Westerfield attorney's begin defense: Dusek STUNNED by Defense calling for Keith Stone. Barb next?

Union Trib ^ | July 2, 2002 | Union Trib

[FresnoDA]

Westerfield attorney's begin defense

By Jeff Dillon and Steve Perez
SIGNONSANDIEGO

July 2, 2002

A recovery dog behaved normally during an inspection of the motor home of murder defendant David Westerfield, a police investigator testified at the outset of the defendant's case this afternoon.

Prosecutors rested their case Tuesday morning against the man accused of kidnapping and killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam, but the judge said there is an unspecified witness the prosecution may call before the trial ends.

Attorneys for Westerfield began calling defense witnesses this afternoon.

Dog's behavior recounted
San Diego police homicide investigator James Tomsovic was the first witness called by the Westerfield's defense team. He was asked by defense attorney Robert Boyce to describe the behavior of Cielo, a search dog owned by Jim Frazee, during a search on Feb. 6.

"The dog went around the motor home with Mr. Frazee in close attendance," the officer said. "The dog examined each of the lower equipment bays on the motor home, again with Mr. Frazee in close attendance and that is all I can recall of my observing."

Frazee has previously testified that his dog "alerted" to the possible scent of a cadaver on the motor home.

Under cross examination by prosector Jeff Dusek, the investigator testified that he had no formal training in dog handling.

Neighbors testify
Two neighbors of Westerfield's followed Tomsovic on the witness stand. Though called by the defense to testify that the defendant left the motor home parked in the neighborhood often, Dusek elicted testimony from that that showed the defendant usually cleaned it before and after his travels.

No witnesses have recalled seeing the defendant do that on the weekend in Febuary that the victim, Danielle van Dam, disappeared. Westerfield parked his motor home around the corner from his home as television news crews invaded the neighborhood to report on the well-publized search for the child Feb. 2, and returned without it on Feb. 4, after embarking on a rambling journey around San Diego and Imperial counties.

Software enginer Mark Roehr, who lives across the street from Westerfield, testified that he and his wife Janet have socialized with Westerfield over the last four years. Roehr said the defendant would park his motor home in front of his home for a period of time ranging anywhere from a day to several days.

Roehr agreed under questioning from Boyce, that Sabre Springs was a family neighborhood where a range of school-age children could be seen walking its streets.

Roehr said he found Westerfield's motor home unlocked at one time.

Prosecutors have presented forensice evidence that blood and hair from the victim was found in the motor home.

The Roehrs returned to the Sabre Springs neighborhood around 3:30 p.m. on Feb. 2 after a day of house-hunting to learn of Danielle's disappearance, according to the testimony.

Westerfield appeared moments later in his motor home. Roehr said his neighbor was unable to get to his home because of the presence of the news media, and because authorities had taped off certain parts of the neighborhood.

"He pulled up on Briar Leafe toward Mountain Pass road then gave me a sign like 'what's going on?' " Roehr said. "Rather than try to explain through the window of the motor home, I just pointed him down the street toward Mountain Pass to find a place to park."

Under cross examination from Dusek, Roehr said that it had been several months since Westerfield had brought his motor home into the neighborhood. He also said that he had never seen school-age children in the motor home.

The couple had been in the neighborhood around 10:30 a.m. the morning of the girl's disappearance, but at the time had noticed nothing unusual, Roehr said, under the prosecutor's questioning. Westerfield was not seen in the neighborhood then, Roehr said.

Roehr also said he never checked the motor home's door daily to see if it was locked.

"Did it appear that when the motor home would be brought into the neighborhood it was in preparation for a trip?" asked Dusek.

"Typically, yes," Roehr said.

"Why do you say that?"

"Because I know that's what he does. He comes in, he cleans the windows, gets it ready -- because it's stored some place where it gets dirty. He gets it prepared."

The prosecutor noted that it appeared to be "a ritual" when Westerfield was planning for a trip."

On most occasions, Roehr said, Westerfield would be accompanied by his son, or a girlfriend.

'Helpful and friendly'
His wife, Janet Roehr, described her neighbor as "helpful and friendly" and his home as "neat and orderly."

