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

Skip to comments.

Expert: Body dumped after defendant fell under suspicion (SO WHO DUMPED DANIELLE VAN DAM'S BODY??)
Union Trib ^ | July 11, 2002 | Steve Perez/Greg Magnus

Posted on 07/11/2002 6:47:45 AM PDT by FresnoDA

Expert: Body dumped after defendant fell under suspicion

by Steve Perez
and
Greg Magnus
SIGNONSANDIEGO

July 10, 2002


Union-Tribune
Susan L. describes her relationship to David Westerfield.
An expert witness called by the defense Wednesday afternoon said he is "very confident" the nude body of Danielle van Dam was probably dumped off Dehesa Road near El Cajon more than a week after murder defendant David Westerfield came under police surveillance.

Insect expert David Faulkner testified he based his conclusion upon studies he conducted on larvae and insects recovered from the victim's body, discovered by volunteer searchers on Feb. 27.

Westerfield is accused of kidnapping 7-year-old Danielle van Dam from the child's bed and killing her five months ago. He could face the death penalty if convicted. This was the final day of defense testimony.

Based on Faulkner's studies, which use the life cycles of insects, the earliest the body could have been left there was Feb. 16 to Feb. 18, he said under questioning from Westerfield's defense attorney.

Earlier Wednesday, San Diego police detective Sgt. Bill Holmes testified that investigators placed a tracking device on Westerfield's car during the first days of the investigation. They tracked his movements until his arrest on Feb. 22.

Defense attorney Steven Feldman has said Westerfield would have had no opportunity to dispose of the body because he was under constant police surveillance from Feb. 4 until his arrest Feb. 22.

A medical examiner relies on three factors to make an assessment, Faulkner has said: the amount and distribution of rigor mortis, the change in body temperature and the degree of decomposition. But after several days, rigor mortis dissipates and the corpse assumes the temperature of its environment.

Insects can give more specific information because they have a definitive development period that can be meticulously measured, said Faulkner, who collected insects during Danielle's autopsy. Faulkner said the presence of specific fly larva and adults and the absence of beetle larva on the body helped him determine an approximate "post-mortem interval."

Faulkner said during normal daylight conditions flies can land upon a body and deposit eggs within 20 minutes of its death. He believed the body had been at its Dehesa location approximately 10-12 days before its discovery.

He admitted under cross-examination by prosecutor Jeff Dusek that weather conditions for February were "extremely abnormal" and could have affected the amount of insects available to find the body.

"There was very warm temperatures in February and no significant rainfall for most of the winter," Faulkner said. "The insect population in general was much lower."

Change of character

A woman who once lived with David Westerfield told prosecutors the defendant's character would change after drinking and he would become "forceful."

"Susan L." mother of "Danielle L.," and Christine Gonzales, both of whom testified earlier, lived with the defendant for nearly a year, beginning about 3 1/2 years ago. The woman's last name was not read into the court record because her daughter, a minor, testified Tuesday.

Before he was charged in February, Westerfield's criminal record consisted of a 1996 drunken-driving conviction.

The woman was called initially as a witness for the defense, during which she testified that the defendant had a problem with sweating, left his motor home unlocked on occasions, left a garden hose out in front of his home and became stuck in the sand in his motor home during trips to Glamis.

Prosecutor Jeff Dusek's line of questioning eventually led to the defendant's behavior after he began drinking.

"He would become very quiet," she said.

"What else," Dusek said.

"Sometimes he would become a little upset."

"Depressed?"

"Yes."

"Basically, you would see a change in character when he would drink."

"Yes."

After agreeing with Dusek that the defendant was much different while drinking than when sober, the prosecutor asked if it was one of the reasons she eventually left Westerfield.

"Because of the drinking? Yes," she answered quietly.

Dusek later provided Susan L. with a transcript of a statement to investigators in which she reportedly said that Westerfield would become "forceful," when he drank.

"I remember that occasionally," she said.

Westerfield told investigators he had been drinking the night he visited Dad's in Poway, the same night he encountered the victim's mother, Brenda van Dam, and her friends.

Earlier during Dusek's cross-examination, "Susan L." began crying on the witness stand, admitting that she still cares for the defendant.

"Susan L." testified that she had just broken up with the defendant when she saw on television that he was a suspect in the second-grader's disappearance Feb. 2.

Dusek asked her about the last time she had seen Westerfield.

"You still like him, don't you?"Dusek asked her.

"I care about him,"she said, sobbing.

The witness said she spoke with Westerfield the day after she had been out with a male friend.

Dusek showed "Susan L." a transcript of her Feb. 5 interview with police. The prosecutor asked the witness if she saw the defendant the night she went out with the other male friend.

"Did you tell law enforcement that you saw (the defendant) sitting outside?"' the prosecutor asked. The witness later testified under questioning from defense attorney Robert Boyce, that it was something Westerfield had told her.

Dusek attempted to turn that statement against the defense, asking if Westerfield had contacted her the next day.

"Yes, he called me."

"After discussing what was discussed, you didn't feel comfortable with the defendant at that time, correct," Dusek said.

"At the time, yes."

Initial testimony

The woman, under direction examination by Boyce, testified that she met Westerfield through Glennie Nasland, another defense witness, at Big Stone Lodge in Poway "three-and-a-half, four years ago."

They started dating and she moved in with him about two weeks later, she said.

They camped often in the motor home, sometimes accompanied by her daughters, her daughter's fiance and Westerfield's son.

Their journeys woud take them to the Silver Strand, Anza-Borrego and Glamis. Sometimes, when the weather was bad, they would leave the Silver Strand and travel to Borrego intead, she said.

It wasn't unusual for them to arrive at night, or search for friends and not find them, she said.

Before the trips, she would help load the motor home, she said, leaving it parked either across the street or in the home's driveway and leaving its front door open.. The motor home would often sit there for up to two days before the trips, she said.

It wasn't unusual for a hose to be left out in the front yard or for Westerfield to walk around with cash in his pocket, she said.

The motor home also would become stuck in the sand during their desert trips, "Susan L." said. "He would try to dig out the sand from the out from under the wheels and fit a board underneath," she said.

She testified he would leave the wood behind.

Later, she testified that Westerfield's son, Neal, was familiar with computers and would often help his father with them.

She also said the defendant had a problem with sweating, often under his arm pits head and face, even during cold weather.

Prosecution witnesses have testified that they thought it was unusual for Westerfield to be sweating profusely when they first contacted him in February.

Routes not uncommon

Meandering journeys in a motor home -- such as the one described by Westerfield -- are not so uncommon, according to one enthusiast who testified today.

Eugene Yale, an East County attorney and motor home enthusiast, came to the attention of defense lawyers when he wrote a letter to the defense to point the meandering nature of motor home trips. He did so because he had read a newspaper article about testimony in the case and "didn't think it was accurate."

"I'm here because I think the truth should be out," Yale told Westerfield attorney Steven Feldman, at the end of his testimony today.

Yale described several meandering routes to Glamis, including one similar to the route Westerfield told investigators he took on the same weekend that Danielle van Dam disappeared from her bedroom in the middle of the night.

"One of the joys of having a motor home is you don't have to rely on rest stops, restaurants or Jack in the Box, though I seldom pass one by," Yale said. "You can take the back roads, look at scenic areas. My wife and I have a motor home because we like to see things, and not to get stuck by clinging to one standard route."

Prosecutors have made much of a roaming route that Westerfield took through San Diego and Imperial counties in his motor home the weekend of Feb. 2. Westerfield told investigators the solo trip took him to Silver Strand State Beach; then east across the desert to Glamis where he got stuck in the sand; then moving on to Superstition Mountain, Borrego Springs and back to Silver Strand, where he parked on a street overnight before returning home to Sabre Springs in Poway on Monday morning.

"The scenery on (Interstate) 8 and toward Jacumba and the desert is not the most appealing," Yale said. "An alternative route is go up through Ramona, San Ysabel -- that way."

Generally, Yale added, he would take one way heading toward Glamis and return by a different route "just for a change of scene."

Avoiding crowds

Yale further testified that when he traveled to Glamis, he avoids crowds. "I set up away from people," he said on direct examination.

It was also not unusual to keep windows closed at times, Yale said. "A windshield on a motor home is pretty big -- and I've logged over 100,000 miles in them -- people have a natural tendency to look in, see what's going on."

Sunlight also tends to damage interior furniture, he said. In addition, shades drawn on windshields and sides reduce glare for his wife and children who enjoy watching videos.

Motion denied

Before court adjourned on Tuesday, Superior Court Judge William Mudd denied a defense motion to acquit Westerfield on the charges, that possession of child pornography.

Mudd noted that the defense motion ``brings to the court the question of whether or not, in the best light possible given to the prosecution's evidence, is there sufficient evidence to go to the jury from the question of the guilt or innocence of Mr. Westerfield on charges he is facing?

``The answer to that question is yes,'' Mudd said, answering his own rhetorical question. ``The motion is denied.''

Police criminalist Tanya DuLaney testified yesterday that blue fibers found in Westerfield's motorhome match fibers found around the body of the victim and on clothes in his washing machine.

DuLaney said she found a total of 46 blue fibers while examining the 1997 Southwind motorhome Feb. 6, four days after the second-grader was discovered missing from her Sabre Springs home.

Eleven blue nylon fibers were found on the headboard of the bed at the back of the vehicle, DuLaney said, with 31 discovered on bench seats, one on a front passenger seat and the rest on a couch.

Father wants back in court

Damon van Dam has filed a motion to be readmitted into the trial of his daughter's accused killer, Judge William Mudd said today.

The judge barred the father from the courtroom and third floor of the San Diego County Courthouse on June 25 because he said Damon van Dam was stalking and trying to stare down Westerfield.

At the time, Mudd said he had reached the limit with the father and told him to leave.

Mudd said he will consider Damon van Dam's motion tomorrow.

Baseball's 'sorry state'

The 7-7 tie in the Major League Baseball All-Star game Tuesday night prompted the judge to comment today on what he called the "sorry state of professional baseball."

Mudd was unhappy that Commissioner Bud Selig decided to call the game after 11 innings because the National and American league managers had told him that they had run out of players.

"It sure lets you know where the fans fit in," Mudd told jurors before testimony began.

The judge also reminded the jury that they would be off next week because Mudd had a prepaid and long-standing vacation planned by his wife of 30 years.

Mudd said the break would be good for jurors since the end of the case would be "intense."

"The pundits are telling me you're all a bunch of idiots," the judge said, referring to some criticism that the week-long break is going to leave jurors with an impression that the last witnesses who testify would be the best witnesses.

Mudd said the break would actually work to jurors' benefits.

"This actually is going to work out to your benefit."

"Get back to know your boss, your co-workers, spend time with your families," Mudd said. "Take a vacation. This is going to work to your benefit. It allows you a bit of a break before the end of the trial. The end of the trial will be intense."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: 180frank; damonvandam; westerfield
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,301-1,318 next last
To: mommya
I wouldn't admitt to watching her "talk show" if my life depended upon it...She has literally made me ill, and I am not kidding. She is out of control, crazy...rabid with her feelings about DW.

I'm glad they don't allow HER in the Court Room...talk about giving Mad-dog looks to someone? Can you all just imagine?

sw

161 posted on 07/11/2002 9:45:04 AM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
"You cannot 'retry' someone based on 'More conclusive evidence.' That is known, if you didn't know it, as 'double jeopardy,' and is specifically forbidden by the Constitution."

Can't the judge "dismiss without prejudice"? Or does that only apply in civil trials?

162 posted on 07/11/2002 9:45:32 AM PDT by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mommya
Yes, I think you have the gist of it. Probably there will be some transcripts up pretty soon on this brief session. That phone call to Brenda on the 16th sounds pretty important, and if it's, say, someone calling her to say, I just dumped your daughter for instance, then it should be allowed into evidence. Period. I see that as being reversable error on the judge's part.
163 posted on 07/11/2002 9:45:45 AM PDT by MizSterious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: paul51

This is a misleading interpretation of the testimony. As was determined on cross, this conclusion was based on the life cycle evaluation of the flies which was subject to other factors, not the least of which is climate. It was also established that although the time frame between the remains being dumped and found would not be shorter, with high probability, it could indeed be longer.

B

U

Z

Z

O

F

F

 

164 posted on 07/11/2002 9:47:09 AM PDT by FresnoDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: GoldenBear
Perhaps--or maybe someone said "I just dumped your daughter's body" too? Hearsay? Well, it seems pretty important to the case to me, but then I'm no legal eagle.
165 posted on 07/11/2002 9:47:32 AM PDT by MizSterious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
It looks like Feldman will have 2-3 days more to go - at least - and that he has 2 more expert witnesses that will need use of the gruesome type photoboards - and he will call Armstrong - I don't think those 3 will take up 3 days - so maybe we will get to hear from Bill Libby, Barb, or Neal? (Hopefully all three) Feldman was saying to the judge that the pros. should not be allowed to adress anything in rebuttal that should have been presented in the case in chief - I think he was heading for the supposed Dehesa witnesses he alluded to before. If the pros. does have some witnesses lined up who say they saw RV at Dehesa or something - I do think they should have had to present it in the main case. Of course I am assuming and speculating - what do you think?
166 posted on 07/11/2002 9:49:52 AM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
If you think there is something simple about any of this case, you are different indeed.

I am playing devil's advocate, as I realize there is no way I can know based on such scanty knowledge as the media put out, what the evidence is against Westerfield.

However, by "simple" I mean you have to ignore a lot of circumstantial and physical evidence in favor of appearances.

The average FReeper is socially conservative, and we are nauseated by the whole "spouse-swapping" thing. We have to consider--with some justification--that those who indulge will be morally reprobate in other areas of their lives.

The notion of "compartmentalization" is a Clintonian one that we know is utterly false.

However, this guy is a creep, as well. Since he was single, he would not have been allowed into the "circle of friends" the Van Dams swung with, if I understand these things. So he was an outsider, but loved child porn and may have felt like an outcast. There are lots of motives here for him to have done what he did.

Now, you might be right about these other people, but the FACT of the murder has to be taken into consideration. Someone did it, and motives abound in our immoral and hedonistic society. But Westerfield seems to have been PART of that climate, not apart from it.

167 posted on 07/11/2002 9:50:09 AM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: fnord
also, some of the bugs may have been underaged (or looked that way), and isn't that more important than guilt or innocence? I mean really, isn't it!?

Honest, your honor, I didn't know she was only 11 minutes old! She looked 13 anyway!

(Apologies to Amgwanna Kikbouti and Cheech & Chong!) </font size>

168 posted on 07/11/2002 9:50:35 AM PDT by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
I agree with you. I would like to hear what the call was all about and what did the police do to pursue it.
169 posted on 07/11/2002 9:52:31 AM PDT by GoldenBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
You have to remember that there are many on FR who think the Smart family is guilty, too, only because it was THEIR CHILD that has gone missing. There is a tendency on FR to ignore the simple in favor of the convoluted.

Are you implying you speak for everyone ? You don't.

What you said is not borne out by fact. Most on here have no opinion, if anything about the Smart case.

I think she ran off with a new boyfriend. I think there could me multiple scenarios, but in none of them, are the parents the culprits.

Have you conducted a survey, on these threads or the Smart threads? Have you been on the Smart threads?

Since you claim to be psychic and know what all of 'us' are thinking, tell me what I am thinking right now!

170 posted on 07/11/2002 9:52:36 AM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Spunky
Since March. It was signed over to Feldman in Feb.
171 posted on 07/11/2002 9:52:54 AM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
If you wouldn't mind, add me to that list. Haven't really gotten into the whole trial but it's kind of interesting reading
172 posted on 07/11/2002 9:52:58 AM PDT by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Spunky
Now I know where she is coming from. Just said she wishes she had stayed in the courtroom during the trial of the person who murdered her fiance. (Does anyone know the details of this)

I saw this also just before I found the remote and was able to turn the TV off. If her fiance was murdered and did not have to marry her, consider him lucky. She is one sick b**ch, full of hate and prejduice. Why won't they replace her with a human?

173 posted on 07/11/2002 9:55:17 AM PDT by Blue Screen of Death
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
WHAT proof do you have that he "loved child porn"? There is a MINUTE number of "questionable images", and there is strong evidence that much of it isn't even his.
irl
You have NO proof that he ever even SAW those images.

You are being emotional, and equating the PRESENCE of POSSIBLE child pornograpy with guilt.

There is NO evidence that he EVER acted inappropriately with his daughter, or his girlfriend's daughters, all of whom were very accessible.
174 posted on 07/11/2002 9:56:09 AM PDT by Politicalmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Blue Screen of Death
wow - now tell us what you really think.
175 posted on 07/11/2002 9:56:37 AM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
So he was an outsider, but loved child porn and may have felt like an outcast. There are lots of motives here for him to have done what he did.

Really??? Please enlighten us. Especially show where it has been proven that the very small percentage of questionable/child porn was David A. Westerfield's. I must have missed that.

176 posted on 07/11/2002 9:56:46 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious; pyx
Pyx, my mind sees something a little more devious than that. If he kills Westerfield (and throw in the defense team for good measure), he'll probably get a light sentence, because he's a "grieving father." If people start looking at Damon too closely, though, he could get a much longer sentence if he did what I think he did. Just my opinion, folks, one to which I'm entitled, and not to be construed as fact.

MORE food for thought.

Damon never appeared to be the 'caring father' up until,,,,,,,, it looked like the Prosecution might lose their case.

Who would suffer if they did? The DA. Might lose his re-election. So, where is all the VD's money (new house) coming from ?

Gee, DA, powerful position, lot's of bribe money, organized crime money, hush hush money, etc.

So, he pays Brenda some money, arranges for Damon to kill DW. DW dead before trial over, it's over. DW will be seen as guilty, case closed. DA wins.

Damon gets light sentence due to temporary insanity, grieving father ( and the DA,prosecutor will be already on his side), and no futher investigations into Daneille's death.

EVERYBODY (except DW and Danielle, and the San Diego citizens, and the US system of JUSTICE) WIN !

177 posted on 07/11/2002 10:01:34 AM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
CNN's Nancy Grace recounting how important it is that the prosecutor got the entomologist to acknowledge insect infestation could have occured earlier.
178 posted on 07/11/2002 10:01:49 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
More evidence of the uninitiated buying into the media hype.
179 posted on 07/11/2002 10:02:07 AM PDT by ItsOurTimeNow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Eva
Didn't Brenda drive the blue van to Dad's that night?

no.

180 posted on 07/11/2002 10:03:43 AM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,301-1,318 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