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

[EllaMinnow]

Did you hear that OJ's latest venture is a porno flick? It's true.
I hope this soothes the worries of those who fret about what kind of a life Mr. David Westerfield will have after his aquittal. I'm sure he'd do quite well in porn films - he has quite a library of them himself.

[MizSterious]

LOL--sounds like they are charging him with "Felony Whatever."

[John Jamieson]

They're not supposed to make up their minds this early, but I sure suspect that the diliberations will be short and NOT GUILTY. Oh, and I fully expect the child porno charge to be dropped, before they get the case.

[Illbay]

Look, as one of the "thread-bound"--in fact, an extreme case; I never see you anywhere else--you must realize you're learning less and less about this topic as you study more and more, because you are so lost in the sea of information you can't even see the shore any more.

The fact is that all these little details that you leap upon and study till they're thoroughly dissected still don't amount to more than your opinion.

You'd never be on a jury, because you can't keep your objectivity. It's not that you're really a bona-fide skeptic, either, because I skeptic is suspicious of ALL sides of the argument.

Your template only filters out certain data, and lets the rest in unmolested.

It's really quite funny to watch you types.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

GAWD!! I am so sick & tired of people bringing up the O.J. trial throughout this one!! There are NO comparisons to be made! NONE!

I don't think they get out much.

They might be shocked to find out that gas is over a buck and a half a gallon and a loaf of bread is over two dollars.

[Bonaparte]

I know you consider forensic entomology to be an exact science on a par with mathematics. But don't be surprised if the prosecution calls one of Faulkner's colleagues as a rebuttal witness after the defense rests. They can do that, you know. There are good reasons why Faulkner qualified his estimate of PMI, admitting under cross that time of death could have preceded the date he favors.

Perhaps prosecution will call someone like Didier Gosset, who will soon be presenting his published research at the 16th AIFS Conference ("Effect of chemical substances on the delay of colonization by necrophagous insects and implications in the determination of the post-mortem interval") or J-B Myskowiak who will be doing likewise with his own research (" Effects of refrigeration on the biometry and development of Protophormia Terraenovae and its consequences in estimating post-mortem interval in forensic investigations"). Others could include Goff, Bourel, Benecke or any of the other 70 or so forensic entomologists who are known to frequently differ in their opinions concerning methods of PMI determination.

Of course, it's certainly possible that Dusek will allow Feldman to create the impression with the jury that Faulkner's profesional opinion is the only one out there in a sub-discipline that has only had it's own organization for 6 years and that has not yet settled on its criteria for certification. Did you know that the national body representing entomologists refused to act as the certifying organization for forensic entomology?

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

TEMPLATE alert.

[Illbay]

Fascinating. I had NO IDEA that they brought out entire new books of law every couple of weeks, and that the "old ones" have no more validity.

Must make it really tough on the SCOTUS, since they no longer have case histories to rely upon.

[oremus]

Sheer human pride would cause those types to not abandon their position.

As for me, I have had my hunches, but I have kept an open mind all the while waiting for the evidence before making any real decision. The evidence now points heavily toward innocence. Some just won't admit it because they won't admit that maybe they are wrong.

I do know there is at least one such person who has not been around too much since the bug evidence came out... doubts maybe?

[Illbay]

He just can't get away from that "phallic thing," can he?

[EllaMinnow]

I've been reading some of the "suppressed" statements that were released today over at the sandiegochannel.
Quite interesting!

[truth_seeker]

I believe that the little girl was being sexually abused by her dad..she died accidently and because an autopsy would have outed that they had the kidnapping..

I direct this remark directly to you mainly. Your profile says you are/were a RN in alcohol detoxification.

I believe in a fairly high probability that DAW had an alcohol problem, and commited it in a full blackout. Evidence for alcohol problem:

1. DUI 1996
2. Susan L. left him over drinking in 2002 (alcoholism gets worse in six years)
3. Not remembering the drive home from Dad's-truthful
4. My synthesis of these facts

The defense has filed a motion, for use on appeal, which profers an alternate defense: intoxication.

Let the factfinding crowd research that, a bit.

[Illbay]

That's an interesting analysis. You do realize, don't you, that if that happens every assistant D.A. and every top detective in the Sheriff's Dept. should be fired.

[MizSterious]

But at least I'm not quoting junk I heard on Court TV as though it were evidence, testimony or even the truth.

[gigi]

I might be wrong but I think she said she was a dispatcher??
She was up rocking her baby not spying on DW.
She sure saw alot from the rocking chair. LOL!


We used to live in a house that had a small backyard and a two story house behind us. I don't think the neighbors spied but it bugged us, not that we had sex parties or anything to look at, but still, used to bug me.

Now we have an acre of land behind us so no rear neighbors.

[EllaMinnow]

Great to see your posts again.

[the Deejay]

". I'm sure he'd do quite well in porn films - he has quite a library of them himself."


Has it been FIRMLY ESTABLISHED these are DW's personal films?

[Henrietta]

Will you provide link?

[UCANSEE2]

and immediately get jumped by the "thread-bound" if you dare question their template.

It is what happens when, instead of asking questions, learning, discussing, debating, expressing your opinion and being willing to listen to others opinions,

YOU JUMP IN, and start telling everyone they ARE WRONG, ONLY YOU ARE RIGHT.

THAT THEY ARE IDIOTS, and that FACTS and REALITY, and TRANSCRIPTS, and ALL the PREVIOUS discussions on past threads where all these issues have been discussed over and over and dissected and proved or disproved, MEANS NOTHING.

That is why.

[John Jamieson]

Oh, but some of the doubt that DW did it, comes from a belief in a lot of us that the van Dams "might" have done it. That's very important to the case.

For a long time, I tryed to keep seperate the possibilty that DW might be guilty, and concentrate on just the narrow issue of, has the state proved his guilt. They never came close. Now I'm ready to try the van Dams, because I feel that once the investigation centers on them, the truth will out, inspite of the rebuilt house, burnedup body, missing blue van, etc.