Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Damon Van Dam Takes Witness Stand: Day 2 of Westerfield Trial
KGTV 10 News-San Diego ^ | June 5, 2002 | KGTV

Posted on 06/05/2002 3:57:07 PM PDT by FresnoDA

Damon Van Dam Takes Witness Stand

Day 2 Of Westerfield Trial
Posted: 9:05 a.m. PDT June 5, 2002
Updated: 2:52 p.m. PDT June 5, 2002
SAN DIEGO -- The tearful father of murder victim Danielle van Dam admitted under oath Wednesday that he initially lied to police about a few events at his home that led up to her disappearance.

Damon van Dam, 36, said police asked him what had happened in the garage of his home that night when two friends of his wife, Brenda, arrived before a "girls night out" at Dad's Cafe in Poway.

The father testified that he initially didn't tell authorities that he had taken "a puff or two" from a marijuana cigarette the women were smoking.

"I didn't think it mattered and I didn't want to get in trouble for that," van Dam told prosecutor Jeff Dusek.

But van Dam said that after the officers told him they were only interested in finding his daughter, he began to be truthful with them.

He said he also did not tell police about one of his wife's girlfriends, Barbara Easton, coming into his bedroom that night after returning from the outing.

"When they told me it was absolutely critical to know what happened that night, I told them everything that happened that night," van Dam said.

He said Barbara was on the bed with him, above the covers, for about five minutes as Brenda first went to the bathroom, then downstairs.

"I kissed (Barbara), snuggled her some," van Dam said. "I think I put my arm around her and rubbed her back."

Damon van Dam

In his opening statement Tuesday, defense attorney Steven Feldman said that initial lies from the van Dams threw the police investigation off track.

Much of the morning testimony in the David Westerfield trial Wednesday was designed to orient jurors to the layout of the van Dam house, by using a floor plan and photographs.

Van Dam described the upstairs hallway that led to bedrooms, and also told the jury of six men and six women what was in Danielle's room. One of the issues in the case is whether artwork posted on the doors of the bedrooms would help someone know which room would be hers.

He added that each of the children's rooms had night lights, but Danielle's was burned out, so he opened the drapes to allow light from the street into the room.

Shown a photograph of his daughter's door, van Dam began to cry as he described why a dog gate had been placed there.

"I asked that the room not be cleaned," he finally explained.

Earlier today, Dr. Norman "Skip" Sperber, a forensic dentist, testified that four of Danielle's teeth were missing when he examined her mouth.

One eventually was found "way in the back of the mouth, where the gum meets the cheek," he said.

Under questioning by Deputy District Attorney Jeff Dusek, Sperber said it is not unusual for teeth to fall out during decomposition.

The child's body was found near some dumped trash and under a tree off a road in Dehesa in East County.

However, no teeth were found at the scene, Sperber said. He explained that animals, who sometimes carry away human remains, normally do not bother with teeth.

In opening statements, the prosecution said the loss of teeth showed that Danielle could have been suffocated.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: vandam; westerfield
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-316 next last
To: BunnySlippers
Bunny, you have not addressed my post 82, Any comment?
101 posted on 06/05/2002 5:59:39 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Thank you, coop...we all deserve answers to our questions, even if we don't like what we hear (I include myself in that). This one has me puzzled tho.

sw

102 posted on 06/05/2002 6:00:17 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
I did not watch it but would love to. It is not televised in Los Angeles.

With all due respect probably the same places you are, the local San Diego papers, AP, Reuters, thesandiegchannel.com and Court TV.

Call me confused, but which is it? Are both of these your words?

If you aren't watching testimony, you are basing your belief on reports.

You come out awfully authoritatively for someone who "did not watch"......or did you? I can't keep up.

103 posted on 06/05/2002 6:01:28 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
moral issues rather than "who murdered Danielle". I agree that for purposes of the trial, the moral issues are only important to extent that they help defind "who did it". Murder is a moral issue and I think that immoral people are much more likely to do it. Now we've got the scuz ball next door vs. the scuzs balls at home. Porno on the neighbors computer, vs. the live porno at home.
104 posted on 06/05/2002 6:06:12 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: demnomo
I feel nothing but sympathy for what happened to that poor little girl. However, her parents are sleazy creeps who cared more for their perverted pleasures than for the safety of their children. I do hold them somewhat responsible for what occured. If they hadn't holed themselves up in the garage to smoke dope and have an orgy, Danielle might be here today. I know that there are folks here on FR who think that the Van Dam's "private life" had nothing to do with the daughters abduction/murder. Phooey. Not only are the parents LIARS, but they are shameless fools as well...

We agree

105 posted on 06/05/2002 6:08:42 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
You come out awfully authoritatively for someone who "did not watch"......or did you? I can't keep up.

All you to need to do is to read over my posts to see that I have said that I am just like the average observer. I know from the past that you live nearer to San Diego than I do. Perhaps ... perhaps you are watching it on TV but I do not have access. I am a crime buff but I again have no special information nor do I claim to have. The only thing I have is an interest in the case from the beginning (as you have had). I read the daily synposis on rec.true-crime, the stories here and the sources I have already mentioned. Any special "authorative" air that you may have read into my posts is a result of your imagination.

