"I know fire and brimstone's coming," he said. "I don't have the opportunity to respond. Please keep in mind that the system is adversarial. Please consider what the defense's position might be in response to some of the line of fire." Posted on 08/07/2002 7:08:12 PM PDT by FresnoDA
August 7, 2002
Ending nearly five hours of defense argument, the chief attorney for murder defendant David Westerfield rested Wednesday afternoon by urging jurors to remember they "save us from lynchings" and reminding the panelists that they are the "conscience of the community." The jury should begin deliberations Thursday.
Defense attorney Steven Feldman began his afternoon remarks by telling jurors he was in the "homestretch" of his arguments. Repeatedly, he urged jurors to take the defense's point of view into consideration when the prosecution received its opportunity to rebut his closing arguments.
"I know fire and brimstone's coming," he said. "I don't have the opportunity to respond. Please keep in mind that the system is adversarial. Please consider what the defense's position might be in response to some of the line of fire."
"Ladies and gentlemen this has been an extraordinary experience," Feldman said, leaning on a podium for support. "It's been hard, it's been emotional, it's been intense and at times overwhelming. The burden the lawyers have, is coming your way. The tension, the angst, the pain, is coming your way."
"You are the conscience of our community. You, you save us from lynchings. You protect us. Thank you."
Prosecutor Jeff Dusek, given the opportunity to respond late in the afternoon, began by saying he hardly knew "where to start."
"You were told to expect a rebuttal," he said, "and you are going to be given a rebuttal, when you are told falsehoods, misrepresentations, total distortions throughout the entire closing argument."
The prosecutor said he had moral and legal problems with what Westerfield "did to that child."
Earlier, Feldman had sought to remind jurors that the 50-year-old design engineer could not be placed off Dehesa Road where Danielle van Dam's body was recovered.
He showed them aerial photographs of the scene and wondered aloud why, as prosecutors have charged, his defendant would drive several hundred miles just to place her in that spot.
"It's narrow," he said of the two-lane roadway. "Where's the evidence anyone saw a motor home? Where's the evidence of David Westerfield (being) in Dehesa?"
Feldman noted the difficulty of accessing the site, pointing out that the area, up a steep bank, was so difficult to reach, steps were later added to it.
Feldman also noted that authorities were unable to identify a hair found underneath the body.
"Whose was it? It wasn't David Westerfield. It's not Danielle van Dam's. How could it have gotten there?"
The defense attorney also pointed out the area was used as a dump, with any number of possible sources of the orange fibers found on Danielle van Dam.
Turning his attention to autopsy evidence, he noted that there were no broken bones around the victim's neck, saying that proved the victim wasn't strangled or asphyxiated, as prosecutors contend.
Feldman's closing argument also revisited the days of forensic entomological evidence. He pointed out that, based on the bug experts called, it would have been "impossible" for Westerfield to have placed the body there.
February's weather was hot, Feldman said, hot enough to promote the growth of bugs that entomologists have pointed to as evidence the victim's body could not have been exposed since early February. The victim's body was recovered Feb. 27.
Referring to earlier comments by Dusek that authorities didn't know the proper questions to ask of the bug experts, Feldman said:
"So they're going to say because they didn't ask the right questions we should convict David Westerfield?"
The defense attorney also made several pointed references to the reason forensic entomologist David Faulkner was called to the scene – because he was called in by law enforcement. Faulkner ended up being a defense witness in the case.
Faulkner, who has previously testified in cases prosecuted by Dusek, testified that, based on the development of insect larvae, the victim's body could not have been exposed to the elements before Feb. 16.
Feldman told jurors that the best estimate of county medical examiner Dr Brian Blackbourne was that the body was left out 10 to 42 days before its discovery.
He reminded the jurors of the testimony of defense expert Neal Haskell, who testified that blow flies did not colonize the body of the 7-year-old girl until at least Feb. 12.
"We already know that David was under constant surveillance, then it's impossible for him to have done it. If Faulkner is right, he's not guilty, there's no issue."
He called the agreement by his experts a "concordance of science."
Feldman ridiculed the conclusion of one prosecution witness, forensic anthropoligist Dr. William C. Rodriguez III, who concluded the range of possible death dates extended to January 17, a time the victim was still alive.
He also made light of a prosecution theory that the victim's body wasn't colonized within a reasonable time frame because it became "mummified."
