Judge Allows Danielle's Dad Back In Court: (Damon was banned for MAD-DOGGING Westerfield!)

North County Times-San Diego ^ | July 13, 2002 | Kimberly Epler

[Jaded]

There is a lovely piece composed by our own Southflanknorthpawsis called "Big Bugs Don't Lie".

Mash Here: Stealth Ninja Dave

Click on Sing Along then Sing Along #3. Then just sing along.

[dread78645]

No, I think he is going to claim that the rain rehydraded the body and hatched more flys locally, both making it a likely day for the flys to lay eggs. I don't buy it, but I think that's going to be his line.

Well it could be his line, but I'd have to wonder how 0.17" of moisture would do that ?

And since blowflys usually lay eggs within 20 minutes of exposure, you'd have to conclude the body was mummified before it was exposed, then later re-hydrated. Not a good argument for the prosecution.

The thing that limits the earliest date of exposure is the beetle larvae, Faulkner found only the initial generation.

[the Deejay]

"who was it that said barbara and denise shared a bottle of wine before driving to brendas?"

Duh Knees.

[the Deejay]

"Wasn't it at that time that Denise bought GS cookies from Danielle?"


Yep. That very night.

[dread78645]

Could you just imagine the big, neat guy, lurking in Danielle's closet, resisting the urge to organize it? Now, if her closet was rearranged, THEN I might start to think he was in there....

Either DAW or Martha Stewart, did they find any hand-tied potpourri sachets ...

[pyx]

I still maintain molestors don't care what the parents do...if they find a weakness, they will exploit it..whether the parents are gone all the time volunteering or bar hopping. If they think the child can be gotten, the child will be had.

What specific testimony or specific evidence has been introduced in this entire trial that demonstrates David Westerfield is a child molester ? What specific testimony or specific evidence has been introduced in this entire trial that Danielle Van Dam was molested ?

[pyx]

My second question above should read;
What specific testimony or specific evidence has been introduced in this entire trial that demonstrates that Danielle Van Dam was molested ?

[John Jamieson]

As I said, it doesn't fly with me. The flys would have hit the body before it a chance to dryout, unless it was in a refrigerator, or sealed. Either way somebody has to do something on about the 16th.

[Stiv]

I'm still waiting for the defense to show that dw didn't kill her..

Perhaps I'm confused here, but isn't the prosecution supposed to show that DW did kill her? The defense doesn't have to prove squat. It is the state that has the "burden of proof" as to guilt, and right now it's looking like a mighty heavy load for them to carry.

[Greg Weston]

"The defense doesn't have to prove squat."

Yeah but if they can prove something to help the accused they tend to do it. It can really help things.

[truth_seeker]

To me California seems a lot different than my neck of the woods - but I don't really know. Some of the witnesses described Poway as being a small town where you would run into familiar people at many places - like the gas station, stores, you get the drift. I dunno though - doesn't seem that way to a gal from a real small town.

San Diego is something like the sixth largest city in the US. San Diego County is about 2.9 million souls, and Poway is a suburb of the city of San Diego.

It seems natural that Poway would be described by locals as having a "small town" nature. They mean that in the sense of having a community identity--strip malls, little league, schools, churches, similar neighborhoods and of course eating places and bars..

In old fashioned American small towns, it often meant families which had lived nearby for generations. That is not the case in Poway, which is largely made up of subdivision homes & condos, built in the last 30 years.

If I recall, the Van Dams are not originally from California. I'm fairly sure that the patterns of suburban sprawl of California, are taking place in many other places, too.

[Greg Weston]

Why do we have to wait until "this trial is over" to hear "how bad" they are. Tell us all about the "information". You you saying the media whores are keeping it quiet? They have already told us alot of stuff about the Van Dam's lifestyle. They are holding back the real juicy stuff for some strange reason huh? Are you in touch with Feldman to know what he "has against these two"?

Tell us all about it.