Under questioning from Dusek, she testified that she had never been in the upstairs part of Westerfield's home, or his office.

She too recalled seeing Westerfield's motor home arrive on that Saturday afternoon, but admitted to Dusek that it wasn't typical to see him in the motor home alone. Typically, she said, someone drove with him in a car to assist in picking up and dropping off the motor home from storage.

"Did he have anyone with him this day," said Dusek.

"No," she replied.

Focus on hose:
Another neighbor, Paul Hung, said his relations with the defendant were cordial. Under questioning from Boyce, Hung said he had a "open invitition" to swim in Westerfield's pool. He also said it wasn't unusual for Westerfield to leave his garden hose out in the front yard.

Prosecutors have made much of a garden hose being left out in front of the defendant's home on the weekend the victim disappeared and he left on the trip in his motor home.

"Was it unsual for Mr. Westerfield to leave his hose unraveled on the front lawn?" asked Boyce.

"I don't think so," Hung said.

"You've seen it like that before."

"Yes I have."

Hung also verified that the motor home had been left in the neighborhood and that children were also seen in the vicinity.

Another defense witness shared little more with the jury than his name and title before being dismissed. Boyce asked Richard Maler, a San Diego police robbery detective, if he had interviewed Keith Stone on Feb 2. Stone, a construction project manager, was with Brenda van Dam and two of her friends the night before the victim vanished.

The interview took place at a police substation. But once Boyce asked Maler if Stone had told him where he had been that night, prosecutor Dusek raised an objection that led to a lengthy sidebar discussion between the judge and attorneys.

When it ended, the witness was excused without a public explanation.

The day's final witness was police detective Johnny Keene, who recounted the times he contacted Westerfield on Monday Feb. 4, upon his return to the neighborhood.

His first contact was around 9:30 that morning he said, under questioning from defense attorney Steven Feldman, and lasted until around noon.

There was a period of time when Westerfield accompanied them to an inspection of the motorhome on Skyridge Road.

The defense attorney appeared irritated when Dusek produced a photograph that showed Keene and other authorities looking through Westerfield's garage, with the defendant present.

The photograph, taken sometime between 10:30 a.m. and 11 a.m., was apparently introduced by Dusek to show the investigator was wearing gloves when he was going through the garage.

It appeared to be the first time Westerfield's defense attorney had seen the rather sizeable photograph.

"We see a man inside of his house," Feldman said, holding up the photograph for jurors to see. "Who's that?"

After Keene identified him as a police sergeant, Feldman noted the man was standing in the area of the washer-dryer.

"Do you see any sweat on Mr. Westerfield's armpits," the defense attorney said.

"Not in that photo."

Previously, authorities have testified Westerfield was sweating profusely when they contacted him, though the weather was relatively cool.

After the jury was excused for the day, Feldman complained that he had not been previously provided a copy of the photo.

Prosecutors rested their case
Prosecutors rested their case after calling an animal DNA expert who testified that hairs found on Westerfield's laundry and in his motorhome could have come from the van Dam family dog.

Westerfield is accused of sneaking into the van Dam's Sabre Springs house on Feb. 2 and abducting Danielle, then killing her and dumping her body off rural Dehesa Road near El Cajon.

Today was the 15th day of testimony in the case and the 17th overall day of court activity since the trial began on June 4.

Judge William Mudd told jurors before the start of a noon lunch break that an additional prosecution witness had not been able to develop his or her testimony due to the speed with which the trial began and that prosecutors might call that witness "if and when that witness becomes relevant."

Dog evidence

Lawyers spent much of Tuesday morning revisiting the testimony of a dog handler who said his dog "alerted" to the possible scent of a cadaver on Westerfield's motor home in a police impound yard on Feb. 6.

Canine handler Jim Frazee initially testified on Wednesday, June 26. Testimony didn't resume until today because jurors toured the motor home Wednesday afternoon and lawyers for both sides met with the judge to discuss witnesses and related legal issues on Thursday and Monday. There is usually no court activity on Fridays.

Though his dog, Cielo, sat down, looked at him and barked after sniffing a storage compartment, Frazee admitted he wasn't sure the dog had had a valid reaction until he learned on Feb. 22 that Westerfield had been arrested and a blood stain had been found in the vehicle.

