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.

[FresnoDA]

Based on the testimony the Van Dam's gave during the preliminary hearing yesterday, how responsible to you feel Brenda and Damon were in the victimization of their daughter Danielle?

Entirely

20%

Very

40%

Somewhat

19%

Slighty

6%

Not at all

15%

© 2002 Midwest Television, Inc.

[RangeRatt]

Bunny, he's one of the reasons these threads are in existance! I stand in AWE of what he has been doing in regards to this case.

[Freedom2specul8]

More sensationalist propaganda...biased radio propagating biased listeners..THAT'S all..

[Freedom2specul8]

I bet your sheriff did teach him a lesson.. LOL! Guess what kind of efforts they give if the child is 18..

[FresnoDA]

Barb on Video!! (Not like that...ha!!)

Video: Low / High
Get Media Player

VERY INTERESTING......

[RangeRatt]

and in case I haven't said this before, THANK YOU! You have not only answered the questions I have posed (even the inane ones), but have given me a better overall understanding of this case as a whole, to date.

[Freedom2specul8]

G'nite..

[RangeRatt]

sleep well.

[MizSterious]

And the wafts of Pot Smoke drifting skyward told the outside world, "We are stoned, we are stoned!!"

And there's the truth if ever there was truth. By the way, I was wondering--is it a full moon or something tonight? I think I heard the cry of the dreaded were-bore. (You know the legend of the were-bores, don't you? When the moon is full, ordinary people grow cliches and haunt the populace screeching the same old chestnuts over and over. Dread those were-bores!)

[BunnySlippers]

He said a sexual pervert entered that home..and that he more than likely has been tracking Danielle for a long time. Some of us have been saying that for a long time.

I like John Walsh, he is a wonderful victim's advocate but he is NOT infallible. One LKL just about a month ago TWICE he said that Jon Benet's father cut her down from the chiling where she was hanging from a noose ... twice. Of course, she did not die by hanging ... she was wrapped in a blanket.

I don't think the police should skim over this by not investigating the parents AT ALL. You seem to think they are completely innocent and I'm not so sure. If LE refuses to investigate the Van Dams then they are not doing their job. If Westerfield is guilty (and I think he is) he should be punished by death.

So it seems like there are a few people on this thread who become name callers if one has the gall to think the parents may well have had some complicity in this murder. You seem to want to silence people who are here merely tossing out ideas and talking about this crime.

Were you like this during the OJ trial?

[BunnySlippers]

chiling = ceiling.

[RangeRatt]

in as much as I can't answer for Kim, I haven't noticed where you were the past few nights on these van Dam Threads, but I can tell you, I was here, and things, well, they got kinda ugly. I am glad to report that we are now able to interact with each other, if not in a completely civil manner, than at least with enough humor to know when flames are being hurled and when we are just loosing a little good natured steam at someone who might not share the exact same viewpoint as we do.

'Cause is that what THIS (FR) is all about? Many people, different views, offering opinions, theories, and ideas? That's what I signed on for.

[wonders]

Easton says that it's too bad he didn't have to take the stand.

So she is a he? (Sorry, couldn't resist that one.)

[RightWingMama]

Yeah, that is awesome! I'm telling you. JW said it took what..days to get the LE off its behind?

That is usually the case. Why then did it take the cops about, what..........20 minutes to declare the Van Dams innocent?

[notpoliticallycorewrecked]

ROTFLMHO

Breaker, breaker rubber duck, com'on back!

[BunnySlippers]

in as much as I can't answer for Kim, I haven't noticed where you were the past few nights on these van Dam Threads, but I can tell you, I was here, and things, well, they got kinda ugly.

I was here and checked in on the Van Dam thread as I do every night ... Fresno had pinged me. Yes, noticed the nastiness and didn't post on the thread.

I don't agree with everything every single poster on any thread says ... but I don't understand why there are two or three on these threads who can't bear that someone might feel differently. I do know that there are people who are reluctant to post knowing they are going to be bashed.

[BunnySlippers]

Why then did it take the cops about, what..........20 minutes to declare the Van Dams innocent?

The Van Dam's had to submit to polygraphs before LE said they were not suspects.

[RangeRatt]

well, glad to have you along. I have posted what I thought were either "dumb" questions, or, in some cases, thoroughly inane comments, not afraid of getting bashed, but instead, to turn attention away from those getting bashed. I don't like that any more than you do, I sure, but I wouldn't avoid posting for that reason.

I find very few things shocking anymore, but this crime is one of them, and I want to know everything about it that is available. Viva Free Republic!!!!

[rolling_stone]

Police say the alarm was not set, but the panel is a type that indicates when doors and windows are opened and shut at all times.

Whoops I missed this so my theory about setting the alarms needs reconsidering..seems to me if the lights and beeps come on ALL the time with a breach then with the kids and dog and all their vistors, that thing would go off constantly to the point of driving someone crazay and making them ignore it......strange...

[BunnySlippers]

Whoops I missed this so my theory about setting the alarms needs reconsidering...

During the third preliminary hearing Damon Van Dam said he had tested the alarm panel after the abduction. If a child's magnet was placed against the alarm that it would somehow impair it's function. I don't know alarms well enough to speak on this issue. Anyone here have experience with this?