No Decision From Westerfield Jury: Deliberations Continue Tuesday, August 13, 2002

SAN DIEGO -- Jurors completed a third day of deliberations without reaching verdicts Monday in the trial of David Westerfield, a former Sabre Springs man accused of kidnapping and killing Danielle van Dam.


	WESTERFIELD TRIAL Share Your Thoughts About The Case Get The Verdict: Sign Up For Breaking News E-mails Westerfield Trial Jury Questionnaire VERDICT COVERAGE Verdict coverage of the David Westerfield trial will air live on Channel 10 NewsChannel 15 and will be live streamed on TheSanDiego Channel.com DANIELLE VAN DAM 1994-2002 Watch Danielle Video Montage E-mail: daniellevandam @yahoo.com Send mail to: P.O. Box 501515 San Diego, 92150

The six-man, six-woman panel was handed the case Thursday after more than two months of testimony.

According to search warrant affidavits made public after six months under seal, Westerfield admitted to police that he dropped off bedding and other items at a Poway dry cleaners two days after Danielle disappeared.

The warrants and affidavits had been sealed since shortly after the girl's mother discovered her missing from her bed the morning of Feb. 2. Last week, the 4th District Court of Appeal ordered the documents unsealed.

Westerfield, 50, a self-employed design engineer, is charged with murder, kidnapping and possession of child pornography.


	Jury Has To Consider Question Carefully

He could face the death penalty if the jury finds true a special circumstance allegation that the murder of the 7-year-old happened during a kidnapping.

The trial, which started June 4, included 23 days of testimony, 98 witnesses and 199 court exhibits.

Trial observers say the deliberations could come down to DNA vs. bugs -- DNA evidence that the victim was in the suspect's motor home versus testimony from defense forensic experts who said bugs on the girl's body indicated it had been dumped while the suspect was under police surveillance.

The alleged swinging lifestyle of the victim's parents, Brenda and Damon van Dam, also could factor into the jury's verdict.

Defense attorney Steven Feldman told jurors forensic evidence involving bugs on the victim's body proved it was "impossible" for his client to have dumped the body beside an East County road, where it was discovered Feb. 27.

The defense claimed throughout the trial that Westerfield was under tight surveillance by police and the media beginning Feb. 5, three days after the Sabre Springs girl was discovered missing from her bed.

SURVEY

	What decision do you think the jury in the David Westerfield trial will reach?
	Guilty on all three counts Guilty of kidnapping, murder Guilty of possessing child pornography Not guilty on all three counts Hung jury
Results \| Disclaimer

Westerfield was arrested Feb. 22.

Prosecutors contend the defense did not represent accurately the information provided by experts who study insect infestation of corpses.

Physical evidence -- including Danielle's blood on Westerfield's jacket and fingerprints, hair and fibers found in the defendant's motor home -- point to Westerfield's guilt, prosecutors said.

Feldman said the prosecution presented no evidence that Westerfield had ever been in Danielle's home. He noted that her parents testified to holding sex parties in the home, and said one of their house guests might have committed the crime.

Feldman also suggested that Westerfield could not have maneuvered his way through the darkened van Dam home the night of Feb. 1 without anyone hearing him seizing the 58-pound child.

Possible bases for reversal by a higher court:

Assuming the jury votes to convict -- and the odds are that it will -- I've been thinking about the possible reasons why a higher court might overturn the conviction and send it back for another trial. If I understand the process correctly, that will likely take a finding of error on Judge Mudd's part, which I think is very fertile ground to go plowing in with your team of mules.

Here's what I get so far:

- Failure to sequester the jury at any point during the trial. Feldman argued for that from the start, and at least two of the jurors specificially requested it. With all the publicity this case has received, there can be no question that the jurors have been exposed to potentially contaminating information and speculation.

- The inclusion of the "porn" evidence. Lacking any basis by the prosecution to establish that the porn legitimately goes to show motive -- and there is none, as far as I know -- the porn should have been excluded. Having been admitted in the absence of any basis, it is prejudicial.

- The exclusion of the "lifestyle" evidence about the van Dam parents. The defense deserves the opportunity to present alternate theories about how the crime mught have taken place. That's only fair and reasonable. Mudd excluding the lifestyle evidence effectively foreclosed the defense from being able to do this. The fact that cocaine dealers and sexual kink artists were casually coming & going from the home is *not* irrelvant information for the jury to hear. It is much more relevant than the porn evidence which was admiited.

Anyone care to add, delete, argue, or change?

No, I am not a doctor, but I have had some experience with abused children and child abusers.

Years ago, because of an involvement with a neighborhood child, I became involved with Fl HRS and was licensed as an emergency shelter. There were over 150 children that went through the doors of my home. I took all the classes and seminars that were available to me as a foster parent to learn recognition and treatment for child abuse. Unfortunately that position comes with interactions with the abusers also.

When I read the exerts from Danielle's diary it gave me chills because it is so typical of an extremely abused child.

I use to have one of those "safe places" that children were sent to.

Of all the children that I kept, and a lot of them were delinquints with records, there was only one child that I asked be removed from my home. That particular child was a 14 yr old boy that had a sadistic nature, there was an evil in his mind and heart that caused him to enjoy cruelty to animals, (psychological reports do show cruelty to animals without remorse is the tell tale sign of a sociapathic personality) and other children. At the same time one of my children was a 12 yr old girl in a wheelchair, (she had been born with cerebral palsy) she became the victim that the sociapathic child loved to terrorize. That was reason I asked for him to be removed.

It is only my opinion, but my observations about the principles in the VanDam case lead me to believe the wrong person is on trial.

I am firmly in the camp that believes that DW MIGHT be guilty, but I have some real problems with the prosecutions case. I do not believe they proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Fwiw, that is *exactly* where I am.

I think DW might have done it. But before I'd send someone to death or to prison for life, I'd want want more than what the prosecution presented in this case. Doing something like that is a large decision. If you think he's guilty, you don't want to acquit him on a technicality. But if you think the prosecution has not proved its case, then I think you have to give DW the benefit of a reasonable doubt.

I'm glad I'm not on that jury. It would be ripping my guts out.

If there was something else in DW's past that pointed to this, I would probabbly vote to convict him. The porn doesn't do anything for me this way. I've looked at porn on the computer myself. There was a time when I did a lot of that. It was more interesting to me than television.

Looking and doing and raping and killing and smashing out the front-teeth of a seven year-old neighbor girl are very different things.

For me to believe that DW did all that, there would need to be more evidence. That level of violence typically leaves tracks that cannot be erased by an amateur.

Based on the evidence that has been presented, I could not vote to convict him. It seems equally likely to me that the crime happened some other way.

Who's the cocaine dealer? I know that there were rumors of trace evidence of cocaine found in the van Dam house, and I know that Brenda said that she got some reefer from Rich Brady. But I don't remember hearing where the cocaine came from, or who in the house was a cocaine dealer.

I *think* Brenda or someone admitted to the cops that one of their party guests that night was a known cocaine dealer. It didn't get into the evidence, and the vD's never admitted to using coke -- despite traces on their carpet.

I'll try to find the refernce.

It still bothers me that the vD's were excluded by the police so quickly. They are the default cause of the crime. Especially given their lifestyle stuff.

Yet, they seem to get a walk within minutes.

DW, however. get a spotlight immediately put on every part of his life. "When did you clean your motor home, and how well did you clean it? Did you or did you not use Clorox?"

That seems wrong to me.

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.

No Decision From Westerfield Jury

Jury Could Take At Least A Week, Experts Say