Skip to comments.Court Testimony: DNA, fingerprints from motor home link Westerfield to Danielle
Posted on 03/12/2002 6:35:18 PM PST by FresnoDA
click here to read article
2. Well, you know what the defense is going to say. He's already set it up by saying Danielle ran all over his house while he was talking to BVD the day of the cookie selling. He'll just say that he always left the RV unlocked and that children got in there & played. I think it's all bogus, but they'll claim it. I think someone as anal retentive as DW would have kept his nice, neat RV carefully locked up at all times.
March 12, 2002 Transcripts. 10:00 A.M. until 1:00 P.M. Lunch Break
[09:57] all entered living area, 2 det and DW
[09:58] does recall walking to pool area
[09:58] was detective with you?
[09:58] she was with me - - so was DW
[09:58] det parga
[09:58] anyone else in house? Sgt Ray -
[09:58] he stepped inside
[09:58] Det Keen
[09:58] He has never been to vd house
[09:59] the female cop went there at some time
[09:59] was Ray at the house? not that he knows
[09:59] DW took you upstairs
[09:59] Was Det Cargo with you? Yes
[09:59] DW showed you closets? yes
[09:59] and the attic? yea
[09:59] Keen checked attic
[10:00] how long in house 10-15 minutes - upstairs maybe 5 minutes
[10:00] did Ray go up - - doesn;t recall
[10:00] then you left house - yes
[10:00] you drove to RV with Det Parga? Yes
[10:00] don't know how to spell that name
[10:01] Harga, Carga or Parga
[10:01] the detectives discussed their feelings that DW was very cooperative
[10:01] did not talk about DW as suspect
[10:01] at no time did they call him a suspect or discuss him as one
[10:01] while they drove to RV
[10:01] was DW a suspect?
[10:01] how is this relevant? asking
[10:01] the were discussing suspicious circumstances in the car
[10:01] webnt to RV
[10:01] went in - walked thru
[10:01] DW was in there too
[10:01] he and Carga went in
[10:01] how long to drive there -
[10:02] about 20-25
[10:02] how long from DW house to RV, didnt time, est 20-25 mins
[10:02] DW cooperative in RV? yes
[10:02] did he point out areas in bedroom - no - he was more toward front
[10:02] pile of bedding on bed? No - - just sheets there
[10:02] were you in bedroom? Yes
[10:03] NOT a pile of bedding, only sheets
[10:03] cop is sure no bedding on bed - just sheets
[10:03] not a closed off bedroom, just the back of the RV
[10:03] was fargo with you? No she was in front of RV
[10:03] Carga is a woman
[10:03] did you go in bathroom - it is not closed off
[10:03] Det. Carga
[10:03] has accordion door
[10:04] DW was inside the RV
[10:04] went back to DW's home
[10:04] son home?
[10:04] was son there? Not that Keen knew
[10:04] when you approoached him in driveway
[10:05] there were 7 detectives nearby?
[10:05] and media?
[10:05] yeah they were at vd house
[10:05] satalite there
[10:05] went to DW house later
[10:05] multiple in area
[10:05] he wasn't paying attention to media much
[10:05] he was sweating?
[10:05] can you see VD house from DW drive? yes
[10:05] and media? yes
[10:06] satillites? yes
[10:06] trucks yes
[10:06] court - - we have gone over this -
[10:06] DW was sweating?
[10:06] inthe middle of cops and media -
[10:06] you approached mr W and asked Qs, common knowledge missing girl in neighborhood
[10:06] not fair to say - cop says
[10:07] 1 Sgt. 3 dets whenhe walked out.
[10:07] Mult. media at VD house? true
[10:07] yes - girl missing was common knowledge
[10:07] said "Thats" fair to say not "not fair to say"
[10:07] DW said he had been to glamis
[10:07] asking about gas and cost to fill RV
[10:07] and someone told Keen that had been confirmed
[10:07] so was that he had been at Silver strand
[10:08] Confirmed that he'd been to Silver Strand
[10:08] DW did not tell cop that he'd overpaid
[10:08] DW said he was short of money? yes
[10:08] asking about gas and motor homes
[10:08] DW went to strand in first place because he didn't have his wallet
[10:08] cop doesn't know about that stuff
[10:09] no RV bleach smell, only smelled bleach in half garage not other half
[10:09] Expensive to fill up RV? I'd say so
[10:09] sorry ahead of you all
[10:09] search of garage
[10:09] you serced one side
[10:09] he didn't smell bleach - - she did
[10:09] looked around motor home, did not appear to be clean?
[10:09] he never smelled bleach at all
[10:09] DET: didnt appear dirty
[10:09] the woman did
[10:10] Femme Det smelled blech on her side, he didn't smell any on his side
[10:10] he didn't smell anything unusual at all
[10:10] not in garage or RV
[10:10] in the RV
[10:10] she just said she noted something in the garage
[10:10] only thing that did not appear in order was bed in RV
[10:11] < did the RV appear cleaned recently? he can't say - it didn't look dirty
[10:11] nothing indicated a good cleaning to him -
[10:11] he didn't smell cleaning products
[10:11] he didn't smell cleaning products
[10:11] he didn't smell cleaning products
[10:11] no dirt or dust
[10:11] the bed was unmade - - only sheets on it
[10:12] Only thing he really saw that was out of place was the bed was unmade, no comforter
[10:12] Pros asking
[10:12] nothing further by pros
[10:12] he left SS because of no wallet?
