Posted on 07/03/2002 6:41:25 AM PDT by FresnoDA
Janet Roehr, who lives across the street from Westerfield in Sabre Springs, said Westerfield typically left the 35-foot motorhome at his house overnight before leaving for a trip.
Roehr said she only saw the 1997 Southwind for a few minutes the afternoon after the girl was discovered to be missing from the neighborhood. She didn't see it again.
Her husband, Mark, testified he did not see the motorhome the day before.
The testimony likely did not help the defense case, which began directly after the midday lunch break. Three witnesses took the stand in the morning before the prosecution rested.
Janet Roehr said she saw the youngest child of Brenda and Damon van Dam chase a ball across the street just two weeks ago.
"Did you see the parents anywhere?" defense attorney Robert Boyce asked.
"No, I didn't," Roehr answered. She said that she had to leave her house and help the boy back across the street.
The van Dams testified earlier in the trial that they kept their children under tight rein, able to play alone along the sidewalk near their house but never across the street.
The defense has portrayed Sabre Springs as a family neighborhood filled with children.
Under cross-examination by Deputy District Attorney Jeff Dusek, both Roehrs said they never saw young children in the defendant's motorhome.
Westerfield, a 50-year-old self-employed design engineer, could be sentenced to death if convicted of kidnapping and murdering the second-grader, who lived down the street from his home.
He also faces misdemeanor possession of child pornography charges.
Westerfield's next-door neighbor, Paul Hung, testified that he saw the defendant's motorhome parked near Westerfield's home about 8:30 a.m. on Feb. 2, the day Danielle turned up missing.
"I saw the motorhome parked on the side (of the house)," Hung said. "No, I didn't see David that morning."
Hung testified that a half-hour later, the motorhome was gone.
That night, Westerfield was not around as searchers combed the area around the van Dam home, Hung testified.
Detective Johnny Keene was recalled to the stand and told Dusek that Westerfield was questioned the morning of Feb. 4 and again that afternoon and night.
In between, the defendant was free to do what he wanted, Keene testified.
Defense attorneys have alleged that Westerfield -- even though he wasn't under arrest -- couldn't leave and hadn't eaten when he spoke to authorities.
The final prosecution witness, Dr. Joy Halverson, of Quest-Gen Forensics in Davis, testified that the mitochondrial DNA found in four of five hair samples could have come from Layla, the van Dam family's dog.
Halverson said she found a complete match in two samples. She also said she found nothing to exclude the canine as a source for the hair.
Two samples with the full match came from Westerfield's motorhome, according to a chart prepared by the prosecution. One was in the hallway carpet, the other on a bathmat.
The evidence gave the prosecution another link between Westerfield and the slain youngster, who was found dead east of El Cajon on Feb. 27.
Last week, another DNA expert, Holly Ernst of UC Davis, said she was unable to get results from the samples that she could reproduce.
Halverson, though, said Layla's DNA sequence was found in 23 of 267 dogs in her database, or one in nearly 12.
Those numbers, though, are where she ran into trouble in cross-examination by defense attorney Steven Feldman.
Halverson admitted a mathematical error when she narrowed the field in her database from 358 dogs to 267. She said she filed an amended report. The chart shown to jurors gave a third set of numbers.
"Is it good science to make a mathematical error three times in the same data set?" Feldman asked.
Halverson called it human error.
Earlier, a volunteer dog handler testified that he sent an e-mail saying he "was bursting with pride" on the day Westerfield was arrested in connection with Danielle's disappearance.
Jim Frazee, who volunteers with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, sent the e-mail to three friends on Feb. 22 -- 16 days after his dogs examined Westerfield's motorhome at an impound lot on Aero Drive.
Frazee testified last week that one of the dogs, Cielo, gave an alert signal at the door to an exterior storage compartment on the passenger side of the vehicle while searching for the child's remains.
Under cross-examination by Boyce today, Frazee said he did not mention the alert in a report he filed because police investigators asked for the results to remain confidential.
"On Feb. 6, you don't recall telling anyone what the dog found?" Boyce asked.
"I don't recall what I told them," Frazee said.
The defense concentrated on the fact that, with no other report filed, the only evidence of Cielo's alert came from the e-mail after the defendant's arrest.
Boyce quoted Frazee's e-mail, which he said stated: "I wasn't sure, but I thought Cielo was giving his cadaver alert. I thought he may have been doing this just to please me. Today, however, came word of the suspect's arrest and that they found blood in the motorhome."
Frazee said the arrest raised his confidence in Cielo's finding.
Frazee's supervisor, reserve sheriff's Lt. Rosemary Redditt, said she watched Cielo's search of the outside of the motorhome and had no trouble recognizing the dog's alert at the storage door.
Thankyou for the compliment. Yes, the defense can call anyone as a witness. Given Dusek's admission that some of the prosecution witnesses have hired lawyers and what appears to be at least some discussion about immunity deals, I would expect Feldman will find out their names and put them back on the stand. I certainly expect Feldman to call Barb Easton, a lesbian/bi-sexual, since she apparently is the one person Brenda especially wanted to keep away from Danielle. Barb's motive and access to Danielle is certainly equal to or greater than that of DW's. Was her car checked, or was Damon's van checked for Barb's presence? Inquiring minds want to know. Maybe there was a reason Damon got rid of his car? I would think Feldman might want to look closely at Damon's former vehicle.
Those witnesses in danger of prosecution will then either assert their 5th Amendment rights or be granted immunity. If they assert their 5th Amendment rights, the entire focus of the trial will then be on them and the prosecutor, if it isn't already, not DW. If they are granted immunity, they must answer every question honestly or face prosecution for perjury. The prosecutor will have to be careful in structuring the immunity deal so as to preserve any right to prosecute them if they were involved in the death of Danielle, or at least limit such immunity to only the persons needed in order to convict the real murderer.
Needless to say, the prosecutor is in a deep hole now and is in danger of having this case collapse in on him. He may be buried up to his neck now from the looks of things.
Who knows; if it goes this way, the judge just might favorably consider a defense motion for a directed verdict of not-guilty before the case goes to the jury.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the prosecutor may attempt to create a situation that might tempt the defense to move for a mistrial is they think they will lose this case badly. That would put great pressure on DW to make such a motion since it would end this trial without a guilty verdict, but might jeopardize a possible, and very likely civil rights action against the police if he got an aquittal from the jury. Don't be too surprised in this happens since an aquittal would look much worse for the prosecutor than a mistrial. I've seen it done before in my county and judge's are not likely to rule that the incident creating the mistrial was intentional even when everyone knows it was intentional.
I think Danille disappeared sometime Friday between NOON and 5:30pm. Damon and Brenda are covering up for this because Brenda was in a hurry to go OUT with friends and they both thought Danille would SURELY show back up sometime. I think maybe the reason Damon wanted to get the partiers to go home early, is that he had to tell Brenda that Danielle never showed up. Then they had to work on cover stories, to keep it from looking like they were bad parents. WHAT HAPPENED TO DANIELLE? Most likely case is that she wandered around the neighborhood, got picked up by a known sexual offender, then killed and dumped at a later time. Police did not have the means to invetigate this possibility, because they are trying to follow leads that stem from her disappearing FROM THE HOME, LATE AT NIGHT on FRIDAY. If not true, and she disappeared early in the day, it would take a whole different manner of investigation. So, now, we may never find out what truly happened. because the parents have been trying to hide their mistakes.
[yes,very well put UCANSEE2 - and it is coming out as inconsistent testimony from the whole gang.]
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.
