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.

[rolling_stone]

Arrest made in attempted anduction in Oak Park -San Diego,,,

[Travis McGee]

Blablablabla.

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!

[cyncooper]

From Jennifer Shen's testimony:

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.

[Jrabbit]

Could the tape be of the phone call to the VD's on the 16th?

[UCANSEE2]

Sure pal. I'm just here in SD getting 5X the info you're getting, so I guess you are much better informed.

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?

[Rheo]

According to another forum...it is a media tape of Dehesa.

[connectthedots]

If the prosecution has not alleged that DW had an accompice, and DW could not have dumped the body (based on expert testimony), DW must be acquitted.

[UCANSEE2]

Could the tape be of the phone call to the VD's on the 16th? Don't have any idea. As I said, the next few days will be very interesting.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Travis......we are usually on the same side, but I beg to differ.

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.

[countess]

"COULD SHARE A COMMON SOURCE" is light years away from "similar in every way."

Get over it.

[dcwusmc]

Have I stated that I held him up as a hero? Not likely. What I said was that, not having followed the trial daily, I could not, based on what I CURRENTLY KNOW, vote to convict. That I would have to WAIT UNTIL ALL THE EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED, not prejudge the case. Perhaps he IS the one. I DON'T KNOW and on what I have seen presented so far, I could not vote to convict. I also mentioned PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, to which each of us is entitled. Your dogmatic insistence as to his guilt does you no credit.

[Jaded]

Okay, since you asked...

**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.

[John Jamieson]

"tons of physical evidence" that will fit nicely in a thimble and $3.50 worth of dirty pictures do not prove murder.

[Travis McGee]

How many friends of yours collect videos clips of little girls getting gang raped?

[cyncooper]

Could the tape be of the phone call to the VD's on the 16th?

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.

[Jaded]

Um, no. It was a dull orange fiber tangled in the back in her hair.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

How many friends of yours collect videos clips of little girls getting gang raped?

What testimony indicated that those were David A. Westerfiield's?

[demsux]

That looks more like red to me, but, then again, it looks to me like an X inside of a box

[cyncooper]

I wanted to direct your attention to this, too.

[John Jamieson]

"COULD SHARE A COMMON SOURCE" also means "may not".

This is not proof of anything. The prosecution has the burden of proof and has not met it.