WESTERFIELD TRIAL: Week Three - Day Three

San Diego Courtroom Trial | none

[John Jamieson]

You don't have to be drunk. I worked at the same place for 30 years and often wondered how I got there in the morning. I used to show my badge to toll takers and throw money at the guards. Long time ago.

[UCANSEE2]

LOLOLOLOL

[Jaded]

Yep, Stealth Ninja Dave.

[John Jamieson]

Lots on new transcripts and an almost right map up at signonsandiego.com.

[sbnsd]

Feldman got the medical examiner to admit that Danielle was probably still alive mid-February. I know what testimony you are referring to. That is not an accurate representation of the medical examiner's statement.

Yeah, I recall that testimony also. The ME did NOT say "probably still alive mid-February". He said it was possible, not probable.

[dread78645]

You don't become an instant child molester/murderer/kidnapper because you are drunk.

True story. But don't let "kevin currey" or "texasforever" know about this. The anti-libertarian threads will kill us all

[UCANSEE2]

And I think someone else even suggested this before, and we can check on this fact;

Would a person coming from Dad's and going to DW's house go by the VD's ??

Is there a way to go that doesn't go past the VD's?

I know I have several routes to get to my house, even if coming from the same spot each time.

And if I was Drunk, God knows what route I might take. God only knows if I would know for sure what route I was even on or did take the next morning.

[Karson]

What is your take on the pajamas testimony today? If they weren't the ones Danielle was wearing the night she disappeared, why where they mentioned in the testimony?

[cyncooper]

Thanks for the heads up!

[cyncooper]

Correct, sbnsd.

[cyncooper]

P.S.

an almost right map

LOL

You could send them some corrections, I'll bet. You have really put alot of effort into getting it laid out and it is appreciated.

[John Jamieson]

I didn't buy a new car for years, because I was convienced the old one knew the way.

[BigBobber]

Interesting idea about the dog. If Danielle were mauled, could this be mistaken for the damage to the body attributed to wild animals at the disposal site?

BVD admitted the dog scratched Danielle's back not long before the disappearance. Were these scratches noted in the autopsy? Seems like they would still be present if Danielle died not long thereafter. If they were not visible, would it mean she had lived a while after abduction?

Like a lot of you, I think the dog is somehow strongly connected to this case. I have never heard of a dog getting a bloody nose from "running into someone's leg" as DVD testified. Why is the dog's blood all over the house? What about the shredded bed, wetting incidents, being locked in different rooms, having to pee multiple times Friday night, etc. Something is very strange.

[nycgal]

Is this the testimony you're referring to?

Cross by Mr Feldman
Q SO NOW IS IT YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT DANIELLE VAN DAM COULD HAVE BEEN ALIVE ON FEBRUARY THE 6TH, 2002?
A FROM JUST EXAMINING THE BODY, SHE COULD HAVE BEEN, YES.
Q FEBRUARY THE 7TH.
A YES.
Q FEBRUARY THE 17TH.
A POSSIBLY. YES.
Q DEPENDING ON THE WEATHER CONDITIONS, FEBRUARY THE 22ND.
A I BELIEVE THAT'S PUSHING IT A LITTLE BEYOND WHICH I CAN ACCEPT

RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q I JUST WANT TO TAKE THE QUESTIONS AND REVERSE THEM JUST SLIGHTLY. TO SAY SHE WAS DEAD ON THE 17TH OF FEBRUARY YOU WOULD HAVE TO SPECULATE TO THAT, TOO, WOULDN'T YOU?
A WELL, I HAVE EVIDENCE OF THE CONDITION OF THE BODY. SO IT'S NOT SPECULATION.
Q WELL, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE TENTH DAY ON YOUR ESTIMATE, ISN'T IT? YOU TOLD US YOUR RANGE WAS TEN DAYS OR SO AT THE LOW END.
A RIGHT.
Q AND I'M THINKING THE 27TH WAS THE DAY THE BODY WAS FOUND, TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THAT WOULD BE THE 17TH. I'M JUST TRYING TO TAKE YOUR NUMBERS.
A WELL, 17TH WOULD BE WITHIN MY RANGE OF TEN DAYS TO SIX WEEKS.
Q THAT TEN-DAY RANGE, THAT DIDN'T IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A MONSOON IN SAN DIEGO, DID IT?
A NO. Q WHEN'S THE LAST MONSOON YOU HEARD OF IN SAN DIEGO?
A I DON'T REMEMBER.

[John Jamieson]

They say right on the map, that he went to Borrego, but don't show it.

[UCANSEE2]

I didn't buy a new car for years, because I was convienced the old one knew the way.

Sometimes my car drives me home, when I intended to go somewhere it. It seems to have habits too.

[BigBobber]

Some random thoughts, have just finished the previous 1000 post thread:

Rheo, thanks for keeping us up to date. Great for those of us who can't listen during the day.

Mrs.Libery---you're on FIRE! Can't wait to see your comments tomorrow.

This hair in Danielle's hand is a case breaker. If that hair is DW's, he is toast. Likewise, if they can't say it is his, he walks. I can't believe Dusek would not have mentioned it in opening statement if it was DW's hair.

It has always disturbed me that Daniele's body was not found wrapped in a sheet or other material. If DW was carrying her body around in MH all weekend, then dumped body at Dehesa Sunday night, and body was bloody, he would have had to wrapped her in something. Otherwise there would be blood all over MH. So where are the sheets? For that matter where are her PJs? How and where did DW get rid of these items?

The poison oak at dump site is very significant. PO is very hard to identify when dormant, as it would be in February. Yet, you can still get the rash from the bare twigs. If DW is allergic to PO he should have gotten a rash if he dumped the body. Likewise with DVD.

I like the new reply box. Still missing spell checker though! :^)

[UCANSEE2]

I went to the signonsandiego.com and found the transcripts as well as all the motions that were filed by both sides.

VVVVVERy Interesting.

It had the pdf copy of the motions on 'alibi and 3rd party culpability'. You should (if you haven't) read them.

Seems like there may be some big surprises to come. Also sounds like defense was preparing for worst case, meaning if someone prosecution had enough (planted/misinterpreted/coincidental) evidence and defense couldn't disprove it, then defense could use the drunkenness as an option .

[Rheo]

Are you noticing there is an awful lot of testimony about the dog in this case? And especially today I realized that Feldman (I think) keeps asking everybody to describe the dog...especially her size. Strange.

I noticed it too...thought the inference was that Layla had been switched for another dog or something.

[UCANSEE2]

I can't believe Dusek would not have mentioned it in opening statement if it was DW's hair.

From what I understand, this has gone so fast, that testing on much of the evidence hadn't been completed by the time the PH, then the trial started. Some may not be completed yet.