[Congressman Billybob]

Because of the forensic evidence, I have little doubt that Westerfield will be convicted. Her blood on his jacket, her hair in his bed, her thumb print on his bedside table.... My concern is with the penalty phase of the trial.

For 400 years until the US Supreme Court wrongfully stepped in, it was the job of judges in England, in the American colonies, and then in the United States, to name the penalties for those convicted of crime. Juries were never involved in THAT stage of a trial.

Judge Mudd in the Westerfield case, and most judges in most courtrooms across the country, would have no hesitancy in ordering that a man who savaged and killed a little girl should pay with his life. But because the US Supreme Court dragged the jury into this issue -- with no justification in the text of the Constitution -- all it takes is one squeamish juror, and Westerfield will be housed at taxpayers' expense for the rest of his life, rather than executed, which is what his crime deserves.

I am certain of a conviction. If there is a hold-out on this jury and a hung jury and mistrial, that will mean a new trial. He WILL get convicted. My concern is that he might not get the death penalty, for the reasons stated.

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest column: "Good People, Naked People, People Who Are Wet and Wild."

Click for latest book: "to Restore Trust in America"

[bvw]

"My concern is with the penalty phase of the trial"

That "concern" might mean you have been brainwashed by Court TV as that IS their focus now. Check yourself, Congressman, carefully check yourself.

[Guenevere]

The more evidence I hear, the more I'm sure he DIDN'T do it!

But the media already has him drawn & quartered.--They eviscerate him daily!!

I'm very tired of Nancy Gracisms & the other dame who say things like ....

.."well, the jury is enjoying their time away from their jobs a little too much"....
...in other words...'Jury, you know he's guilty, so quit fooling around & bring in the right verdict, you lazy people'.....

I think the man has been railroaded, pure & simple.

[VRWC_minion]

Because of the forensic evidence, I have little doubt that Westerfield will be convicted

You are right of course, but just wait until you see how these folks can disassemble evidence piece by piece.

[Jaded]

Read the transcripts on what wasn't tested.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Well, well.........

Since you so BOLDLY weighed in, I have a question. Have you watched the trial very closely and studied transcripts or are you making your decision based on the slanted news clips here and there?

Your citing the typical items of "evidence" make me think the latter.

BTW, can you describe that "bedside table" for me? Just curious, you know.

[the-gooroo]

The fact is, some of the LE detectives in this case have been reprimanded for falsifying evidence to obtain an arrest warrant. It is in their personnel files. Doesn't that at least make you wonder if there was any motive and opportunity for them to do the same in this case? It doesn't bother you that they didn't do a thorough investigation of VD's and their home?

[lexington minuteman 1775]

Well this is California where some 600 are sitting on death row.I think they have executed 11 folks since 1977.About the only thing you can be assured of is if he gets the death penalty he will never get out of jail.But an execution would be 15 years or more up the appeals road.

[connectthedots]

I certainly respect your opinions, but I do have a few serious questions. The forensic evidence is circumstantial in nature, which is as valid as direct evidence, certainly gives good reason to suspect Westerfield.

What troubles me is that the prosecutions theory seems to be so open-ended and consists of much speculation as to how DW actually could have done it. A few questions that have not been answered that would cause me to vote 'not guilty' are:

1. Where is the evidence that DW was in the VD home? Even the prosecution has admitted that they found none.

2. How could DW keep a body in the motor home for up to two days and the dogs not alert when used to detect the presence of Danielle in the motor home?

3. What about all the fiber, finger prints, DNA that has not been identified? Where is the evidence that establishes when this evidence was deposited? I will grant that this forensic evidence, on its own, is very strong,

4. Most of all; how does a reasonable person explain away the bug evidence that four experts testified about and concluded that the body was disposed of no earlier that 2/9, but more likely 2/16; the day Damon was known to be driving in the desert in the Dehesa area pasing out flyers and almost immediately there after suggested that LE look closer to town?

DW may have murdered Danielle, but the prosecutor has fallen far short of eliminating reasonable doubt. Had the DA not been in such a hurry to indict, he may have been able to better develope the evidence; but he didn't.

[bolthead]

While you're describing that "bedside table", could you also explain where that "thumb print" was found?