[10:12] did you confirm if he had a wallet at SS?
[10:13] The ranger spoke to a cop
[10:13] NO, now the pros is asking more I believe
[10:13] and DW did pull a wallet from his pocket
[10:13] I believe that was DEF who finished up
[10:13] DW had a wallet at the beach - the ranger says he saw it -
[10:13] DW counted his money and said he didn't think he overpaid
[10:14] DW said the ranger offered money back to him, DW told ranger he couldn't have overpaid him because he still had this much money left
[10:14] end witness
[10:14] NEW WITNESS COMING ON
[10:14] Jim Watkins??
[10:14] relivancey object by DEF
[10:14] They are asking for an in camera hearing before the witness can testify
[10:15] goes to motive says pros
[10:15] goes to motive
[10:15] something off computer
[10:15] computer talk
[10:15] no evidence that these photos are illegal
[10:15] reviewing some pictures?
[10:15] or who downloaded them
[10:15] can't tell who downloaded them
[10:15] anitmation cartoons?
[10:15] these are photos from count 3
[10:16] someone is saying they don't look like count 3 material
[10:16] apply to ct. 3 and go to motive - pros says
[10:16] Judge asking to see them
[10:16] so he can decide if they ae relevent
[10:16] defense is objecting to these photographs and there relevance to count 3
[10:16] color photos, mult pages
[10:16] Ex. 5
[10:16] people's exxibit 5 - animated CARTOONS!!!
[10:16] animation cartoons
[10:17] Witness is JIM WATKINS
[10:18] news room people are spec that it is cartoons of child port
[10:20] not to be allowed??
[10:20] const. talk
[10:20] Def. arguing
[10:20] Felman wants access to them, he has not
[10:20] He wants copies of the photos
[10:20] assist counsel arguing
[10:20] the Pros says no
[10:20] he wants to phot copie
[10:20] judge not sure if law allows this
[10:20] [10:20] he says he will show them to Feldman in his office, not give a copy
[10:20] the judge is going to check law on it
[10:21] carttons constitute a violation of count 3?
[10:21] Def. is entitled to access
[10:21] DA says, goes to motive
[10:21] objection overruled
[10:21] det watkins
[10:21] is being sworn in , will testify
[10:22] the cartoons constitute a violation? they go to motive
[10:22] not going to display photos/cartoons
[10:22] DET w/SDPD
[10:22] aprox 19 yrs
[[10:22] comuter forensics lab
[10:22] the cartoons can be entered as evidence
[10:22] objct overruled
[10:23] he is certified as comp forensic examiner in wash dc
[10:23] Dark hair, dark full mustache, Det. Jim Watkins taking stand
[10:23] pros will not display them
[10:23] going over all his qualifications
[10:23] Detive SDPD
[10:23] and training
[10:23] 19 yrs
[10:24] early feb of this year, did you become involved in search warrant of DW residence
[10:24] yes i did
[10:25] he got a call
[10:25] common assignment
[10:25] went from NE Sub Station to DW house
[10:25] homicides, child abuse, terrorism
[10:25] called in monday evening the 4th
[10:25] other computer ppl with you, yes
[10:26] took mobile feild imaging kits
[10:26] different media, hard drives , to create images
[10:26] to create iomage or copy of DW comp hard drive
[10:26] directed to office imaging in there
[10:27] took HD out of Comp, moved from COmp in office, attached to kits, made copies, replaced back into DW comp
[10:27] how get onto HD ?
[10:27] They were directed to upstairs office
[10:27] < placed on there by comp user, by diskett, or download, an act the user has to preform
[10:28] took hard drives from computers - - pleural computers
[10:28] imaged two comp and lap top and palm pilot
[10:28] third computer gateway in bedroom
[10:28] took user manuals and books
[10:28] possible looking for passwords
[10:29] found envelope in bookcase behind books, sticking up
[10:29] so three computers, a laptop and a palm pilot were checked
[10:29] envelope containes 3 zip disk and 3 CD rom
[10:29] explaining what these are
[10:30] how they contain information available, w/o leaving it on computer
[10:30] giving computer lesson to DA more or less)
[10:30] three zip disks and a CD found in envelope - - sounds like it ws hidden in bookcase
[10:30] explaining what CD roms are and how they are read in comp
[10:31] 3 CD roms in there
[10:31] he is describing the disks
[10:31] what they look like
[10:31] spinds around and computer reads info
[10:31] "under the age of 18"
[10:31] we were called in to do imaging
[10:32] we did a preview of the things inthe envelope
[10:32] found what he thought were porn
[10:32] setthose aside and informed detectives
[10:32] they were seized
[10:33] the original hard drives remained int he house
[10:33] the things inthe envelope were reviewed
[10:33] they found stuff there
[10:33] all DW's computer stuff was very organized
[10:34] 100's of folder names
[10:34] he was very careful about his folders and files
[10:34] one had BJ
[10:34] 'BJ' under jpgs
[10:34] *blow jobs* depicted oral sex
[10:34] less than 100 images
[10:34] teen, big red, farm 1
[10:34] hundreds of file names
[10:35] appear to be himans in photos, appear to be femal, appear to be fairly young
[10:35] Yes to all
[10:35] first 4 pages appear to be animals
[10:35] thousands of photos - - under 100 objectionable
[10:36] girls under age of 18 appear to be in sexual photos
[10:36] yes, in sexual acts
[10:36] humans, female, fairly young, engaged in sexual activities and photos
[10:36] 4 pages animals
[10:36] annimation photos
[10:36] a series of animations, with a dialog
[10:37] rest of the pages - girls under 18 - sexually explicit poses
[10:37] appears to be young Female, bound by rope
[10:37] hands behind back
[10:37] drawings with dialog -
[10:37] hands above head in series, bound by leather strap, dress being pulled up
[10:37] appears to be fighting, asking not to be hurt, raped
[10:37] person appears to be having vaginal intercourse
[10:38] female having oral sex with man as goes on
[10:38] 2 series very similar
[10:38] this is annimations
[10:38] was in directory of BIG RED
[10:39] other labled under sub directories, main folder , swim, cartoons, was directory big red, 1BR, 2BR
[10:39] how these were filed on computer
[10:39] bt on what computer?
