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.

[alexandria]

It tells me a lot. Obviously, Dusek respected his work but didn't like his results.

Should I post THE moment again? IE. SWEET!!

[UCANSEE2]

I think it's really crummy of Feldman to be so short sighted as to only want to be sure that DW is acquited and not go all the way and solve this case. We still have so many questions!

Yeah. Like he don't get paid enuff. He ought to do it just to show the SDPD and the DA up. Really shove it to them. Make the DA look like a total idiot. Show up the Judge to for being a biased, prejudiced, crooked moron. Yeah, if you are an attorney, that's just what you want to do. Makes your next case so much simpler. (/sarcasm)

[crypt2k]

Then of course that area was supposedly searched once before but came up empty..

maybe DW did have an accomplice and this action was meant to "clear" DW.

[UCANSEE2]

Well, for the body being easy to discover it sure took a long time by my standards to find her.

And since they SEARCHED that same area ONCE already, is it likely the body wasn't there the first time? The reason it took so long is the killer finally put it where an idiot could find it? Because he was so tired of the inept job the police were doing going after the wrong guy anyway and taking away the spotlight?

[cyncooper]

So here is a macabre question. How would YOU hide a dead body?

Remember that case back east several years ago with the guy who used the chipper/shredder to dispose of his wife?(Oh, my) They still found forensic evidence and were able to convict.

[cyncooper]

People keep saying "searched the SAME area". They searched in the vicinity, but not that exact spot.

[crypt2k]

In Borrego Springs there are many rock-filled alluvial fans along mountainside (most notably the west face of the Santa Rosas),
miles from any road, that would hide a buried body for eternity. One could walk on rocks for a great distance without leaving footprints. Hard terrain for tracking dogs. Good physical condition would be a requirement, however.

[rolling_stone]

In the ocean deep, just would be sure to weigh them down and that they don't have a Rolex with a serial number on it..that caught one bad guy...made an interesting TV who dunit.

Another true story, a guy called the crime victims fund and said he was a victim of a crime, he had helpe a guy dump a boy encased in cement in a lake and he hurt his back. He wanted the crime victims to pay his medical bills, so they said sure, just bring them on down and well take care of them, and they did, he got free medical and room and board. Another near Darwin crook.

[rolling_stone]

boy=body

[RnMomof7]

yep

[UCANSEE2]

They searched in the vicinity, but not that exact spot.

Well, I would have to say that you are assuming something NOT IN EVIDENCE.

The statements by the Head of the DRC and DAMON were that they had MORE Searchers that day. It also may be true they didn't search that exact spot, but I believe that is an ASSUMPTION the press made and spewed to everyone. Prove me wrong, I don't mind at all. It's when I learn the most.

Now, another question for you. Why if they searched that area once, were they sent back AGAIN? Who sent them back? Based on what ?

[dread78645]

Desert climates with low humidity ...

El Cajon is not desert !
The environment is close to Texas hill-country in late summer. I've spent many years in both places (and 6 years in Connecticut, BTW).
Your "desert" is from books and magazines.

I'll check in the attic for "record-wash" --it might un-stick your needle. Maybe.

[John Jamieson]

Repeat from late last night and this afternoon:

Best Evidence, The Murder of Danielle

I have watched as much of the trial as possible on CourtTV, and the Internet. I have reread major portions of the transcriptions and discussed the case for many hours on this forum. I see tons of tealeaf reading type evidence: hoses, lights, curtains, dancing, sex play, porno, and fibers that may or may not have a common source. I see only two areas of good quality, scientific evidence worthy of serious consideration.

First is the motorhome evidence. DNA from Danielle is in the MH and on Westerfield’s jacket which may have been in the motorhome. The DNA evidence is backed by a fingerprint, and hair. Most people are aware that I believe no conclusive test for blood was ever run, but it doesn’t matter on an objective level, only an emotional one. Since Danielle’s DNA is in there, I can think of only three ways it could be.

1. DW grabbed Danielle and killed her in or out of the motorhome, leaving blood or drool DNA, the fingerprint and hair.
2. Danielle got into the motorhome on her own and played in there, leaving the same evidence.
3. The motorhome was “flaked” by LE to build a case ie. DW was framed.

Second is the bug evidence found on the body that says the body was placed there no earlier than Feb 12th. An expert paid for by the prosecution and one paid for by the defense have both testified to the scientific validity of their conclusions, and they are in very good agreement (as I write this of course there is a third expert waiting in the wings, who is unlikely to outweigh the other two, and probably won’t even disagree much). I see only three reasonable explanations for the Feb 12th earliest dump date.

1. Danielle was alive until at least Feb 12th.
2. Danielle’s body was refrigerated until Feb 12th.
3. Danielle’s body was tightly sealed against bugs until Feb 12th, and then unsealed.

All three require the action of a human being to make the body available to bugs on the 12th.

Lots of theories about this case exist, but there are really only three possibilities.

1. Westerfield did it alone.
2. Westerfield did it with an accomplice
3. Somebody else did it.

Now we need to test these three theories against the two major hunks of good scientific evidence.

1. Westerfield did it alone. Doesn’t fit, he was under constant police surveillance and could not have dropped off the body.
2. Westerfield did it with accomplice. Does fit. Explains both the motorhome evidence and bug evidence.
3. Somebody else did it. Does fit, but only if you use the second or third explanation for the DNA.

The prosecution theory as expressed in the opening statements is clearly theory 1. Unless the judge allows the prosecution to reopen the testimony to try to prove theory 2, then DW walks. Would it be double jeopardy to switch now? I don’t know the law well enough to say.

By this analysis it sure looks like DW will be judged not guilty, with many people believing that theory two was the only logical approach for the prosecution to take, and they blew it.

[John Jamieson]

Damon told the PRESS on the 18th, that the searchers should be searching closer to SD. So I guess Damon did.

[UCANSEE2]

If this MEDIA TAPE Feldman has now, shows the Dehesa Rd site, and the same SPOT where Danielle was, and she isn't there, that will be a casebreaker. Since no one knows what the tape shows (no one on here) ,It is all wishful thinking at this point.

[cyncooper]

Wow, thanks for the story. Good body disposal idea, too. The ocean probably holds many secrets.

[Bluebird Singing]

What about Damon and his high school buddy out searching in the desert after being advised not to. Were they off on their own, or with others on the search team. Was he driving his own blue van out there? I'd really like to know where that van is today.

[cyncooper]

I can't prove you wrong (how could I? I don't have any inside info).

[cyncooper]

Thanks for the reply. Another good idea (if I can put it that way...)

[UCANSEE2]

Why if they searched that area once, were they sent back AGAIN? Who sent them back? Based on what ?

Damon told the PRESS on the 18th, that the searchers should be searching closer to SD. So I guess Damon did.

(1) you are right about Damon.

(2)The DRC said the info came from two anonymous phone calls.

(3)Bill Garcia, who looked at maps, DW's route, analyzed it all and came up with the idea they should search the Dehesa Rd. Site again (believe this was after the 2 anonymous phone calls, which occurred 1 day apart. I.E. They didn't listen, so had to call them again.)