VAN DAM MURDER VERDICT [VERDICT IN: GUILTY!]

ABC radio

[Congressman Billybob]

You've got that wrong. NOBODY "takes the stand" on appeal. Appeals are conducted based on the record made at trial.

I think what you are referring to is the "penalty phase" of the trial. Courtesy of the US Supreme Court rewriting the Constitution, the jury -- rather than the judge -- now must decide what penalty to apply for Westerfield's offenses as found in the "guilt phase" of the trial.

Rape and murder with aggravated circumstances warrant the death penalty under California law. However, all it takes is a single juror who is too squeamish to do what the law says, and the death penalty is out and life without parole is the result. Westerfield can take the stand in the penalty phase, but he is unlikely to do so because the prosecution could then question him about the blood, the hair, the pornography, and the motor home trip.

Look for Westerfield to remain silent and for the defense attorneys to argue, in effect, "He didn't REALLY do it, even though you found that he did do it." Their goal will be to find just one squish juror to vote against the death penalty.

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest column: "The Truth of a Gravel Road."

Click for latest book: "to Restore Trust in America"

[ItsOurTimeNow]

It's nice to know that you've been relying on the media shills for your information, rather than actually following the court proceedings and reading the transcripts.

You've been herded like a nice little sheep.

[twigs]

It't not even because they're swingers that makes them fair game. It's the fact that because of their lifestyle, other people were in and out of their house THE NIGHT Danielle disappeared. And there were unidentified handprints. I don't think DW is any paragon of virtue--in fact, it has looked to me like his life has been spiraling out of control for some time. While I don't like the Van Dam's lifestyle, I wouldn't think it worthy of note in this trial but for the FACT that it created traffic throughout their house. It's not the lifestyle; it's the unexplained people. I'm not at all certain that DW is innocent, but these people with access to the house the night Danielle went missing creates reasonable doubt to me.

[mwl1]

Innocent persons vehemently advocate their innocence. That he did not speaks volumes.

[Freedom2specul8]

feldman may not be a good appellate atty..

DW may be at the mercy of "pro-bonos" now, which doesn't indicate quality or anything.

[marajade]

All Westerfield had to do was get on the stand and say she's been in his home and motorhome before and left her fingerprints and hair and blood there... Did he? No.

[arm958]

It is not unreasonable that specs of "her" blood and fingerprint didn't get there by innocent means when she was unsupervised

This is why I think you Westerfield supporters have completely lost your ability to think straight.

[Slip18]

"He will not need money - he will have dozens of high-powered liberal attorneys falling over themselves to represent him should he get the death penalty..."

He might even find himself a rich wife. There are hundreds of groupies out there for animals such as this one.

[GretchenEE]

Who will decide the penalty for the crimes? Will it be done by this jury, or ??

[OldFriend]

Yup, and OJ was covering for his son too.

[southern rock]

Gee, I'll bet the pedophiles will be happy to hear that children of swinger parents are legally fair game because they come equipped with reasonable doubt.

I'll bet they are too. Something to think about, all you "swinging" parents out there.

[Lurking Libertarian]

What if Feldman wins the appeal? Does he have to represent DW at the new trial, even though he can't be paid or does Westerfield get a court appointed attorney?

As I pointed out above, I'm not sure what the law is in California. In some states, once you appear as counsel in a criminal case, you're stuck for the whole case. The theory is that if the defendant couldn't afford a lawyer, the court would have to appoint one anyway, so they will "appoint" the lawyer who's already in the case because he's the most familiar with the case.

[agarrett]

What evidence was that?

  Let's start with allegations of police misconduct, not permitted. Then move on to the infamous phone call to the VanDams of Feb. 16, not permitted. Perhaps the requests for defense investigation of evidence in the VanDam house, not permitted.

  Basically, anything that may have served to produce an inference blaming the VanDams for Danielle's murder was not permitted into trial. The excuse was the Westerfield was the one on trial, not the VanDams. However, if his reasonable defense is that some one else - the VanDams - did it, this can create a mistrial. I suspect it will in this case.

Drew Garrett

[ItsOurTimeNow]

A jury that wasn't sequestered during the Judge's vacation, or during the deliberation process.

Both times, mind you, when all you heard about on TV were cases of child porn and child abductions.

[bvw]

Yes, we had more info, more time to discuss the evidence than the jury did. Remember (1) Judge Mudd severly limited what might be brought in -- including such clearly relevant pieces as the testimony of the van Dam boys, and many others. (2) The jury could not discuss the case among themselves and explore such things as bug forensics and how dogs are used. We did extensively. (3) The jury did not have the relatvively safe haven we have here on FR to discuss the case, instead they had full media glare and harassment directed at them -- all screaming to convict Westerfield. (4) We have had time -- many have followed this case closely since January. Unlikely that the jurors have given the case that much time in consideration. (5) Finally we have had a great force multiplier -- hundreds of people active in rthe discussion and reasearch.

I'll admit that unpaid, voluntary, customer-free efforts like this are prone to spottiness. Other than that The fact that a consensus of folks -- Freepers -- have reached a conclusion that is at odds with the Jury's, and have done so after an intense and extended effort does not speak well to (1) the overly-limited facts presented to the Jury, (2) the irredeemably prejudicial allowed use of the porn and porn charges, (3) the failure of the Jury to be sequestered from the day after day barrage of misstatements and incredible prejudice against Westerfield in the local and national media.

Is there a recent famous public case known in which reasonable doubt was clearer? Hard to imagine it.

[marajade]

Listen, they had blood, hair, and fingerprints... That's all I need to know...

[Freedom2specul8]

JJ, got the news..am glad you're ok today but get that doc appt!

[SirAllen]

Let me guess, the cops "planted" the blood on his jacket right? And the hair too? Or was it the real murdered who set him up?

How can you ignore this evidence?

[Peach]

You got that right. If I was innocent, I'd take the stand and I'd have asked for a trial by judge so I didn't have to worry about a nutty juror (like some of the "Westerfield is a great man" folks on this thread today!)

[Congressman Billybob]

If Westerfield now lacks more assets/money to pay his attorneys, the "grateful taxpayers" will be required to cough up the money to pay the lawyers to conduct a few years of appeals. That, too, is courtesy of the US Supreme Court. Is this a great nation, or what?

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest column: "The Truth of a Gravel Road."

Click for latest book: "to Restore Trust in America"