[10:39] speaking of a danielle, daughter of a gf
[10:40] bikini in hot tub
[10:40] hi everyone
[10:40] appeared to be on lounge in pool area with towel over face, chest and below were seen, all photos legs spread in V shape
[10:40] this was a girl, daughter of a friend ?
[10:40] real photos of young girl on computer? Yes - - a Danielle - - the daughter of a girlfriend - - early to mifd teens
[10:41] one with her mother and 2 in bikini near a jacuzzi
[10:41] several of her in a bikini near a pool with a towel on her face?
[10:41] in the photos her legs were apart
[10:41] yes, over her head a towel and one photo was a straight shot tot he crotch
[10:42] he reviewed photos and made notes
[10:42] speaking of reports filed, losing feed again
[10:42] early to mid teens so 14-16?
[10:43] about people looking at the photos and writing reports feldman wants notes feldman is looking at DEt watkins notes right now
[10:45] they are looking at reports
[10:47] the girlfriend's daughter was in a bathing suit
[10:47] no sex activity there judge is telling feldman he needs to look at pics on a break but must question witness now
[10:48] the sex stuff was cartoons
[10:48] felman asking for copies of things again
[10:48] judge saying i am sure DA will give to you
[10:49] judge sees nothing wrong with Feldman not having copies of any of this info
[10:49] asking if pediatrician training?
10:50] he wants questioning to go on
[10:50] take classes in child develop
[10:50] no sir
[10:52] asking about the disclaimer on porn sites
[10:52] cop says not always a disclaimer
[10:52] says there are more w/o disclaimer
[10:53] asked if he could tell who d/l photos, David or son?
[10:53] don't know whether it was son or someone else
[10:53] answer no
[10:53] people shown on net are sometimes selected because they appear younger than they are - - cop says he doesn't know that
[10:54] majority of sites have no disclaimers saying the girls are over 18
[10:54] other lawyer taking over questioning
[10:54] do you know who downloaded those things? no
[10:55] Dusek was just questioning
[10:55] asking about morphing
[10:55] lady mentioned palm pilot
[10:55] were the disks fingerprinted? Doesn't know
[10:55] a photo altering prg for pc's
[10:55] can u tell if photo has been morphed?
[10:56] how can you tell if morphed? blue outlines, dif. in tones, grain
[10:56] usually you can see the differences
[10:56] none of Davids appreared to be morphed
[10:56] morphing - - altering appearance of an image
[10:56] Det has yet to not be able to see that a photo was morphed
[10:56] moving a head to another body,for example
[10:57] still saying no photos looked altered
[10:57] his job is to get the photos off the computer
[10:58] more of same
[10:58] if it appears to be altered, they put it in a separate category
[10:59] asked if he went back and researched the sites where photos came form?
[10:59] discussing how to tell if it is morphed, better the technology, the better the morphing
[10:59] answer no, no sites listed
[10:59] some advertising banner mentioned by Det
[11:00] talking about palm pilot
[11:00] do you know who took these photos? No
[11:00] he copied all info from it
[11:00] four computers examined 3 personal computers 1 palm pilot
[11:00] and a lap top
[11:00] asking if he knoes how many bedrooms in house
[11:01] back to house
[11:01] answer no, he tried to stay outta the way
[11:01] located various places computers
[11:01] he was only there for the pc's
[11:01] sone images taken from hard drive, zip disk, cd's
[11:01] asking about allocated space now?
[11:02] 3 or 4 bedrooms
[11:02] hard drive talk
[11:02] active files
[11:02] allocated space is available space...deleted info used to be there
[11:02] now its available for new files
[11:03] images on hard drive were on allocated space
[11:03] were any of them in unallocated space? one was in the deleted space
[11:04] allocated or inallocated recyle bin step before inallocated
[11:04] looking thru papers now
[11:07] < now to zip files
[11:07] zip had deleted files
[11:08] tech talk now
[11:11] expalaining how to name files..dpg...dll...etc
[11:12] did not find that DW had renamed any files
[11:12] in attemp to hide files
[11:13] officer ?? examiled files ffrom all the computers?
[11:13] many thousands
[11:13] he said no child porn
[11:13] defense objecting
[11:13] not prepubescent girls in images
[11:14] not prepubescent girls in images
[11:14] according to the other cop
[11:14] Collins asked that this other cop look at them
[11:14] Mr. Armstrong
[11:14] is clear - - no one thought they were pre-pubescent girls
[11:14] 68000 images from the pc's
[11:15] Armstrong spent about 1 1/2 hours looking at photos
[11:15] no prepubescent females in photos
[11:16] do you disagree with his conclusions? "Not at all."
