Posted on 04/25/2002 9:15:24 AM PDT by FresnoDA
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.
I guess it is no surprise when everything the van Dams have done and do is explained away. Isn't amazing that they may be one of the most suspicious looking set of parents we have seen, yet new hoops are jumped through every day to defend them. Unreal !!!!!
I heard that the mother of the little 2-year-old boy missing in San Diego right now wants little to do with Brenda van Dam, but Brenda insists on trying to get the mom to "warm up to her" so she can help her. I guess one could conclude that the mother of the toddler realizes no common circumstance with Brenda van Dam ?????????
What I have asked for is a separation of the 'stories' and the actual testimony.
Have you read the testimony ? What did it lead you to believe?
That time of day when many leave their keyboards to fix chow, watch for the kids to get off the bus, or leave work to head home.
I will be interested to see who can either provide proof or admit they are mistaken.
It gets very easy to tell different kinds of people. There is the kind that
(1) Knows everything and is always right.
(2)Loves those that agree with them, and hates/makes fun of those that don't.
(3)Never will admit they are mistaken.
I will provide proof of what I have said so far, just as I will admit I am wrong if provided proof of such.
When any of you get time, will you take me up on this ?????
YOU CAN SEE that it had Damons and Brenda's DNA on it...Damon is NOT the Maternal side of MitDNA testing. So how can it be "Damons" DNA was on the stain?
So help us out with your vast knowledge of the actual testing and results on specific said dirty underwear..
sw
Woops, evidently "u" can't see "2". According to the experts quoted in the papers and elsewhere on other cases, no DNA in urine. If someone knows differently, please post? Everyone (except you) seems to agree the stains were something else.
"DNA samples were taken of it and compared to some blood stain samples from a jacket and some carpet."
This much is correct.
"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."
If the child had been systematically abused by someone, their DNA would not have shown up in the sample unless the lates episode of abuse had been quite recent. That's why when someone is raped, they want you in the clinic immediately--traces of their DNA will quickly disappear with baths, etc. I do not know if they tested for anyone else's DNA--they were looking for Danielle's at the time, to compare not only with the blood, but with her body once found.
"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."
Alas, apparently you have not read the official transcripts. The so-called "running transcripts" were quite helpful until we got the genuine article, but the official transcripts are far more complete--and more importanly, accurate. For those too lazy to look up past urls just go to www.signonsandiego, look for the Danielle stories, and you'll find the transcripts posted there.
These transcripts were not easy to obtain. It took lots of legal wrangling with the courts to get them released. Let's not let all that work--and money (the transcripts alone cost $435, just for the three day hearing)--go to waste.
I wanted to play a little longer...Heck, you guys ruined all my fun....:~)
sw
I'd say you've got one heck of a quick temper there, kiddo. Pick your fights carefully on this thread. Kimmie ain't worth it.
sw
LOL........it's so pathetic I can't even have fun playing. :(
First, from the transcripts, page 385:
24 Q. Did you notice anything unusual in the area of
25 the underwear?
26 A. There were stains in the crotch area.
Read on from there.
Now, on to your next uninformed statement--as far as I know, there is no such thing as "normal" vaginal discharge from a 7 year old child. Either she had irritation from dirty swimming pool water, an allergy to bubble bath, some other medical problem--or she might have been sexually abused prior to her abduction. One of the most common signs of child sexual abuse is, as a matter of fact, vaginal discharge. Look it up if you don't believe me. It was probably not urine, or they would not have gotten DNA from it.
Also, please note that none of us has thus far stated as fact that she was molested prior to her abduction. We asked the questions--had she been molested by someone prior to the abduction? And if so, who, when, and how? These are questions the police should have asked, but if they did, we haven't heard from them.
sw
Usually, the great thing about FR is the sharing of information, the getting at of the real 'truth'. I do not trust those that claim to have the 'truth' but are unwilling to prove it. They are either being snobbish, hoarding it in hopes it gives them 15 minutes of fame, or they don't have the truth.
Is there some reason one of you can't post the specific information on the stain in her underwear, since it seems to be so important ?
A. A pair of underpants. Q. With regard to the underwear, where were those underwear from
A. They were collected from the victim's bedroom.
A. Yes, I was.
Q. How did you obtain a DNA profile from that underwear?
A. I went to an area on the underwear which would commonly be a collection point for biological material. In particular, on this there was a yellowish stain that was observed on the inside crotch area of the underwear. It would be a natural area where drainage would occur from a vaginal area.
Q. Is that a source of genetic, that is biological material, that you have obtained or others have obtained from like samples in the past?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Is that a fairly common source, for example, in sexual assault cases, for example?
MR. FELDMAN: Objection. Relevance.
THE COURT: Overruled.
THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.
17 BY MR. CLARKE:
Q. Now, in particular, you obtained results from all five of these items, the carpet stain, the jacket stain, the two samples from Brenda and Damon Van Dam, and from the underwear; is that correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Did you then make comparisons of those results?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. With what results?
A. That the stain from the carpet and the stain from the jacket were of a similar source or highly likely from the same source as the source of the DNA on the inside crotch area of the underwear. I also determined that those three items could also be the result of a biological offspring of Brenda Van Dam and Damon Van Dam.
Q. All right. Could you tell us what you mean by that last portion in terms of the "could be from a biological offspring?" What do you mean by that?
A. DNA is inherited from your biological parents. You get half of your DNA from your mother and half from your father. And in the cases where there isn't a known reference sample available, a lot of times biological parents references are used. Their DNA is tested and their types are observed, and if it is compared to an unknown or to a secondary reference, like the underwear is, the -- there are types that are developed, determine if those types could have been the result of DNA passed on from a biological mother and father.
Q. So is it correct then that your DNA analysis of the parents' DNA was consistent with an offspring of those parents having left those genetic profiles in the stain found in the underwear?
A. That's correct.
Q. And is it also correct that the profiles from the carpet stain, the jacket stain and the underwear stain all matched each other?
A. Yes, they do.
I don't need you to tell me who I should and shouldn't pick a fight with.
I will defend anyone I choose to on this forum, especially if I feel they are being honest and open, and being picked on. So far MizSterious is the only one that has offered any intelligent arguments.
You and FresnoDa have proven that you are quick to judge, and slow to read, slow to learn. See if you can figure out why I said this !
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.