PROSECUTORS TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY IN WESTERFIELD CASE

Union Tribune/KFMB ^ | April 25, 2002 | Harry Jones

[FresnoDA]

Westerfield hearing could be focused on death penalty

By J. Harry Jones
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

April 25, 2002

A San Diego Superior Court hearing has been scheduled for 9 a.m. today for David Westerfield, the Sabre Springs man accused of kidnapping and murdering 7-year-old Danielle van Dam.

The attorneys involved in the case are prohibited from discussing it because of a gag order, but it is possible that prosecutors will announce whether they will seek the death penalty against the self-employed engineer.

His attorneys have insisted on Westerfield's right to a speedy trial, which is scheduled to begin May 17. He is being held in County Jail without bail.

After Westerfield's arrest Feb. 22, prosecutors filed special allegations in the case, accusing him of committing murder during a kidnapping, which gives them the option of seeking his execution if convicted.

District Attorney Paul Pfingst has a protocol on reaching a decision that usually takes several months; the case is reviewed by a panel of senior prosecutors. Defense attorneys also have the option of meeting with Pfingst.

It has been just over two months since the charges against Westerfield were brought, and because of the gag order it has not been possible to determine whether the panel made a recommendation or if Westerfield's attorneys met with Pfingst.

The district attorney makes the final decision. If he chooses not to seek the death penalty, Westerfield would face a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole.

Danielle's family lived two doors from Westerfield. Her parents reported her missing Feb. 2, and police quickly focused on Westerfield as the prime suspect.

Prosecutors said DNA testing proved that blood found on some of Westerfield's clothing and in his motor home was Danielle's.

Volunteer searchers found the girl's body Feb. 27 east of El Cajon in a stand of oak trees just off Dehesa Road. The cause of death has not been determined because of decomposition of the body, officials said.

[Freedom2specul8]

Jaded, I will read your friar post in full when I get back..I have questions..for example: what report discussed the underwear being taken from a drawer, do you know? I'll see you tonight..

[Freedom2specul8]

Just because you guys discussed the underwear at great length doesn't mean I did, (I didn't) or read it (I didn't). I was NOT being sarcastic. Life too busy to do that Spec.Gotta go for real now...

[MizSterious]

"where does it say there was a heavy discharge?"

With all due respect, Kim, READ THE BLEEPING TRANSCRIPT before you start spouting off. The urls to a couple of official court transcript sites have been posted. If you want to pretend to know a lot about this case, you really have to start there. Many of the stories in the media were completely knocked down by the court testimony. Two different people testified about the panties. It was mentioned twice, then (count 'em).

[MizSterious]

Friar Tom's post is interesting, but to really get the sense of what happened at the hearing, read the transcripts. Honest to gosh. It works.

[MizSterious]

SW, you are quite right, this is very serious. There are other ways a child of that age can have discharge--dirty swimming pools, certain types of bubble bath, etc.--but when you combine the discharge with the diary entries and certain other odd comments by Damon especially--then I think it should at least be considered. Unfortunately, every time it's brought up, accusations about "blaming the victims" start getting tossed about.

[spectre]

I hear you. As I see it, the only real victim here is Danielle, and we seek truth and justice for the poor child, as corny as that may sound to some people.

sw

[FresnoDA]

BIG BUMP...there has been entire threads about the discharge...and about the "maturity" early breat bud development of abused children. Might even have been one of kimbo's post....guess that is the advantage of having selective memory....

[FresnoDA]

See post #122 this thread, you seem to be functioning on about 3 of your 6 cylinders. 

Can not believe you are feigning ignorance of the discharge....but as Miz said, we are not going to read the transcripts for you. 

To bad, I thought you were a VD apologist, but at least a learned one...now it appears you are simply a headline browser. 

I thought you were more serious about this story kimbo....oh well, at the least, NOW WE KNOW the rest of your story....FresnoDA

[UCANSEE2]

FRESNOda

Time for you to take some of your own medicine.

According to the Transcripts there was evidence of a stain found on Danielle's underwear.
It was not determined to be semen, or vaginal discharge from abuse, or infection.
It was decribed as YELLOWISH STAIN. Yellowish as in urine.

DNA samples were taken of it and compared to some blood stain samples from a jacket and some carpet.

If it was SEMEN or signs from ABUSE, then Damon has a problem, cause the DNA matched DAMON VAN DAM, and BRENDA VAN DAM. None of it matched Daniel Westerfield at all.

Anyway, you have jammed Kimmy for not reading the transcripts, yet I find that you and others apparently either
(1) have not read them either, or
(3)Read what you wanted into it, or
(3)Skipped through them so fast you misunderstood the testimony and evidence.

[UCANSEE2]

Apparently, MIZ... is the one that I should have directed this at more than Fres...

[FresnoDA]

Uhmmmm....It is David Westerfield, Mr. Holmes. But then again, I am sure you have read the transcripts from stem to stern, like Miz and I....so why don't you tell us what the details are....Sherlock.....

[UCANSEE2]

Helllllooooo!

Would you like to be directed to the testimony so you can READ IT FOR YOURSELF ?????? Or do you just want to talk about other people to make yourself feel better ?

[FresnoDA]

Time for you to take some of your own medicine.

Actually, VIAGRA is the only "legal" medicine discussed in the VD case,

or do we need to explain that part of the story to you as well??

[UCANSEE2]

David, Daniel, I keep getting those two names mixed up.

How about this. Prove what I said is wrong. From the testimony. Or have you really not read it as you say?

[FresnoDA]

People v Westerfield Prelim Transcripts

March 11, 20002, AM

 

March 11, 2002, PM

 

March 12, 20002, AM

 

March 12, 20002, PM

 

March 14, 20002, AM    Brenda and The Demon  

 

March 14, 2002, PM    Brenda and The Demon

 

[UCANSEE2]

I know where these are. I have read them. My question was have you ? If so , prove it.

Or are you only capable of being a smart-aleck and making personal attacks on others ?

[FresnoDA]

Here is a better idea, why don't you and kimmie start a thread called, amnesia, the best defense....LOL

[UCANSEE2]

Thank you. You have just proved you will not read nor quote the testimony, no matter what it says. You have proven you can do nothing except make smart-aleck remarks.

Now I know what the DA in your screen id stands for.

[FresnoDA]

Or are you only capable of being a smart-aleck and making personal attacks on others ?

Uhmmmmm.....I will take smart-aleck for $1000 Alex......

[UCANSEE2]

Come on, I don't bite.

Do you have anything that supports your conjecture that the stain in Danielle's underwear was more than normal urine or other vaginal discharge ? (i.e. not from sexual abuse).

I am not saying Damon is innocent, as I am a proponent of the belief he is guilty as hell (of what exactly, I don't know yet).

I don't think David Westerfield (wanted to say Daniel again) has anything to do with it.

What I want most is to get the facts straight. I have contributed to some incorrect spiel here on FR, but I have admitted and corrected it.

So, I ask again, prove what you say, or admit you are mistaken. It's pretty simple.