WESTERFIELD TRIAL: Week Three - Day Four

San Diego Courtroom Trial | none

[Freedom2specul8]

Don't ya think the vd fibers would have been vacuumed by then?

[Jaded]

Where can you download the interview?

[Jaded]

Prosecution has said they will be finished by June 26. So we prolly seen most everything. Just glad there are no more campers.

[BARLF]

Dave McNally,36,had just bought the house between the vanDams and the neighbor who has been questioned repeatedly by police Jan.31. McNally met the van Dams the next afternoon,hours before the second-grader disappeared.

"They came over to the house,brought Danielle with them,sold us Girl Scout cookies," McNally said Saturday." The next day,he(Damon van Dam) came running over here,asked us to check our house,because she's known to sleepwalk.

McNally,who hadn't moved into the house yet,said that they didn't find the missing second-grader at that time.

http://www.nctimes.net/2002/200210/53130.html

[fnord]

Good to see you back :-)

IMO Dusek has done the best he can with a bad case. Premature indictment, political and media motivations, and hasty, or perhaps shoddy, police work don't give him much to work with. Perhaps it's unkind to say so, but he also doesn't seem to be the kind of lawyer who can make a silk purse out of this sow's ear.

Going into trial, I thought the DA had to prove or reasonably explain these points.

1. Place Danielle in DW's home/MH.

2. Place DW in the VD house (or explain how that might be unnecessary).

3. Place DW at Dehesa (or again, show it to be unnecessary).

4. Show DW to be a child molestor/pedophile.

5. Show means and manner of death .. in other words show that a crime was committed (all we know now is that the girl is dead).

Dealing only with evidence (not rumors or opening statements), the prosecution has only shown the first point, and have given no indication as to the time when this occurred. Time for Dusek to pull the ace from his sleeve, if he has one.

Since I won't be around much the next few weeks, I'll profer a few predictions:

a. The prosecution will rest without any meaningful evidence to show means, motive, or opportunity, hoping that a circumstantial case will emotionally sway the jury.

b. The 'child porn' charge will be dropped (quietly, so as not to embarrass the DA).

c. Feldman will dismantle the tenuous house of cards that make up the DA's evidence.

d. Feldman will present testimony and evidence to show that some other person/persons, known or unknown, were more likely to have been involved. He may leave the jury convinced that DW is way down the list of probable suspects, despite his convenience.

e. Feldman will rest after about 2 weeks of witnesses.

f. The jury will return 'not guilty' in a very few days, and DW walks before the end of July.

All these predictions will be null and void if the prosecution does indeed, despite all current indications, have decisive evidence of the 'smoking gun' variety. YMMV :-)

btw Kim, what do you make of the .22 casing in the bedroom after it had been gone over? That is somewhat interesting, no?

[demsux]

btw Kim, what do you make of the .22 casing in the bedroom after it had been gone over? That is somewhat interesting, no?

Man, that shell casing is absolutely devastating. It shows one of two things.

1. VERY sloppy evidence gathering and crime scene management, which will cause reasonable doubt with the jury regarding ALL evidence obtained by LE. This is a pop fly for Feldman.

or

2. Evidence tampering by LE and/or whomever had access to the house after investigation began. Obviously, DW did not have access to the house at that time. Another pop fly for Feldman

[John Jamieson]

I read it at courttv.com; don't know if you can download as it's scanned.

[demsux]

Posted by demsux to fnord On News/Activism Jun 22 2:38 PM #846 of 847 btw Kim, what do you make of the .22 casing in the bedroom after it had been gone over? That is somewhat interesting, no?

Man, that shell casing is absolutely devastating. It shows one of two things.

1. VERY sloppy evidence gathering and crime scene management, which will cause reasonable doubt with the jury regarding ALL evidence obtained by LE. This is a pop fly for Feldman.

or

2. Evidence tampering by LE and/or whomever had access to the house after investigation began. Obviously, DW did not have access to the house at that time. Another pop fly for Feldman

Since Kimberly won't give me a reply, would you like to comment?

[Rheo]

New thread for weekend posts Weekend Thread

[Freedom2specul8]

I'm sorry to hear that you won't be around for a few weeks. I hope it's not too late to reply.


Dusek has done the best he can with a bad case. Premature indictment, political and media motivations, and hasty, or perhaps shoddy, police work don't give him much to work with. Perhaps it's unkind to say so, but he also doesn't seem to be the kind of lawyer who can make a silk purse out of this sow's ear.

