[rintense]

He purposely mislead the jury into thinking that the VanDamn's, because of their lifestyle, were soley responsible for the death of their daughter. If a lawyer has a confession on file, his job isn't to still try and prove his client is innocent, but rather to prevent the presecution from establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that his client is guilty- to DEFEND his client. Westerfield deliberately mislead the jury to defend his client, and as such, is in violation of the code.

[CARepubGal]

But the jury did not buy his arguments. He did not get the creep off. The San Diego DA Pfingst is a weasel and deserves to be retired. The lawyers did their jobs properly. The DA had a better case so he won. Much more credible too.

[cyncooper]

I'm late to the thread, so apologies if someone else has pointed this out.

Westerfield was also charged with (and found guilty of) possession of child pornography.

The defense tried to say it was his 18 year old son's!

The prosecution was put in the position of having to call the son to the stand to testify, whereupon he had to testify that he did view some pornography, but it was of adult women, not children.

That is what the defense did to Westerfield's own son.