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.

[pinz-n-needlez]

I say 'not guilty.'

The jury already displayed it's independence and good sense by deciding to meet on Fridays. That was a direct snub to Judge Mudd, Feldman's biggest nemesis.

There are a couple of engineers on the jury, IIRC, and they will sympathize with DW, as so many of us hane, once we saw the evidence.

I would bet that a few rational minds would be able to convince the rest that Dusek did indeed need to prove the kidnapping, and there is no path from DW to poor, dead, Danielle.

Let's hope they pic up on the drycleaners miss that folks caught on to here only yesterday.

[pinz-n-needlez]

There is no evidence that the VDs were checked in regards to ANYTHING!

Thanks to Diane Halfman, they had a golden cloak over them from the get-go.

Poor Danielle, that her parents would have so many people who would eschew short=term discomfort rather than protect her or vindicate her death.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Friday was "the girls' night out." Could it be someone was lonely?

Did anyone else catch Feldman's suggestion that this was more like 'business as usual' for Brenda and the gang rather than a special night out to celebrate Denise's leaving? They certainly did pretty much the same thing the weekend before, without losing any children in the process.

[Krodg]

I agree. That could be you. Scary!!!

[pinz-n-needlez]

Is it possible that whoever killed her place a plastic bag over her head and then later removed it when disposing of the body?

I hadn't thought of it earlier, but this sure would account for how she got dead with no verifiable cause. Poor baby.

[pinz-n-needlez]

re: Brenda saying the dog was edgy that night. She and Damon also differ on whether the dog was locked in the son's room. Damon sez yes, Bren sez no, because she could hear the dog downstairs looking for a place to sleep. Who's telling the truth?

Neither!!!!!

[pinz-n-needlez]

I think Dusek reads 'dirty books!'

LOL

[Krodg]

Was the girl that testified about his strange appearance and attitude, the same one that said the computer didn't work properly? Does anyone know if she was friends with the cop that was also a customer?

[small_l_libertarian]

Hey, finally some success with a DNA question. I just read in a NY Times article about Monica Lewinsky's stained dress (ewwwww....) that dry cleaning alone does not kill DNA. Washing with detergent can kill DNA. At least according to the NY Times.

[small_l_libertarian]

Both clerks said both things (that he was acting strangely and that the computer/printer weren't working right). One of the clerks said that she talked to Detective Ott, but not about this case.

[John Jamieson]

But wouldn't it be DW's head that hit the headboard?

[John Jamieson]

Monica Lewinsky's dress was not cleaned.

[Jaded]

And the side show Dusek used on the jury? Yep.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Feldman pointed the jurors to this. With all the evidence in the jury room, they could easily check it out and draw their own conclusions, couldn't they?

Maybe Feldman decided to wait to point it out rather than have Dusek do a bs/convicning dance around that fact.

[small_l_libertarian]

I know it wasn't cleaned (ewwww again). I didn't mean to give the impression that it was. I'll go and get what I read and be right back.

[fussybutt]

I would like to know what proof we have, other than VD's word that the child disapeared on the night of Feb 1, morning of Feb 2. Since her own fingerprints were not in her room, (room was obviously cleaned since she had been in it) how are we to know that something was not done to her sooner and the activities that night were to cover up?

[Krodg]

What was taken in on 1/26?

[small_l_libertarian]

Here you go:

If semen is found on the dress, prosecutors would then probably seek a saliva or blood sample from the President to determine a DNA match. The tests are extremely reliable, said prosecutors and defense lawyers who use DNA testing in trials. Such a stain would retain DNA material for many years, unless the dress had been cleaned with detergents, said experts in DNA testing. Dry cleaning alone would not remove it, nor would storage under poor conditions, they said.

Here's the link:

LINK TO NY TIMES STORY

[Jaded]

I thought it was the other one. She said he looked tired. He wasn't chatty. Doubt that he shows up at the cleaners at the crack of dawn often. It's bs ya aks me.

[Jaded]

One would think, him bein' 6'2" and all. But hey, don't let the facts get in your way. Dusek certainly doesn't. IMO.