Van Dam Trial Transcripts, Complete: Testimony continues to vary from previous statements.

San Diego Superior Court/Union Trib ^ | April 9, 2002 | San Diego Superior Court-Kristen Green

[BunnySlippers]

Hey, thanks for the ping, you wierdo!

[NatureGirl]

I have a question. I've been reading various articles about this case on FR, but I've missed something. How (or why) did the police start to suspect Westerfield? Did someone phone in a tip? Was it because he was the only single guy in the area? Have the police even said why they checked Westerfield out in the first place?

Thanks for posting these transcripts.

[Freedom2specul8]

Off topic ~alert~ off topic ~alert~!

[Valpal1]

Patricia Lapage has nothing to say on the dancing issue either.

JUDGE: Hold On. All right. Counsel I see Cherokee Young's. I see Patricia Lapage. That's not what she said. So I don't see that Patricia Lapage or Brenda Easton are particularly relevant to this hearing.

I don't know that Barbara Easton's credibility as a witness against the wife of a man she has an adulteress relationship is very high. Her motives and intentions are very suspect.

Just because a witness is called to impeach another's testimony does not mean they will be succesful at it.

[Freedom2specul8]

Fres is pretty cute...me thinks. :) I'm sure his kids appreciate him.

[Freedom2specul8]

Hostile witnesses aren't always a good thing to use, that's for sure. It's risky.

[Valpal1]

I'm only assuming that since the police took the vacuum bags into custody, as well as the steam cleaner, that if they had any evidence indicative of parental guilt, they would have followed up on it.

It is not an unreasonable assumption. It's just possible that LEO is actually right and you DW apologists are wrong.

[vacrn]

Val, I didn't say that Patricia LePage will have anthing to say about the dancing issue. I said it seems that all of these people will impeach Brenda's testimony of events surrounding that night. I hope that clarifies.

[cake_crumb]

Great work!

Once again, I'm simply ASTOUNDED by BVD's very conveniently selective memory. Another thing that's been nagging me for a while: the VD's have been described as "swingers". How could a swinger not know the meaning of an "adult party"?

[Valpal1]

Let's clarify a little more; these witness will be used in an attempt to impeach Brenda's testimony.

Doesn't mean they will succeed. Glennie Naslund is also a possible alibi witness for DW if I understand the PH correctly.

It will be a very aggressive trial, unless of course, Feldman's motions to dismiss based on police misconduct are successful. Then it's all over except for the civil suit.

[Lanza]

There are lies. Damon admitted to not being fully truthful with the police until the 3rd interview about the drug use. No excuses for trying to cover his own rear-end when his daughter was missing. Brenda and Damon told the media they only knew DW to wave at him. Little by little more info trickled out about selling girlscout cookies, going in his home, discussing adult parties. They are not honest people, even when their daughter is missing.

[MizSterious]

NG--I don't have time to look them up, but one videotaped interview and one interview in the newspaper (two different ones) said someone had pointed him out. Val disagrees that this actually means that someone pointed him out, but I take the officers at their word. The documents filed recently about the improper interrogation indicated that the person who did the pointing out was in fact Brenda, and that she might have lied to the police when she did so.

[Lanza]

Did BVD really smile and mouth "Hi Dave" in the courtroom?!!! I missed that one. There is something very very wrong here.

[vacrn]

"Doesn't mean they will succeed"

True Val, I agree

[Valpal1]

Did BVD really smile and mouth "Hi Dave" in the courtroom?!!! I missed that one. There is something very very wrong here.

Well it's rather hard to believe such a thing happened in full view of camera's and didn't make the news or even these threads on the day it happened.

But then crystalk posts opinion polls and believes its factual information.

[cake_crumb]

"It's just possible that LEO is actually right and you DW apologists are wrong"

I haven't seen more than two posters who subscribe to the notion that maybe the parents did in their little girl. What is really getting to everyone is the way the VD's change their stories constantly.

On that note, here's another question: how could Brenda be on speaking terms with the guy, sell him ahem...Girl Scout cookies twice, chat in his house while the kids played by his pool (unattended), give him her name and home phone number, BUT NOT EVEN KNOW HIS NAME UNTIL MEETING HIM AT DAD'S (as per her testimony)???

A swinger who doesn't know what an "adult party" is. Cut me a break.

[spectre]

You assume the police would have followed up on it? LOL! The lead Investigator didn't even know about the blood smears on the railing and around the garage area..Boy, was he ever shocked by those little left out details that Feldman broke to him at the PH.

Val, you call us DW apologists? I call us trying to get to the truth about exactly who killed Danielle? Don't YOU want to know you've got the right man behind bars? He said "not guilty", and we're trying to figure out why the guy is sticking to his story.

Hey, if it turns out the evidence is clear against him, then we've got our man! Justice will prevail, we'll all breathe a sigh of relief. You don't think we'd be happy knowing the killer is behind bars, even if it turns out to be DW? YOU ARE SO WRONG..

sw

[Valpal1]

Not true, the officer said his name came up "as someone who had recent contact"(with the victim). I pointed out that it was standard operating procedure to generate recent contact lists and interview all of them.

Police did not rush out to locate and question Mr. Westerfield, but politely waited for him to return from his trip and interview him. Then they got suspicious.

Rational logic dictates that if he had been "pointed out", the police would have put out an APB looking for a possible suspect, not wait for him to return, when a child's life was at stake.

The DW apologists are so sure the police are wrong and they are right about the evil parent's guilt, they are past being either rational or logical.

But of course it's easy to twist words and parse them. Of course Brenda "pointed him out", who else would the police get recent contact information from?

[spectre]

I think it is YOU who is past logic..Your personal attacks against those who have a difference of opinion other than YOURS is becoming a problem. Cut out the name-calling, it's really offensive to those of us who are taking this seriously. You have quite an attitude, Val... We don't all march to the same drummer..

sw

[Freedom2specul8]

You also kindly reminded us about the girl scout cookie customer list...recent contacts..