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 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 741-745 next last
To: truth_seeker
Sorry if my "enough of OJ" coment seemed snotty, I was really posting to myself because I was going on about it. Of course we can agree to disagree, I was just telling you why I thought the way I did about the Goldman family.

And since I don't run in OJ's circle, and I live in Northern Florida, I don't think I have to worry about him. LOL!
661 posted on 08/04/2002 5:40:09 PM PDT by gigi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: gigi
What I got from that trial was completely through the "major" media. Now, I think there is a possibility they wanted OJ found quilty and unfortunately the DA's office was listening to the media and got over confidant. "Reasonable Doubt" is the key to any case.
662 posted on 08/04/2002 5:48:20 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
Exactly, the jury was sequestered through the whole trial and wasn't subjected to any of the media. They had a whole different take. I think alot of the "players" got caught up in the media hype. Which is why I thought alot of it disgusting. I watched most of the trial and wasn't surprised at the verdict.

I think we can agree that the OJ trial took on a life of it's own.

Okay now "enough of OJ" LOL!

I was "Back To School"(YEAH!) shopping all weekend, will they televise tomorrow's hearing with the judge and attorneys?? We should find out if the defense will put on another witness, right?
663 posted on 08/04/2002 6:15:55 PM PDT by gigi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 662 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
he's pretty well alibied (page 8451, line 23).

I went to your link and re-read Neal's and LE's testimony. It certainly is confusing about who looked at what on the computer. I'm curious about Westerfield's daughter. Did he have any custody rights regarding her? They had been divorced for ten (?) years so she (probably)would have still been a minor. Has there been anything reported on her? Anyone.

664 posted on 08/04/2002 6:48:11 PM PDT by I. Ben Hurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 660 | View Replies]

To: gigi
We should find out if the defense will put on another witness, right?

It's my understanding defense was to let the judge know on Sunday. Guess the rest of us will have to wait until Monday.

665 posted on 08/04/2002 6:53:40 PM PDT by I. Ben Hurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: gigi
For the first time in fifty years NO "back to school" shopping for me.......I'll miss it!

You are correct about OJ trial taking on life of its own. In that way these two seem similar.

Read Neal's testimony today. First questions by Duseck established him as a "hostile" witness. Not wanting to be there etc. Thought he did a fairly good job. I don't see anything in the testimony that helped Duseck THAT much. What a "mean" thing to do to both the son and the father. Except for a couple of porn questions, most could have been obtained from other witnesses. IMO it made Duseck look bad.

BTW how many men/women are on the jury? I forgot.
666 posted on 08/04/2002 6:54:56 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
I don't see anything in the testimony that helped Duseck THAT much. What a "mean" thing to do to both the son and the father.

Good evening hoosiermama. I thought I would point out that one of several things Dusek established through Neal is that Westerfield called his son Saturday to go check his house and make sure it was locked up. Neal did this (his mom waiting in the car outside) before DW returned Sat. afternoon to the neighborhood.

Several things are significant about this and Dusek will explain in his closing.

667 posted on 08/04/2002 7:26:20 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
What a "mean" thing to do to both the son and the father.

P.S. It was kind of "mean" of Westerfield to let his attorney hint that the child porn belonged to his son, imo.

668 posted on 08/04/2002 7:28:31 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I thought DW had already returned to the home once in the morning. Forgot wallet and returned again. AM I confused?
669 posted on 08/04/2002 7:31:04 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
You've got an awfully powerful microscope on it cyn. I don't see much there, but I could be wrong. I'll go back and reread everything when I get time.

I had a great few hours with 4 generations of Jamiesons this evening. My parents 59th anniversary tomorrow and my daughter, hubby and their son, the oldest greatgrandson (10) just flew in today.
670 posted on 08/04/2002 7:35:25 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
I thought DW had already returned to the home once in the morning. Forgot wallet and returned again. AM I confused?

He left in the morning and didn't return home to "look for his wallet" until around 3:30 or 4:00 in the afternoon. He said he did not find his wallet there. He said he then drove to where his SUV was parked and said he found the wallet there and continued.