The dog didn't give an "alert" after it was allowed to sniff a shovel and lawn chair stored in the compartment and failed to react after a second trip around the motor home, Frazee said.

"'I didn' t know what to make of what Cielo did and left the scene wondering,'" Frazee said, reading from a Feb. 22 e-mail he had sent to friends about the incident.

Both Cielo and Frazee's other search-and-rescue dog, Hopi, had failed to react during a previous inspection of the motor home at its storage area on Feb. 4.

A defense attorney for Westerfield asked Frazee if he knew he had the nickname "180-Frank."

"You have that because when you and your dog search in one direction, everyone goes in the other direction," Robert Boyce said.

"I've never heard that," Frazee replied.

Another dog handler, Rosemary Redditt, testified Tuesday morning that she saw Cielo's behavior at the motor home on Feb. 6 and had no question that the dog had actually given an alert.

Other developments

Animal DNA analyst Joy Halverson testified that dog hairs found on Westerfield's laundry and in his motor home could have come from the van Dam family dog, Layla.

Westerfield's lead defense attorney, Steven Feldman, questioned Halverson's credentials and methods, noting that her interpretation of the DNA evidence changed between her first report, a follow-up report and a presentation in the courtroom.

There won't be any court activity on Thursday, due to the Independence Day holiday, or on Friday.

Mudd told jurors he might have to change his rule against court activity on Fridays and hold a session on Friday, July 12.

Mudd has said he plans to take July 15-19 off for his wedding anniversary.

[Politicalmom]

You mean he loaned out his HazMat suit? : )

[UCANSEE2]

You see nothing and I see a murderer.

I see a person that could be the criminal in this case. But the evidence so far would not convince me If I was a juror. There are too many other questions that have not been answered, and we haven't even heard the defense side of the case yet, so, by LAW, I would not be allowed to make a final judgment.

You on the other hand, as part of the general populace , can.

[Rheo]

Or he didn't use his feet when entering the VD home..his shoe used was a dud apparently.

[luvbach1]

I was responding to those who thought it inconceivable that he would say we. Even after I had posted that I had heard it myself.I don't think "we" was said out of habit and it had nothing to do with congeniality. It was a just a mistake!

[Rheo]

That should be...shoe used by dog for ID'ing DW in VD home was a dud.

[Karson]

As far as her parents allowing her to cross the street, today we heard her brother, Dylan, age 5, just did...we also heard reference, brief before sustained, that Mark Rohr, DW's neighbor had to rescue on of the VD boys from something.

You think Brenda thanked the neighbors for helping Dylan back to safety? I'll bet she didn't know a thing about it until today. She'll thank them later I'm sure.

[Politicalmom]

Sorry if I misunderstood your point. : )

[nycgal]

Fatima, none of us know how he got in, got out and all of the steps he had to take to commit this crime IF HE DID IT. The prosecutor has not told the jury and everyone else how Danielle was killed, when she was killed and why she was killed, and at this point I can't imagine what he is going to say in his closing. There is nothing in the online trial transcripts that will answer the questions you have asked.

[Politicalmom]

But, but....these are STRICTLY supervised children!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! (Sorry, I couldn't hold my face straight)

[John Jamieson]

For those that believe it can't happen: I just watched a "Forensic Files" about an east Texas farm family whose 4 year old daughter was found naked and bleeding. The girl died the next day. LE arrested the mom and stepfather for satanic murder. Father had a hunting knife with blood on it. Satanic looking items in the house, curling irons and push pins matched some of the wounds. Father failed polygraph, mom passed. Both sentenced to life.

Released by a judge 5 years later after an animal expert proved that the girl was killed by by a pack of 3 farm dogs.

Police had witheld evidence that didn't agree with their theory.

[Karson]

uh huh ;)

[UCANSEE2]

not well enough to make it likely that she would cross the street (which her parents didn't allow) and browse through his MH.

Either you are watching CTV or not watching the trial at all.

