The evidence can be examined by the defense. The disk files can be compared and dated well enough to verify their authenticity, or prove tampering. So can the blood/DNA work. The SDPD certainly didn't hold the body somewhere and then place it. They also wouldn't cooperate with any scheme the vanDams might have attempted. John Gacey pleaded innocent also...with 30 bodies buried under his house. He claimed he didn't know how they got there. Amazing!
It is appalling that the tragic murder of Danielle van Dam has been a political godsend for District Attorney Paul Pfingst. That he exploited it to his own advantage only makes the situation more deplorable.
Pfingst may have compromised the case. The Rules of Professional Conduct limit what a prosecutor may reveal to the public prior to trial. A prosecutor may disclose only the name of the defendant, the charges that have been filed and the dates of pending court appearances.
In his quest for publicity, Pfingst went well beyond that. He offered his opinion about the strength of the case against David Westerfield, discussed Westerfield's criminal record and revealed details about the evidence, including facts known only by the police and the little girl's killer. Perhaps most outrageous was his revelation that Westerfield failed a polygraph examination, which is not even admissible in trial.
What will be the ultimate result of Pfingst's conduct? Will a change of venue motion be granted, requiring the extraordinary expenses and complications of trying the case in another county? Will some kook pop up giving a plausible confession, citing facts and circumstances he has gleaned from the press, further complicating an already complex case? Will yet another recusal motion be granted against the district attorney's office, resulting in the attorney general having to pick up the case?
STEPHEN R. ANEAR
Rancho Santa Fe
An interesting Op Ed in the Union Trib.....