You are right...the media circus surrounding it alone is enough to make it difficult let alone the actual tools etc he has to work with.

If the defense brings out experts that criticize the investigation..it is quite possible they will try to rip it to shreds.

I noticed you wrote that atty might not be very good...Did you read the ''news report'' about duske's qualifications?
Prosecution: A -team

When District Attorney Paul Pfingst selected the team to prosecute the man accused of killing Danielle van Dam, he turned to two veterans who've been involved in numerous high-profile cases.

Prosecutor Jeff Dusek, who will be marking 25 years in the San Diego County District Attorney's Office this month, has handled more death penalty cases than any other lawyer in the office.

George "Woody" Clarke, a San Diego prosecutor for 20 years, is a nationally recognized expert on DNA evidence, complicated scientific data now frequently used in criminal cases. His expertise has been recruited by Los Angeles prosecutors, who made him part of their team in the murder trial of O.J. Simpson.

~SNIP~

Dusek, 52, was once described in court papers as being part of an " 'A' team" of prosecutors and investigators who had been assigned to handle the retrial of six gang members in the killing of a San Diego police officer.

Dusek's boss, James Pippin, said he's confident Dusek and Clarke will handle their latest assignment well.

"We've got the 'A' team," Pippin said.

(click link for more info)

If dusek is as good as indicated, and I've had a few freepmails from people who say they know he is cuz they live in that area, he's already accounted for the investigation's weakness..I would hope.

Do you remember hearing that feldman asked about the tech's wearing hair nets? Someone mentioned that to me.. I dont' remember hearing it...EVEN IF they didn't..how common is it to wear hairnets while collecting evidence..and what if they didn't? it wouldn't match DW's anyway..

WRT: your predictions, I think I'm of the opposite opinion right now. :) Do you have absolutely no confidence in the talent of the prosecutors and the evidence. What about after reading that article above? I'll bookmark your post, and see if you have predicted correctly. I believe he'll be found guilty on the child porn charges, If the jury doesn't get hung, he'll be guilty...if there is more evidence to be shown..as I suspect. I don't think the defense will convince the jury of a 3rd party...cuz they've not proven a bunch of strangers were in and out of the house all of the time.

The crazy bullet casing..I think everyone of us agrees it wasn't from a cop. I don't think a cop carried it from another crime scene so....just because the casing looked old, doesn't mean it wasn't recently used. Bullets can look old before they are spent. From what I understand, 22cal bullets can enter a body and just bounce from one organ to another in an adult body of medium build. I was also told that it can do the same thing to a child. As far as blood not showing..that would be strange. IF the blood on the shoulder of his jacket was from her abdomen, it would make since since it appears she might have been slung over his shoulder..what if he ran out of the house and not crept quietly? (say the tv volume his the sound of running footsteps?)

I hope you are back soon!

[UCANSEE2]

Added. Thank you.

[UCANSEE2]

You have been added, and Welcome !

[UCANSEE2]

Following is the most recently revised PING LIST.

Please feel free to copy this to use to PING everyone for the Danielle Van Dam / David Westerfield TRIAL threads.

[RnMomof7]

It is incorrect to assume that the teeth were all lost by some violence to her. They testified that teeth just fall out after death.

[RnMomof7]

I think his behaviour as described by the dry-cleaning clerk was odd and was apparently different from the way he normally behaved.., the child-rape pictures and animation scenes, blood, scratches, hair, lack of his fingerprints in the rv and other strange events lay more doubt on his innocence then guilt on another. I don't think we've even gotten through HALF of the prosecution's evidence.. (not just evidence against DW..but all the evidence)

Kim you have called this guy guilty since day one..no innocent till proven by you

There has been no evidence that he was in anyway connected other than the blood..If you had just killed a little girl and were well heeled what would you have done with that stuff? How about bury it ..burn it..get rid of it

Has there been ANY evidence of the porn brought to the trial YET ? Do you know for sure that is what it was? All the experts have agreed he is an unlikely perp based on the porn..mostly adult....and with no previous history of child abuse..

You want to hang him because there are NO fingerprints? Mine are not there maybe I did it..are yours there? Gee maybe you did it..

If I clean my house (everyone says this guy is a neat freak) I wipe off all the current prints..so does that mean I did something

So far the Nancy Grace crowd has some real evidence..a drop of blood, no fingerprints and a shopping list with bleach on it...

How about a little objectivity here??