[Freedom2specul8]

That was poor wording. It depends on how long I've been glued to my monitor on how poor it can actually get. I'll attempt to reword it..

I am still waiting for the defense to actually show that it has enough information to deflect any rays of guilt from dw to someone else. IE the defense could bring forth evidence from other neighbors houses or vehicles..such as danielle's blood drops or her hair or layla's hairs using tapelifts.. I mean if danielle had a habit of sneaking in other people's vehicles dripping blood we deserve to know that. (not neighbors she was at all the time of course..)

[Stiv]

If the defense is going to say the PARENTS of a murdered 7yr old brought STRANGERS in the house all the time, he better prove it and not leave the jury thinking that bvd was just a stoned tipsy (or drunk..whatever) flirt. That's how he left them hanging.

For your information, "left them hanging" means only that time ran out before Judge Mudd's vacation. I'm sure -- very sure -- there are quite a few bombshells to come. I could be wrong -- have been before, will be again -- but that's what my gut tells me. Now, as to the part about what the defense had "better prove..."

1) Doesn't matter if they were strangers, though offering the "Brad Pitt guy" (didn't bother looking up the name -sorry!) an invite seems to me as being quite similar as offering invites to strangers.
2) The jury will be instructed that, if given two reasonable theories, they must choose the one that assumes innocence.

The theory that presumes GUILT says that (a) an extremely drunken 50-year-old man "snuck" into the van Dam household without alerting occupants or animals, despite a security system; (b) he left not a single trace of his presence, despite his inebriated condition; (c) he destroyed all vital evidence (excluding hair and fiber, which I think we all agree are very tenous) except for a blood-spotted jacket, which he took to a dry-cleaning establishment at the height of the search frenzy; and (d) he dumped the body at a place the prosecution hasn't proven he ever visited during the required time frame. I won't bother going into the bug stuff here.

The theory that preumes INNOCENCE assumes (a) that hair and fiber can be easily transferred, (b) that an inquisitive and apparently bright child -- one who was prone not only to nosebleeds but also whom had been scratched by the piss-happy, magically barkless 'Layla" -- might explore an unlocked motor home found along the path to the local park; (c) there is zero proof that Mr. Westerfield ever viewed said pornography, regardless of its 'organization' into folder's (if someone needs an explanation of how it is possible to 'organize' pics into folders without being aware of contents during download, I'll be happy to detail although I've done so in previous posts); and (d) , there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence of DW's interests in young children or even teenagers.

Two theories. Without the prosecution providing ONE SINGLE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that Westerfield ever entered the van Dam house or even was on their property that night -- and keeping in mind the fact the jury must presume any "reasonable" innocent theory over a "guilty" theory that has little credence (save evidence dealt with above), is there any real doubt as to what the correct verdict should be?

Be aware that I am NOT saying Westerfield is innocent. I'm only saying the state hasn't proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the parameter our criminal justice system is based on, and the one on which this trial revolves.

I will be happy to hear your input/response.

Stiv

 

[KLT]

Social diseases could be a real problem.....but it still doesn't help to have one of your children brutally killed..

[KLT]

We know one thing my friend...the child's DNA was found on Westerfield's clothes, in his closet, and in various locations....We may never know exactly the cause of death in this case, because of the degree of degradation many times it is inconclusive, especially on a small child whose weight is substancially less then an adult's...sad but true!

[KLT]

Uuhh, s'cuse me. You're an advocate for vigilante justice? Last time I checked every person accused in this country has the right to defend themselves, face their accusers & have the RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL.

Uhhhh, excuse me...but I do believe the rape and murder of one's child qualifies as something completely different....
an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth....Now that's a fair trial......

[BARLF]

I have put together a little time line. Using PDvD and Brenda PH testimony concerning the morning after/Sat.Feb.2 from the time they got up until calling 911. Also a few of my own comments and questions. Anyone with corrections in my time line please feel free to address same. I'll start with Brenda.

