In taped interrogation, Westerfield tells police 'my life is over'

San Diego Union Tribune ^ | January 7, 2003

[EllaMinnow]

I remember the snide remarks about "Mrs. Kravitz" very well.

[CW_Conservative]

westerfield has pics of himself getting a blowjob...

According to the source below, Brenda performed oral sex on a female, identified as F#1.

This was right after she had sex with F#1's husband, at the same time and in the same room as Damon, who was doing the aforementioned F#1.

Brenda states she didn't feel comfortable with it, but Damon did. He said he wanted to separate. Brenda was afraid "people would view me differently", so she started to take the prescription drug Xanax.

6 to 8 months prior to Danielle's disappearance, Brenda meets F#2 at Dad's. She convinced Brenda swinging was "fun". Next night Brenda and Damon and F#2 and M#2 are "swinging".

Correction, Damon has equipment failure, so he is forced to watch M#2 satisfy his wife. Again, Brenda did not think this was right. Of course, this thought only surfaces after she has sex.

A month later Brenda is "swinging" again. Seems Damon's equipment is on the blink, so Brenda feels "guilty", but what the hell, she has sex again with M#2. This time Damon does not stick around to watch.

According to Brenda, the last "swinging" time was when Damon got his hands on some Viagra and instead of having sex with Brenda, he has it with F#2. This time Brenda is in the room as spectator.

Brenda states that other than Halloween 2000, Damon and her never "swung" at their home.

I guess she doesn't consider a woman in bed with her husband at 2 am the night her daughter disappeared, to be unusual sexual behavior for a married couple.

Not only is Brenda taking Xanax, she admits to smoking marijuana twice a week for the 8 months preceding Danielle's disappearance. She says she thinks she was "pressured" into smoking again.

Source:

www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/documents/SCN_20030109150542_001.pdf

[CW_Conservative]

The prosecution, in their motion to preclude "irrelevant" cross-examination of the Van Dam's "lifestyle", make the following claim:

"Neither logic nor common sense help prove that an adult male involved in consensual non-monogamous relationships with consenting adult females would be sexually attracted to a 4 foot, 58 lb. girl."
Source:
www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/documents/SCN_20030109150542_001.pdf

As long as Dave could mantain the appearance of a successful, single guy, he would have a steady supply of consenting females. Men have that advantage, even as they get older.

[truth_seeker]

"As long as Dave could mantain the appearance of a successful, single guy, he would have a steady supply of consenting females. Men have that advantage, even as they get older."

Or looking at the overall big picture, it appears Dave went after females, widely varied in age, consenting or not, even as he got older.

It similarly appears that as he got older, the females got younger. And due to age, could not legally consent.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that ping pong balls, flashlights, homemade movies of neighbors, child-porn collections, or previously being accused of rape of an adult, are evidence of murder of a child.

But when coupled with blood, dna, various fibres, a strange and untimely desert journey, and four failed polygraph tests, it does add up, boy doesn't it though, to law enforcement, the DA, the preliminary hearing judge, twelve jurors, and reasonable folks.

(Or else all of the abovementioned factors result from a strange coincidence, coupled with some pretty cleverly administered conspiracies.) ** The mathmatical probability of which is vitually the same as the concept of zero.

(And then, pray tell, after all the trouble, those darn San Diego voters go and fail to re-elect the DA, anyway.) ** Which is a fact.

[truth_seeker]

In haste, I made one of my alloted mistakes for the day. "Russle" should have read "ruffle" as in "ruffle your feathers."

Be mute, or not, as you please. Only a few have been muted by the "system"; posting or not being at the will of the remainder.

[cyncooper]

The source for the documents has been given several times on this thread and we all have read Brenda's statement.

Hate to break it to you, but there was nothing, absolutely nothing, new in that statement, except what those of us with a brain had guessed, and that was it was Damon's idea and the marriage was troubled. This may be a source of satisfaction to you, but it is not a revelation.

What is of interest are the many, many revelations about Westerfield, but you don't seem to be able to muster any disapproval of him, say, filming his neighbor getting in and out of her shower while she is in the privacy of her own home.

You do not possess the ability to interpret evidence correctly. That much is clear from what little I have read of your "analysis" of the case. Probably because you often twist the facts, put emphasis on the irrelevant, or outright lie.

[cyncooper]

Or looking at the overall big picture, it appears Dave went after females, widely varied in age, consenting or not, even as he got older.

Don't expect this character to acknowledge the facts here.

He dismisses the episode with Westerfield sneaking into his niece's bedroom and the fingers in the mouth business, by calling the niece a "nitwit". See? Everyone is of low character in his view except (in his sick and distorted view) the much putupon and falsley maligned Westerfield. He is saving his scorn for the van Dams and Dusek.

Your voice of commonsense and sanity is much appreciated.

[Jaded]

I think it is sooooo sad that there are only one or two of you here who have the inside track on the truth. It must make your life very lonely.

HERE'S A CLUE CYN: THEY ARE ALL TRASH. Including your precious heroes. Danielle was the victim. Period.

[cyncooper]

The van Dams are not my heroes. I do not equate what they have done with what DW has done.

There are well more than one or two of us who are able to discern the truth--and that is clear to all except the core group who still refuse to concede that David Westerfield murdered Danielle van Dam.

[EllaMinnow]

You, of all people, accusing someone else of hero-worshipping trash!
I actually felt kind of sorry for you the past few days. I know you thought that it was okay after the police video came out - you thought that was the worst there was on your Davey-Boy, didn't you?
And after more and more poured out about him - and more is coming - I thought you must be embarassed, or at the very least, a little ashamed of your advocacy for a man you really knew nothing about.
Now I hope you are embarassed - I hope you are absolutely mortified that you were such a fool.

[Jaded]

Actually, Red, I quit posting Monday night because I got so tired of the same crap from the same people. Many of us actually have other things to do. Some of you are rather like the media and the democrats. You refuse to let anyone look at things, they are required to have the official postition. It's been that way for months any you have been one of the leaders. There are things that could not be explained. That was all everyone wanted from the beginning. The full explanation, the truth, no more no less.

They are all sleazy, you seem to miss that point. Why? Are you lurking for someone, are you the plant? Someone's relative?

So go scream and rant and rave it's what we've all come to expect. Whatever. Your bitterness is showing.

[Valpal1]

Do you still believe David Westerfield is innocent?

[Valpal1]

Do you still believe David Westerfield is innocent?

[EllaMinnow]

Jaded, you know better than that!
The "official position" on the FR Westerfield threads has always been the one that Fresno set up 11 months ago.
I have my own opinion, and my opinion has certainly been justified over the past few days.

For you to claim that you have "something better to do" is just laughable!

How pathetic you are.

[Jaded]

Then don't waste my time.

[EllaMinnow]

Did you see Val's question?
Do you still believe he is innocent?

[Jaded]

David Westerfield is SCUM. Sleazy, vile scum.

[EllaMinnow]

But is he MURDERING SCUM?

[Valpal1]

But is he guilty scum or innocent scum.

Or just case unproven scum?

[EllaMinnow]

I'm not holding my breath for an answer. I've got better things to do.
I'll check back in a few hours.