Defense has had no shortage of witnesses to make its case

SignOnSanDiego ^ | July 14, 2002 | Alex Roth

[RnMomof7]

If the jury is easily swayed by bias press reports prepare the hot dogs to toast as DW is fried.....It is brutal out there .EVEN Fox..had all the info wrong and then in essence judged him guilty..

Appeal stuff IMHO

[John Jamieson]

The Layla hairs in the motorhome are the best evidence that Danielle played in the motorhome. They may be the most important exculpatory evidence. They explain away the prosecutions best evidence.

[shezza]

But the dog, well, I'm sorry, I'm going to have to raise the odds. The chance that the Van Dams tracked that many dog hairs from their cookie visit into the Westerfield house is pretty small, even in Ms. Samantha's Santa Monica/Tom Hayden world. Give it 1 in 8, even though in the real world it's 1 in thousands.

Are you saying that since the Van Dam dog's hairs were in his motorhome and house that David Westerfield kidnapped Layla, too? Obviously I'm a bit thick, 'cause I don't see where you lay out how you arrived at your "1 in 8, even though in the real world it's 1 in thousands."

[Defiant]

Glad to see you have a sense of humor. Hootin' back atcha.

[hergus]

"I'm gonna use your e-mail and voice my objection to the reporting. DW said those words when he was going on a little travel trip with the LE..."

All of these pro-DW threads are so full of hate towards the van Dam's, yet when DW's actually words are put into the public sphere you want to object.

Don't you realize that this is why Feldman begged to have these interviews sealed until after the trial is over?

If Feldman thought these statements were not incriminating he would not have tried to hide them from the jury in the first place.

You can't blame LE or the prosecutor for using what they have.

[juzcuz]

I wonder why LE burglary team was called for. Is that a customary response to a missing person report???

Denise testified that Barbara didn't come down from upstairs, at all. Denise said that Barbara came down, when it was time to leave. So- did Barbara stay upstairs by her lonesome? She was in the Masterbedroom? Did she take something from the VanDam Master bedroom????

None of the swing-set mentions that Barbara was at the table. They testified -Denise, Brenda, Rich, Keith, Damon all at the table- Mood was SOMBER..

So where was Barbara???--checking in on Danielle, maybe????
My point is that Barbara had at least 15-20+ (if we can believe what the swingers say) minutes upstairs alone with no witnesses as to what she was doing, until it was time to go.

[John Jamieson]

The dog hair in thr RV proves that Danielle played in the motorhome, 100%. Westerfield did not take the dog on 2/1.

[ItsOurTimeNow]

Especially if they watch CNN or CTV. I think this break was a horrible idea, unless they had sequestered the jury the entire 10 days.

I think despite the lack of evidence, DW is going to fry on public opinion.

[hergus]

I'd like to do a poll and see how many people think your incessant song posting is offensive.

This case is about a dead child. You act like you've never followed a case concerning a dead child before. Most cases have their villains and their heroes. Not all children that are killed are from fine upstanding families that aren't easily parodied.

Your songs mock Danielle's memory and this very forum. It saddens me that people are having fun here at FR at Danielle's expense.

[John Jamieson]

We are ALL very upset about the death of Danielle, but many of us think the evidence against Westerfield is very poor. We want the CORRECT killer to be fried, not just anyone. To kill the wrong person for her, truely would be defaming the memory of Danielle.

[spectre]

Well, since you asked :~)

You might try computing the odds for this crime happening at the house..if YOU took DW out of the picture...just for kicks.

I am hoping the Jury will look at the whole picture, and understand that he couldn't have possibly been in the house to snatch Danielle.

Gut feelings and instinct say he didn't do it. These same feelings say the odds of him being convicted with just the blood evidence are there. Mostly because we have heard from people like you, who won't listen to reason.

This does not mean I think the man is guilty, I don't. But the jury doesn't have the advantage of knowing some of the things we do, and the fact that there is supposed to be a GAG order, but CTV and talk shows STILL broadcast that the man is guilty and misrepresent the facts..is deeply troubling.

Even with you, Defiant..you pronounce him guilty, and the trial isn't even over? It's a reverse OJ situation. They had all the evidence that he was guilty, but we knew they wouldn't convict a "brother". There was blood, alot of blood...but the dried up glove didn't fit..so they must acquit?! The trial was a farce.

You don't want to consider the other evidence, or the man's character references...You don't want to consider that he couldn't be the killer...it's just the question of blood and fibers. BUT I say.."The bugs don't fit..you must acquit"...trace blood evidence be damned.

You had him convicted from the get-go...you can't get past this. Why bother with a trial?