In the mean time Neal came by the house to check the locks (and went inside while he was there) before the 3:30 time. DW did not mention this call or lock check to police (that I can see).

671 posted on 08/04/2002 7:39:42 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Cyn, My son is a little older than Neal. Believe me if there is any porn on my computer it probably does belong to him. I know he AND his buddies have looked at sites on his computer...caught in the act at about Neal's age. It seems to be a guy thing at that age.

He knows my feeling about it, and he also knows his "actions have consequences". If they are his actions on MY computer he better be prepared for the consequences......Besides having One Mad Mama!
672 posted on 08/04/2002 7:40:50 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 668 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I had a great few hours with 4 generations of Jamiesons this evening. My parents 59th anniversary tomorrow and my daughter, hubby and their son, the oldest greatgrandson (10) just flew in today.

Wow! That is truly wonderful. Your parents can serve as an inspiration to all of us. Congratulations to them!

You enjoy being surrounded by your family, now.

673 posted on 08/04/2002 7:42:02 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
JJ what a great celebration. ENJOY!

I may be really confused, but I thought the neighbors talked to him earlier and he left because of all the commotion in the neighborhood.

I'll look too!
674 posted on 08/04/2002 7:45:58 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
John,
I know you were pretty cynical of Goff's testimony I just finished rereading and was suprised at how little he really said.
It seems to me that he never really narrows down a TOD. He says he calculated 2nd, 9th and 12th using different sets of data and temperature locations. He picks on Faulkner's and Haskell's testimony. He slams his own field by saying they can't calculate TOD, only insect lifespan. At the end of direct Dusek does not even ask him for his estimated time of death, he just asks:

BY MR. DUSEK:
Q BASED UPON YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE INSECTS AND YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIELD, ARE YOU ABLE TO SAY THAT OUR VICTIM DANIELLE VAN DAM WAS NOT DEAD FROM FEBRUARY 1ST THROUGH FEBRUARY 12TH?
A NO. I WOULD DEFER THAT TO A PATHOLOGIST OR FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST. MR. DUSEK: THANK YOU, SIR.

So basically all Dusek gets is he cannot say she was alive, not a statement that she was dead on the 2nd, 3rd or 4th or even before before any particular date. I was sort of amazed after the press coverage and such that this is all he got....
675 posted on 08/04/2002 7:47:07 PM PDT by clearvision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: I. Ben Hurt
Back sliding glass doors.
676 posted on 08/04/2002 7:49:10 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 613 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
Besides having One Mad Mama!

You go, girl! Sounds like you raised him right, yet still boys will look at that stuff from time to time.

Neal did admit to looking at adult women, but the child porn and such he said he did not seek out or view.

677 posted on 08/04/2002 7:56:38 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: clearvision
I was critical of Goff during the testimony, but I forgave him when I reread his testimony carefully. His method was probably more complete and more inclusive than the first guy's. His math errors were trivial. It was fun watching Feldman kill him, but in reality Goff ending up basically reaffirming the first two bug guys, that DW couldn't have done it (atleast alone). Feldman should have concentrated on that point more. Dusek wasted his money.
678 posted on 08/04/2002 7:58:35 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I could not believe he let his attorney do that and also to try to guess at a password.
679 posted on 08/04/2002 8:04:57 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 668 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
"Paul Hung, who lives next door to Westerfield in Sabre Springs, says he saw his neighbor's motor home parked outside the house around 8:30 a.m. Feb. 2. By 9, it was gone, he said. "


THis is the first time I was referring to. The second time was at 3:30 which is what he said in his statement. According to Neal testimony, The sister took the message from the father earlier in the morning, before Neal's return from his friend's home and his mothers trip to do errands. ....about noon. He returned to get school books etc and checked the doors at that time no hurry. The actually request was not allowed as testimony (hearsay) so we do not know how the request was worded.


Why do you find it suspicious? It sound pretty normal to me.
680 posted on 08/04/2002 8:06:09 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 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