[11:16] back to the danielle pix..the daughter of a friend<---judge speaking
[11:16] from the files you downloaded,
[11:16] do you know when they were open? yes
[11:16] do you have a list of those times? yes
[11:17] talking about 6 photos of the real child
[11:17] Discovery page 14-54
[11:17] says when files were open?
resume at 20 til 11
[11:41] computer forensics guy testifying
[11:41] that's exhibit B
[11:41] Exhibit c is 5 pages of typed info - - computer directories
[11:41] Jim Watkins is still testifying
[11:42] Exhibit D is 2 pages of of directory of CD'a and zips
[11:43] descriptions now
[11:43] mother and daughter sitting together
[11:43] out in the pool
[11:43] pool area
[11:43] 2 - girl lounging in chari - towel on her face
[11:43] girl in bathing suit, pool area, towel over her head
[11:43] exhibit A, photos that obtained from DW house, from zip drive? yes sir
[11:43] towel in chair next to her
[11:43] picture 3
[11:43] as if someone just got up
[11:43] young lady and girl sitting together fully clothed
[11:43] next is girl sunbathing with towel over face
[11:44] Judge - 8 photos of DW friend and her daughter
[11:44] chair next to her with towel over it, as if someone else had just gotten up from there
[11:44] court doesn't think this detail is necessary
[11:44] judge is looking at them
[11:44] ask a broad question if you want
[11:45] the photos are of same people near pool - - yes
[11:45] all photos in Ex. A photos os same people in pool area
[11:45] images in exhibit 4 - - when were they created on computer
[11:45] Images in Ex 4 - when filed created on zip, hard, or cd?
[11:45] first page was created on 5/17/1999
[11:46] yes, the 1st page, the file ea7950. jpg created on may 1799
[11:46] at 12:56 p
[11:46] next one - 4/22/99
[11:46] ea13186 on 4/22/99
[11:46] these are old files
[11:46] next 5/17/99
[11:47] any photos on 2nd page on spec. date
[11:47] try restarting your puter
[11:47] dates will follow
[11:48] any photos in year other than 1999? Judge getting pissed
[11:48] exhibits #4 all from 1999
[11:49] pictures and animations all created in 1999 in exhibit 4
[11:49] yes others than in 1999
[11:50] two in ...
[11:50] Judge says all 1999? Number 4 - yes
[11:50] yes there are exibits created in years other than 1999 - two in -
[11:50] that set of photos
[11:50] the beastiality
[11:50] are they in exhibit #4?
[11:50] I am in exhibit 4
[11:51] one in 12/17/01
[11:51] another one, same date
[11:51] same date iea11058.jpg
[11:52] Dec 17, 2001
[11:52] continuing testimony of DET. Watkins RE: computer photos
[11:52] iea11058.jpeg same date 12/17/01
[11:53] and that's it! nothing since Dec. 01
[11:53] tryng to indicate two pictures to judge
[11:53] when animations done?
[11:53] judge had to describe how to enter items into record
[11:53] A = animations
[11:54] 1st series 1/14/99
[11:54] 2nd series A 1/14/99
[11:54] these are all the things -
[11:54] when were animations done?
[11:54] speaking of animations now
[11:54] animations 1999
[11:54] can't say how on compu
[11:54] didn't say anything about the animations yet
[11:54] all done at the same time? Yes sir
[11:54] can't say if downloaded
[11:54] second series 1/14/99
[11:55] cannot tell how they got on the computer
[11:55] irrelevant ? about how many sites have these sorts of thigns
[11:55] wjhen were animations done?
[11:55] all at the same time - on 1/14/99
[11:56] he can't say how the photos got on the computer
[11:56] forensic computer guy done for now
[11:56] DEF asked if it is illegal to take those photos of friend's daughter?
[11:57] Objectoin, sustained
[11:58] judge wants movement - next witness
[11:58] SDPD dude
[11:58] 22 years
[11:58] Julie Mills drycleaner spoken about now
[11:59] homicide det - 5 years
[11:59] don't read from report, witness!
[11:59] oh good I like this dry-cleaning stuff :)
[11:59] Clerk at Twin Peaks cleaners
[12:00] Det. where located
[12:00] highway road
[12:00] when happen
[12:00] last week
[12:00] interview of mills
[12:00] counter person for cleaners
[12:00] asked about DW
[12:00] What did it center around
[12:00] comforter covers, two comforters, jacket to drycleaner on Feb 4
[12:00] Hailey Mills is clerk at cleaners
[12:00] Julie Mills
[12:00] 2/4/ 7-830 DW pulled up, wearing tshirt, shorts,
[12:00] 4 - 5 items to comforter, covers
[12:01] 7-8:30 pulled up in motor home - tshirt and shorts
[12:01] along/ w/ jacket
[12:01] 2 comforters
[12:01] did not indicate why he took them to cleaners
[12:01] DW did not
[12:01] did she describe anything unusual
[12:01] DW seemed upset
[12:01] Cold, so why dressed
[12:01] DW had asked her out previosuly, not talkitive this time
[12:01] she had known him for several years and
[12:01] seemed upset
[12:01] Previous convo w/ DW?
[12:01] numerous times
[12:01] acting then
[12:01] over many years
[12:02] asked her out
[12:02] many times
[12:02] he was not talkative this time
[12:02] 7 - 8:30 a
[12:02] Terry Torkerson
[12:02] she said he seemed upset that morning
[12:02] that he was not dressed for the cool weather
[12:02] When convo w/ Torkerson
[12:02] warrant written and on 3/7 and 3/8
[12:03] focus on 3/7 and 3/8
[12:03] convo re: TT actions of getting items form cleaners
[12:03] he told me he had gone there on feb 6
[12:03] TT gone there on 2/6
[12:03] and talked to julie regarding clothing
[12:03 returned on 2/7 for ....?