"So conditions in San Diego are so unusual, they've never been seen like this before? The body mummified so much that the bugs went 'poink?' "
Earlier Wednesday, the defense attorney intimated to jurors that it was a stretch to believe that a drunken, 6-foot-2-inch tall David Westerfield stealthily entered the van Dam residence in the middle of the night and silently spirited away 7-year-old Danielle van Dam.
It's "common sense" that only someone familiar with the house, with the van Dam family and with Danielle could have entered the house and awakened Danielle without her "screaming bloody murder" and waking up her family, Feldman argued.
"There's absolutely no way that someone unfamiliar with this residence could do this," Feldman said.
And that person was probably someone that Damon and Brenda van Dam had previously invited into their home, Feldman said, referring to testimony that the couple was sexually adventurous and had engaged in spouse-swapping.
On Tuesday, prosecutor Jeff Dusek had told jurors "the bogeyman didn't do this crime either, as much as they want you to believe that."
'Circumstantial case'
Feldman also argued that law enforcement officials had been stretching their circumstantial evidence from the start of the investigation to fit Westerfield because they knew there was no "clear, unambiguous" smoking gun pointing to the neighbor.
"We're still looking. That smoking gun we're still trying to find," Feldman said. "They might have the outlines of the shadow of the gun, but we're still looking."
Westerfield is accused of kidnapping Danielle from her Sabre Springs home on Feb. 2 and killing her. He is charged with kidnapping, murder with special circumstances and possession of child pornography.
Westerfield, who lived two doors from the van Dams, was an early suspect in the case and came under police surveillance on Feb. 5.
After a massive community search that drew national attention, Danielle's naked and decomposing body was found dumped off rural Dehesa Road near El Cajon on Feb. 27.
Jurors have heard 24 days of testimony and have seen 199 exhibits since the trial began on June 5.
During his 3 1/2-hour closing argument Tuesday, Dusek told jurors they didn't have to determine how and when Westerfield entered the van Dam house and kidnapped and killed Danielle, just whether he committed the crime.
Feldman urged the jury to examine the details of the case and told them that laws regarding jury deliberations required them to interpret evidence in favor of the defendant's innocence whenever there were two conflicting but reasonable interpretations.
'Heartburn'
A day after beginning his closing argument with a frenetic, courtroom-spanning presentation, a subdued Feldman resumed his summation by asking jurors not to blame his client for his own performance.
He asked the jurors not to consider the kidnap-murder case as a personality contest between himself and prosecutors Dusek and Woody Clarke.
"If there is anything I've said, anything I've done that has caused any of you heartburn, please don't hold it against Mr. Westerfield," Feldman said.
Much of the prosecution's case against Westerfield relies on speculation, Feldman said, speculation without evidence that Westerfield knew his way around the van Dam's home, that he wore left no fingerprints because he wore gloves that were never found.
"Did he gag her? There are no gags. Did he tie her up? There's no rope," Feldman said. "They have to guess."
'Red herrings'
He also dismissed as a "red herring" the prosecution's suggestion that Westerfield had disposed of evidence because police never found a pair of black boots Westerfield had supposedly been wearing to Dad's Café the night Danielle disappeared.
Feldman said Westerfield's former girlfriend had testified that Westerfield didn't own a pair of black boots.
"Watch out for them red herrings, folks. There's lots of them," Feldman said. "We don't want the courtroom smelling like a fish market."
Reasonable interpretations
Feldman told the jurors that there were reasonable explanations for Westerfield's supposedly odd behavior the weekend Danielle disappeared – and that his behavior was not that of a man who was carrying around either a kidnapped girl or a dead body.
Several witnesses testified that Westerfield had invited them to come along with him on his trip to the desert that weekend, Feldman said. It was a trip he told people he wanted to take on Super Bowl weekend because the desert would be less crowded.
"It was spontaneous, but it wasn't as though, 'I've just kidnapped somebody and I have to get away immediately'," Feldman said.
Staying in his motor home at Silver Strand State Beach on the morning of Feb. 2 was consistent with someone trying to sleep off a hangover from drinking at Dad's Café the night before, Feldman said.
Reasonable behavior
And Westerfield's decisions to go to Glamis and other desert locations, then back to the beach, were consistent with the behavior of someone who'd recently been dumped by his girlfriend and couldn't find any joy in his surroundings, Feldman said.
"If there was something suspicious and unreasonable (about the route), where's the body? She's either dead or he's carrying her and this is a perfect place to dump a body," Feldman said.