1. Brenda awake at 8:15am. Got up at 8:25

2.Took shower and dressed. I'm allowing 30 min. for this but could be less.

3.Goes down stairs 9am. Starts breakfast,neighbors kids come over sometime between 9 and 9:30am.

4 Goes upstairs to get Danielle finds her missing.

5.Calls 911 at 9:39am according to time stamp on emergency call.

Damon up at 8am

Derrick already up/maybe Dylen,too. Damon made poptarts for boys and waffle for himself.Brenda came down,started doing the dishes/Damon took garbage out.Then what? Damon: We went back upstairs for awhile. After that,what happened? Came back down stairs and she started to make breakfast for the kids. The neighbor kids came over. What time did the neighbor kids come over,if you can estimate? 9:00,around 9.

Not placing much importance on the difference in time that Brenda and Damon give here. Understandable we don't check out clock every time we make a move. I do wonder with this tight schedule when they found the time to go back upstairs "for awhile". If Damon was saying this to indicate he and she had a quickie then he must be akin to a rabbit or a monkey. Or he could have been trying to state he had no sex with Barbara during the 2/3/or 4am party.

Dusek asked Brenda what she saw when she entered Danielle's room. Brenda says, a "Bean Bag and Big Dog." Dusek means the style of bed,Brenda says an empty bed.

What did you do? I asked Damon if he had seen her. And he said--I asked him if she slept in her bed because sometimes she would sleep--they liked to sleep in Derricks room. He has an extra bed.What did he say? He said he tucked her into her bed. What did you do then Ma'am? I looked in the bathroom because sometimes she gets up and she'll sit there for a little while. And I started calling her name. I started looking under the beds......

I asked him if she slept in her bed......

Could Brenda not tell if the bed had been slept in or not,just by looking at the bed? Dent in pillow? Covers untucked if Damon tucked her in? All of this in 9 minutes?

I have thought from the very beginning or after hearing testimony(PH) that whatever happened to Danielle happened after 8:30pm and before 1:45am. More likely when and why Layla tore her bed apart.This part is just my speculation and nothing more. The above time line etc. is from PH testimony.

[spectre]

Wow, that's some chip on your shoulder, Greg.

The background info on the Van Dams was so bad the judge wouldn't let Feldman introduce it...So I don't know what it is, and you know that.

And Greg, you just want to argue, so go suck on a lemon...

sw

[pyx]

We know one thing my friend...the child's DNA was found on Westerfield's clothes, in his closet, and in various locations.

I haven't read or heard any testimony or evidence thus far where Danielle Van Dam's DNA was found in David Alan Westerfield's closet. Please cite from evidence or testimony to verify this particular assertion.

I am aware that on 1/4 inch blood spot was found in DAW's motorhome that scent dogs did not pick up (which makes me curious as to how long it was there for.) I am aware of on 3/16 inch DNA spot on DAW's jacket shoulder. I am aware of one single hair with a root that likely matches Danielle Van Dam that was found in the drain of DAW's motorhome and again there is no indication of how long it has been there.
I am aware of a ring finger print and a small finger print on one of the cupboards in DAW's motorhome that likely matches Danielle. Again, there is no indication of how long those two partial fingerprints had been there and its noted that they were covered in a fine coating of dust so it seems possible they were there for some time.

Other than these bits of evidence, I know of no hard evidence that links David Alan Westerfield to Danielle Van Dam.

I also know that scent dogs did not pick up DAW's scent inside the Van Dam house, which could be accounted for by my HAZMAT Dave Theory. And I am also aware that the scent dogs did not pick up any trace of Danielle Van Dam in David Alan Westerfield's home.

I also know that Forensic Entymologist Faulkner was initially hired by the prosecusion and last week testified for the defense and clearly indicated that in his opinion, Danielle Van Dam's body was not at the Dehesa Road dump site until at least February 16, 2002 which is about two weeks after David Alan Westerfield had a GPS tracking unit on his vehicles and was under constant surveilance by police and media.