[12:03] warrent executed
[12:03] TT talked w/ Molly???
[12:03] 15:40 hours warrant executed
[12:04] kelly bellam
[12:04] Sevice of search warratn o 2/7
[12:04] green zip up jacket two comforter covers and comforters two pants, black sweater
[12:04] TT served SW at TP cleaners to KB
[12:04] 7 articles request and rec'd
[12:04] tt said he served the search warrent at cleaners to kelly belom and recieved several articles
[12:05] What obtained: see honus up above
[12:05] Anything additionally?
[12:05] also black shirt
[12:05] got reciepts
[12:05] for each of the items
[12:05] Address? Can't remember
[12:06] TT's interview of Kelly Belom:
[12:06] Address located in TT's interview
[12:06] What do w/ articles?
[12:06] What did TT do with them?
[12:06] is that the location he got the articles from
[12:06] Back to SDPD to evans specialists
[12:06] he brought them to the sdpd
[12:06] assigned to Homicide 4
[12:07] DA DONE
[12:07] he asked bellom questions and she volunteered additional info
[12:07] why didn't he bag them?
[12:07] torgeson asked
[12:07] RE: Mills
[12:07] asking or volunteering?both
[12:07] didn't tape record
[12:07] did u tape ... no
[12:08] witness discussed testimony with Deputy DA Clark this morning
[12:08] DAte of reports of TT 2/7, 2/8
[12:08] Before came to court discuss w/ whom? Dpt. ?
[12:08] Dpt. DA
[12:08] not spoken w/ anyone else?
[12:08] maybe Sgt.
[12:08] Mr. TT?
[12:08] TT is woman
[12:09] not today
[12:09] anyone he talked w/?
[12:09] Woody Clark is DNA expert
[12:09] only people TT, Sgt. Holes, and DDA Clark
[12:09] Kelly and Julie
[12:09] those five only
[12:09] He has met DEf attny befor ein another case
[12:10] def is probing issue of who he talked to
[12:10] NEXT WITNESS:[12:10] DIRECT:
[12:11] Karen LeVala
[12:11] forensic specialist,
[12:11] police woman
[12:11] 9/99 hired june 2002
[12:11] been there 2 yrs 8 months
[12:12] take evid, process evid for fingerprints
[12:12] Background talk
[12:12] describing experience and schooling
[12:12] mjored in evidence tech
[12:12] how to process evidence at crime scenes
[12:12] her duties in VD: photos, evidence collection
[12:13] Interned at SDPD
[12:13] item of clothing from torgerson--from laundromat
[12:14] did u recieve an article of clothing from tt
[12:14] yes, not sure of date
[12:14] she's consulting evidence list created byherself
[12:14] feldman unclear about document, wants date--feb 1
[12:14] date? evid. list dated 2/19
[12:15] Article rec'd 2/7
[12:15] time? 1632 hours
[12:15] in bag from DC, 4 items
[12:15] got article of clothing from tt on feb 7, in a dry cleaner bag. four items, not inventoried, jacket included
[12:15] got the article of clothing feb 7
[12:15] jacket got evidence item #94
[12:15] in a cleaners bag
[12:16] didnt inventory the 4 items... included a jacket
[12:16] jacket released to criminalist shaun sorianno on Feb 8
[12:16] released jacket to crim. sean zoriono
[12:16] RV talk
[12:16] motorhome search she participated
[12:16] she searched while it was in veh impound garage, over a few diff dates
[12:16] at impound on difff. dates
[12:17] latent prints? 2/8
[12:17] latent prints
[12:17] finger prints??
[12:17] found prints
[12:17] black powder
[12:17] used tape
[12:17] desribes process of collection
[12:17] vihicle impound garage
[12:19] recovered some prints? yes
[12:19] area of bed?
[12:19] area of bed? yes
[12:19] prints off of cabinets beside bed
[12:19] condition? on cabinets, one on drivers side
[12:20] cards have all info about date, etc.
[12:20] location descrip on card?
[12:20] wooden cabinet on drivers side near bed
[12:21] DA DONE
[12:21] by FELDMAN
[12:21] documents she was referring to were not provided to DA
[12:21] Evid list to homicide team
[12:21] notes marked
[12:22] he didn't have access to this--now they are entered as defense items
[12:22] def exh "E"
[12:23] she says those are her notes so she didn't give that latent fingerprint card to the DA
[12:23] only latent fingerprints in exh "e" form rv
[12:23] so feldman didn't get them
[12:23 Feldman wants them
[12:23] 6 cards
[12:23] fingerprint on window
[12:23] suppose to be 6... only 2
[12:24] documents say page 6 of 6....
[[12:24] Exhibit E starts with #3 of 6 cards - - then there is #6
[12:24] print #1 on window, orientation unclear
[12:25] He wants to know where the others are
[12:25] directionality of which the print you lifted is manifest
[12:25] lift 1
[12:25] where wa print? on window
[12:25] latent 1 of 6 shows location on window
[12:25] on top of window
[12:26] what "orientation" of the print
[12:26] what direction is it in?
