Posted on 07/22/2002 3:02:31 PM PDT by FresnoDA
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.
Frustrating isn't it? After reading up on fiber evidence and how it came about as a forensic tool the "no known source" statement COULD be an ambiguous statement capitalized on by the DA.
Fiber evidence in and of itself, without a known source is pretty much useless.
Reason being, the chance that you, Sally, Joe, and I most likely have purchased something made with a particular material blend and dye color is too great. IE towels, blankets, sheets, clothes, all purchased at local stores Wal-Mart Mervyns.
Where fiber evidence becomes important and noteworty is when, as in the Atlanta murders case, the fiber in question can be traced to a verifiable source that for some reason is not available to much of the population.
As mentioned above the green acrylic fiber that was found on victim was found to match a possible suspects home carpeting.
Upon further investigation the carpet was traced to a company that sold carpet by the hundreds of thousands of rolls. However, it just so happened that that particular shade of green dye was a limited or discontinued color.
The company had sold the majority of the rolls to a contractor that had only used it in apts. in the Eastern states, this cut the odds to around tens of thousands of possible odds, still too high.
The clear and convicting evidence was when the next victim was found and had, (if I remember correctly) not only a couple of the green fibers present but new brown acrylic fibers. These brown fibers matched the carpet found in the suspects car as their source.
Odds of that, real slim, especially since he had been seen around the last dumping location of body, loose alibi, etc.
Anyways, the fiber evidence CAN have merit but only in certain cases and only combined with other forensic evidence, forensic bug evidence is very reliable and even standing by itself it establishes and provides us with facts about the crime and crime scene. When it is veiwed with other forensic facts it can be most revealing.
What ? Are you 12 years old and mowing lawns ?
Get a rope.
The first paid bug man was hired by the prosecutor. His investigation was done and his report prepared while he was working for the prosecution. His findings didn't match the prosecution theory, so Dusek didn't enter his report into evidence. The defense did. The second bug man used different techniques, but arrived at a time-frame only slightly shorter than that of the first report, but neither fit the prosecutor's (and police) contention that the body was dumped on Feb 2.
I don't know what the SD media is saying, but it surely doesn't match the transcripts.
Makin' it up, makin' it up.
The events described are not card draws. I think your scenario might be a Bays' Theorem problem.
But really it's a quantum probability issue, what with all the spin I detect on it.
I really don't think so, This body was placed there - and from what I understand, quite hidden. Not the act of a panicked killer - but of someone who took the time to hide their crime.
You would be amazed at how fast animals can dessimate and scatter a corps. The Bundy case is a good example - some of the victims remains were never found in their entirety.
I wonder if you would be so kind as to ping me to that post when you make it.
My work and all make it hard to keep up with the threads, and I miss alot scrolling through squabbling, banter and absurdity. I want to be sure I catch any content-rich posts.
Well, if he couldn't do it, he couldn't do it. I guess that's where Feldman rests. He would have to supply video of cops planting evidence(BTW that happened to me before, and if I remember, I will tell the story sometime, as it is relevant to this topic and more common that ppl think) to convince some of the DW persecutors of the obvious.
I just wish we had proof of who did it. Maybe Feldman has some info from the Avila case to punctuate the trial.
Reality is very disappointing.
And you seem to have issues with sexual organs: ("Westerfield boxer-shorts bumps (Ewww)", Danielle pubic hair "sick as it was").
Uhmmm, Kim. are you 14 years old ?
He tells them to make assumptions not in evidence. The only reason there has not already been a mistrial is that DW stands to make more money by being falsely convicted, then exonerated that by having the case thrown out.
All of the relevant evidence that has been suppressed by LE WILL COME OUT eventually. Did the caller on the 16th have a hispanic accent? Were some of the hairs in the RV Brenda's? The VD's prophetic comments about finding the body are more incriminating than DW unrecorded alleged comments to LE.
DW will be Emperor of San Diego when the dust settles from this. Some LE belong behind bars, not just reprimanded.
Henry Lee testified for O.J., big deal, yeah he's innocent."
ALL experts are paid for their research and testimony. The desperate comment made by the opposition "are you getting paid?" is designed to cheapen the experts testimony to the jury...happens in every case.
Greg, you would have been the perfect Juror to serve on the O.J. case. Your mind is made up before hand, and the evidence doesn't matter. You critize them, for doing the same thing you are are doing..LOL!
(Oh, if we could only see ourselves as others do..)
sw
You know, the defense is putting on a compelling case...
Honestly, we don't get much on this case here in NY....so I have to go by Fresno's threads....which seem to be current...
One hair, and 2 spots of blood can be compelling, but if the child had been in his home before, it can be explained away...afterall the child was a neighbor...The hair could have come in on the bottom of his shoe.....everything can be accounted for...
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.