VAN DAM MURDER VERDICT [VERDICT IN: GUILTY!]

ABC radio

[wallcrawlr]

I just heard this at noon.

[Illbay]

Calling Westerfield a "child molestor" is, to me, like calling the Titanic a "sailing yacht."

[Illbay]

Westerfield was not called to testify on his own behalf, for one thing....that was a red flag to me....

To be sure, that isn't unusual at all. Defense attorneys regularly instruct their clients not to testify on their own behalf.

[P-Marlowe]

Saw his face all during the trial, that of an innocent man done wrong just by living near these trash neighbors

"Hi. I'm John Wayne Gacy.

Do I look like a child murderer to you?"

[BunnySlippers]

You're right. Testimony like that would not have helped. Because if he was in that drunken of a stupor he could not have testified that he was in a drunken stupor.

You Westerfield defenders just amaze me. You all act like Hillary and Bill defenders. You ignore the evidence and rely solely on your emotions.

Crystalk knows he's not guilty because she watched the whole trial and he just "looked like an innocent man wronged." Geez, Ted Bundy looked like a boy scout. Jeffrey Dahmer looked like a Boy Scout leader. Wayne Gacy looked like a ...Westerfield. Hmmmm.

Very few Child Molester Murderers look like murderers. They look like people.

840 posted on 8/22/02 4:34 AM Pacific by P-Marlowe

Good post.

To believe the Save Dave crowd you'd have to be convinced that EVERYONE plotted against him. From LE to the media. Even seasoned attorneys on talk shows ALL said it for over for David Molestorfield. Every last one of them had to be in on the plot ...

Then you'd have to believe a LONG string of coincidences that placed the blood, hair and fiber evidence in his custody.

Add to that the fact that we have to believe that either all the CHILD porn was mailed to him in innocent attachments and he had no idea that he had it or that his son was the sick pervert who collected it.

The jury is to be congratulated. They reached the right verdict after long and careful consideration.

[Illbay]

You pompous blowhard.

You have NO ACCESS to the evidence the jury had. Twelve ordinary people were presented with ALL the evidence, EVERY BIT. They were privy to ALL the arguments from both sides. They deliberated ten days, sifting and examining everything.

They concluded that the man was GUILTY, and their findings point to the fact that they may well believe he ought to die for what he did.

Yet you continue to spew your verbal diarrhea. You and Bill Clinton both mouth these platitudes about your respect for "the Constitution," yet you care not one whit about JUSTICE.

I am SO GLAD I can stuff this in your arrogant faces!

That for you, you misbegotten son of the Democrat party.

[Peach]

They found no DNA under her fingernails or in any other part of her body for the same reasons - she was too decomposed.

[Illbay]

Perhaps there is some lack of rationality here, but it is in the depth of my feeling, not in my thinking.

These people are some of the most arrogant, pompous cretins ever to participate on this site. And it was THEIR irrationality, in the form of extreme vitriol against ANYONE who dared dispute their elaborate shell-game they had constructed to "prove" Westerfield's innocence--ultimately predicated on the fact that someone once heard someone say that Westerfield was a conservative Republican--that finally set my teeth on edge. I have been silent for many weeks on this issue, waiting for the inevitable guilty verdict I knew would come.

And now, yes, I am irrationally gloating and dancing on the grave of this stupid batch of conspiracy theories. I'm having FUN doing it, too. I haven't been this satisfied since my wedding night.

[FreeTheHostages]

Re your post #828 -- wow, thanks for sharing. That's an incredible story. Yeah, re the jury looking at the defendant: that's almost an old wives tale. Some times it means something, some times not, the best thing to do is wait for the jury verdict to be read.

[Illbay]

The idiot defenders on this site are going to dispute you. They'll say it was only a couple of minutes of video--downloaded by Westerfield's son--of some little girls frolicking topless on the front lawn.

The depth of their illness is staggering.

[FreeTheHostages]

OK, Hal, honey, you're scaring me. When I thought you were just JOKING about doing a study of Microsoft v. Mac in terms of child abuse, I thought it was funny. I as much as anyone enjoy a gratuitous jab at Microsoft (which to my lights is not an innovative company and is stifling other tech company products such as java). But I must conclude now with Bush that you're serious. Stop it!! You're SCARING me!!!

[Illbay]

Maybe he'll confess while he's lying on the table, as the drugs start flowing into his arm.

Your favorite monster is going to die for this, son. Get over it.

Oh, and BTW: I hope this'll make you think twice before downloading that next bit of kiddie-porn you've had your eye on.

[EllaMinnow]

...and I'm applauding every word you're saying.

[FreeTheHostages]

So far my predictions are doing better than yours vis a vis Westerfield. Hint: this is because Westerfield is actually guilty.

How's the weather on your planet? In that alternative reality where there's a picky clever explanation for all of the government's evidence and Westerfield escapes through some complex machinations short of quantum mechanics? Oh I'm sure you've all been working for weeks on the blood on the jacket that he took to the drycleaners. Forgive me if my actual real-world life on Earth has detracted me from understanding the impact of your deep insights-from-afar that contradict a unanimous jury, Det. Nycgal.

I predict that your prediction that jurors will someday regret their decision is hopelessly, myopically wrong.

Sincerely, a fellow conservative woman with more experience in the criminal justice system.

[Freedom2specul8]

LE corruption......

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/736867/posts

Ruby Ridge" used to refer to a geographical location in the state of Idaho, but after an incident that took place there ten years ago today, the phrase has come to refer to a scandalous series of events that opened the eyes of many people to the inner workings of the federal government, including the vaunted Federal Bureau of Investigation. Now that ten years have passed, the feds will accelerate their ongoing effort to "move forward" and have the scandal declared "ancient history." But the Ruby Ridge episode should not be soon forgotten.

[wimpycat]

I have to second his comments about juries. I've done jury duty twice. I'd heard that rumor about juries not looking at the defendant when the verdict is guilty, so when we were called back into the courtroom to give the verdict, I made it a point to look straight at the defendants' table.

And it is emotionally draining to be a juror. You realize while you're deliberating and reaching a verdict that what you're doing affects many people's lives. In both my jury experiences we took everything very seriously and we asked each other individually if we were comfortable with the verdict before we announced we had one.

[Freedom2specul8]

LE corruption......

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/736867/posts

"The "solicitor general" told the judicial panel that even if the evidence supported the charges, the case should be thrown out because "federal law enforcement agents are privileged to do what would otherwise be unlawful if done by a private citizen."'

[small voice in the wilderness]

You have NO ACCESS to the evidence the jury had.

That isn't going to stop them. They'll be listening to the White Album, looking for clues to his innocence. This group has gone beyond intervention. Go over to the Smokey Backroom and read awhile. It's like walking into a DaveKrishna cult meeting. If you listen closely, you can hear the meditating chants of "DUHHHHHHHHHHH" in the background.

[FreeTheHostages]

Re transcripts: I was a prosecutor for 8 years and it works like this. First, some courts do allow transcripts in. Some court reporters that use real-time voice transcription only need a short time to correct it and can get accurate transcripts in by the time the jury needs them. But, in the real world, most court reporters do not have the equipment or technology to produce a complete accurate transcript that fast. But they can read back from their recordation of the sounds. (They have machines that record composite sounds in keystrokes, like dipthongs and such.) So really it's just a practical limitation. In the future, transcripts may well be available to the jury upon request.

[FreeTheHostages]

Any thoughts on whether the daughter decides to be a witness for life in prison for her father. Her silence has been extraordinary.

This is a very good observation.