Feldman's Questions Show Defense Strategy: Dig into Damon and Brenda van Dam's Private Lives!

KNSD NBC ^ | March 19, 2002 | Lynn Stuart

[FresnoDA]

Experts say attorney Steven Feldman's questioning of the van Dams gives clues to the strategy he will pursue during the trial.

Feldman's questions show defense strategy by Lynn Stuart

SAN DIEGO, March 15 –    When the parents of Danielle van Dam testified Thursday at a hearing to decide if the murder case should go to trial, it gave the suspect's attorney, Steven Feldman, an opportunity to grill them.

Much of the questioning may have seemed like needless digging into the couple's private lives, but experts say Feldman was laying groundwork for his defense.

---

At times during the long day of questioning, Brenda and Damon van Dam appeared openly exasperated by the tough questioning dished out by Feldman. The attorney for murder defendant David Westerfield focused on the couple's drug use, their alleged "swinging lifestyle," and lies they told to police early in the investigation into Danielle van Dam's disappearance. Many of his questions were ruled irrelevant, and at times it appeared to the untrained observer that the attorney was asking the same questions over and over as he tried to find a wording that satisfied the judge. But legal experts gave Feldman's savvy courtroom performance high marks.

"It may just look like not much was happening, but Steve Feldman really got in there, he did his homework and he got the answers to the questions he needed to get," criminal defense lawyer Gretchen von Helms said.

Some of the questioning was an attempt to catch the van Dams in inconsistencies. If Feldman can show that Brenda or Damon answered Thursday in ways that contradict or were inconsistent with their past statements or the testimony of others, it could hurt the prosecution's case when it goes before the future jury.

One example is when Feldman questioned Brenda about her night out at Dad's Cafe.

"You just told me you don't recall dancing with David Westerfield. Is that true?" Feldman asked.

"Yes," Brenda answered.

Feldman claims that he has witnesses who will testify that they saw Brenda dancing with Westerfield the night before Danielle was discovered missing. That could raise doubts about the mother among jurors, legal observers said.

"He wasn't asking those questions for anything but preparing a transcript so that he can use that for impeaching those witnesses at trial and he did that very effectively.," von Helms said. Feldman peppered both parents with questions about their drug use.

"How often did you smoke marijuana?' he asked.

During the preliminary hearing, the judge ruled that many of Feldman's questions about the van Dams' lifestyle were irrelevant. But during the trial, the defense will be permitted more latitude, and von Helms expects Feldman to bring up the subject again.

"It opens up to the defense to go in an say not only were they doing drugs and having sex and all these other things, which in one side of it, but also that it affected their ability to be parents," von Helms said.

The questioning also gave Feldman a chance to see how the van Dam's react to his questions. How the van Dams appear to a jury could plant seeds of doubt that affect their deliberations on Westerfield's guilt. Legal experts say if the parent's don't show any more emotion in trial than they did in court today, that factor alone could hurt them with a jury.

[fivecatsandadog]

AH so, now you think its her mothers blood that was in the RV and on the mans coat? Sorry you're reaching

The DNA evidence currently suggests it could be EITHER. Who's ignoring evidence now? It was a DROP of blood, not A POOL of it. Brenda was dancing with DW at the bar, and denied it. Witnesses saw her. Why did she attempt to keep this fact unknown? Why does her testimony conflict with her earlier statements? You need to examine the evidence, again, my friend.

[fivecatsandadog]

I don't think anyone PLANTED any evidence. I think that the evidence, right now, either through pure luck or some very careful planning, points in the direction of DW. Ever see the movie "Presumed Innocent"? Remember the ending? Evidence was planted in that one, but likewise, until all the results were in, the "evidence" pointed to Harrison Ford as the guilty party.

[Jaded]

He didn't have that much hair.

[Jaded]

He twitched his nose. Or used his "transporter". Beam me up.

[Freedom2specul8]

Looks to me, both sides of argument are being posted. But on some of these threads there have been several instances of name calling and that is more ridiculous than some of the theories which have been presented. I get to hear my kids calling each other names sometimes and honestly when I come on FR I'd like see it kept to adult standards of courtesy even when there is disagreement.

AMEN.....amen and AMEN. Thank you for shedding the light on the truth for all of us.

[FresnoDA]

OH YEAH?? OH YEAH???

[Freedom2specul8]

It does state on the FR posting guidelines "Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts." I would imagine breaking the rules would get one in trouble with the moderators.

Hmmm, it's easier to do it than not maybe.. "Loose lips sink ships." I know that was intended for those who could reveal info that could hurt ''our'' side in the war of terrorism..but it can also has other meanings.

[Freedom2specul8]

LOL~ YEAH! ya big bully wanna-be. :)

[bvw]

A couple years back the flaming on FR was so bad that Jim Robinson set up a special chat-flame war area "The Alley", as in "Take it to the Alley". These fights on the VD threads are like a mere Jalapeño to a genuine "white bullet" Habañero.

[Mrs.Liberty]

I am pretty familiar with SD County. I am just basing the drive on drives I have made from Poway area to the 8/15 Interchange, and then east towards the general area of El Cajon. I would not expect he would have run into traffic at that hour of the morning, but I also would not expect he would be barreling down the freeway at breakneck speed. These are estimates at maybe 60 mph down the freeway, little more time getting off the freeway towards the Dehesa area.

