Expert: Fingerprints in motor home are Danielle's
KIMBERLY EPLER
Staff WriterSAN DIEGO ---- Danielle van Dam used pressure when she touched a wooden cabinet less than a foot above the bed in David Westerfield's motor home, a fingerprint expert testified Wednesday during Westerfield's trial for allegedly kidnapping and murdering the 7-year-old girl.
Fingerprint expert Jeffrey Graham Jr. said he compared a partial print of Danielle's left ring and middle fingers lifted from the cabinet to fingerprints taken from Danielle's hands after her body was found. He said he was "absolutely certain" there was a match.
|
POOL PHOTO
|
A projected computer image of the latent finger print taken is compared to the known print of Danielle. This computer copy images were part of Pat Wertheim's testimony given yesterday at the trial of David Westerfield.
|
"These two prints ... were made by Danielle van Dam," Graham said.
Danielle also moved her hand from side to side when she left the prints on the bottom corner of the cabinet in Westerfield's motor home, Graham said. Her hand touched at an angle with her pinkie finger closer to the cabinet than her thumb, he said.
"The hand didn't just come down and lift right back up," Graham said. "There was some motion."
Under questioning from Westerfield's attorney, Steven Feldman, Graham said he couldn't say when Danielle made those prints.
Danielle's body was found in rural East County nearly four weeks after she was reported missing from her Sabre Springs home Feb. 2.
Graham also testified that Westerfield's fingerprints didn't match any of the more than 300 fingerprints lifted from the van Dam house. Neither did any of the four friends that Danielle's parents had over the night she disappeared. Westerfield's prints weren't found in his motor home either, Graham said.
Graham said fingerprints are left by "chance" and a lack of prints doesn't mean a person was not there.
If a person has clean hands, doesn't touch any surface conducive to leaving prints or wears gloves, they may not leave anything behind, Graham said.
An expert from the Arizona Department of Public Safety crime lab also testified about Danielle's prints and used a computer program that highlighted the ridges and creases found in each fingerprint sample with different colors to show matching feature after matching feature.
Jurors also heard more testimony on day 10 of the trial about the hair, laundry, computer discs, carpet samples and other evidence collected from Westerfield's house and motor home. Other than the fingerprints, prosecutors didn't provide any links between Westerfield and Danielle.
The trial is now heading into the science phase, with upcoming testimony to center on DNA evidence.
Piece by piece, forensic specialist Karen LeAlcala described the items she collected from each room of Westerfield's house and his motor home in the days after he was first questioned in the disappearance of Danielle, who lived two houses down the street.
In describing the items found in Westerfield's house, LeAlcala said a bottle of ID Juicy Lube, a sexual lubricant, was found in a compartment of Westerfield's bed headboard. In the washer, LeAlcala said she found a pillow case with a "grassy" type material inside. She also showed jurors a pair of medium gray and black-striped boxer briefs that were collected as evidence from Westerfield's laundry room.
The significance of the boxer shorts, if any, was not discussed.
Meanwhile, Westerfield's defense attorney's began setting up a scenario where the fibers and hairs could have been transferred to Westerfield's house or motor home by investigators and downplayed other items, like the fact bleach was the No. 1 item on a shopping list found in Westerfield's home.
Feldman pointed out that Westerfield was doing laundry and above his washer was a bottle of bleach.
Westerfield, 50, could face the death penalty if convicted of kidnapping and murdering Danielle. Prosecutors have argued the twice divorced father of two committed the crime to satisfy his sexual desire for young girls.
Westerfield also faces a misdemeanor count of possession of child pornography.
Earlier in the day, police Detective James Tomsovic finished his second day of testimony by describing how he was alerted to an advertisement that pictured a canopy bed very similar to Danielle's bed that another officer had seen in Westerfield's kitchen.
Tomsovic said the advertisement was folded up so only the bed was clearly visible. The prosecution also has hinted that Westerfield may have been watching Danielle through his bathroom window.
Contact staff writer Kimberly Epler at (760) 739-6644 or kepler@nctimes.com.
6/20/02
"Yeah, like we always wear them. I mean, like, there is nothing worse than leaving dirty fingerprints at someones house. Like gross, ya know!"