Posted on 07/22/2002 3:02:31 PM PDT by FresnoDA
Isn't it funny that those of us in SD who are getting 5X more info than you have come to the conclusion that DW is guilty as sin?
Gee, it must comfort you, (tons of physical evidence aside) to be defending someone with THOUSANDS of (cataloged and titled and sorted into personal files) porno images on his computer, focusing on KIDDIE PORN and actual VIOLENT CHILD RAPE VIDEOS.
Some hero for you to hold up!
A: I WAS ABLE TO MAKE USE OF FAYE SPRINGER, A CRIMINALIST AT THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY CRIME LABORATORY, AND THEY HAVE A MICROSPECTROPHOTOMETER. AND I TRANSPORTED THE FIBERS, THE ORANGE FIBERS, THE ONE COLLECTED FROM THE NECKLACE AND SEVERAL COLLECTED FROM ITEM NUMBER 5, THE LAUNDRY OUT OF THE WASHING MACHINE, TO SACRAMENTO AND USED THE MICROSPECTROPHOTOMETER IN SACRAMENTO.
Q: HOW DID THAT WORK IN TERMS OF YOUR ABILITY TO USE IT IN SACRAMENTO?
A: I WAS INSTRUCTED BY FAYE SPRINGER AND TOGETHER WE ANALYZED THE FIBERS.
Q: WHAT DOES THIS MICROSPECTROPHOTOMETER DO?
A: IT'S ACTUALLY VERY MUCH LIKE THE INFRARED SPECTROPHOTOMETER. WE'RE JUST USING A DIFFERENT RANGE OF LIGHT. AND IT'S A WAY TO QUANTITATE THE ABSORBANCE OF A COLOR THAT A FIBER HAS. SO THERE COULD BE SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPES OF ORANGE FIBER DYE, BUT THEY WILL ABSORB LIGHT DIFFERENTLY BASED UPON THEIR DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. SO YOU WOULD EXPECT TWO FIBERS THAT WERE DYED THE SAME WAY TO ABSORB THE SAME WAVE LENGTHS OF LIGHT AND TWO FIBERS THAT ARE DYED IN A DIFFERENT WAY TO ABSORB DIFFERENT WAVE LENGTHS OF LIGHT. SO BY RUNNING THE FIBERS THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR INSTRUMENT, WE WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE FIBER FROM THE NECKLACE ABSORBED LIGHT IN THE SAME WAY AS THE FIBERS TAKEN FROM THE LAUNDRY.
Q: JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, YOU USED BOTH A MACROSCOPIC AND A MICROSCOPIC COMPARISON ON THESE ORANGE FIBERS FOUND IN THE DEFENDANT'S HOME AND IN THE NECKLACE OF DANIELLE VAN DAM, CORRECT?
A: YES.
Q: YOU ALSO PERFORMED THE INFRARED CHEMICAL TEST ON THOSE FIBERS AS WELL, CORRECT?
A: CORRECT.
Q: AND ON AT LEAST THE FIBER FROM THE NECKLACE AND ORANGE FIBERS TAKEN FROM THE LAUNDRY AT WASHER YOU ALSO USED THE MICROSPECTROPHOTOMETER DEVICE, IS THAT CORRECT?
A: THAT'S CORRECT.
Q: WITH WHAT RESULTS?
A: IN EVERY WAY THAT I COULD MEASURE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FIBER TAKEN FROM THE NECKLACE AND EVERY CHARACTERISTIC I COULD LOOK AT, THEY WERE SIMILAR TO THE FIBERS THAT WERE FOUND IN THE LAUNDRY BOTH IN ITEM NUMBER 5, 6, 7, AND 9.
Q: WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE FIBER FOUND IN DANIELLE'S NECKLACE COULD OR COULDN'T HAVE COME FROM THE SAME SOURCE AS THE FIBERS FOUND IN ITEMS 5, 6, 7 IN THE LAUNDRY ROOM AND THE BEDDING, NUMBER 9?
A: I CAN TELL YOU THAT BASED UPON THE TESTS CONDUCTED THAT THE FIBER TAKEN FROM THE VICTIM'S NECKLACE COULD SHARE A COMMON SOURCE WITH THE FIBERS TAKEN FROM THE LAUNDRY AND THE BEDDING
This is testimony I posted the other day. The analysis includes testing the color.
Now, someone may want to argue the finer points of the testing, but I think I have established I have a reasonable basis for my assertion and that would mean I am not lying.
The difference is you are getting 5x of media hype, lies, whatever it takes to keep the PUBLIC riled up so they will be able to sell more ADVERTISING TIME/SPACE, and I have spent months researching this case, reading the transcripts, listening to testimony, word for word, keeping an open mind, and debating each detail of the case with other intelligent open-minded people on both sides of the 'fence'.
So, Thanks for recognizing how much better informed I and others are.
I do not wish to criticize you, nor make fun of you. Seriously. If this crime/trial was in my town, and I had only the local media, TV,Papers, etc. for a source, and you were on FR discussing the case every day, the SHOE would be on the OTHER FOOT. Know what I mean?
I live in SD County too and I don't think he's guilty. I even have a family member in LE and don't think he's guilty. Reason: It has not been proven
I have followed practically every minute of the trial.
I have a family full of extremely pro-LE members (all SD County residents) and none of us think he's guilty, though the cop-kin hasn't weighed in either way.
**FREE HAZMAT DAVE**FREE HAZMAT DAVE**FREE HAZMAT DAVE**
Then there is that huge shrink-wrap machine that folds up to a compact 6"x6" and slides in to any briefcase. With shrink-wrap vailable in a variety of eye-popping colors.
It is a media tape. The judge said to Feldman he understood that he (Feldman) had just received the tape from (I think it was channel 8) and the judge asked if that was the info he needed to proceed on Wednesday. Feldman said he thought it was. Dusek said they'd like a chance to see it, so it was left at that.
What testimony indicated that those were David A. Westerfiield's?
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.