Mudd Letters Opened To Public: Van Dam Jurors Continue to Mull and Ponder Westerfield's Fate! 8-15

Union Trib ^ | August 15, 2002 | Union Trib

[FresnoDA]

Letters to judge opened to public

SIGNONSANDIEGO

August 14, 2002

The judge in the trial of David Westerfield today allowed reporters to see court log entries of notes from jurors, as well as letters to the judge from the public about the murder of Danielle van Dam.

The letters from the public included a variety of theories about the case.

Jurors ask to review pictures, interview

One letter-writer sent the following theory to Judge William Mudd: "Danielle van Dam killed herself.''

A nearly illegible postcard with a Spokane postmark alluded to at least one ex-wife "with a drinking problem (who) lives in Spokane.''

 

DAN TREVAN / Union-Tribune

Some of the folders of documents made public by Judge William Mudd.

The writer failed to indicate whether the reference was to ex-wives of Westerfield – who has been married and divorced twice – or someone else connected with the case.

The postcard was unsigned.

Another missive came from a man who referenced another high-profile murder trial – that of O.J. Simpson.

"The O.J. Simpson case was a miscarriage of the state's justice mainly because Judge (Lance) Ito was too lenient with the actors defending O.J.,'' the man wrote.

There was no news Wednesday afternoon about the status of deliberations, but Mudd announced he was holding a sealed hearing 9:30 a.m. Thursday to consider an unspecified defense motion in the case.

Wednesday was the fifth day of deliberations. The prosecution concluded its closing arguments last Thursday.

Westerfield is accused of kidnapping 7-year-old Danielle van Dam from her Sabre Springs home and killing her.

He could face life in prison or the death penalty if convicted of murder with special circumstances.

He has also been charged with misdemeanor possession of child pornography.

The log entries show that on Friday, the jury requested ``all available evidence of pornographic images'' and a photograph of a teen-age daughter of the defendant's ex-girlfriend.

[Space Wrangler]

Well, I know it would present reasonable doubt, but why not make it a little more prominent. My guess is that Feldman did not want to make an outright accusation of police misconduct, but there it is just the same, and the jurors will have to deal with it.

[small_l_libertarian]

No, just lucky. I'm not even sure what it is I found. I do know that it's not the same thing that was displayed in court. That was a big, rectangular receipt (maybe 5 x 8"). Could have been a blow-up, I suppose, but the shape was wrong.

[the Deejay]

See, the county has spent so much on this trial,
the judge cannot risk his paycheck getting cut
back.

[NatureGirl]

Yep. That's what Watkins said - that they were in DW's house, Youngflesh found the CDs, and they decided to look at them because of the way they were labelled. Alldredge says this happened sometime prior to 1 am, 2/5 (the time the warrant was issued, per his affidavit), Watkins testified that he wasn't in the house until "after midnight", meaning the 5th.

My best guess is that Watkins lied on the stand about the timeline - that he, Youngflesh and Alldredge were in the house on the evening of the 4th, copying DW's hard drives, and looking at the CDs. Note that he (Watkins) had to be corrected by the Prosecution as to the actual day he was in the house, doing the imaging. He starts off by saying it was the 4th, and then corrects it to the 5th. Why? Wasn't it legal for them to be copying the contents of some guy's computer without a proper warrant?

[NatureGirl]

Hmm. How clever Det. Ott must be, to be able to "deduce" from a dry cleaning receipt that it belongs to Twin Peaks. The scoundrel can read! LOL

[fivecatsandadog]

Dry cleaners around here pin numbered tags on garments to correspond with the receipt/order. If his jacket was dropped off 1/27 seems like the pin-tag on it would be different from the tags on the other items in the 2/4 stuff.

[Rheo]

Or it really wasn't the jacket that was taken in on 1/26 but he wanted the reasonable doubt there??

You're idea is probably closer to truth.

I need to go back and read that portion as I haven't done so yet.

[UCANSEE2]

"The receipt for the green jacket says 01/27, but Someone has mixed all the items together in a pile, so LE's on scene think it all belongs with the 02/04 stuff."