He also addressed Westerfield's use of "we" while describing his trip to the desert to a police investigator in a taped interview, noting that Danielle's mother, Brenda van Dam, once said "they" had taken her daughter.
"It's a natural slip. There's nothing to it. Unless you want to take it out of context – no surprise – unless you want to spin it," Feldman said. "Again, one side does it, it's not sinister, the other side does it, it's sinister."
Dyed blonde hairs
Feldman also hinted in passing at an alternate explanation for the dyed blonde hairs found in Westerfield's motor home, hairs which were found to match the DNA of Danielle – or her mother.
"If it was the case that Brenda van Dam was in the motor home, would you know it? Would she tell you?" Feldman asked the jury. "And wouldn't it be a fatal blow to the prosecution's case if the defense could show you one time, ever, innocently, that Danielle van Dam was in the motor home. That would slay their case."
Though Feldman said witnesses had reported seeing Westerfield's motor home parked on the van Dams' street with the door unlocked on at least one occasion, he didn't point to any testimony that showed Danielle or her mother had been in the vehicle.
Fiber conclusions
In a new development, Feldman disclosed that the prosecution originally intended to present a knit afghan from Westerfield's residence as the common source of the acrylic fibers found on Danielle's body and Westerfield's laundry.
San Diego police criminalists initially concluded that the fibers from both scenes could have matched those from the afghan, Feldman said, but the prosecution had to abandon the evidence after a Sacramento lab performed more detailed tests and found they didn't match.
And there was "a universe of fibers" found on Danielle's body, none of which were also found in Westerfield's home or vehicles, Feldman said.
Porn evidence
Feldman also argued that the prosecution had failed to prove that any of the sexually explicit images found in Westerfield's office comprised child pornography, let alone that it belonged to Westerfield instead of his 19-year-old son, David Neal Westerfield.
The prosecution hasn't shown that Westerfield had any sexual interest in young girls, let alone the motive to kidnap one, he said.
"Don't get sidetracked into their speculation. They don't have a motive. They're grasping," Feldman told the jury. "You might have a moral problem with what Mr. Westerfield did or didn't do, but morals are not law."
Dusek immediately attacked a chart developed by the defense depicting rates of body decomposition, saying it was designed for humid, Midwest conditions. When compared to the dry air of the east San Diego county, such use was "misleading and inappropriate," the prosecutor said.
There was no "impossibility" created by the bug experts' testimony, he contended.
The prosecutor urged the jurors to ignore Feldman's suggestions they deadlock and instead, listen to each other's views until reaching a verdict.
"That's why jurors are sent into a jury room rather than each one being sent into a separate polling booth," he said. "There's supposed to be give and take, with open minds."
Dusek also rejected Feldman's suggestions that, if given the choice between two reasonable interpretations of facts, they must automatically choose the facts that favor the defendant in the case.
"What you have to do is first of all determine whether each of those facts have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The instructions tell you that."
Holding up a rope to demonstrate his point, he said each of the facts in the case could be analogous to the many pieces of twine that make it up.
"Take all the facts you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt exist, then you make the determination that the rope still holds," he said. "Is there only one reasonable inference, one reasonable interpretation, one reasonable conclusion?"
He yanked on the rope to show its strength before setting it down.
He used the Chargers' and Padres' chances of winning championships this year to make another point about how to view the volumes of circumstantial evidence in the case.
"How reasonable is it the Padres are going to get in and win the World Series and the Chargers get in the Super Bowl and win?" he said. "It's possible, but not reasonable, sorry guys, the statistics of that chance are virtually nil.
"Yet, the possibility of that is greater than all these other 'accidents' coming together in one case and leading us down the path of not guilty."
He attacked Feldman's assertions in his opening statement, that the defense would "prove not speculate."
"We've seen just the opposite is true," Dusek said. Such statements were even carried over into the closing argument, the prosecutor said.
For example, Dusek said, Feldman spoke in his opening statement about the van Dam children being in the defendant's home and "jumping up and down on furniture in the living room and on other bed sheets."
"There's been no evidence of that," Dusek said. "As my dad used to say, that's a whole lot of wind sauce in your air pudding."
At one point during his summation, Dusek appeared to be having trouble finding a word and a helpful voice came from the audience to his aid. Brenda van Dam supplied the word. When Feldman objected that the audience was "assisting in closing," Mudd urged the audience to "please remain silent."
