Union-Tribune
Susan L. describes her relationship to David Westerfield.Posted on 07/11/2002 6:47:45 AM PDT by FresnoDA
July 10, 2002
Union-Tribune Susan L. describes her relationship to David Westerfield. |
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."
"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."
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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."
I believe in your right to your own opinion.
IF you want to debate DW's guilt, and tell me how wrong I may be, you need to provide something better.
All night long, and yesterday also, you set the same pattern. Others have mentioned it also. You won't answer questions, provide proof, backup what you say.
Any answers you do give are just more speculation and opinion on your part.
You and redlipstick were saying you/she had READ the released affidavits and they were VERY INTERESTING. One of you is a LIAR. Plain and simple. You stated you have posted reference to a press release and now you back down.
What I am saying is this.
(1) I don't dislike you. You are , I am sure, a very nice person. We all are (those who aren't , raise your hand)
(2) Just because we are on different sides, so what. That is the fun of it.
(3) this is the problem. You have no credibility. Period. When you won't answer, or refuse to back up what you say.
Maybe you have your reasons, just like I am getting off the computer here in about 10 minutes, so if TIME is the consideration , fine. But this has been going on for at least two days, so it would take a little more than, gotta go right now.
You have debated fairly well, I give you credit, and stuck in there. I like that. But, just like us, you have to back up things with proof, if you want anyone else to listen.
If I don't hear from you again until the trial starts, (I won't be on the computer until Monday) Have a nice weekend, or several (10 days, I believe).
This is true. Just like, I assume many other decent size cities.
Of course.
I do think he did it. If I were in the jury box I wouldn't be exposed to a lot of what we are, number one. And I would be bound to follow my oath as a juror to consider only the evidence. This would mean that wondering about the phone call Feldman keeps trying to insert would not be allowed into my deliberations as questions by attorneys are not evidence. It goes both ways. I could be a juror, think he did it,, but feel the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I've thought that more than once as I considered all of the coincidences related to DW.
Some obviously think that the number of coincidences lead to confirmation of his guilt. Ordinarily I would agree, but I keep thinking, "Oh my goodness, did Brenda know that that piece of info would be needed to make DW look MORE guilty?"
But I can't bring myself to think that she knew, not really.
Damon's outbursts around the courthouse play into this scenario, too. I just don't know.
So you think Dusek wants to argue that Danielle was chemically doped or refrigerated ?
Good plan. Good f*cking plan.
I think I understand what you are saying here cyn, but when there are two totally divergent sides represented and testimony and scenarios being given, what do the juror's have, other than to speculate upon whom is telling the truth and which side - the defense or prosecution - came closest to capturing the truth?
IMO, this is a totally subjective judgement call that each individual juror must make for themself.
Too many complications.
BUT, what if SOMEONE, that was invited to hookup with Brenda, but didn't get to, because of change of plans, whose wife was gone, went instead to the VD's around 11pm, 12 pm.
Damon maybe wasn't home.
THis person , for whatever reason, pals up with Danielle. Maybe the boys were asleep, but she woke up to go to the bathroom. This guy, let's say, has a key. HE walks in and plays with Danielle for a bit. She is in these shortop and bottom pj's and is growing fast for her age. He kinda gets aroused, and starts getting handsier and handsier. Wants to play some 'games'. ... da...da..d.a.
Then , Danielle gets hostile, realizes he is touching her places he isn't supposed to. She resists, he grabs harder. Struggle, something, all of a sudden, he goes out of control and rapes her, or kills her.
NOW, the details, whether he takes her out of the house, or Damon comes home and helps him (probably) don't matter too much.
What does is what happens later. Now, Damon and Brenda have the goods on this guy. They can blackmail him.
New car, fine. New house, no problem, he's a mortgage broker.
The reason the partiers stories dont' match, is because Damon had to inform Brenda, and then they had to act like Danielle was there until morning. When things could be set up better and they could call the police, and the blackmailee could be home, safe and sound.
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.