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
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880, 881-900, 901-920 ... 1,541-1,560 next last
To: redlipstick
He attends school about 300 miles away from home. His books are with him. OK. But your post didn't say "I called my son and asked him to get out his lawbooks." What you stated sounded like he was right there.
The words "I JUST ASKED " usually mean immediate access and response.
I just asked my son to get out his law textbooks and tell me if the when and how questions must be answered for a murder conviction.
He read the same sentence to me from several of his textbooks:
......
794 posted on 01/14/2003 5:48 PM PST by redlipstick [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 789 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
So, if your son was not right by your side, you sure didn't make that clear, and left yourself open to my remark.
To: UCANSEE2
I think that the question that you don't think I answered is, do I think that someone should be executed for a crime if their civil rights were abridged.
Is that the question?
If it is - just say yes.
If it isn't, just ask me the question you want me to answer.
882
posted on
01/15/2003 2:31:33 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: UCANSEE2
I was talking to my son ON THE PHONE...is that better?
883
posted on
01/15/2003 2:33:56 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: redlipstick
Did the jury not get to see the pics during the trial and why not?...was the case not strong and due to the jury instructions, they had to acquit?
Which jurors actually said that Christmas was the reason?
884
posted on
01/15/2003 2:45:58 PM PST
by
Rheo
To: CW_Conservative
If the public won't stand up for their own rights, then the police would obviously believe they could violate the rights of a "potential suspect". It's like the "pro-choice" people ignoring that there is, in fact, a choice, though they use the term to apply to abortion on demand, the other choice, obviously, is to have the baby.
Well, like the pro-choicers using their term deceptively, so you use the concept of "the public won't stand up for their own rights", when what you mean is that you expect all citizens to never cooperate with the police because they have the right to not be forced to submit to warrantless searches, etc. Or the right to remain silent OR what you say can and WILL be used against you.... See, people have the right to cooperate voluntarily.
To: Rheo
The photos weren't found until quite a while after the verdict.
There was a thread a few weeks ago about the case. I'm trying to remember the guy's name - I'll pull the thread up if I can find it.
886
posted on
01/15/2003 2:50:52 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: CW_Conservative
What the article doesn't say is that the dogs did "HIT" on one of the neighbor homes. I believe it was the empty one next door to the VD's. The one that the new neighbors were due to move into.
Anyone else support or disagree with this?
What I don't know is if the LE's were able to get into the empty house or if they didn't search it because it was 'supposedly' empty and if that is where Danielle was 'kept' until someone could move her body somewhere else?
To: redlipstick
I was talking to my son ON THE PHONE...is that better?LOL!
I was just going to ask if they have phones at your son's college and if you happen to have one of your own, but perhaps I assumed too much before you stated definitively...
To: cyncooper
I just saw on another forum a poster denying that DW asked for the gun, since it wasn't recorded on the desert trip...conveniently forgetting that on another occasion when he asked for a gun, it was videotaped, and has been available for viewing for over a week.
There are thse who seem to believe that the transcripts supercede and invalidate everything that we have seen and heard with our own eyes and ears.
889
posted on
01/15/2003 2:55:35 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: UCANSEE2
I know about the case red is referring to. I never knew the part about the jury wanting to go Christmas shopping. There were pics found after the fact(trial) and if I'm remembering correctly, he was tried again on Federal(?) charges and is in prison. If I'm wrong I'm sure it will be pointed out immediately. The POINT is that the jury decided on this one and he was found not guilty. The LE didn't screw up by violating his constitutional rights.
890
posted on
01/15/2003 2:56:27 PM PST
by
Jrabbit
To: redlipstick
If it isn't, just ask me the question you want me to answer. The questions in POST 758,
POST 761,
POST 767 ,
POST 783 ,
POST 784 ,
POST 845 ,
POST 846 ,
POST 850 ,
POST 853 ,
POST 865 ,
POST 875
To: redlipstick
And post 880.
To: redlipstick
Ok, thanks...would like to read about it.
Sounds like a damn nightmare.
893
posted on
01/15/2003 2:58:43 PM PST
by
Rheo
To: Jrabbit
Federal perjury charges, I believe. Not murder.
894
posted on
01/15/2003 3:00:19 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: redlipstick
I was talking to my son ON THE PHONE...is that better? Yes. Makes it easier to see why you mispelled acquittal so many times.
To: UCANSEE2
As I recall, the dogs didn't HIT on that house, per se...they lead the handlers to that house....not sure if a big difference.
The people were supposedly there when LEO conducted their door knocks in the next few days.
The man did a short interview in the paper....saying he met the VD's and Danielle on FRIDAY when she sold him cookies.
896
posted on
01/15/2003 3:01:21 PM PST
by
Rheo
To: redlipstick
There are thse who seem to believe that the transcripts supercede and invalidate everything that we have seen and heard with our own eyes and ears. I noticed.
To: Rheo
Wanna bet she never answers and that she made it up (the part about why they acquitted)?
To: Jrabbit
Could you please list for me the violations of Mr. Westerfield's civil rights?
I know that there was some violation, that's why Ott and Keyser didn't testify, but I'd like to see some specifics.
Please.
899
posted on
01/15/2003 3:02:27 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
To: UCANSEE2
I'm not the one who said Christmas shopping. IIRC, the judge told them that they would be sequestered over Christmas if they didn't come to a decision.
I might be wrong, but I think that's what was stated in the article I read recently.
900
posted on
01/15/2003 3:06:58 PM PST
by
EllaMinnow
(get real.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880, 881-900, 901-920 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson