Murder Charge Likely In Missing-Girl Investigation (Danielle van Dam)

Union Tribune ^ | February 25, 2002 | J. Harry Jones

[FresnoDA]

Murder charge likely in missing-girl investigation

Authorities believe 7-year-old Danielle is dead, source says

By J. Harry Jones 
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

February 25, 2002

It is increasingly likely that a murder charge will be sought against David Westerfield – possibly as early as today – for the death of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam, even though her body has not been found.

A law enforcement source close to the investigation told The San Diego Union-Tribune that "investigators and prosecutors are of the belief she is dead."

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the murder charge would include special allegations that could lead to the death penalty if Westerfield is convicted.

San Diego police Chief David Bejarano would not comment specifically on the source's claim, but said a decision on whether to bring a murder charge would be made today.

"We have been working with the investigators, the District Attorney's Office and the family throughout the weekend," Bejarano said. "Even if we do file the charges, there is always still the hope that she will be found."

Westerfield, who turns 50 today, is being held in isolation in the downtown jail without bail on charges of kidnapping and burglary in connection with the disappearance of Danielle from her Sabre Springs home. Danielle last was seen Feb. 1, when her father put her to bed, police say.

Westerfield, who lives two houses from the van Dams, is scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow.

He was arrested Friday, following a three-week investigation. Authorities said DNA tests found Danielle's blood in Westerfield's motor home and on a piece of his clothing. Additional evidence was discovered on a piece of the girl's clothing in her bedroom.

One reason for bringing the murder charge now is to avoid a possible legal entanglement, a source said. Theoretically, if Westerfield were to plead guilty immediately to the kidnapping and burglary charges, his attorney might be able to argue double jeopardy if a murder charge were brought later.

The decision to charge Westerfield with murder was discussed over the weekend with Danielle's parents, Brenda and Damon van Dam, the source said.

A spokeswoman for the van Dams last night said the couple would not comment on the case until after Westerfield's arraignment.

Westerfield became the main suspect within days of the girl's disappearance when he consented to, and failed, a polygraph test, several sources have said.

His Mountain Pass Road home had been under constant surveillance by detectives and members of the media covering what has become a national story. He was arrested at his attorney's office Friday.

Bejarano said during a news conference Friday that police "believe without question that DNA evidence links Mr. Westerfield to Danielle's disappearance."

Tests on additional pieces of biological evidence are pending.

Police started looking at Westerfield because he was the only neighbor away from home the weekend Danielle disappeared. He told police he socialized with Brenda van Dam and two of her friends the evening of Feb. 1 at a Poway bar.

He said he went home alone, then drove his motor home to the desert, where he spent the weekend by himself.

Authorities and hundreds of volunteers have searched eastern San Diego County methodically, hoping to find some trace of the girl.

Yesterday, 200 volunteers hiked through the Kitchen Creek area of the Cleveland National Forest, which is dissected by Interstate 8 – the freeway Westerfield likely would have driven to the desert.

Prosecuting a murder case without a body is difficult, but not impossible. Last year, a former Santee man was convicted of killing his estranged wife, Guadalupe Dailey, even though her body never has been found.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So then, what was John Walsh guilty of? What about Polly Klaas's parents?

They are guilty of being singled out by a sick homicidal maniac.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...leaving a seven year old unsupervised for most of a day..."

My two year-old didn't sleep well Sat. night, he had an upset stomach. Last night he went to sleep at 8:15 PM, we checked on him at 11:00 PM when we went to bed, and didn't open his door until 7 AM this morning.

Should I expect to have my kids taken from me now?

[Amore]

Oh, and when you say Danny Rice, I don't know that name. Sure you don't mean Jimmy Ryce?

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I do think the parents' negligence helped to make her abduction possible."

Do you have proof of any negligence by the van Dams? Why haven't you notified the authorities?

[Mrs.Liberty]

Thanks for the excellent post.

I agree on the time-issue, meaning, we don't know too much of the timeline of when DW suppsedly left with Danielle,
and where did he go first?

If what I have read is correct, he paid his $$ at Silver Strand State beach Sat AFTERNOON,
then once the park ranger came and gave him his balance, he freaked and went to the desert, where, the next day, he got stuck in the sand.
WHat time did he leave home in the RV? Did anyone in the neighborhood hear him leave in the RV?
Where did he go BEFORE he arrived at the state beach?

I am reposting a post from the 760KFMB (Rick Roberts radio station) message board
that asks many questions we are all wondering about (when I guess we should instead be out searching):

"There are way too many questions and too many different stories. I wondered about the alarm also.
They were always seeing the blinking lights on the alarm and closing doors but not turning the alarm on or locking the doors?
If DW came in before 1:30 when did he leave and where were the parents?
How did he know the alarm wasn't on? Why did he not worry about getting caught in the house or throughout the whole night?
When DvD tucked in Danielle did he close her bedroom door?
When BvD went to shut the kid's doors was her daughters door already shut or open?
What about when they went to wake her up?
Were the people that BvD and her friends hooked up with at the bar and brought home strangers?
Did their daughter sleep walk out and then she was taken?
Was she running away or going to look for parents?
Where was her father sleeping when the dog woke him up needing to go out?
If the dog can't bark how does he wake him up?
If the door was open why did he have to let the dog out?
Did they go to bed at 3am and what time did they wake up?
Was it before the boys got up (7am) or when the friend came to play(9am)?
From Interview with Local "8" Damon starts to say Why didn't they check on the kids to see if they might have wondered out or why the doors were open?
Were they with their company at all times during the "get together"?
Did DW have any relations with any of the women or men who went to the Van Dams?
Was he over there and something went wrong so he did the getting rid of while
others cleaned at the house then came up with a story "you were never there" "it never happened" then he
gets blamed and takes the fall? Did he and Brenda dance at the club together?
Who is lying? People at the bar had to see if they did.
Was DW's rv at his house? If not why wasn't there evidence in his SUV?
Did anyone have any bruises or scratch marks?
Do they only have specks of blood? Why do they think she is dead?
If there had been a trail of blood why didn't anyone see it that night before going to sleep or in the morning?
How did he get in without anyone seeing?
If her door was shut did he open any of the other doors waking up the boys looking for her?
How was it so easy for him to get past the parents, get a silent alarm, a dog that doesn't bark, and carry the girl home without anyone knowing. "

[scholar]

we checked on him at 11:00 PM when we went to bed, and didn't open his door until 7 AM this morning.

Eight hrs. is a pretty normal time frame, and I am sure you didn't have open doors, with an alarm system indicating that there had been a breach of security, while you didn't even bother to check on your son.

[spectre]

For crying out loud, Luis...John Walsh's wife turned her BACK at a shopping mall and the kid was nabbed.

Polly was abducted from her own bedroom while she was having a sleepover with other children.

These parents were victims of circumstances that any one of us could have fallen prey to. They were wonderful parents.

You don't want to believe Brenda was guilty of being at the bar soliciting sex partners that evening, so we are on a different wave length. I can't believe you are taking up for her, when not ONE person is contradicting she was there, not even Brenda herself.

sw

[buckman10_2000]

Ann Jillian?

[Mrs.Liberty]

My two year-old didn't sleep well Sat. night, he had an upset stomach. Last night he went to sleep at 8:15 PM, we checked on him at 11:00 PM when we went to bed, and didn't open his door until 7 AM this morning

Did you come across an open door (and, on the presumption you have an alarm system, a blinking light on that) at your home in the middle of the night?

If so, did you just shut it and go back to dreamland, or did you check on your kids?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Sorry, Danny is my brother's name.

[Amore]

Ok, now you're going to start attacking me. Now that I think about it some more, I question your motives MORE than FresnoDA's. A number of people have discussed this case and most of us have felt that the parents were negligent. You don't like that. You've been getting quite incensed about it, attacking anyone who dared question the parenting of the Van Dams. In fact, you haven't seemed quite stable which is why I have been avoiding you
-- until you asked me a direct question, which I answered. Your tactics are not changing anyone's mind and really they only hurt your cause. I stated long ago that I believed Westerfield was guilty and that the parents had no direct involvement in Danielle's death. Apparently that's not enough for you. Well, too bad. This is a discussion forum and we are discussing the case.

[Admin Moderator]

I've done all the pulling of replies on this thread that I intend to. I will not pull this thread. Knock if off or be suspended.

[demsux]

Double secret probation

[Valpal1]

You don't want to believe Brenda was guilty of being at the bar soliciting sex partners that evening, so we are on a different wave length. I can't believe you are taking up for her, when not ONE person is contradicting she was there, not even Brenda herself.

She can't be "guilty" of something that isn't illegal and she hasn't been charged with and convicted of.

I'm taking the swinger gossip with a 1 lb bag of rock salt. So a schlock jock puts in on the air. Frankly, if there was that much alleged swinging going on, there would be a cess pool of slimies looking for their 15 minutes of fame doing "I done the Van Dams" interviews. Where are they?

Failing to deny the stories signifies nothing, maybe they choose not to dignify such apersions by answer them.

Westerfield failed a polygraph, not the Van Dams. Pretty sure the LEO's asked all the questions we have, and Westerfield failed the polygraph, not the Van Dams (needed repeating). Westerfield is arrested and charged, not the parents, yet a lot of Freepers are still piling on the Van Dams, working very hard to implicate them into criminal complicity or negligence with nothing more but media innuendo and gossip!

[The Right Stuff]

There are a couple of other odd points that bear mentioning.

And, I will concur with Luis that there has been no (to my knowledge) official report of the VD's "lifestyle", or their "garage with the indoor locks" - just some news from some unidentified so-called LEO and some disc jockey named Roberts.

The only other corrobating thing that could be said to show the VD's lifestyle is that apparently they were asked specifically about it on LK Live and when interviewed by Newsweak and Thyme magazines they didn't deny the allegations, just said their lifestyle was "irrelevant".

I also agree with others that if they indeed DID live a lifestyle like that hypothesized, I believe that they SHOULD be held accountable. 1 - for giving knowledge of where three small children lived to perverts and drug users and 2 - for not adequately protecting their young children...like not checking on them until 9 in the morning, for example.

That being said, I would like to add a couple of things I found strange. Having seen them myself on Fox News, I can verify them myself.

1 - the little girl was CONSTANTLY wearing this neck choker thing. I know several 7 year old girls who like these, none of them wear them constantly. It looked odd, like a biker tattoo or a dog collar.

2 - Danielle looked oddly developed for a 7 year old. Most of my friend's daughters did not get (sorry for the language, but that's the way they describe it in the health textbook) "breast buds" until age 11 or 12.

Someone else noticed this on one of the threads and said it might be due to molestation.

If that's true, perhaps there is more to this story. (And Luis, if I still lived out in CA, I would be combing the canyons with you. There are so many wild animals out there, I can't see how a 7 year old could survive for long.)

[spectre]

See reply Number 132. I'm not risking 4 years on this forum for a suspension or a time-out...

sw

[LWalk18]

So having "breast buds" before 11 or 12 is a sign of molestation! Please tell me where you get this information, since apparently every female in my family (including myself) were "molested" unknowly judging by the fact that we developed breast buds at 7-8. Not to mention a good portion of my 2-3 grade class at the time.

Some of this speculation about the VD family is getting quite silly. What we know is very little, except that her blood seems to be all over Westerfield's property. For now, however, none of us can jump to conclusions either way.

[MizSterious]

I have read that it is one explanation, but not the only one. Most little girls do not develop at age 7. (In other words, while it can happen, it's not the norm, and for some reason, it keeps turning up among little girls who have been systematically molested.)

[MizSterious]

I don't think the moderator was saying we couldn't reply at all. Just that we had to play nice.

[MizSterious]

Yes, we are 'piling on' as you put it. The reason is, if they had not been...um...partying...in the garage, with door locked from the inside, perhaps they might have noticed someone stealing in and making off with their daughter. Or, worse scenario, if they had not brought a predator to the house, he might not have taken the daughter so easily. This last is speculation, yet I'm starting to give it more credence. Yup, I think Westerfield had been to that house before, despite what the VDs are claiming.