SDPD Takes Heat For Attempt At Interview: Contact with Westerfield called shocking(van Dam suspect)

Union Tribune ^ | March 8, 2002 | Greg Moran

[Valpal1]

I always think the best of cops

Maybe they wanted to say "We've found her body, would you like to confess and tell us about it."

Maybe they hoped he would break.

I think Feldman is working this issue pretty hard, considering the officers never actually spoke to his client.

He wants the gag order pretty bad, which means it ain't good for his client. If the affidavits (sp?)and other "evidence" are so full of exculpatory information as well as 3rd party culpability as he has proclaimed, why the gag order?

Feldman is grandstanding, IMO.

That said, the DA should help him put a lid on it. If the stuff is that explosive, let's not taint the jury pool and give Feldman another avenue of appeal after conviction.

Although desparately curious as an armchair detective, ultimately I want justice for Danielle and increased awareness of pedophiles/child porn to help protect other children.

[Howlin]

I'm not even a lawyer, but I did watch the O.J. trial, so I feel qualified to speak: the whole WORLD knows you don't speak to somebody after they have an attorney!

[spectre]

"I'd say the pics were still child porn...what else can they be called"?.

So, Kim, you have passed judgment without SEEING the pictures, based on hear-say, rumor and inuendo?

Bad move, Kim...ROFLMAO

sw

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

I'd say that the pics are still child porn--what else could they be called?.

Apparently the "actors" were not clearly under the age of 18. It seems that it was difficult to determine.

While I find all pornography disgusting, it may be that DW did not know it was child porn. If the age was hard to tell, he may not have willfully broken the law.

Furthermore, it doesn't appear that he had a thing for real young girls as far as the porn evidence indicates.

[Freedom2specul8]

??? Didn't you read the article? ROFL!

[Freedom2specul8]

I guess we all need to reread the article in question..because the only charge of complaint by the defense attny was that there was no child porn on the puter..as reported. SO...if the alleged pics were questionable, he would have replied on those too, right?? Regardless, charges made by the police dept are not rumors per say.. they are allegations made by teh police dept for the prosecuting attny who believes there is enough evidence to convict. Besides, it wasn't the prosecuting attny's office who claimed their was child porn..it was the PD..we all stood corrected when the child porn on puter allegation was clarified by the defense attny.

[spectre]

Haven't you been following the threads..? There isn't a clear definition of what "child porn" is. But you don't have a problem defining it, when it comes to Westerfield.

AND I don't have a problem defining "infidelity" when it comes to the van Dams.....LOL and a big little smiley face :~)

sw

[Freedom2specul8]

So, Kim, you have passed judgment without SEEING the pictures, based on hear-say, rumor and inuendo?

BTW, Cute ya stinker. :)

[Freedom2specul8]

Why no, I've not seen actual differences of opinion on the definition of child porn on these threads. I'm sorry I missed it though. We all know it when we see it, right? (famous words of a supreme court judge who wasn't talking about child porn but obscenity..but close enough)

[spectre]

Turn-about is fair play...:~)

sw

[Freedom2specul8]

He wants the gag order pretty bad, which means it ain't good for his client. If the affidavits (sp?)and other "evidence" are so full of exculpatory information as well as 3rd party culpability as he has proclaimed, why the gag order?

He may just be grandstanding and putting on a show..he's apparently known for that..he may just want to mislead the press.. I'll be back after awhile..

[rolling_stone]

I don't know if Westerfield is guilty or not, the "evidence" that we have heard about started out strong but seems to be fading. My concern is what if he is innocent? He does have the right to a fair trial, and if it was you or me we would want one also. The right of the press and the public to know has always onflicted with the right of a defendant to a fair trial...my thoughts are that less sensationalism would result in a fair trial, and what harm is done to the public if they have to wait till the trial to hear the evidence? Much of what you hear in the news will not be admissible for good reasons at trial, but by having it aired in the media, the jury pool can be tainted..I don't think Feldman is grandstanding or has so much to hide, only wants it presented fairly not one-sided...

Look at the Sam Shepherd case and F Lee Bailey, where there was a media frenzy...most of us now believe Shepherd was innocent and a window washer was guilty..put yourself in the place of the accused and imagine how you would feel if only news against you was coming out, not exculpatory evidence or evidence of third party culpability...I am for law and order and believe those that prey (and especially assault) on children and seniors or disabled are the lowest of the low and should be delt with severely, (IMO the best reason for laws is to protect those that can't protect themselves from predators)but I also feel the right to a fair trial trumps the right of the free press...we also have constitutional protections to keep overzealous officals in line...JMHO...regards..

[Freedom2specul8]

LOL Touche!

[spectre]

That's the whole point, I haven't seen it, have you?

(careful, that was a loaded question)

sw

[Amore]

I think Feldman is working this issue pretty hard, considering the officers never actually spoke to his client.

He wants the gag order pretty bad, which means it ain't good for his client. If the affidavits (sp?)and other "evidence" are so full of exculpatory information as well as 3rd party culpability as he has proclaimed, why the gag order?

Feldman is grandstanding, IMO.

See?! I told you this day was coming, now I AM agreeing with Val!

[alpowolf]

Watching everyone assume this man is guilty, makes me as a single man very concerned. If a kid disappears the nearest single man is arrested and everybody automatically convicts him.

I begin to think that I need to look for an adults only community. Certainly I had better never let a kid into my apartment under any circumstances, lest he/she leave DNA behind.

Now of course I will be flamed as "anti-children".

[MizSterious]

You forgot to ask everyone to hold hands and sing kumbayah. (or however it's spelled)

[newzjunkey]

Could this be a scam by elements of the police dept. to further embarrass the much hated DA, Paul Pfingst, criticized for ethical lapses and bungled murder cases? A two term incumbent, he pulled less than forty-two percent (42%) of the vote in Tuesday's primary despite the heavy press coverage thanks to the DVD case.

If the 17,000 votes left to be counted Monday don't change things, Pfingst is likely to face former deputy DA and current Superior Court judge Bonnie Dumanis (kneejerk Freepers will overlook her qualifications and obsess over allegations? she's Lesbian). The bonus is the union's candidate lost. If somehow Dumanis isn't the run-off candidate (she has a lead of around 8000 votes right now), it'll be attorney Mike Aguirre, someone with apparently NO prosecutorial experience.

[Jaded]

Actually, some of us have doubts about his guilt or doubts about his being alone in the said act of kidnap and murder. You must have missed the threads that got pulled. There are just are too many things here that don't add up. Who knows maybe it will end up on court TV. Until then we'll all be doing our arm-chair detecting and lawyering.

[spectre]

Not so fast, Amore. Feldman might just know he won't get that gag order, thus resulting in the press going ballastic, and airing the case in public till the jury pool IS, in reality, tainted and he really can't get a fair trial?

Never ask a question you don't know the answer to, right, Consular?

sw