You asked..:~)

sw

[bvw]

I've read that kind of "statistical" analysis founded on much better data in the past. And debunked too. Why debunked, what debunks it? Do you want to know?

[Henrietta]

He probably wanted to have them sealed because they contained reports (hearsay) written by LEO's who were biased, and what was written would give a wrong impression of his client.

[NatureGirl]

Your songs mock Danielle's memory

I, for one, think you are incorrect. I think they very deliberately mock the Van Dams and their friends. Big difference.

It saddens me that people are having fun here at FR at Danielle's expense.

Danielle is way beyond this, I assure you.

If you don't like the song parodies, don't read 'em. I skip over them, just because that's not what I'm here for.

[spectre]

His words were taken out of context, hergus...surely you must know that! But I guess YOU just proved Feldman's point why he wanted them sealed to begin with.

sw

[bvw]

About that blood ... a fuzzy polaroid shot, spot cut from the jacket, tested. Chain of custody is questionable. If there was just one person in or near that chain of custody acting with malice ... the evidence could have been planted. No way to blow up a proper 35 mm photo and compare the blood spot while on the jacket at the scene, with the blood spot on the cut out patch.

[Defiant]

Let me 'splain. The dog didn't open the RV, even if DW left the door unlocked. Nor was the dog in the DW house at the time of the cookie visit. The hairs of the dog that don't bark could only have gotten in the RV by transfer from Danielle at the time of her mythical sneak into the creepy neighbor's motorhome....or off of Danielle and/or DW on the night that DW kidnapped Danielle. The hairs in the house could have gotten there only at the time of the cookie visit by transfer from one of the 3 Van Dams...or off of Danielle and/or DW at the time Danielle was kidnapped.

Any hair of the VD dog in the motorhome is VERY suspect, even if you accept the defense theory that the blood got in there when Danielle was playing in the RV months previously. The odds of even one hair being in there are small. But when you have lots of dog hairs consistent with the VD dog in there, then you are talking big trouble for the defense. Now, you have to assume not only that this little girl jumped into the goat's RV, but that she had a lot of the dog's hairs on her clothes at the time, and that she dropped a whole lot of them on this chance occasion. The odds of that are pretty small.

There is a similar analysis with respect to the dog hairs in the house. You could explain a few hairs from the cookie visit, although it would be suspicious. But, the huge numbers of hairs that were found? Not reasonable to expect that number of dog hairs transferred, unless you assume that they came off of someone who had just been in contact with the dog, because he had just taken a little girl out of the dog's house.

For purposes of argument, I gave it a 1 in 8 chance of an innocent transfer of the large numbers of dog hairs consistent with the VD dog in both the RV and the house. I think the real world odds would be more like 1 in hundreds, if not thousands. The point is, even if you give VERY favorable odds to the defense, and give him all the benefit of the doubt, the numbers soon show that there is still a miniscule chance that DW is innocent. All DW has to do to minimize this dog evidence, as I pointed out, is to produce a dog, any dog, that spent time in his house and RV, and whose hairs are consistent with those that were found. Did Suzanne L. mention that dog? I didn't hear it. DW might also want to test the mitochondrial dna of the found hairs against this mythical dog, to see if they match the ones that are believed to be from the VD dog. Give us this mythical "real" dog (like OJ's "real killer"), and I withdraw the argument that the dog hairs increase the odds of guilt.

If Feldman does not present this dog, this will be a clear sign that there is no such dog OTHER THAN the VD dog. Like the Sherlock Holmes dog that did not bark, Feldman would be the attorney who did not present evidence that he would have if it existed.

[MizSterious]

A lot of things sicken me. Such as quoting misinformation and disinformation from the LE leaks (later proven untrue--yet still quoted); such as people making up phony "statistics" to prove an otherwise nonexistant point; such as quoting someone out of context for the same reason (to prove an otherwise nonexistant point); such as ignoring exculpatory evidence because it doesn't fit in with the lynching party plans; such as requesting a lynching without benefit of trial (not you, but Southern "Free"bird); such as ignoring some obvious suspects among the van Dams and their friends; such as sanctifying all the van Dams do as though, because they're "victims", they should be exempt from normal sensibilities.

Lots to sicken people, and I am not alone in believing that. (Over 60 people do their serious discussions on another forum for that very reason.)

What sickens me most, however, is that despite the HIQs here (HangImQuick), the truth remains: Executing the wrong person is not justice for anyeone. Especially Danielle. Her killer is still walking around loose out there, I'm convinced of that.

[John Jamieson]

Why are you so dense? The dog and Danielle played in the motorhome is the only logical conclusion.

[MizSterious]

Some people see what they want to see. Nothing else.