Posted on 07/15/2002 6:55:50 AM PDT by MizSterious
By Alex Roth
STAFF WRITER
July 14, 2002
A week ago, Janet Roehr, a neighbor of David Westerfield's, testified at his murder trial about some of his routines, including his occasional habit of parking his motor home in front of his house.
Her testimony lasted 15 to 20 minutes, but what she said wasn't as important as what she did: She smiled at Westerfield.
Roehr was among a parade of defense witnesses who consider themselves friends of Westerfield's and who seem to like him, even as he stands accused of kidnapping and killing 7-year-old neighbor Danielle van Dam, who disappeared from her bedroom in Sabre Springs in February.
At various times during the trial, those witnesses have grinned at Westerfield, winked at him and laughed in his direction. One witness gave the 50-year-old design engineer the thumbs-up sign while leaving the courtroom.
Whatever else Westerfield's attorneys have accomplished so far, they have succeeded to some degree in humanizing their client. Legal experts said the importance of this achievement shouldn't be underestimated in a case in which the jury must decide not only guilt or innocence but also, potentially, whether he deserves the death penalty if convicted.
"They give the picture of Westerfield being a pretty normal middle-aged, middle-class guy," said San Diego defense lawyer Robert Grimes, who has been following the case. "It makes the jury wonder: Could this person really have done this horrible crime?"
During the guilt phase of a trial, rules of evidence place limits on character evidence ? that is, testimony about a defendant's personality. Nonetheless, a jury can get some feel for a defendant by sizing up his friends and evaluating how much those people stick up for him.
Several neighbors, some camping buddies and a female friend Westerfield hung out with at a Poway bar have testified. In large part, they were "people who seem like nice, ordinary citizens," said San Diego lawyer Mike Still, a former prosecutor.
One of the defense's most powerful witnesses was Westerfield's former girlfriend Susan L., who cried while acknowledging she still cares about Westerfield but hadn't seen him since shortly before his February arrest. She dated Westerfield for about three years after his divorce from his second wife. (Her last name is not being published to guard the identity of her daughter, who also testified.)
Her affection for Westerfield seemed genuine, although she admitted on cross-examination that he changed when he drank alcohol, that he once became "forceful" when drunk, and that he once waited outside her house.
In some ways she was a terrific witness for both the defense and the prosecution. For the defense, she made the point that Westerfield is a man who can attract a woman who seems sweet and normal. For the prosecution, she illustrated that Westerfield might have a dark side that goes beyond his alleged habit of collecting child pornography.
In addition to showing the jury that Westerfield has friends who care about him, his legal team has succeeded in raising questions about some of the prosecution's theories in the case, some legal experts say.
For instance:
Prosecutors say Westerfield engaged in suspicious behavior by embarking on a meandering, two-day journey in his motor home on the weekend Danielle disappeared. He went from Coronado to the Imperial County desert and back again, traveling back roads and getting stuck in the sand twice along the way, he said.
But several defense witnesses testified that within the esoteric subculture of San Diego County motor-home enthusiasts, Westerfield's behavior wasn't necessarily that weird. It's not uncommon to drive back roads as a way of taking in the scenery and avoiding high winds on Interstate 8, they said.
Prosecutors noted that Westerfield, who is compulsively neat and organized, took off that weekend without putting away his garden hose, which was uncoiled on the lawn. This shows he was in a hurry, they say.
But Westerfield's former girlfriend said it wasn't unusual for him to toss down the hose in the front yard before leaving on a motor-home trip. She also said the motor home got stuck in the sand during several camping trips she took with him.
Prosecutors called a volunteer who testified that his cadaver-sniffing dog reacted to a side compartment of Westerfield's motor home during a search at a police impound lot.
Under questioning by the defense, he revealed that he never told police about his dog's behavior and that he was much less definitive about his dog's reaction in an e-mail he sent to the dog's breeder several weeks later.
Prosecutors say child pornography found on computer disks in Westerfield's office prove he has a sexual affinity for young girls.
But a computer expert hired for the defense suggested that at least some of the pornographic images might have been downloaded by Westerfield's 18-year-old son.
Meanwhile, the prosecution ? which has succeeded in presenting a powerful body of forensic evidence linking fibers, blood and hair from the girl to Westerfield's house, motor home and sport utility vehicle ? stumbled once or twice in the past week.
Prosecutor Jeff Dusek leaned on several defense witnesses in a way that might cost him some credibility with the jury, legal observers say. And he may have come across as unnecessarily mean-spirited when confronting witnesses whose testimony conflicted with the prosecution's theory of the case.
"Prosecutors wear the white hat," said Still, the former prosecutor. "Don't beat up on witnesses you don't need to beat up on."
But Dusek had his stellar moments, too. His questioning of the defense's star witnesses ? insect expert David Faulkner ? was one of the most effective, and important, cross-examinations of the entire trial.
On direct examination, Faulkner, an entomologist with the Museum of Natural History, said flies on the girl's body indicated it was dumped at a time when Westerfield was already under 24-hour police surveillance.
But on cross-examination by Dusek, Faulkner appeared to contradict himself, admitting that strange weather patterns in February ? as well as the imprecision of the science ? made it impossible to know precisely how early the flies had infested the girl's body.
At the start of the trial, lead defense attorney Steven Feldman promised that the insect expert's testimony would exonerate Westerfield.
"Science is going to come to Mr. Westerfield's rescue," Feldman told the jury.
