VAN DAM MURDER VERDICT [VERDICT IN: GUILTY!]

ABC radio

[Congressman Billybob]

The scent dogs are supposed to respond only to a DEAD body, not to live people being there (motorhome or wherever). Remember that Westerfield in talking with the police before he was charged and arrested, referred to "we" in describing the motor home trip to the desert, yet he was supposedly alone on that trip.

If he had Danielle in the motor home at that point, but she was still alive and wimpering into her mouth gag, and he only killed her when it was time to "dispose of evidence and witnesses," then the dogs should not have responded to the motor home.

The jury's guilty verdict makes sense on the facts. The protestors on this thread who say "an innocent man was railroaded," do not make sense.

Congressman Billybob

[Peach]

Good post, FreeTheHostages. Generally I can ignore the ignorant among us, but today I was in the mood to debate. You are correct, however, that debating with the ignorant few is not worth the effort.

[SirAllen]

All I can say to you Westerfield supporters is that I hope you never lose a child or family member and have the murderer walk free after jurors such as yourselves acquit him.

[FreeTheHostages]

Software engineer David Westerfield - Another Gateway customer. Why are these perverts always Windows users? I'm going to compile some statistics to determine if there is a pattern among child molesting killers that correlates to their product choices.

ROFL. Now who said there weren't intelligent posts here! Thank you thank you thank you.

[homeschool mama]

**If he is not guilty he must take the stand on the next phase and shout it from the mountain top.**

You're right. *IF* a new trial is allowed he should do just that.

I have a feeling there was more between BVD and Westerfield than Girl Scout Cookies.

[southern rock]

I disagree, unless you assume that everyone who swings or smokes grass is naturally predisposed to kidnapping and murder.

Smoking grass has nothing to do with it. Swinging in your own home, with your kids in the house puts your kids at risk. Is this even in dispute?

[ItsOurTimeNow]

No, you're ignorant because you got all of your information from the 6pm news.

Baaaaaa...baaaaaaaa!

Good little sheep.

[arm958]

The jury discounted the "bug" evidence. That's what juries do... Juries discount evidence that doesn't fit with the conclusions they come up to... Have you ever served on a jury?

Do you mean "come up with"?

[cynicalman]

NOBODY "takes the stand" on appeal.

I was not taling about the appeal but the penalty phase

[marajade]

"and photograph the blood stains on the jacket with a polaroid camera, instead of a 35mm."

Big deal... Doesn't discount the fact that the blood was still there...

[JudyB1938]

Some on this thread may wish to go read this or read it again:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/736983/posts?page=24#24

[Steve0113]

The only thing I can't figure out is how this case got to trial so quickly.

IIRC, the right to a speedy trial is routinely waived, to allow both sides to prepare. In this case, the defense declined to waive that right.

[HamiltonJay]

There is no fabrication of this man being a sick bastard... I am not buying into the rediculous insanity that this guy was framed.... this guy is guilty as sin... undoubtably.

[FreeTheHostages]

Steve: Take the bug evidence. Four -- count 'em -- FOUR experts testified that her body wasn't where it was found until two weeks after Westerfield was under constant surveillance. That's not "reasonable doubt"?

I don't think you get it: we more than reasonably doubt that you're capable of relating accurately the damming evidence of guilt in this case. We have more than a mere scintilla of doubt that you are misrepresenting the facts. We have a huge doubt as to whether you are even conservative. All these things we doubt. But not Westerfield's guilt.

There, marajade, doesn't that just about sum it up?

[EggsAckley]

Whew! Thanks for your voice of reason. I was beginning to think I was in some sort of co-dependants anonymous meeting or something.

Time to move on, folks. I can't help but think of how hard Westerfield would be laughing if he read this thread.

[PrairieDawg]

You wrote:

collection of the hair, blood, or fingerprint evidence

• Hair - mitochondrial DNA match. Could have been Brenda or the boys as well as Danielle's.
• Blood - not proven to be blood. I believe that it was a mitochondrial DNA match as well (i.e. could have been Brenda's as well).
• Fingerprints - Danielle was in Westerfield's house unsupervised while Brenda was looking at the kitchen remodel. Fingerprints in the moter home could have been from quite awhile ago (Westerfield didn't always lock the thing as per testimony).

The evidence isn't there to convict, IMHO. And we know that Brenda and Westerfield bumped and grinded at the bar (as per testimony) - do we know that they didn't do other things either in the motor home or his house?

This case isn't over yet, IMHO.

[JudyB1938]

Oops, I left you out of the ping. See #411.

[marajade]

"I have a feeling there was more between BVD and Westerfield than Girl Scout Cookies."

So what? I don't care if he had sex with her everyday for the past four years or whatever it was since they've been neighbors... It doesn't negate what he did to Danielle.

[marajade]

Was there or was there not blood, hair and fingerprint evidence irregardless of what my source was?

[connectthedots]

This case is a perfect example on how a judge can manipulate a jury verdict by excluding relevant evidence, commenting on the testimony, and abusing his discretion in the way he handles objections. Mudd was not impartial at all in this case. He did everything he could to insure DW was convicted. Whether DW actually killed Danielle, or not, the system did not work; the prosecutor and the judge worked the system against DW and did society a grave injustice in doing so.

I don't know what is worse, that they knew they were doing it and don't care, or they don't even realize it.