[12:26] silence from her
[12:26] it's on the window, she says
[12:26] print two, same question, same answer
[12:26] basically Feldman is getting at that there was not a good description of where exactly the print was taken
[12:26] or what direction the finger was pointing
[12:27] he isn't asking what part of the window is up
[12:27] she doesn't have copies of front of cards
[12:27] he wants to know the direction of the print
[12:27] she has no independent recollection of print orientation
[12:27] asking why she doesnt have copies of the front of the card is objected to and sustained
[12:28] feldman noting prosecution's "second" failure to provide discovery in a timely manner
[12:28] regarding print cards
[12:28] det. tom ?
[12:29] one other criminalist
[12:29] in RV at same time as her
[12:29] who else in RV while she was collecting? one detective, another criminologist was in and out
[12:29] she has no recollection as to the direction of any of the prints
[12:29] prior to use of black powder was the rv luminesced? no
[12:29] did she prepare a report? nope
[12:29] notes? yes
[12:30] she has the notes, not with her
[12:30] asked about participating in searches of homes? Object. beyond scope, sustained.
[12:31] they are avoiding the evid at the homes.... hum
[12:31] she takes lift cards to pd lab
[12:31] gives them to latent print unit
[12:31] she turns it in to latent print unit
[12:31] he wants to know who she gave it to
[12:32] lpu is an office, the cards are sealed in envelope, record of when turned in
[12:32] once you remove the lift what do you do with it... she collects it and takes it to lab
[12:32] chain of custody defined
[12:32] purpose of chain of custody described
[12:33] she is unable to say the person she gave the card to
[12:33] she gave the card to a clerk, no name
[12:33] can't remember clerk name
[12:33] < civilian clerk
[12:34] i'm being facetious
[12:34] discussion of PD property room
[12:35] was PD treating Westerfield evidence different? no
[12:35] evidence other than cards would be in property room, she infers
[12:38] when you were in the motor home were you wearing any kind of shoes
[12:38] shoe protection sorry
[12:38] talking about floor of RV
[12:38] cross contam
[12:38] carpet from bathroom removed?
[12:38] no precautions to insure cross contamination didnt happen
[12:38] she doesn't remember if the carpet was removed before or after she was in there removing prints
[12:39] was carpet removed from bathroom before you got there? no
[12:39] did she protect against cross contamination? "I walked through there"
[12:39] doesnt remember if carpet was removed before she got there or after
[12:39] They did remove carpet, but can't remember if it was before or after I got there
[12:39] only carpet she remembers in the bathroom was a rug
[12:40] she walked thru the hallway
[12:40] knows the area just outside the bathroom has a particular evidence value
[12:41] re: 2/8
[12:41] did she have that knowledge about the carpet on 2/8
[12:41] re: outside of bath area
[12:41] big interest in that carpeting
[12:41] "some' interest
[12:41] she knew it was important
[12:41] Q bag w/ evid, whom rec
[12:41] A clothing? TT gave it to her
[12:42] regarding laundry bag (which "you did not inventory"
[12:42] W contained ?
[12:42] in dry cleaner bag
[12:42] A clear bag from DC
[12:42] Q: what do upon receipt
[12:42] area outside bathroom was important to law enforcement true? Yes
[12:42] A: would have put in bag and sealed. DID
[12:42] Q have a spec. recollection?
[12:43] she placed them in a paper bag (three items)--does she have specific memory? "I believe I did"
[12:43] do you actually remember doing it? no
[12:43] trained to prepare reports?
[12:43] are you guessing?? I'm guessing
[12:44] Do you remember doing it? No
[12:44] did she make a report regarding clothing? she has chain of custody
[12:44] REPORT did you have a report?
[12:44] No, she only had c-o-c
[12:44] judge asked : did you prepare ANY reports? No, evidence list, c-o-c
[12:44] didja take notes?
[12:44] doesn't recall
[12:45] define c-o-c
[12:45] chain of Custody
[12:46] no master computer list regarding evidence
[12:46] he shows her c-o-c
[12:47] discovery pg 1299
[12:47] is this the internal coc
[12:47] k lealcala name on there
[12:47] is it a true and accurate copy?
[12:48] did she sign it, or handwrite?
[12:48] yes, initials
[12:48] right next to her typed name
[12:49] did she get evidence from motorhome from det ott or kaiser?
[12:49] were they in motorhome prior to alcala?
[12:49] she doesn't think so
[12:50] sign in or out sheet for entering RV?
[12:50] not to her knowledge
[12:50] any document to sign to reflect her entry into RV. only her own notes
[12:50] she did get evidence from the detectives
[12:51] so, no master list? she doesn't know of one
[12:51] move on, counselor!
[12:51] laundry bag now
[12:51] why didn't she inspect contents of bag?
[12:51] because she was turning it over to criminalists
[12:51] Jusge says she is testifying about the cleaner sttuff and the prints - that's all
[12:51] not her function to evaluate clothing for trace evidence. no
[12:52] she does look for trace evidence
[12:52] is it part of your job to investigate scenes for trace evidence, yes
[12:52] argumentative, down boy!
[12:52] but she didn't look at the laundry bag for trace evidence? Objection - sustained
[12:53] just said "understand i want to finish up with this witness before we break"
[12:53] do you remember if the detectives were in the RV while you were there?
[12:53] were ott or kaiser ever in RV while laalcala was in there, yes
[12:53] were they in there?
[12:54] yes - they were there at the same time
[12:54] did you see them near the print area?