Actually what I should have said is this:

(Ott has to hurry so he puts DNA on green jacket,not realizing it isn't on the 02/04 receipt. That DW had been there a week before and not picked up the green jacket yet. That he had gone in 02/04 and left the black clothes without picking up the jacket. WHODA THUNK IT? )

Later, LE's with warrant take all items, receipts back for testing. When it turns out that the green jacket has positive hits for Danielle's DNA the LE's have proof. Then, they check the receipts and find the green jacket isn't on the 02/04 receipt. OH WELL. Hope for a stupid jury, or try to hide that info. Seems someone put the 'plant' on the wrong piece of clothing.

[NatureGirl]

Capt. Ron Newman...

"Nothing to see here, folks! Move along!"

[BullDog108]

The term "sport jacket" has always seemed very odd to me...you cannot mistake that fall/winter jacket for a sport coat...even if you are a 12 year employee that doesn't know your POE address.

That was the most amazing thing that jumped out at me during her testimony. She works for 12 years at this location, but does not know the address. Then everyone just giggles at the response. Truly amazing.

[UCANSEE2]

Well, I know it would present reasonable doubt, but why not make it a little more prominent. My guess is that Feldman did not want to make an outright accusation of police misconduct, but there it is just the same, and the jurors will have to deal with it.

I would guess you are very correct. Feldman didn't want to leave the courthouse and find his car had been towed. Then go to tow lot and find he had a warrant out, then end up in jail, then end up dead. Pretty good reasons for not CLAIMING in court that POLICE INTENTIONALLY FALSIFIED EVIDENCE or TESTIMONY. Better just to let it be 'apparent'.

[iaf97]

In order to get a search warrant an affidavit must supply necessary facts to support its issuance.It must include facts showing why the search is being conducted,why LE believes items related to a crime will be found in the area to be searched and what specifically they seek to obtain from the search.In this case,the underlying facts for the warrants as set forth in the affidavit were often hearsay statements of DW which for various reasons would not be admissible at trial.For this reason, the affidavits were sealed.

The proper way to attack evidence otained from unreasonable searches and seizures is by filing motions under PC sections 995 or 1538.5.The facts set forth in the warrant are hearsay. I would assume that Feldman filed motions to suppress statements of DW obtained in violation of MIRANDA and also attacked any weaknesses in the search warrants. It seems that LE obtained the search warants for the cleaners from DW's voluntary statements prior to the time he began asking for an attorney.

The facts pointing to DW as a suspect appear weak based on evidence in the possesion of the LE prior to execution of the warrant ie he was one of the neighbors who was not home and probably that he had been in the area the night before. However,in every case there is a balancing act between the interest of the state in apprehending criminals and the rights of individuals to be free from unreasonable search and seizures,forced testimony etc. The exigency of the circumstances might justify the issuance of a warrant on weaker facts in cases such as this where a child's life might be in imminent danger.

The statements in the affidavit are only relevant to the reasonableness of the searches.Most of what was in the warrants was presented to the jury. Any discrepancies could have been used to undermine the credibility of SDLE and the legal effect would be to suppress the evidence obtained from the executed searches.In the words of Alan Keyes,Does this make sense?

[BARLF]

Yep,he's the Captain,what the Cap says, goes.

[UCANSEE2]

Wasn't it legal for them to be copying the contents of some guy's computer without a proper warrant?

Gee, NG, they had to copy some GOOD STUFF they had with them onto DW's disks, to make sure they had something for evidence. "Gee, we got this one where the star looks JUST LIKE Danielle. Kinda a rape scene. Make sure we get that copied onto his files. Tomorrow we come back and load all this stuff off as if it were there all the time."

[Rheo]

The police requested these affidavits be sealed, is this common?

[NatureGirl]

It's a toughy. The whole thing goes in a circle and makes my head start to spin.

It's like a "chicken before the egg" thing, or that trick they used on the old Star Trek -

"Everything I say is a lie...
I'm lying."

[the Deejay]

I could easily buy your planting theory if LE had a
blood sample of Danielle's blood, but they didn't.

As for the receipts, the jury should have them in
the jury room. Surely, one of them would catch the
descrepancy in the clothing to the receipts. And
would easily be able to see the green jacket was at
the cleaners on 1/27.

[Lanza]

I am so VERY afraid! There is a guy on CTV actually making sense! Is anyone else watching it? He is on with Catherine Crier saying there is no way scientifically LE could not find a trace of DW if he had been in there (and hid as the prosecution claims). Beth of course being the sci-fi expert she is tried to argue it. Does anyone know who this guy is? Reminds me of "The Science Guy."