Posted on 07/13/2002 6:28:25 AM PDT by FresnoDA
I read on a posting the other day where Brenda had gone to be an advocate for the mother of the little black child who is missing. If Brenda's advocate is anything like Brenda is, she tells lies.
There was no objection from the prosecuter when it was said she had been harrassing potential buyers of Westerfields house.
Do you have a resource that you know this for sure? If so let me know and I shall say no more.
Because his blood was on it, too, and perhaps he didn't realize that Danielle had bled on it? Posters here keep emphasizing what a small spot it was (though there shouldn't be any spot at all), so maybe he thought the stains were all his.
The judge in the David Westerfield trial denied a request by The San Diego Union-Tribune yesterday to unseal more search-warrant documents in the case.
Superior Court Judge William Mudd said he was following the orders of the 4th District Court of Appeal, which he interpreted as permitting only some of the search warrants to be unsealed.
My hat's off to you.
This is from DVD's testimony on 6/5:
________
A: WHEN HE HAD THAT SAND RAIL, I BELIEVE HE HAD A BAJA-TYPE BUG WHICH IS A VOLKSWAGEN WITH THE ENGINE EXPOSED AND, YOU KNOW, ENGINE EXPOSED AND EXHAUST COMES OUT THE BACK. AND IT WAS BLUE AND HAD THE CUT-OFF FENDERS. AND I THINK HE HAD AN OLDER PORSCHE CARRERA I THINK IT WAS. AND HE HAD A WINNEBAGO, BIG CAMPER WITH A TRAILER.
_____________
DVD's memory of 4yrs ago is much better than recent events?
What in my post #124 was conspiratorial, Kim? I mentioned nothing about a conspiracy. One doesn't have to conspire to perform an incomplete investigation.
As far as "answers" go, I think it has been pretty well established in court, that the reasons given for getting a search warrant for DW, were (shall we say) heavily embellished. To that subject, I believe we have "answers".
Regarding your post, you haven't limited your post to proven fact. Who are you trying to kid? There is considerable speculation in your post. JMO, Kim, but I think you remove and edit thoughts, theories and speculation, such as those I just posed to you, simply because they don't fit your agenda. Again, JMO
Any clue WHY the secrecy ?
During a brief hearing Friday, Judge William Mudd told Guylyn Cummins, an attorney representing The San Diego Union-Tribune and other news media, that his reading of a 4th District Court of Appeal opinion -- ordering the release of certain documents -- didn't require turning over anything else.
Westerfield wasn't at the hearing.
Affidavits for five other search warrants were released Thursday. In one, Westerfield is quoted as saying the desert would be a "great place to dump a body" while showing police where he camped the weekend Danielle van Dam disappeared.
Later that day, when a detective said it would be nice to know where 7-year-old Danielle van Dam's body was, Westerfield told him to be patient and police "will get the information they need," the affidavit states.
When asked when that would be, Westerfield said it would be sooner than they think, according to the affidavit.
The affidavits were originally sealed at the request of police in early February and remained out of public scrutiny when defense attorneys filed suit.
The sworn statements were made available at the start of an 11-day break in Westerfield's trial. He is charged with kidnapping and murdering Danielle van Dam, who was reported missing from her Sabre Spring home Feb. 2.
Her body was found dumped along an rural road east of El Cajon Feb. 27.
In a telephone conversation with Superior Court Judge Cynthia Bashant, Detective Randy Alldredge said that when Westerfield was first contacted by police on Feb. 4, he mentioned an upcoming father-daughter dance Danielle was going to attend with her father, Damon.
He said he learned that from Brenda van Dam when they spoke at Dad's Cafe and Steakhouse the night before the girl was discovered missing.
But Brenda van Dam did not tell police she talked to Westerfield about her daughter or a father-daughter dance, according to the detective. Alldredge said Brenda van Dam was later asked to confirm that she had not mentioned the dance, according to the affidavit.
"According to (Brenda) van Dam, the only persons who are aware of the dance are the immediate family members and one neighbor next door, not Westerfield," the affidavit quotes Alldredge as saying.
"Only Danielle van Dam could have told him about the daughter-father dance and only after she had been abducted," the affidavit stated.
That Feb. 4 telephone conversation helped support the first search of Westerfield's home, which occurred Feb. 5.
"SDPD officers are currently watching the (Westerfield) residence and motor home," Alldredge wrote. "I believe evidence will be destroyed if the warrant is not served tonight."
Detectives also wrote that Westerfield "matches FBI profiles regarding a possible suspect of an abduction" and that several strands of blond hair were found on the floor of his Toyota 4Runner.
Puh-leeze! If he KILLED her while wearing that jacket (or the jacket was somewhere blood could have splattered onto it) and then noticed there was BLOOD on it, wouldn't such a careful killer simply ASSUME it was HER blood or at the very least a combination of his and hers? Remember, this is a guy who the prosecution claims made gargantuan efforts to eliminate every bit of trace evidence he could -- I can't imagine why he would think it was his blood and HIS ONLY if there were ANY POSSIBLE way her blood could have gotten on it during the commission of a murder. If, on the other hand, Danielle DID get those few drops on it during the Girl-Scout cookie session or while playing in the motor home unbeknownst to him, Westerfield would have NO REASON to suspect it was anyone's blood other than his own (or perhaps an animal's if the guy ever went hunting or fishing, forgive me for not doing research on his outdoor sporting actvities!) and would naturally have no qualms about taking it to be cleaned. Just my opinion, of course....
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.