[MizSterious]

He had a beard. And men usually have a lot of hair on the arms and legs. This stuff does fall off, just like head hair does.

[Freedom2specul8]

Agreed... Is the alley still there? I like non-flaming peppers myself..and mild salsa..that's it and as far as I'll go. :)

[wonders]

Ref your #504: I agree there are several things which point to DW's guilt. I'm not sure it's all that unusual to come back from a camping trip with scratches. I've got my share of them while camping. Still, the scratches do look suspicious. If the scratches were made by Danielle, they'll find DW's DNA under her nails, and then, LOCK, he's guilty for sure.

The blood spots both in the camper and on the jacket make me very suspicious, too. But they are undated. And it isn't lunacy to speculate that a little girl that age would want to have a look inside the camper when it was parked so near her house on so many occasions. Add to that that the little girl bit her nails and was at the loose-tooth stage, might have scratched herself climbing into the camper, and little spatters of blood are not that impossible.

Moreover, as I understand it, the "further testing" of the blood spots involved matching the DNA found in the blood spots to created DNA from Damon and Brenda, proving that the blood was "from an offspring of Damon and Brenda." Danielle has two brothers. There is clear proof that Danielle was, at some time, in the camper, however: her fingerprint found on a cabinet in the camper. This also proves she was alive when in the camper. It doesn't prove when she was there.

I know some people are hung up on the parents' sex lives. I've never posted about that, myself.

Yes, some wild theories have been posted. But many theories on how DW did it have their share of lunacy as well.

Again, if there is fibre or DNA evidence of DW in the VD house, or at Dehesa, or on the body, I'll be convinced he's guilty. Also guilty if they find lint from Danielle's PJs in DW's house house or SUV or camper. (There's that convenient pair of identical PJs to which they can match lint.)

[bvw]

The alley isn't there anymore, as far as I know -- now we have the moderators.

[spectre]

Gosh, Kimmie, why would you even think I was talking about You? Was I? Naahhhh...:~) (big smile on my face :~)

It's hard to take anyone seriously who walks around insulting people then snickers about it, LOL! Oh well, if the shoe fits, ROTLMAO.. My opinion, it's sooooo immature. :~) LOL!

Old saying..

The squeaky wheel gets the grease....It's also the first to be replaced. LOL!!

Just kiddin, hardy har har...I'm such a card, LOL!

sw

[wonders]

I think the child was no more available than polly klaas who was snatched out of her bedroom in front of people. Sometimes things just happen out of luck or planning.

From the same website: "At about 10 PM that evening, an intruder, high on booze and armed with a knife, crawled in through an open bedroom window...She had been brutally raped and strangled...His rap sheet was a pathetic litany of major and minor offences that included robbery, burglary, assault, rape and kidnapping that stretched back 26 years."

I still don't think the type of "situational molester" described in your post fits DW. And I don't think these types elaborately plan their crimes. They are crimes of opportunity, committed in a fit of rage, often helped along by drugs and/or alcohol. At least that's how I read the info on the site.

As I said, DW didn't just take advantage of an open window. If he did it, he had to have planned it. Also, DW has no history of violence. Does this description fit Polly Klaas' murderer? To a T. Long history of violence, took advantage of an open window. Violently raped and murdered victim.

We don't know how Danielle was murdered. It is suspected she was smothered. There were no signs she was murdered violently by an enraged killer (as in stabbing, strangulation, etc). We also don't know whether she was raped. I'm not saying DW didn't do it, just that I don't think he fits into this particular category of "situational molester."

Of course, if it is because that the vd's handed her over to him..icckk.. I can't even fathom it. That has been mentioned before too.

I can't fathom it either, Kim. I don't want to go there. "Icckk" is right.

The criminology aspect is interesting. Glad you brought it into the discussion.

[HamiltonJay]

Again, you are reaching further and further for your doubts.... going beyond reasonable. I camp as well, and get scratched all the time, but I don't get numberous scratches on my forarms from a 2 day camping trip... consistent with defensive scratches if I were choking someone. I don't get other peoples blood in the camper.... don't know about you, but kids don't arbitrarily play in my camper at my house, let alone bleed it in, or leave blood on my coat which I just happen to take the cleaners a few days after they die.

Sure it is not beyond all possible doubt that this guy did it, but nothing is ever beyond all possible doubt. The standard is only REASONABLE doubt. As of this moment, there is no reasonable doubt in my mind to let this guy walk... he will get his day in court, and I believe without question physical evidence on the body will also link him as well, and I am very sure that the prosecution and DA have more evidence than has been published so far.

I am not objecting to him having his day in court, I am pointing out the folly of people here trying to blame the DA's re-election campaign or the parents covering up etc.. its lunacy. Even the defense attorney's tactics so far are consistent with the defense of a guilty man. Not trying to establish alibi or innocence showing he did not do it, but to raise questions and attack the victims. This is a defense strategy attempting to "create" a reasonable doubt, not find or present one.

[HamiltonJay]

DW has no history of violence

Neither did Bundy before they caught him....

[Freedom2specul8]

Yeah...uhuh..whatever you say spectre! :)

[spectre]

I knew that would fly right over your head, Kim. :~)

sw