Dusek attacked Feldman's assertion that his client gave authorities "precise, detailed information" about his whereabouts.
"Yeah right," Dusek said. "What he said was the truth, packed with lies, alibis. Where you can find him here, here and here. Why those locations? Then he left out the good stuff. The dry cleaners, cleaning the SUV. He didn't tell about that. He told folks in Glamis that he had a flat tire on his trailer. Yeah, right. He was telling the truth, the cops just followed it blindly and confirmed every little bit."
Dusek is scheduled to continue the prosecution's closing rebuttal Thursday morning at 9 a.m.
By Alex Roth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
August 8, 2002
After a night of drinking, a burly man like David Westerfield couldn't have sneaked into a strange house and kidnapped a girl from her bedroom in the dark without waking the child's parents, Westerfield's defense attorney argued yesterday.
"There's simply no way – there's no way – that someone unfamiliar with this residence could do this," attorney Steven Feldman told jurors on the second day of closing arguments in Westerfield's murder trial.
Waving his arms and shouting several times, Feldman called the prosecution's case "illogical" and said it was based on "guesswork" and "grasping." He urged the jury to be "objective in the face of the intensity of the emotion."
In the end, he said, there's too much reasonable doubt to convict Westerfield of kidnapping and killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam on the first weekend of February.
"There's too many holes," Feldman told the jury. "There's no smoking gun. There's too many explanations. They can't put it together."
Before finishing his closing arguments at 2:50 p.m., Feldman spent the day attacking the prosecution's evidence piece by piece. His summation, which also included part of Tuesday, lasted about five hours.
He said his client, who lived two doors from the van Dams in Sabre Springs, had nothing in his background to suggest he was sexually attracted to young girls. Feldman noted that no trace of Westerfield was found anywhere in the van Dams' house.
And Feldman dismissed the notion that his client's circuitous journey in his motor home that weekend – Westerfield told police he drove 550 miles to the beach, the Imperial County desert and back to the beach – was anything out of the ordinary.
"The man told the cops he wasn't busy," Feldman said. "He didn't have work in his face that weekend."
By the end of the day, prosecutor Jeff Dusek, who gave closing arguments Tuesday, had begun his rebuttal of Feldman's summation. Dusek is expected to finish today, and it will be the final time either lawyer talks to the jury before the panel begins deliberating.
In his rebuttal, Dusek accused the defense of "falsehoods, misrepresentations, total distortions." He said Feldman was using "desperate" tactics.
On the probability of Westerfield's innocence, Dusek said there's a better chance of the San Diego Padres winning the World Series and the San Diego Chargers winning the Super Bowl in the same year.
Among other things, the defense's closing arguments put a spotlight on a ruling made by Superior Court Judge William Mudd last week.
Over the objection of the defense, the judge decided that the jury will have just one option on the issue of murder, and that is felony murder – in this case, murder during the course of a kidnapping.
Westerfield's attorneys wanted to give the jury the option of considering a second theory of premeditated murder. Such an option would presumably give the jury the leeway to conclude that Westerfield killed Danielle in her room, meaning he didn't kidnap her because she was already dead by the time she was taken from the house.
If there is no kidnapping, there is no special-circumstance conviction, and hence Westerfield would not be eligible for the death penalty.
Under Mudd's ruling, the jury must make one finding: Either Westerfield kidnapped and killed the second-grader or he didn't. The judge's assumption was that whoever killed the girl had to have kidnapped her first.
In light of the jury's options, Feldman told the jury yesterday to consider the possibility that Danielle was dead before she was taken from her room. He noted that the girl never screamed loudly enough to wake up either parent.
And if the child was killed in the bedroom, Feldman argued, the jury must acquit Westerfield on the murder count because there was no kidnapping – and thus no felony murder.
"If she was killed before he left that room, he's not guilty," Feldman told the jury. " ... That's what the law is. And you all promised to follow the law, regardless of what the law is."
Some legal experts said yesterday that Feldman's reasoning appears to be solid. Prosecutors, however, say the point is moot because there's absolutely no evidence that the girl was killed in her bedroom.
Feldman spent most of the day arguing that it was impossible for his client to have killed Danielle at all. Feldman cited testimony that Westerfield was drunk at Dad's Cafe & Steakhouse on the night the girl vanished. Feldman described the inside of the van Dams' house that night as "pitch-black."
