San Diego Swings: Van Dam trial brings "swinging" into the spotlight!

San Diego Online ^ | August 2, 2002 | Thomas K. Arnold

[BARLF]

I wonder how lucrative this swinging lifestyle is? "Sex is certainly a big part of it," Lanzarratta concedes,"but it's not the only thing."

Lanzaratta is Executive Director of NASCA International.

Think about that .......

[Bluebird Singing]

Just typed in NASCA on a search. There is a website - nasca.com.

[mommya]

I found that El Cajon swinger's club website a while ago and wondered where exactly it was - WARNING - IF YOU DO NOT WANT PORN ON YOUR COMPUTER - DO NOT TRY TO FIND OR GO TO THAT WEBSITE - IT HAS A BIG OL PORN PIC RIGHT THERE ON IT _ AND WON"T GIVE YOU ANY MORE INFO THAN THE ARTICLE DID. I can post just the text if anyone wants it.

[Bluebird Singing]

Mommya - I went ahead and looked and after doing so, it's inconceivable to me that an investigation could have been done so quickly - ruling out DVD, or anyone in any way associated with the group in the house that night.

[hoosiermama]

SO how are you going to bring this to anyone attention? National Enquirer maybe? They seem to be the most accurate on some of these cases.....Sad for our media.

[rolling_stone]

Central Valley Social Club: PO Box 1864 Clovis, CA 93613-1864; 559-443-6244;

In your own backyard, I wonder if swingers there use crew cab pickup trucks with rifle racks in back??

[sunshine state]

That caught my eye right away, also.

[BARLF]

I tried Tony Lanzaratta and Google. Lots of stuff there,conventions etc.

Now I feel dirty. Hope my computer isn't!

[BARLF]

CEO of a huge enterprise!

[Commander8]

If monogamy is freakish I guess I'm part of a proud few. I think it's best to remember that even though the Van Dams' lifestyle is severely ethically challenged, David Westerfield is the one on trial for killing that girl.

[pyx]

If monogamy is freakish I guess I'm part of a proud few. I think it's best to remember that even though the Van Dams' lifestyle is severely ethically challenged, David Westerfield is the one on trial for killing that girl.

Three questions fer ya', Commander;
1.) Do you believe a defendant has the right to a fair trial ?
2.) Do you believe a defendant has the right to access information and evidence that may demonstrate he is innocent ?
3.) Why were the attorneys for David Westerfield in part denied access to information and evidence about the crime scene and what witnesses did and said ?

After all, David Westerfield is accused of both kidnapping and murder. The Van Dam's house is part of the crime scene and yet it appears that the Van Dams destroyed evidence in the crime scene itself, even while police were still searching for Danielle Van Dam. Vacuuming, steam cleaning,repainting and recarpeting is the destruction of crime scene evidence. The pizza partiers were witnesses. They hold vital information. The defense should have access to that information.

[Bluebird Singing]

Well said!!

[KLT]

Great parents those Van Dams...UGH!

[clearvision]

John,
In regards to Dusek, Hall testimony. First it was very painful to read. Second it is probably the best evidence I have seen of how our court system is not set up to deal with technical data. Hall was required many times to answer yes or no (the judge said answer yes or no, not even option for don't know, or does not apply) to questions on hypothetical examples with incorrect data as part of the question.

Dusek spent 1/2 his time arguing that Hall criticized Goff on average temperatures and that Hall was in error because Goff wrote median and Hall said average (which in this case were the same). Hall's main criticism of Goff was that he used degree hours versus degree days for thermal calculations when Goff had no hourly temperatures to deal with (he made them up by averaging daily temperatures.

When Hall finally discusses one subset of Anderson's data that would lead to early Feb., it was with only one type of fly. The other fly type was in the 12th range and the other data sets for both flies came out 12th or later.
I also found it troubling that Dusek was able to make snide remarks like "you do know who to calculate that don't you?" and "your flies" to Hall and not get any warning from the judge.

Then there was this in the transcript:
DUSEK
Q ARE YOU SAYING CLOSE ENOUGH FOR A MURDER CASE?

A. NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT --

MR. FELDMAN: THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE, OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THE DOCTOR'S ALREADY ANSWERED IT. OVERRULED.

So does that go down as a NO? That certainly was not the intent of the answer, but there was no follow up question.

Frustrating

[Greg Weston]

Oh yeah the cops in the Samantha case etc are all good and the ones in the Van Dam case are all "rotten".

What a joke.

[shezza]

Greg, a couple of the policemen in the Van Dam case have been previously reprimanded, repeatedly, for falsifying evidence. Do you think that's okay? I mean, to plant evidence or misconstrue statements by witnesses in order to "catch" the perp?

[Greg Weston]

Well go look into all the cops involved in the Samantha and the kidnapped teens case. Maybe you'll find a couple there that have been "reprimanded" for something as well.

Are you claiming that Westerfield was framed? Did the cops take lessons in doing it from Mark Fuhrman and Phil Van Atter?

[bvw]

Then you admit the two San Diego cops have done something rotten. On what basis Greg? Show us the proof.

[Lanza]

Thanks for the ping Fres. This swing-dude says sex is just "part" of the lifestyle. I wonder if dopesmoking is the other part since that what the Van Dams engage in? I don't believe for one sec they discourage young couples about the lifestyle. They probably recruit them.

[Greg Weston]

Whatever.