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

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.

Neal Haskell, forensic entomologist 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.

In other words, like any good person seeking justice, you do not want to offer a neighbor chosen at random as a sacrifice to appease whatever false gods this hang-him-high mob worships.

More like if in fact David Westerfield is guilty - then prove it with motive, evidence and fact. Not because he "was creepy" or left his hose unrolled or took a "wild weekend trip" (My husband and I have been known to do that on occassion - just drive wherever the wind blows, and end up where we end up)

The focus on Westerfield to the complete neglect of any other possible suspect and all other possible evidence seems just a little too focused. especially after there was evidence (latent prints) of a yet unidentified person in the VanDam Home.

Secondly, why should a juror believe that one entomologist that differs is better than two that concur?

Unless he give a logical reason its a waste of time. He will need to point out something both missed and show that had they knew it they would have made same conclusion he is.

Remember that it's very likely that not one juror knows anything of the scienc beyond what they are hearing in the courtroom.

Goff appears to be able to put stuff in lay terms, his book is proof of that.

Lastly, do not forget that Feldman doesn't make the big bucks for nothing. This is his thing. For all you know he may damage Goff pretty well and may highlight the prosecution's depseration in the process.

I don't see how the prosecution can avoid explaining the date of death stuff. If it were not explained to me I would see to it I were in a hung jury.

Do not forget that Faulkner was HIRED BY THE PROSECUTION.

OK.

It is reasonable to assume that all the jurors don't see all evidence and experts the same. You act as if each will see it through your eyes. That's an unwise assumption, to say the least.

I don;t know that the evidence will be. I'm speculating. My guess so far is that he will show why the process was slower in this case based on the weather conditions.

All we need to do to be reminded of poor decisions on Dusek's part is to think back on 180-Frank. I'm putting my money on Feldman's experts (one of which reported first to Dusek & Co.) looking best in the end.
Don't know what your refering to.

Your biggest problem is that you are assuming guilt and insisting that innoncence be proven. Switch the horses in midstream if you can, and you'll perceive things better

I know it may look like that to you because I am asking the defense to prove something to me but that request is secondary.

I didn't start assuming anything. I formed my opinion that Danielle was in the RV just prior to her death based on the evidence presented from reading these threads for the first time yesterday. Since then I ahve asked loads of questions and have gotten more informaton about physical evidence that further connects Westerfield. From the camp that believes he is innocenct I mostly got diversions and alternate theories with no basis in facts.

With that opinion based on the evidence, I have conluded that Danielle was in the RV before she was killed. Unless the defense can provide a reasonable rebuttle then I will continue my opinion.

Here is an example: I am shown a movie of murder in process. Someone shoots another. I have been given evidence that a murder took place. Unless I am given some alternate explanation of the movie then I am only left with my original conclusion.

I'm still a couple of hundred posts shy of catching up, but you touched on something that has bothered me for some time. If it's been brought up in posts I haven't reached yet, I apologize.

Did the police measure the amount of gas in DW's motorhome when they impounded it? Apparently the prosecution's theory (although not stated and never proven) is that DW dumped the body at Dehesa on Sunday night. We know that he was getting gas at Carmel Mountain at 7:12 pm Sunday evening. From the costs on the receipts it appears he filled up both times he got gas.

DW claims he went from Carmel Mountain to the Strand to the Cays and then back to Poway the next morning. The miles this trip covered and the mileage of the motorhome should be easy to determine.

The testimony of the Cays security guard indicates he did make it to the Cays that night. A stopoff at Dehesa on the way back to Poway should add 50 - 60 miles to the overall trip. At the mileage of the motorhome that should make a big difference in the amount of fuel left in the vehicle.

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.

2nd Bug Expert Bolsters Westerfield Defense

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