He noted that Westerfield had never been invited inside the van Dams' house and couldn't have known where the girl's bedroom was. Prosecutors believe Westerfield probably sneaked into the house while Danielle's father was asleep in his bed and her mother was at Dad's partying with friends.
"Somehow, Dave Westerfield, all 6 feet 2 of him, sneaks into the bedroom of Danielle van Dam (and) doesn't make a sound," Feldman said.
He offered several explanations for the forensic evidence in the case. According to testimony, Danielle's blood, hair and fingerprints were found in Westerfield's motor home and her blood was found on a jacket he took to the dry cleaner the morning he returned from his weekend trip. Fibers consistent with the girl's bedroom carpeting were found in his motor home.
Also, hair consistent with hers was found in the bedroom of Westerfield's house, in his laundry and in a lint ball in his garage. Various fibers found on the girl's body were microscopically identical to fibers found in Westerfield's house, motor home and sport utility vehicle. Hair consistent with the van Dams' family dog was also found in the lint ball in his garage and in his motor home.
Feldman noted that Danielle, her mother and her brother had been inside Westerfield's house at least once before – several days before her disappearance, when they went to his house to sell Girl Scout cookies.
He also cited testimony that Danielle's mother, Brenda van Dam, danced with Westerfield at Dad's on the night her daughter disappeared. She went to the bar for a girls' night out with two friends.
Feldman suggested that some of the hairs and fibers from van Dam's daughter might have rubbed off on Westerfield when they danced together that night.
"It's a fundamental principle of science," he told the jury.
He also cited testimony that Westerfield sometimes parked his motor home at his house. Feldman suggested Westerfield left the vehicle unlocked and unsupervised and that Danielle might have sneaked inside to play at some point and left a bloodstain.
"Kids bleed all the time," Feldman said.
He also disputed the prosecution's theory of motive – that Westerfield is a pedophile whose collection of child pornography fed his desire to abduct and attack a little girl.
"What's the motive for a 50-year-old design engineer with no prior history to do anything at all like this?" Feldman said.
He said Westerfield, who is twice divorced and has two college-age children, "has no history of ever engaging in such behavior, period." He cited Westerfield's "numerous relationships with adult women," including a girlfriend who split up with him shortly before Danielle was abducted.
Of all the computer pornography found in Westerfield's house, Feldman argued that only a tiny percentage might qualify as child porn, and even those images were "ambiguous." He described the pornographic evidence as the prosecution's "desperate search for a motive."
"These were delivered to you to inflame you, to enrage you," Feldman said.
As part of the defense's constant refrain throughout the case, Feldman spent time focusing on Danielle's parents. The defense has suggested that the parents' behavior – they have admitted smoking marijuana and swapping sex partners with friends – attracted seedy characters who may have been responsible for the crime.
Feldman also said the testimony of a variety of insect experts proves Westerfield couldn't have committed the crime. The defense says the insects found on the girl's nude body, which was found Feb. 27 in a rural area east of El Cajon, show that the body was dumped after Westerfield came under constant police surveillance.
Prosecutors say the insect evidence doesn't exclude Westerfield because the time estimates are too varied and imprecise.
In the beginning of his rebuttal, Dusek accused the defense of "almost encouraging a hung jury" by urging each juror to stick fast to his or her opinions during deliberations.
Dusek also dismissed the argument that Westerfield lacked the ability to sneak in and out of the van Dams' house without waking the parents. Dusek noted that someone clearly succeeded in kidnapping the little girl, who was gone by the time the parents woke up on the morning of Feb. 2.
"We have the reality that somebody got into that room and got her out," Dusek said.
"Speak for yourself, yaya..."
sw
And just what percentage of the world is tuning into Free Republic to learn what trial observers think? Sheeeesh !!!
All I'm certain of is, I think Westerfield did it, and I hope the jury agrees. As for the petty insults coming my way because of that opinion? Not a problem.
| From Jameson Board.... | |
|
| van Dam neighborhood | 02/15/02 | 16:13 |
| Excerpts from the live broadcast on the street where Danielle van Dam was abducted 2 weeks earlier. John is accosted by members of the Psychic Friends Network, David Westerfield leads undercover cops to fried chicken, then slams the door in John and Ken’s face. Neither Mr. Westerfield nor Mr. Kobylt were arrested over the course of the broadcast. | ||
| Brenda and Damon van Dam | 02/07/02 | 11:05 |
| Brenda and Damon van Dam join the John & Ken show via telephone to discuss their efforts to find their missing 7-year-old daughter. | ||
Do they still teach
"Thou shalt not commit Adultery"
AND "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor"
AND "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife"
in California?
sw
While it may suit you to discount us as the Stealth Ninja Freedom Fighters or Save Dave Gang, remember a number of us have been here since the begining, all the way through. We have read all of the articles, poured over transcripts and listened to interviews. So our opinions are not misinformed. Even some of the posters who came along later, researched diligently, so they would be up to speed. Alot of posters have done an admirable job of organizing the evidence and doing running transcripts.
