on 08/02/2002 8:04:40 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
> (weren't some SUV fibers collected in June?).

...
A YES. I COLLECTED THOSE TAPE LIFTS WHEN I FIRST WENT INTO THE MOTOR HOME AND DID MY INITIAL EXAMINATION.

The SUV testimony was objected to by the pros. (June 25th IIRC); after a sidebar, it wasn't brought up again.

27 posted on 08/02/2002 8:16:11 AM PDT by dread78645
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
If I remember right, it was on cross and pros. objected. I assume it was sustained because at that time witness had not brought up SUV at all.
28 posted on 08/02/2002 8:18:35 AM PDT by clearvision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Interesting on negative dog searches being known to jury. Prosecution would not have brought up negative searches of VD house, SUV, DW house. I don't recall any defense witnesses on dogs. If it came out on cross I don't remember it. When 180frank was on stand I think discussion was only on motorhome, could Feldman have even brought up other searches at that point?
29 posted on 08/02/2002 8:22:37 AM PDT by clearvision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz
Goff actually did 4 different runs with two sets of weather data and two different lab test results. The three others were even closer to the other guys.

I like Feb 14th because that's when the Poway porn ring guy realized he was going to be arrested (midnight on the 15th was the actual time) and figured he better get rid of any spare bodies lying around.
30 posted on 08/02/2002 8:23:01 AM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
You're right, the part I posted was from the MH. I'll go see if the SUV tape lift date is in there.
31 posted on 08/02/2002 8:28:18 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: shezza
I don't know the odds of porn evidence. I've stayed away from the porn evidence. I'm not drawn to it, I've considered it. Yet, I was always more curious about the fibers, DNA, testimonial conflicts, time lines,etc., I can't explain why it's that way with me.

But the recent abductions occuring in this country, I think, will have a significant influence on the jury. The odds of the media impact on the jury? I haven't thought about it long enough.

I know I sit here with a notebook, When I have a question, I write it down, and sometimes/ a lot of times, post it. I hope the jury is sitting there with a notebooks,pencils and lots of questions instead of falling asleep.

You might be right, the porn evidence may out way the science, in the minds of the jury, who knows what they could be thinking..



32 posted on 08/02/2002 8:29:16 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: clearvision
The reason I ask about the search dogs (as opposed to cadaver dogs) is the jury can only consider what is presented at trial, so if it was not (and it may have been---that's why I'm wondering) they cannot consider it in their deliberations.

33 posted on 08/02/2002 8:29:45 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA; UCANSEE2; All
Site FINALLY update. Evidence, Forensic Experts, Caption This #6, Say What (Under Glossary)

Stealth Ninja Dave

**FREE NINJA DAVE**FREE NINJA DAVE**FREE NINJA DAVE**

34 posted on 08/02/2002 8:39:33 AM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper; shezza
Ok, here is where she discusses examining the tape lifts from the SUV. I'm still looking for an exact date the lifts were done:

16 A. WHEN I EXAMINED THE ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE S. U. V., MY INITIAL EXAMINATION I BELIEVE WAS IN FEBRUARY, THE END OF FEBRUARY. WHEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THOSE TAPE LIFTS A SECOND TIME, THAT EXAMINATION WAS IN JULY.

35 posted on 08/02/2002 8:40:09 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: shezza; john; fnord
Just got here and can't quit laughing!!! What talent! Thanks for starting my day with humor!! "Dusek cracks up and I don't care".....LOL!!!!!!!!!
36 posted on 08/02/2002 8:43:03 AM PDT by Jrabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I think I've found the "liar".

Duh-knees.
Police interview(s) vs. testimony.
Didn't remember meeting Westerfield at the bar vs. "he was creepy".
Damon didn't come downstairs vs. he ate pizza with us.

37 posted on 08/02/2002 8:47:19 AM PDT by dread78645
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Thanks for that. I was confused in that I thought they went back and collected more fibers even after the trial started. Appreciate you looking it up in the transcripts!
38 posted on 08/02/2002 8:49:51 AM PDT by shezza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
I meant to address #35 to you, too.

Re: J. Shen July 9 testimony about SUV evidence.

39 posted on 08/02/2002 8:50:36 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
You've certainly got one of the major ones, but I think the important one may be Neal.
40 posted on 08/02/2002 8:51:49 AM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 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