Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In taped interrogation, Westerfield tells police 'my life is over'
San Diego Union Tribune ^ | January 7, 2003

Posted on 01/08/2003 9:24:19 AM PST by TomB

In a videotaped interrogation with San Diego police detectives four days after Danielle van Dam was kidnapped, an exhausted David Westerfield says "my life is over," seemingly coming close to an admission that he murdered his 7-year-old neighbor.

"As far as I'm concerned my life is over, the life that I had, the life that I was living is over," Westerfield says in the interrogation conducted the evening of Feb. 5, 2002. Danielle was last seen the night of Feb. 1.

"But you can't blame anyone but yourself, Dave," answers one of the police detectives.

"And I have no problem with that," Westerfield replies.

In the tapes released Tuesday, Westerfield admits "unusual" sexual encounters with his wife, denies anything improper about his alleged use of binoculars to watch neighbors and says the child pornography found on his computer was simply something he downloaded along with a lot of other pornographic images and that he had no sexual interest in children.

Superior Court Judge William Mudd agreed Monday to unseal the videotape along with hundreds of pages of transcripts, documents and recordings in the Westerfield case, as well as transcripts of police interrogations and court hearings conducted in secret.

Some of the material – audiotape and videotape of Westerfield being interrogated during the early stages of the investigation – was released Tuesday afternoon.

The remainder of the material, which ranges from transcripts of closed-door court hearings to motions regarding potential evidence, will be released Monday, Mudd ruled.

The ruling Monday came three days after Mudd sentenced the former design engineer to death for kidnapping and murdering 7-year-old Danielle van Dam, his neighbor in Sabre Springs.

Monday's court hearing came in response to a request by The San Diego Union-Tribune, which has been seeking access to the information for months. The San Diego-based 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled that Mudd must release the information.

The San Diego chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists made a donation to the legal costs.

Westerfield, who attended Monday's hearing, is scheduled to be moved within days to death row at San Quentin State Prison outside San Francisco.

During earlier court appearances, Westerfield was always dressed in civilian attire, but he appeared in court Monday in a green jail jumpsuit. He sat in a holding area so he couldn't be filmed by a television camera.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,541-1,560 next last
To: redlipstick
I'd even take up for you, red, if your rights were violated this way! Seriously, the LE shouldn't be given a pass on legal procedure no matter how serious and emotional the crime. Don't you agree?
841 posted on 01/15/2003 11:24:54 AM PST by Jrabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies]

To: Jrabbit
why were the search warrants legal?

I don't have the answer.

My opinion is that this was such a high profile case, and so much (re-election, reputation of the SD PD, and SD in general) was riding on finding the culprit, finding the body, and having the culprit given the death penalty that rules were broken, to ensure that happened. I fully believe that the SD PD BELIEVED they had the right man. I think they feel justified in breaking the laws of the United States to put the killer behind bars.

My objection to this whole thing, all along has been that they got the wrong person, violated his rights, and possibly planted evidence to ensure they could convict him, and the killer still runs free.

842 posted on 01/15/2003 11:27:08 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 840 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Did I ever say that?

Do you believe that a person should get away with murder because of a technicality? Because a cop uses the wrong word?
What I'm seeing in the transcripts is Feldman picking on words...I'm seeing "Did you use profanity against my client?" and not "Did you plant the blood, did you plant the hair?"
843 posted on 01/15/2003 11:29:21 AM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 839 | View Replies]

To: Jrabbit
IIRC, the LE's were in such a hurry to ARREST someone that they did so before they had their evidence tested and knew if it did or didn't confirm their guesses.

I.E. "Well, we will arrest you now, and then see if we have proof later".

844 posted on 01/15/2003 11:31:05 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
Did I ever say that?

Isn't that what you were implying in your post to Jaded? About how scummy and vile DW is, yet Jaded still supports him? If you meant something different, I would be happy to be properly informed.

845 posted on 01/15/2003 11:32:51 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
I also am wondering what you think now that the information is available showing that his rights were violated multiple times? Since the claim that DW was offering to show them where the body was if they would let him talk to a lawyer, now turns out to be a COMPLETE MISREPRESENTATION of his conversation, done by the SD-UT.

When statements that you accepted as TRUTH are shown to be complete lies, What do you say about it ?

846 posted on 01/15/2003 11:35:39 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 845 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
Being a reprobate and being a murderer are two distinctly different things:

rep·ro·bate (rep?r?-bat´) noun

1. A morally unprincipled person.

mur·der·er (mûr?d?r?r) noun

1. One who murders another.

mur·der (mûr?d?r) noun

1. The unlawful killing of one human being by another, especially with premeditated malice.



Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 .
847 posted on 01/15/2003 11:36:25 AM PST by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies]

To: All
BOTTOM LINE:

If the investigators, Ott and Keyser principly, were willing to violate the LAWS of the UNITED STATES, the LAWS of the JUSTICE System in California, to violate the Constitutional rights of a suspect, (and HAD violated the law before by falsifying evidence), and were willing to LIE in court to the JUDGE, WOULD they also PLANT EVIDENCE to win this case?