The SNFF was really borne out of questions raised by the parents and LE. Even more questions have been raised by the processing of evidence. Makes one wonder what happens in cases that don't hit the radar?
David Westerfield lies awake at night dreaming of that pleasurable moment when he will finally have his way with the woman who has so affected him, so driven him wild, so set afire his libido,...8 year old Danielle van Dam.
Of course he hasn't done this kind of thing before, but boy oh boy, he just can't wait to get her alone in his bed. Oh the things he's going to do to her. Of course actual vaginal penetration and copulation aren't possible, but all those "other" possibilities are just driving poor Dave wild with desire.
Breasts? Who needs 'em! No, Dave has been waiting his chance driven wild to the point of infinite ecstasy by torrid child pornography he's downloaded.
But enough dreaming for Dave, tonight he'd better head back to Dad's and at least make it look like he likes older women. Of course that's only a front, an alibi, an excuse for the really dastardly deed he's about to commit.
So Dave starts to plan. Being an intelligent fellow (albeit driven wild by the nubile flesh of this young tart) he decides that his best plan ever is to secretly sneak into the van Dam house in the middle of the night unnoticed and make off with her. Dave decides this is the best plan ever even though he knows instinctively that he's never been in their house, doesn't know his way around in the dark, doesn't know where her bedroom is or even if she's there, or that he might be discovered by the family and have to kill them all to protect his identity.
Yes indeed. This is the best plan ever!
Of course Dave forgets momentarily that being in his fifties his prostate is going to send send him an urgent message to urinate especially after a night of pretty heavy drinking. But no matter, he'll just hide in a closet or somewhere until he's ready to make his move. He'll just hold it!
Dave, being an incredible dumbass takes her back to his place for hot sex, forgetting for the moment that eventually the cops are gonna come knocking sometime. No matter, he'll clean everything up. Let's see, hair, fibers, blood, saliva, semen, urine, no problem. A little Fantastic here and there and presto, clean again.
Hey Dave, haven't you forgotten something??? You've killed her, but now you've got a body on your hands!!! Time to get rid of the corpus delicti.
Poor Dave, his brain comes unglued. He drives around with her body for hours trying to figure out what to do. Then he has a brilliant revelation!! He'll just dump her out on a roadside where she'll be found and he can leave an excellent crime scene for the police. That's it!! He'll challenge the police to catch him!!
But then he thinks maybe I should just bury her in the desert where she'll never be found, or maybe I should drop her the ocean, or dismember her, or immolate her so she can't be identified. Naw, let's just dump her and go home so he can download some more porn!!
What a shlub!!
I say roast him in hot oil, the Rack,..the Rack., the ironmaiden, arrows at fifty paces, drawn and quartered in the public square, hanging, shooting, electrocution, the needle, a smart bomb,...but of course these are all too good for him.
But then again,...what if he really didn't do it after all???
While most of the people that I have met in the military are law and order people they also have an appreciation of our justice system and the concepts of trial by jury and innocent until proven guilty. This appreciation comes many times from living all over the world and seeing how other countries/governments treat their citizens. Some military wives, however, have not impressed me with their abilities to discern or appreciate anything other than the great goodies they can buy or collect. In other words, many military wives, just like the general population are clueless, brainless, soccor mom types. While YaYa at least is a freeper she is fooling herself if she thinks she is an independent thinker.
It appears that Judge Mudd wants the Jury to be influenced by the bias toward David Westerfield. The Jury is tainted, and Mudd and Dusek are not objecting to it.
Yes, a hung Jury would be better than a conviction. We need more time, to dig into what REALLY went on that night, with the Van Dams and company. DW will stay in jail no matter what...but at least not on Death Row.
sw
Now......it's other people insulting???? I see. No wonder you can't comprehend what so many of us believe and why. Apparently you can't even understand your own actions.
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.