I don't mean to be mean, but the idea that "her parents didn't allow" something has been shown to be nothing more than Brenda's attempt to cover for not paying much attention to her child. Brenda and Damon told police Danielle COULD NOT GET OUT THE GATE. That was a LIE. The boys told police DANIELLE COULD and DID.

Today in court there was an issue with a witness who SAVED one of the VD boys. COuld this have been because the boy was not supervised? We don't know for sure. We weren't allowed to hear the details.

[Rheo]

Maybe she'll stop over while walking Layla.

Everyones kids get out or do something they aren't supposed to do, I don't even fault her for this incident.....I do have a problem with her stating they NEVER do it..NEVER disobey..NEVER cross the street...stating she is watching them constantly when outside.

It does not ring true.

[Karson]

I agree. Anyone who says a child would NEVER do anything is fooling themselves and putting their child in danger. IMO

[Jrabbit]

Leaving Danielle alone in the dressing room at Mervyn's is NOT an example of close supervision. I wonder how it came about that she fessed up to that incident?

[Rheo]

I don't know...wonder if the boys spilled the beans?

[UCANSEE2]

JJ. at this point I would believe just about any story that fit all the evidence and fit the stories that have been told.

To me DW just doesn't fit. The evidence can be explained. The police changing stories,the VD's lying, the police not following up on any evidence that didn't support their choice of criminal, those things I find very hard to ignore. That is why I will not condemn DW for the slim evidence that so far has been presented. I even would believe he was involved, somehow, but did it all by himself, with no trace. NOPE.

[luvbach1]

The dog handler did say he got an indication of a positive after DW's arrest (what you referred to as a possible alert) Feldman's efforts to muddy and nullify that didn't move me. For the purpose of my scenario which someone (you?) requested, I accepted that as a valid alert. One has to make some assumptions to formulate a scenario. Try to do it otherwise.I needn't remind you, this is not a court. We have alternative ways of approaching the truth in a discussion that is not allowed in court, but that does not mean they are necessarily invalid. As for physical evidence of the crimes, some was found. Just because all that you mentioned was not found only proves that the perp was successful in removing most of it. Keeping her quiet: bound, gagged, drugged. All of the above? Possibly.It was done by somebody.

[UCANSEE2]

I have to , have to really go. SOmeone ping everyone with this list in the morning, please.

UCANSEE2;FresnoDA; Mrs. Liberty; demsux; MizSterious; Jaded; skipjackcity; RnMomof7; spectre; Poohbah; BARLF; Valpal1; FriarTom; DoughtyOne; Amore; Travis McGee; BunnySlippers; Hillary’s Lovely Legs; fivecatsandadog; mommya; Doc Savage; ~kim4vrwc's~; goldenstategirl; Politicalmom; southflanknorthpawsis; Lauratealeaf; mini_teacup;Snow Bunny; Alamo-Girl; Republican Wildcat; Howlin; Fred Mertz; onyx;SusanUSA;MdmKoochie ;Uni-Poster;fnord;Uni-Poster; Registered; TXDeb; tutstar; theirjustdue;notpoliticallycor ewrecked;lady reaper;Beach_Babe;brneyedgirl; wonders; HoHoeHeaux; vacrn; Karson;sbnsd;Rheo;John Jamieson;jacquej;let freedom sing; nycgal; hergus; Hildy; tutstar; ThinkingMan; Amore; Howlin; Mrs.Liberty; rolling_stone; wirestripper; Jhoffa_; GummyIII; Luis Gonzalez; Lanza; sneakypete; Tennessee_Bob; Greg Weston;Shezza;Dudley;Winstar1k;is_is;Wednesday’s Child;Donzerly lights;Mrs.O’Strategery;pinz-n-needlez;Angelique;Jdontom;Nancie;Tiger28;sunshine state;fatima;Henrietta;Blue Screen of Death;pubmom;mickie;Spunky;it’s me;TexKat;gigi;Yeti;alexandria;luv2lurkhere;JudyB1938;pyx;SheLion;Dread78645

I apologize to anyone who's feelings I have insulted or hurt tonight. It is too easy to get carried away and do so. Please keep up the debate, no matter what your opinion. GOOD NIGHT ALL

[John Jamieson]

Why didn't the REAL police dogs hit on the motorhome?