But by the time Faulkner left the witness stand, many of the jurors had stopped taking notes. They will be the final arbiters of whether Faulkner's testimony was relevant, and whether it made any sense at all.
By Kristen Green
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 14, 2002
The 11-day break in the David Westerfield trial will be a long distraction for jurors who have been coming to the courthouse for almost two months. But it's not clear who will benefit from the intermission.
Legal experts say such an interruption is relatively unusual, although it does happen during long trials, even in capital cases.
The prosecution and the defense are probably both nervous that jurors will be spending time with friends, family and co-workers who will talk about the case, said Bob Grimes, a San Diego defense lawyer for three decades.
"It's something you always worry about in a high-profile case anyway, and now these jurors have a lot of time on their hands," Grimes said.
It takes discipline not to talk about a case, Grimes said, visualizing a juror having a couple of glasses of wine over dinner and then chatting about the trial.
The saving grace, he said, might be that jurors know they've seen all the evidence firsthand, so they won't be influenced by what others have to say.
Superior Court Judge William Mudd told everyone at the start of the trial there would be a one-week break in July. Before he left for a vacation with his wife and some friends, he reiterated his daily admonition to the jurors, in even stronger terms, to "self-police" their exposure to coverage of the case.
The trial of Westerfield, a 50-year-old engineer accused of kidnapping and killing Danielle van Dam, a 7-year-old neighbor in Sabre Springs, has attracted national attention.
Court TV has aired the daily court proceedings, and the TV magazine "Dateline NBC" taped a special that ran last week. Local television and radio stations have broadcast parts of the trial live and run evening roundups of the day's events. The trial is a frequent topic on radio talk shows.
Mudd warned the jurors that the break would not end coverage of the case.
"When there's nothing live, there will be something contrived," he quipped.
While the jurors are probably looking forward to the week off, the attorneys involved probably wish they could keep the case rolling along.
"It's like anything else in life; it's a rhythm you like to maintain," said Daniel Williams, a San Diego defense lawyer and former prosecutor.
The attorneys in the case, who cannot discuss it because of a gag order, are probably using the week to prepare their final arguments, Grimes said. But he said that if they had their choice, they probably wouldn't take the extra time.
"I would rather just get it over with than worry about it for another week," he said.
When the jurors were dismissed, the defense was in the middle of presenting its case. The trial is scheduled to reconvene July 22. The last lawyer the jury heard from was Westerfield's lead attorney, Steven Feldman.
Mike Still, a former San Diego deputy district attorney, said the break could be damaging for the prosecution. Most prosecutors, he said, don't want jurors to get distracted by issues the defense raises.
"The longer the jury has to think about things, the longer reasonable doubt has to sow its seeds," said Still, who handles civil cases. "As a prosecutor, you wanted to get the case over with as quickly as you could and get it to the jury."
Robert Pugsley, a professor of criminal law at Southwestern University, said the break could leave jurors uninterested.
"It will be a chore for both sides to revive juror interest in the case," he said. "Some jurors might come back with an attitude that this isn't as important as they were told it was."
The judge clearly did not share that concern.
"The pundits are telling me that you are all a bunch of idiots and you are going to lose everything," Mudd told the jury Wednesday. "You're not going to remember anything; you're going to be left with the impression that the last person that testified is the best witness that you've ever heard."
He suggested the jurors use the week to reconnect with bosses and co-workers, and to spend time with their families. The time off, he told the jury, provides a breather before the hardest work begins.
"The end of the trial will be very intense, as you can well imagine," Mudd said.
The more normal the Defense paints Westerfield, the more Damon resorts to his Mad-Dog mode.
The character witnesses for the Van Dams are real losers themselves. Did they have any normal friends?
sw
Did you know that "DW HAS to be the killer, because ONLY the killer would know about the Father/Daughter dance?" Yep, according to Beth Karas, that is a fact...NOT!
sw
I don't believe the jurors missed this point. Westerfield's friends seem like normal, decent people. The van Dams' friends, like the van Dams themselves, are white trash with California valley-girl accents.
And I stress the word friends to distinguish between other witnesses at the bar who didn't know Westerfield. Neighbors, though, all spoke well of him, and had visited or gone camping with him in the past.
Quick quiz: How many neighbors spoke well of the van Dams? How many said they actually knew them?
Those words still ring in my ears..just like "we regret nothing"..
sw
Remember the testimony when someone said "I thought I heard voices in the RV"?
sw
Friday, July 12, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|||
Saturday, July 13 and 14 at 9 p.m. ET
Hosted by Geraldo Rivera
A judge on Thursday unsealed affidavits in the trial of a man accused of killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam, including one in which police allege the defendant told them the desert east of San Diego would be "a great place to dump a body."
The 168 pages of affidavits were used to obtain search warrants for David Westerfield's property and vehicles after the girl disappeared from her home Feb. 1. Her body was found three weeks later along a rural road.
Westerfield, 50, has pleaded innocent to charges of kidnapping, murder and possession of child pornography.
And month later and still no trace of the lovely 14-year-old, Elizabeth Smart, snatched from her bedroom at gunpoint as her terrified 9-year-old sister watched.
At Large will bring you the latest in both cases.
E-mail your comments to: atlarge@foxnews.com
If the jury is equally prone to lean toward "guilty until proven innocent," I think Feldman needs to take his time and present lots and lots and lots of witnesses to rebut the enormous volume of minutia introduced by the prosecution. Surely he's not going to wrap things up within a few days of trial resuming, do you think?
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.