[12:54] not when she was lifting them
[12:54] how about before
[12:54] I don't know if they were there when I was lifting pprints - that day
[12:54] not sure when they were there at same time in relation to finger print collection
[12:55] prints taken 2/8
[12:55] she had been to RV before
[12:55] she had been in RV on prior occasion to getting prints on feb 8
[12:55] danette peer another crimonologist was in there
[12:55] asking about another person was in RV at the same time - annette pear?
[12:56] feb 6, her and annette
[12:56] thye were there on the 6th
[12:56] did anette find blood on that date? objection sustained
[12:56] asking about blood stain on carpet? objection
[12:56] not in evidence
[12:56] not going to allow that question line
[12:56] evidence list
[12:56] evidence list discussed some more
[12:57] leading question - - allowed
[12:57] she had list in front of her 20 pp
[12:57] evidence list is 20 pages
[12:57] signed by her
[12:57] signed by her
[12:57] she seized those items
[12:57] what is the title of the document
[12:58] lab report
[12:58] full title: field services unit laboratory report
[12:58] includes description of her actions? yes
[12:58] jacket is on list
[12:58] includes circumstances of evidence obtaining.
[12:58] and how she got the jacket
[12:58] i.e. it is a report
[12:58] feldman says keep reading title
[12:59] is evidence list a report?
[12:59] evidence list is included in "report"
[12:59] when you use the word report do you mean a report or an evidence list?
[12:59] argumentative - sustained time and time again
[12:59] she has been inside RV how many times?
[13:00] 3+ times
[13:00] a few different days, at least three probably more,
[13:00] as many as 10?
[13:00] she's have to look at her reports
[13:00] she can't answer to ten
[13:00] lunch break
Why do these threads disappear? Anyone know?
Jeffrey Graham Jr. testified that the lifted print matched those taken from the mummified hands of van Dam after her body was discovered Feb. 27 in eastern San Diego County.
Deputy District Attorney Jeff Dusek asked Graham how certain he was that the fingerprints left on the motorhome cabinet belonged to Danielle van Dam.
"Absolutely no doubt in my mind that Danielle van Dam made those prints," Graham testified.Chief Medical Examiner Brian Blackbourne testified Monday that the girl's hands needed to be severed during her autopsy so they could be more thoroughly examined.
However, Graham told defense attorney Steven Feldman that he couldn't tell when the prints were placed on the cabinet.
A police forensic biologist also testified that DNA found in bloodstains in the motorhome and on a jacket belonging to Westerfield were an almost certain match for the child.
Earlier in the second day of a preliminary hearing, biologist Annette Lynn Peer said 19 areas of Westerfield's motorhome were tested for blood, with three containing positive results.
The three included a stain on the carpet between the door and the bed in the motorhome, she said.
Peer testified she also received a jacket belonging to Westerfield, which police said they seized at a Poway dry cleaner, and a pair of underwear belonging to van Dam.
A clerk at the dry cleaning store said Westerfield appeared upset and unusually quiet as he took several items, including bedding from his motor home and a jacket, to be cleaned, police Detective James Hergenroeather said.
Peer also received "known samples" from Westerfield and the girl's parents.
"The stain from the carpet and the stain from the jacket were highly likely of the same source as the inside crotch area of the underwear and could be from a biological offspring of Damon and Brenda van Dam," Peer said.
"Is it also correct that the stains from the carpet, the jacket and the underwear all matched each other?" Prosecutor George "Woody" Clarke asked.
"Yes, it is," Peer answered.
She added that the odds of a duplicate match in the Caucasian population would be one in 25 quadrillion (25,000,000,000,000,000). Her figures were based on early results, she testified, but later testing did not alter the results.
Also, a police forensics examiner testified that while searching files on Westerfield's hard drive and computer disks, he found suggestive photos of Westerfield's girlfriend's teenage daughter named Danielle.
Detective James Watkins testified he copied the hard drives of four computers and the contents of a "Palm Pilot" device in Westerfield's home three days after van Dam was reported missing. Investigators also seized three CD-ROMs and two "zip" disks, he said.
A total of 64,000 images were found in "very highly organized" files, Watkins said.
"Overall, there were thousands of pictures," Watkins said, but of "a questionable nature there were less than a hundred."
Included was a series of six showing a bikini-clad teen posing suggestively on a lounge and in a hot tub.
"I found pictures of a girl named `Danielle' who appeared to be the daughter of a (Westerfield) girlfriend," Watkins said.
One photo, according to Watkins, was of her with a towel over her head.
Defense attorney Robert Boyce challenged Watkins' appearance as a witness before he testified, claiming his testimony would be prejudicial, that there was no evidence Westerfield was the one who downloaded the other "questionable" photos and that they were legal.
But Dusek (pictured, right) argued that Watkins' testimony would support a charge of misdemeanor child pornography and would go to the issue of motive in van Dam's murder.
Superior Court Judge H. Ronald Domnitz examined the prosecution photographs before allowing Watkins to testify.
Among the other items found, Watkins said, were photographs of young females posing with or performing sexual acts with animals and several animated series, including one depicting rape.
In cross-examining Watkins, Boyce was able to get him to acknowledge that there was no evidence Westerfield was the person who downloaded the images, and that the investigator was unable to determine the ages of the females in the photographs.
Watkins also said another detective examining the files told him there were no images of prepubescent girls.
The hearing began with San Diego police detective Johnny Keene completing his testimony, saying he did not smell bleach when he went into a motorhome Westerfield used the weekend van Dam disappeared.
"I didn't smell anything that made my eyes water or make me think this stinks," Keene said.