Now for this to be possible they had to have motive (no doubt here),Opportunity (Plenty, documented in fact that they were alone in the MH before the evidence was found), and had to have access to the evidence to do so.

This last part is hardest to prove (and accept, I am sure).

The hair could have been taken from her hair brush (which the LE's claimed had no hair on it), the print could have been taken from her room and transferred to the MH, and the DNA taken from her panties and transferred. All very easily done, if you are experienced in forensics.

848 posted on 01/15/2003 11:46:04 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 847 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Nothing that I have believed true in this case has been proven to be a lie.
849 posted on 01/15/2003 11:53:24 AM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 845 | View Replies]

To: Jrabbit; redlipstick
From what I have always understood about the design of our legal and justice system, the idea is that the police are trained in the PROPER and LEGAL PROCEDURES. If they don't follow them, then the only recourse is that the suspect gets away, even if he is guilty. This being the only way to ensure rights are not violated. If there is no punishment for them violating the law, then they will do so at every opportunity.

The principle or idiom was "Tis better to let one guilty man go, than to imprison an innocent one."

If it was my daughter would I want them to let the possible killer go? NO. Should I be upset if they do. YES. AT WHO? The LE's that violated the law.

And REDLIPSTICK, you seem to be ignoring facts like PERJURY!

The LE's that admitted violating rights, and LYING in court should be arrested and charged for those crimes. Don't you agree?

Or do we just say, It's OK, DW is a scum , so he deserves whatever happens?

What if.... the killer is still free?

850 posted on 01/15/2003 11:54:46 AM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 841 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Who has been charged with perjury?
851 posted on 01/15/2003 11:58:37 AM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 850 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
My post to Jaded was in reference to something she posted on this thread on Saturday, when she stated that DW was "vile scum."
I see that she has recovered from her moment of clarity.
852 posted on 01/15/2003 12:00:20 PM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 850 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
Nothing that I have believed true in this case has been proven to be a lie.

Did you believe that DW knew where the body was,and would tell the investigators, if they let him talk to his lawyer? I thought you said that his statement "If I get what I want, you'll get what you want" meant that he was going to tell them where Danielle was? Didn't you and the you know who discuss this with each other? On this thread?

853 posted on 01/15/2003 12:01:06 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 849 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
See post #847.
854 posted on 01/15/2003 12:02:28 PM PST by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
Sorry If I wasn't very clear there.

No one has been charged. They should be.

We have LE's admitting that they lied. If you lie in testimony, that is called PERJURY. It doesn't even have to be proven, when you admit to it.

855 posted on 01/15/2003 12:03:21 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 851 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
DW's statement...You'll get what you want..just let me talk to atty first" was in the context of him being taken for the DNA samples at 1910 hours.

Geez, that's certainly different than we've been led to believe.

Did you by chance watch the video interview DW did with Keyser and Ott?

He made similar (no, not this exact phrase, and I haven't had a chance to read the docs as Rheo is doing, so I haven't seen what she's referring to) comments when they pleaded with him to tell them where she was.

856 posted on 01/15/2003 12:04:52 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 833 | View Replies]

To: redlipstick
And you have not answered her question nor mine. I think I should call you the ARTFUL DODGER.

You an Aquarian? (if you respond, "WHY DO YOU ASK", that answers the question)

857 posted on 01/15/2003 12:06:26 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
They were not testifying - this information was sealed - Judge Mudd ruled that their statements were not admissable in court.
Have you confused these hearings with the actual trial?
858 posted on 01/15/2003 12:07:11 PM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 855 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
I'm not dodging - I'm working, and I keep stealing peeks at the thread. I haven't read anything but the top post to me in "My Comments" for the last half hour. Your replies are always the ones on top.
After I get home from picking up my child, I should have time to respond to someone.

In more depth...

859 posted on 01/15/2003 12:13:01 PM PST by EllaMinnow (get real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: All; ~Kim4VRWC's~
BTW, here in KC we had a little girl disappear, and was seen kidnapped by a convicted felon. I think 2 days went by and police found the little girl alive and well. They are still hunting for the man.

Thank You GOD, Thank You the witnesses that saw it, Thank You KCPD for getting her back to her family.

ALSO, KIMMY, I told you it was gonna snow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

860 posted on 01/15/2003 12:23:18 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 859 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,541-1,560 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson