2nd Bug Expert Bolsters Westerfield Defense: (Dusek Melting Down Before Juries Eyes!!)

NBC/San Diego ^ | July 22, 2002 | NBC/San Diego

[FresnoDA]

2nd Bug Expert Bolsters Westerfield Defense

Expert Says Fly Infestations Show When Danielle's Body Was Dumped

 

POSTED: 6:58 a.m. PDT July 22, 2002

UPDATED: 2:28 p.m. PDT July 22, 2002

 

SAN DIEGO -- The trial of David Westerfield resumed Monday with more testimony about insects, as defense lawyers tried to show that their client was not the person who dumped Danielle van Dam's body along a two-lane road in East County.

Before testimony began, Judge William Mudd warned jurors to ignore last week's murder of a young girl in nearby Orange County. Mudd said that the abduction, sexual assault and murder of 5-year-old Samantha Runnion "bears no relation" to the trial of David Westerfield.

Westerfield's trial had been in recess since July 11 so the judge could take a previously scheduled vacation.

Westerfield, 50, lived two doors from Danielle, who vanished after her father put her to bed the night of Feb. 1. Searchers found the girl's nude body on Feb. 27 along a rural roadside east of San Diego.

A forensic entomologist, testifying Monday for the defense, said Danielle's body could not have been dumped at the roadside before Feb. 12, according to his analysis of flies and larvae collected during an autopsy. The blow flies that were found on the body typically descend on a cadaver shortly after death, but it can take longer in cooler temperatures, entomologist Neal Haskell said. Based on his analysis of the temperatures in the area at the time, Haskell (pictured, right) put "the time of colonization" likely at Feb. 14 and no earlier than Feb. 12.

Prosecutors challenged the defense's weather data.

Haskell's testimony puts the time the body may have been dumped several days earlier than suggested by a previous defense witness, entomologist David Faulkner. The defense has seized upon the time of death, which could not be precisely determined, to suggest that the body was dumped at a time when Westerfield was under constant police surveillance.

Westerfield was put under observation soon after Danielle disappeared, according to police testimony. He was arrested on Feb. 22.

During Haskell's testimony about insects devouring Danielle's body, the girl's parents, Brenda and Damon van Dam, stared at the floor as they sat in the back row of the courtroom. It is the first time that Damon van Dam has been in court since Judge William Mudd banned him from the proceedings almost a month ago as a security risk. Mudd restored his trial privileges just before going on vacation.

Lawyers for Westerfield have said they expect to offer two to three more days of testimony.

[Rheo]

Feldman misrepresented the amount of porn..so Mudd allowed for it all to be brought in.

Which is what Feldman wanted as he was able to bring in the porn that was being accessed at the house while DW was at the police station doing his 22 hour interrogation.

[Jrabbit]

Do you apply this logic to the DA's expert witnesses as well?

[willyone]

The weather here has been very dry for three years. This year was the driest on record less than three and a half inches of rain. The weather was also cold for here with few warm spells. Anyone who thinks they can get that close to a time of death by insect castings alone is full of it. Unless of course the OJ jury has been reincarnated. Just this a-holes actions that weekend are weird enough to point to him. Then of course there is the DNA. Unless of course the DA is just trying to railroad Westerfield.

[Jaded]

Look here under evidence.

Stealth Ninja Dave

[Freedom2specul8]

Attorneys do have to answer for direct lies to the jury. What are the consequences if they get caught? IE:if they know the client is guilty and tell the jury he's innocent..

[rolling_stone]

and what if a child killer is already on the streets, all because the SDPD arrested the wrong guy?

It would be tragic if it turns out to be Avila abducted Danielle and had her for a period of time before she was killed, all the while DW was the fox being chased by the hounds...worse yet if Samantha's killer had been caught sooner..will we ever know?

[willyone]

1130 AM for KSDO or 94.5FM up by Temecula.

[El Sordo]

Haskell's research is open for all to see and is regularly tested.

The contentious nature of his field regularly subjects his work to brutal peer review.

He also has a mini van with personalized plates saying: "MAGGOT".

No comparisons with Anderson at all.....

[UCANSEE2]

This was the counsel that lied. And this tactic was discussed before as a way to get all of the porn before the jury, so they could see that the 'questionable' ones amounted to a very small percentage of the total. So they could see that most of it was not anything like CHILD RAPE porn. So the jury could see the WHOLE TRUTH and not just what the Prosecution wanted to SELECT to make their case, and the JUDGE had therefore keep out of court.

It is very possible that the REASON he did it was to do what he gets paid for. Do everything possible to WIN the case for his client.

[CAPPSMADNESS]

Experts can be bought regardless of reputations.
96 posted on 7/22/02 7:08 PM Eastern by VRWC_minion

Now I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but no way I could have gotten this:
No. It was insinuated that this guy's opinion was incontestable because of his reputation. That is a false conclusion which can be best shown by the recent example of an a top five accounting firm's actions. The man's opinion comes from his being expert but its still potentialy wrong or based on mistaken data.

out of the above post

Thankfully, science is a great deal different than the profession of accounting. No one said that The Bug Guy's testimony was "Incontestable"(at least I don't think so) I was just agreeing with the poster that this guy really knows his bugs.

[VRWC_minion]

Well, God Bless America! Attorneys are allowed to lie

It was my understanding that an atty could not knowingly allow any witness to lie ?

[theirjustdue]

" I only get audio and what I read on these threads. Could you please clarify who you mean? Thanks"

I was referring to both Faulkner and Haskell. IMO, this has not been a good day - at all - for Dusek.

Interpretation of how the jury was reading the testimony of each witness, seems to vary dramatically upon whether you feel DW is guilty, or not, but Dusek seemed to me, to be losing both his cool and his case as the day progressed. That's JMO of course and depending which way you lean on the guilt issue, you may well disagree.

[Jaded]

Any mistaken data Haskell may have gotten came from someone Dusek hired in the first place.

[willyone]

Don't you mean the prosecution? You must be the confused one.

[Rheo]

Thank you so much

[UCANSEE2]

All of which need to be considered in light of physical evidence that puts Danielle in the RV. No argument. The question is WHEN?

According to Testimony, the dogs did not HIT on Danielle's scent in the MH or RV. According to information about tracking dogs, they can detect the scent for up to 2 weeks.

IF Danielle would have been in the MH between 02/01/02 and 02/03/02, the dogs should have detected that. They didn't.

[NatureGirl]

Feldman attempted to lie to the jury, and he got caught

Lied to the jury? About what? Obviously, I've missed something today...

[VRWC_minion]

IF Danielle would have been in the MH between 02/01/02 and 02/03/02, the dogs should have detected that. They didn't.

You agree she was in the RV then ?

[Yeti]

Attorneys are allowed to lie to the jury without adverse repercussion on their clients

Welcome to the real world. You only take an oath when you give testimony or an affadavit.