Jury begins deliberations -Prosecutor says victim has pointed to her killer (keep it civil)

UNION-TRIBUNE signonsandiego.com ^ | August 9, 2002 | Alex Roth

[dread78645]

Jurors in the David Westerfield trial began deliberating yesterday after hearing a final statement from the lead prosecutor, who beamed a photo of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam onto the wall and urged the jury to focus on the physical evidence.

Finishing closing arguments in the two-month murder trial, prosecutor Jeff Dusek called a blood spot on Westerfield's jacket the "smoking gun." And Dusek imagined what Danielle might tell the jury if someone could bring her back to life "just for a moment" so she could answer the question, "Please tell us who did this to you."

"I've already told you," Dusek said the girl would tell the jury. "I've told you with my hair and where you found it. I've told you with the orange fiber that you found on my choker, and where you found it.

[John Jamieson]

I just found out about the date problem in the last few days. Dusek said it was a computer error, nothing more.

[small_l_libertarian]

Jaded, I'm almost positive that the 1/26 "Jacket" receipt only came up in Feldman's close. The transcripts of the drycleaners' testimony about the broken/not broken computer I think is from 6/16 or 6/17. (Just looked it up the other day.) Good luck with this argument.

[Jaded]

A week and 2 days? I don't thinks so. But I'm a little cynical. If that's true, the employees at the cleaners are idiots. I'd love to see pics of the receipts. It was discussed a while back. sigh.

[John Jamieson]

DW has to stay in jail, no bail. He doesn't have anywhere to go anyway, unless he wants to stay in his lawyer's house.

[small_l_libertarian]

This may be a really stupid question, then, but I really don't know the answer.

Can California hold him indefinitely in jail without giving him another trial? I know I'm thinking way ahead of myself here, but if there's a hung jury, could the state just sort of "sweep it under the rug" and just keep him locked up? Does anyone know the rules?

[John Jamieson]

The prosecution wants to argue about a one hour problem in DW's travel timeline, but this is just a "computer error". I can see leaving a jacket you don't need at the cleaners for a week, that's no biggy.

[John Jamieson]

They would have to schedule a new trial or turn him loose, but they won't do the latter, unless they hear it was 11 to 1 for acquital.

[cyncooper]

I just found out about the date problem in the last few days. Dusek said it was a computer error, nothing more.

No, Dusek said the 1/26 drycleaning trip had nothing to do with the two 2/4 trips. It is a fact that DW went in twice on 2/4 and the first visit entailed him bringing in the green jacket with his and Danielle's blood on it. The 1/26 visit items were no longer there so we can surmise DW picked them up already. Feldman didn't see fit to ask the clerks about that visit.

Also, it wasn't a computer problem, it was the printer acting up so the clerk would delay her data entry and that is why the time was off on trip #1, but two receipts for 2/4 exist and were testified to.

[small_l_libertarian]

I don't know what to think about that receipt, but here are a few random thoughts:

1 - There is only one jacket and it was brought into the cleaners on 1/26, which means none of the stains on it matter in the least, because they occurred at least a week before the disappearance.

2 - There are two jackets and the one brought in on 1/26 is NOT the green jacket with the stains. The green jacket was actually taken to the cleaners the weekend of the disappearance, so the stains matter.

3 - There are two jackets and the one brought in on 1/26 is the green jacket with the stains, which means the stains don't matter at all, because they're old.

4 - The drycleaners have the most screwed up computer in the world, but it doesn't matter because they have perfect memories and can match up clothing, dates and customers without a computer. The green jacket was brought to the cleaners on the weekend of the disappearance and the stains matter.

5 - The green jacket was taken to the cleaners on 1/26 and the police later planted stains on it. Yikes.

6 - ???

Any other ways it could have happened?

[Krodg]

The only reason he was able to get away with this, is because through the years we allowed it. That is the main reason we're all here, isn't it??

I still believe in my fellow man and I believe there will be some on the jury that want justice. If I am wrong, we are all guilty of complacency because we let this happen.

I believe 'not guilty' but see 'hung jury'.

[John Jamieson]

Hey, with such a perfectly reasonable explaination as that re the most important piece of evidence in the case, there is no room for reasonable doubt, is there?

The same people who thought it was highly unusual for DW to take his clothes to dry cleaners on 2/4 are now having to claim that he did the same thing the week before. Interesting.

[John Jamieson]

I think you've nailed the possibilities. No room for reasonable doubt there!

[The Other Harry]

I believe 'not guilty' but see 'hung jury'. The bad thing about that scenario is that SD DA can afford to play it again. DW cannot.

[John Jamieson]

You mean, he can't sell his house and toys again?

[cyncooper]

The same people who thought it was highly unusual for DW to take his clothes to dry cleaners on 2/4 are now having to claim that he did the same thing the week before.

It was established during testimony that DW was a frequent customer of the drycleaners. That is why the clerk was able to testify to his usual demeanor. He had also never arrived in his MH before.

The unusual thing for 2/4 was the arrival first thing in MH and demeanor and then concealing that visit from police. Then going in a second time with his Friday night Dad's clothes and asking for same-day service.

Fact is, the 1/26 receipt was thrown in during argument as a red herring.

[Politicalmom]

I still have 16 applications for the Refugee board, with no matching email. If you applied for the board, PLEASE send me a FReepmail with your FR name and your ezboard name, so I can approve you!!

Thanks.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread....

[John Jamieson]

Proof beyong a reasonable doubt, is all that's required. The fact that may of us still have reasonable doubt means the DA didn't make it. Most polls are runing 3 to 1 guilty, not 12 to 1 guilty. Expect a hung jury or acquital.

[cyncooper]

I was just clearing up the drycleaning receipt issue because it seemed like some wanted to think the green jacket was taken in for cleaning on 1/26 and it was not.

[JudyB1938]

I was confused on that. Thanks for explanation.

[cyncooper]

Thanks for explanation.

You are welcome!