Replies

While I agree the Defense has some obstacles to overcome, the burden of proof still falls on the People.

I want to hear the Prosecution's theory of how a middle-aged man with no priors, abducts a child from a house where any person could have recognized him, and keeps the child alive in his own home during a time when any minute LE could be scouring the street. Then this man transports live child in broad daylight, in a vehicle that yields no evidence, just feet from her home and transfers her, alive, to his MH which is parked on someone's property.

Being too clean, sweating, cooperating, doing laundry, making shopping lists, etc, do nothing to tell the story of how this was to have happened.

If the punishment is to be death, the scenario better be very credible and very provable. Only time will tell.

Nope.

The defense won't have to explain away much. This is a common misconception people have about the trial process.

I'm sure you've heard this before, but the burden of proof is on the DA. He must PROVE that DW is guilty of this crime "beyond a reasonable doubt." It isn't up to DW to PROVE himself innocent. The Defense will use the good ol' "Some other dude probably did it," defense, and that will be enough. Hell, there are definitely other people who had opportunity.

Feldman hasn't even started his defense, yet this trial is a toss-up to this point. The DA has done nothing whatsoever to solidify his case against Westerfield. In fact, I am truly beginning to wonder if the DA is even trying to convict the man.

Think of it. The cell phone testimony proved one thing only: DW was nowhere near Dehesa--at least not that can be proven by the cp records.

The testimony of witnesses does NOT match their own statements to police--this has happened MANY times already! So what to we believe, their original statements, or their testimony during trial?

Hair evidence has been more harmful than beneficial to the DA. Hair found in DW's SUV was from Danielle L, DW's ex-girlfriend's daughter, NOT Danielle Van Dam. DA cannot place DVD in Westerfield's RV, yet DW ostensibly transported Danielle TO the RV IN the SUV.

No semenal evidence from DW has been found ANYWHERE. No evidence has been found of DW in the Van Dam residence.

No "smoking gun" evidence at ALL so far.

The DA has been able to prove the following things:

1- DW *might* have been deceptive to investigators during interrogation. Of course, it is quite possible that DW was coming to the realization that no, he was not just another witness to BVD's Friday night excursion, but he was, in fact, the primary suspect. When this finally dawned on him, it is VERY possible that he began to be initially deceptive, because HE knew that the real story would do nothing to give him an alibi. So, is he deceptive because he's guilty, or was he simply afraid?

2- Danielle Van Dam, at some point, was inside Westerfield's RV--probably. Of course, the evidence presented to verify this fact cannot be dated, so there is no way to tell WHEN she was in the RV. Also, interestingly, all of the errors in investigative protocol regarding documentation of evidence are swirling around the blood spots in the RV. Why is that? After all, they were METICULOUS in documenting everything else...

3- IF DW has ever been in the VD residence, there is absolutely NO evidence of his passing.

4- IF Danielle was ever inside DW's SUV, there is NO evidence that she was ever in there.

5- Prosecution apparently cannot place DW at the Dehesa dump-site.

6- There ARE fingerprints inside the VD home that cannot be indentified, meaning it is possible that a true stranger is the culprit of this crime.

Now, I realize that the DA has not yet finished presenting his case, but there are some logical deductions that can be made from what we have seen so far. The DA still has to present the kiddie-porn evidence. Of course, even if those images are CLEARLY kiddie-porn (and they may not be) it still PROVES nothing--only that DW was a sick pervert. A sick pervert with NO prior history, of course.

The DA still has a bit more to show regarding the Dehesa site, I would think. Maybe not. I believe they still must show time of death. They will almost certainly use a forensics entemologist for that task. Feldman, during his defense, will present his own entemologist. So the DA won't win that one. It will be a technical "draw."

The DA has the solemn responsibility to prove that DW is guilty of murder and kidnapping.

Yet he cannot prove that either a murder or a kidnapping occurred.

He can imply through the KP that sexual assault was the motive, yet he cannot prove sexual assault occurred.

When you get right down to it, he cannot PROVE much.

Unless there is something DAMNING forthcoming, Feldman will remove any convictions the jurors may have of DW's guilt when the Defense presents its case.

DW will either be acquitted, or the jury will hang.

Be ready for it.