One of many unconfirmed stories surrounding the police investigation of Westerfield was that the smell of cleaning materials inside the motorhome nearly made police dogs pass out.
"It didn't appear dirty," Keene said in response to a question from Boyce about whether it looked as though the vehicle had just been cleaned. "I didn't see dust on the counters or anything like that. The only thing I saw that appeared out of order was the bed, which had sheets on it but no comforter."
Keene testified Monday that the defendant had numerous small scratches on his hand and arm when he was interviewed on his front porch the morning of Feb. 4.
Keene said Westerfield also was "overly cooperative" when detectives questioned him two days after Danielle was discovered missing.
The detective testified that Westerfield pointed to a number of places in his "immaculate " home where detectives might want to look, including a stack of boxes and a door to the attic.
Westerfield lived two houses from Danielle and fell under suspicion after he returned from a weekend trip to the desert.
The twice-divorced father eventually was arrested in the case and pleaded not guilty to murder, kidnapping and misdemeanor child pornography in connection with the second-grader's disappearance and death.
The preliminary hearing will resume Thursday at 9 a.m. The hearing will air live on NewsChannel 15 and will be livestreamed on TheSanDiegoChannel.
The preliminary hearing for David Westerfield, the man charged with abducting and killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam is off Wednesday and will continue Thursday in a San Diego courtroom. Hear live coverage Thursday from 9am-Noon on AM 1130, and after 12pm on AM 600. Meantime, a billboard-sized message card signed by hundreds of San Diegans who took part in a candlelight vigil for 7-year-old Danielle van Dam on March 4th, is now posted at Highway 163 and Balboa Avenue.
SAN DIEGO (Court TV) Blood spots from David Westerfield's jacket and his recreational vehicle match the DNA of his murdered 7-year-old neighbor, Danielle van Dam, a forensic expert testified at a preliminary hearing Tuesday.
A second lab analyst said Danielle's fingerprint was found on a cabinet above the bed in the motor home.
"Absolutely no doubt in my mind that Danielle van Dam made those prints," said Graham.
Westerfield, a 50-year-old engineer who lived two doors down from the van Dams, told police he went on a road trip in the RV the weekend Danielle van Dam was abducted from her bedroom. Three weeks after Danielle vanished, searchers discovered her body in a vacant lot.
Westerfield pleaded not guilty to charges of murder and kidnapping.
After a brief cross-examination, defense lawyer Steven Feldman said he was not prepared to challenge Peer's testimony.
"We will wait until trial to attack this witness's findings," he said.
Feldman's attempt to attack the fingerprint evidence appeared to backfire.
"Do you know how [Danielle's fingerprint] got there?" he asked.
"Danielle van Dam touched that cabinet," Graham replied.
Judge Ronald Domnitz, who will determine whether there is sufficient evidence to try Westerfield, also heard testimony Tuesday about child pornography discovered on four computers and several discs in his home.
San Diego Police Detective James Watkins said there were "less than 100 hundred" images of female children in sexual acts and poses among 64,000 pornographic pictures and over 2,000 video clips he found.
Police allege Westerfield had a sexual motive for abducting Danielle. Her body was too decomposed to determine whether she was raped.
The detective showed the judge copies of the pictures recovered from discs and remote drives found on a bookshelf in his home office. Some, he said, depicted girls having sex with animals while others showed them in bondage.
Officers seized three computer hard drives, a Palm Pilot and a laptop. Watkins said the sexually explicit files were "very highly organized" on the discs. He cited one file titled "BJs" that held photos of oral sex.
Watkins said some images were a cartoon series showing a young girl with her hands bound.
"She appears to be fighting back, asking the person not to touch her, telling the person not to rape her," said Watkins.
He also detailed a series of photos of the teenage daughter of a one-time girlfriend of Westerfield. The pictures, apparently taken on the same day in 1999, show the teenager, also named Danielle, in a bikini near a pool and hot tub. Watkins said that in one shot she is seen with her mother, but in several others she is shown alone with her legs spread.
Under questioning by defense lawyer Robert Boyce, Watkins conceded he did not know whether the material belonged to Westerfield, his 18-year-old son or someone else who had access to the house.
He also suggested police were reading something nefarious into the snapshots of the teenager named Danielle.
"There's nothing illegal about taking pictures of your girlfriend's daughter, is there?" Boyce asked.
No, Watkins acknowledged.
Also Tuesday, another San Diego officer recalled interviewing a clerk at Westerfield's dry cleaner. Detective James Hergenbother said the woman recalled Westerfield, a regular customer, appearing "pretty upset" when he parked his RV in front of the store two days after the girl's disappearance. He handed her bedding and clothing to be cleaned, but did not make his usual small talk, the detective said.
The hearing will continue Thursday morning.
GREETINGS KIM.....How was dinner?
Now what caused the blood in the Van Dam's house?
( 03-12-2002 ) - Understandably, the David Westerfield trial is getting a lot of media attention.
Even some San Diegans said that they can't get enough of it. But others believe that this case shouldn't be covered in the news at all.
For those in offices who do not have access to a television set during the workday, the radio is the only link to what is going on in court.
Some of those who listened by radio said that they felt compelled to tune in after following the van Dam case for so long.
But despite the focus on the Westerfield trial, what has not been forgotten is the tragic loss of Danielle van Dam. For that reason and others most people hope that the case does not become sensationalized as the public--and the jury--finds out what happened to seven-year-old Danielle van Dam.
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.