106 posted on 06/05/2002 6:09:22 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis;ALL
Well, WE did watch the trial. THE Dog could bark, and did bark to "get into the house" said Damon...But still, we have those who say the dog couldn't bark. WHY? Because that's what Damon and Brenda said from the get-go.

Wonder which neighbor heard the doggie bark and spilled the beans to Feldman?

OH, Michael Savage is now talking about the van Dams. Listen!

sw

107 posted on 06/05/2002 6:12:37 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
others knew Layla the peeing-barkless-bleeding wonder dog.

Jaded, I always get such a chuckle out of your description of the dog! You really should give me a spew warning!

108 posted on 06/05/2002 6:12:43 PM PDT by vacrn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Even a murder hasn't been proven -- and beyond a reasonable doubt, probably can not be proven.

Thats my thought ..what if the little girl woke up and no one was home and she wandered out? They do not have proof of sexual abuses eithor right?

109 posted on 06/05/2002 6:12:51 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I started out my writing with: "Westerfield is probably guilty", which is about the most you can say at this point.

Maybe he did it BECAUSE they wouldn't let him play in their sand box?

Okay this is post 82.

I'd say perhaps it was one of my working theories early on.

From today's opening statements I know the prosecution is trying to establish that he was observing Danielle all along. I'm not sure they will be able to make a case for this but I personally think he was.

Therefore, I'm NOT SURE (no more no less) whether he was mad about not playing in their sandbox. Possibly.

110 posted on 06/05/2002 6:13:35 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: spectre
But still, we have those who say the dog couldn't bark.

I haven't seen transcripts of opening statements. But dogs who have had their vocal cords cut (and this was in an earlier article) can still "bark" but in a low pitched raspy way. Can you tell me if the VD's have said the dog has a normal bark?

111 posted on 06/05/2002 6:16:41 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
They can track the ping from the nearest tower. Depends on what the range of each tower is. If it's 10 miles radius the tower will pick up the same ping no matter where your are. The cell phone was a warrant issue. But no that's not explosive. Explosive was something said.

10-4... I think physical evidence could be explosive too.

112 posted on 06/05/2002 6:21:50 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
If he said ANYTHING implying that he knew where the body was, and it's allowed in, Westerfield's doomed.

Since RR's source has been at least partially correct....

113 posted on 06/05/2002 6:22:38 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
They started out from the get-go saying the dog couldn't bark..changed it to the dog didn't learn to bark..to the dog whimpered loudly...to today's soft spoken admittance by Damon that the dog barked to get into the house, but seldom barked otherwise.

You missed it, Bunny.

sw

114 posted on 06/05/2002 6:24:08 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; bvw
Even a murder hasn't been proven -- and beyond a reasonable doubt, probably can not be proven.

Thats my thought ..what if the little girl woke up and no one was home and she wandered out? They do not have proof of sexual abuses eithor right?

This is what I was just thinking in reading the posts about the barking/non-barking dog. Since they had brought up sleep-walking, and I haven't heard if there is definitive evidence DW was in the VD house, what if she just wandered off, and perhaps it was DW or some other person who saw her wandering the streets in the darkness and took her? This could explain no barking from the dog, and the question as to how he knew how to get around the layout of a home he'd never been in.

We don't even know HOW it happened.
115 posted on 06/05/2002 6:26:14 PM PDT by sbnsd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte
" The fiction of "pleading innocent" makes me grind my teeth."

ME TOO! I thought I was the only one. I am fairly sure that there isn't anywhere in the U.S. where you can plead "innocent". You can only plead "not guilty" or "guilty" or "no contest/Alford plea" (which seems to be pretty close to a "guilty" plea).

If I am wrong on this, I wish some FReeper lawyer would set me straight cause I would like to know.

116 posted on 06/05/2002 6:26:27 PM PDT by Irene Adler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: spectre
changed it to the dog didn't learn to bark..to the dog whimpered loudly...to today's soft spoken admittance by Damon that the dog barked to get into the house, but seldom barked otherwise.

And you're an out and out liar! Point out where I said that:

a. The dog whimpered (as you state)
b. That the dog barked to get into the house (as you state)
c. The dog seldom barked otherwise (as you state)

What's the deal? Are you making up stuff as you go?

117 posted on 06/05/2002 6:32:38 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Deep Breath...kiddo. I never SAID you said it, I was saying that is what the van Dams have said.

I was trying to give you some information, since you didn't watch the trial.

Won't make that mistake again.

sw

118 posted on 06/05/2002 6:38:43 PM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: spectre
I was trying to give you some information, since you didn't watch the trial.

Thanks, duly noted. I seem to be the evil one even though I do not condone the parents actions.

BTW, what channel are you getting it on?

119 posted on 06/05/2002 6:43:21 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: spectre
Won't make that mistake again.

*snicker*........Where's Rod Serling when you need him?

120 posted on 06/05/2002 6:45:25 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-316 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson