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 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,301-1,318 next last
To: cyncooper
especially if it is true that BVD at the prelim mouthed "Hi Dave"), It's not true.

May I ask, where you came up with that answer?

I for one would like to know if it is true or not. How do you know it isn't?

301 posted on 07/11/2002 12:16:29 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
The whole weather thing promoted by Dusek was destroyed by one question from Feldman on redirect. The weather condictions would not change the experts opinion that the body was dumped within a few days of 2/16 and that there is no way to explain the absence of insect evidence that would permit the establishment of an earlier date for the disposal of the body. In other words, there is no way DW could have disposed of the body. Someone murdered Danielle, but it wasn't David Westerfield.
302 posted on 07/11/2002 12:16:44 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Last I heard the Smart family hasn't been totally cleared as potential suspects, but the VD's were cleared ASAP. Hmmmm..... makes ya wonder....
303 posted on 07/11/2002 12:16:53 PM PDT by Lanza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I would be able to account for any forensic evidence that could be found.

You'd better pray you don't have someone with a political agenda on the jury at your trial, should you have one. It'd be pucker time for you if one on your jury didn't start by PRESUMING YOUR INNOCENCE. Its interesting that your pronouncements which seem to amount to, "I have nothing to hide", essentially advocate against PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. (For me, gutting the Constitution is just, not an option.)

I'll state it again for the benefit of others, there have been people on these threads who have pretty much convinced me that should something terrible befall a child in my neighborhood, I may indeed have second thoughs of offering help.
304 posted on 07/11/2002 12:17:19 PM PDT by pyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I watched the preliminary hearing. Neither van Dam displayed a friendly demeanor toward DW in any way. Quite the opposite.

May I ask which TV show you watched? Did you see this when the hearing started or before when everyone was being brought into the room and seated?

305 posted on 07/11/2002 12:18:39 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: pyx
Well aren't you charming. (and crude, too!)
306 posted on 07/11/2002 12:18:47 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
"I certainly can say that a child was not in my car or home without my permission."

No offense - but I remember when I said that I would certainly be able to acct. for all the people who had ever been in my house - you didn't seem to agree with that - but now you could be certain that somebody was never in your stuff? What I got out of what you said to me then was - "You may find prints (or fibers or whatever) from people you don't know have been in there at one time (i.e. construction workers)" - but now it would seem like you are saying - "No one could have been in my house (or car or whatever) without my knowledge."

307 posted on 07/11/2002 12:20:21 PM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: mommya
I was addressing your hypothetical about a child in my neighborhood missing and the possibility of forensic evidence connected to them in my car or house.
308 posted on 07/11/2002 12:22:52 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I think the fact that the Prosecution is asking for the death penalty may be one thing that really kills their case.

I am absolutely pro capitol punishment. I would be in 100% agreement of the death penalty for Westerfield IF and ONLY IF there was not so much as a twinge of doubt in my mind. From what I have seen, there is nothing that has convinced me without a doubt or even close.

That may be the rub here. Some jurors may think he is most likely the perp but have little pieces that don't add up.

The Prosecution may have faired better if the investigation had been broader and given the appearance of an open minded search for the killer.

309 posted on 07/11/2002 12:23:01 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Hi, Ya Ya. I love your posts on other threads, but I encourage you to do some transcript reading, or click backwards on these posts and do some research.

Nancy Grace is a twit. She calls for sympathy for poor Brenda who was reduced to running the streets at 2a.m. calling her daughter's name. (Never happened)

The forensic evidence against DW comes down to
1. 1/4" spot of blood on the Motor Home carpet which the dogs never even stopped to investigate, so who knows how long it may have been there.
2. One partial print on one cabinet in the MH. Again, no one knows when it got there, but the dogs never tried to sniff out that area.
3. One hair in the MH sink that was Danielle's. But she had been at his house 3 days earlier, and could have been tracked in on his shoe from the house.
4. 3/16" spot of DNA on his green jacket. That may have been in his house when she was there.

People with better memories than mine can argue fiber minutiae, but the bottom line that I've heard is that there are similar looking fibers associated with Danielle and with DW, which "could or could not" have come from a common source.

Also problematical is that the DA only sought identification, confirmation of items that were likely to condemn DW. There was no, repeat, no effort to identify evidence objectively and then see if it fit the hypothesis that DW could have done it.

So much of what was promised by the prosecution's opening statement, and parroted by the media, has not been delivered. At absolute worse, DW looks "mildy, possibly, maybe" not innocent. But we are only half way through the defense.

Please check the info more. I respect your opinion on many topics, but think you're wrong here.
310 posted on 07/11/2002 12:24:45 PM PDT by pinz-n-needlez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2; cyncooper
As far as the "Hi Dave" stuff goes - I must admit I don't buy it. I never saw this occurr and have only seen it referenced on the various boards.
311 posted on 07/11/2002 12:25:12 PM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: Karson
Do you know whether or not Brenda was there?

Probably measuring for window treatments......priorities priorities

312 posted on 07/11/2002 12:25:27 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Fair enough, South. I understand that POV.
313 posted on 07/11/2002 12:25:30 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
http://www.courttv.com/contact/

Just sent a nice, steaming letter to them chastising CTV for the continued employment of Lisa Bloom(ing idiot) and Nancy Grace-less- don't know how much good it will do but boy did it feel good!

314 posted on 07/11/2002 12:25:59 PM PDT by GoRepGo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: pinz-n-needlez
3. One hair in the MH sink that was Danielle's. But she had been at his house 3 days earlier, and could have been tracked in on his shoe from the house.

One hair in sink drain trap...not just laying in the sink..in the drain trap from how long ago??

315 posted on 07/11/2002 12:28:11 PM PDT by Rheo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
Thanks you very much.
316 posted on 07/11/2002 12:28:23 PM PDT by Spunky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz
CYNICS of Roosevelt believed that he had something to do with that

As was the case, and still is the case, the men on stage (Roosevelt,Truman,Kennedy,Nixon,Bush,Clinton,Reagan,Bush) have nothing to do with it. The men behind the curtain control it all.

In Truman's case, they picked him to run for VP of the US with Roosevelt. (1)Roosevelt didn't like Truman and never would have picked him. Roosevelt knew this was his last time in office, he was diagnosed with a fatal sickness (which he kept quiet from the press, and never had acknowledged himself, but everyone knew) and he was pretty bad off, so when told they were going with TRUMAN, he simply said he really didn't care who they picked.

(2) 'They' had decided on Truman because all other choices had 'little problems'. 'They' had made their decision, and put it into works , before notifying TRUMAN. They got together and had a meeting, where they invited TRUMAN. They had spent several hours beforehand rehearsing a 'phone call' with ROOSEVELT for him to ask TRUMAN to accept.

When TRUMAN got there, the phone rang, Roosevelt gave his rehearsed 'speech' and TRUMAN accepted. ALL controlled by these men 'behind the curtains'.

317 posted on 07/11/2002 12:28:29 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Feldmanized
318 posted on 07/11/2002 12:28:45 PM PDT by demsux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Do you think you - as a 7 yr. old kid - could have gone into someone's car that was parked on the side of the road in your neighborhood - unlocked - without anyone but you knowing about it? I could have.
319 posted on 07/11/2002 12:29:13 PM PDT by mommya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Well aren't you charming.

Thanks for self-identifying as one of the "some".

(and crude, too!)

I'd like to think I am sophisticated and plain spoken.

Then again, I'd like to think of myself as, smart, talented, and good looking. Alas, all I am in your eyes is an ignorant Southern farmboy.
I take great pride in being the latter.
320 posted on 07/11/2002 12:29:30 PM PDT by pyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 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