Plea deal 'minutes away' when body found

San Diego Union Tribune ^ | September 17, 2002 | J. Harry Jones

[John Jamieson]

Certainly possible. Science does evolve sometimes. But these dates weren't even close.

Why do you discount additional perps?

[cyncooper]

I'd take some issue with claiming there was abuse on the threads, by the way.

A poster who is following the trial by watching, reading transcripts and reading news articles develops an opinion that Westerfield is guilty. That poster proceeds to state this opinion and support it citing the aforementioned sources.

For their trouble they are SHRIEKED at and called names like jackals. They are the ones accused of not following the trial and merely parroting Nancy Grace or some other media entity.

It was repulsive, juvenile, hateful behavior that one does expect at Free Republic.

[Valpal1]

If you read an interview or quote of the Van Dams, I'd like to see it too.

Can you provide a link? Thanks.

[Amore]

I sincerely hope and (other than the fact it's Calif.) would expect that such a request would not be granted. It's one thing to seal these documents while trial is ongoing. It's quite another to seal it for the appellate process. Now, they MIGHT (and again I would think not) keep things sealed until DW has his "direct appeal." But even if they go that far, I can't imagine they would go farther and let documents stay sealed for years and years (after he loses his direct appeal), while he collaterally attacks his convictions and sentence.

[John Jamieson]

Must people would think it's a technically, but under the law, DW was incorrectly charged if there were others. The prosecution was as the sole perp.

[cyncooper]

I heard the van Dams, John.

(Hope you're feeling OK)

[CharacterCounts]

O'Reilly is making the point on his radio program today that these defense lawyers were (now obviously) defending a man that they knew was guilty.

Most criminal lawyers never even ask the Defendant about his guilt or innocence because they do not want to know. That does not stop a lawyer from attempting a plea negotiation on behalf of his client. The lawyer attempts to get the best deal and communicates it to his client. If the client accepts, the he will have to place those facts on the record which support his guilt.

[Freedom2specul8]

Damon was a nervous wreck..bvd handled the news conference well. It was live on ctv..

[John Jamieson]

I watched their interview live at about 9am CA time. It will published later today, I assume.

[cyncooper]

Damon was a nervous wreck..bvd handled the news conference well. It was live on ctv..

Well, we have different perceptions on this. Brenda began reading their prepared statement and was unable to complete it, so Damon finished reading the statement.

I didn't read anything unusual into either of their behavior.

[Amore]

It was their tv interview which was broadcast at noon their time today. The VD's said they were unaware of any plea negotiations going on and did in fact say you can't believe everything you read in the newspaper.

I hardly think that's dispositive, and I await further information to show that in fact such a deal WAS in the works.

I guess the other side will only believe in and quote what the VD's say when it fits in with their views.

[John Jamieson]

It also surprised me, when they said they didn't care one way or the other about the DP.

[VRWC_minion]

Everyone deserves the best defense possible. The state is just as much a threat to our freedom as the criminal. Maybe more.

[John Jamieson]

I can second that thought!

[Amore]

Most criminal lawyers never even ask the Defendant about his guilt or innocence because they do not want to know.

That does not stop a lawyer from attempting a plea negotiation on behalf of his client. The lawyer attempts to get the best deal and communicates it to his client. If the client accepts, the he will have to place those facts on the record which support his guilt.

I, and others, have said before on these threads what you said in your first sentence. As for your other remarks, which are also quite true, the reality is that if, in fact, Feldy was negotiating for a life sentence in return for telling them where her body was, then O'Reilly and the people here on these threads are absolutely right in saying that Feldy knew DW was guilty.

[SunnyUsa]

"Bad news for the "Westerfield was framed" brigade."

I avoided these threads because of this "brigade" who only seemed to want to punish the parents, and kept forgetting that an innocent child was murdered by the pervert neighbor.

How will they "explain" how he would've been able to "give up the body?"

[John Jamieson]

"I guess the other side will only believe in and quote what the VD's say when it fits in with their views."

I have discovered (after raising a bunch of kids) that even liers sometimes tell the truth, it's just hard to tell when.

[El Sordo]

Actually, I don't.

Posted this to another thread yesterday:

All right, the jury has spoken and that is that.

However I must admit that something is nagging me, specifically; the bug evidence.

Forensic Emtymology had risen to the levels of an apparently reliable science. Dusek himself has put people in prison base on bug evidence alone. The bug evidence in this trial seems to set the profession back significantly. Either that or the prosecution is missing something.

The only options seem to be:

1) The Forensic Emtymologists are wrong, and have to rethink their approach and are about to learn something new. This could have far ranging consequences for the use of bug evidence in court if the bug guys never figure out why their numbers don't jive with what appears to have actually happened.

2) The Forensic Emtymologists are right and DW has been wrongly convicted. This was a plausible scenario a month ago but now looks mighty weak.

3) The Forensic Emtymologists are right and someone else was involved. This is just plain disturbing.

Has anyone found out if the entymologists have been able to figure out what's apparently throwing them off? Maybe they're about to learn a new twist in their discipline.

[VRWC_minion]

You can't have it both ways,

False choice. In the other cases the bug guys support rather than contradict the physical evidence.

especially since the prosecution paid for two of the bug guys.

Irrelevant information.

Your denial that the a possible option can include that the bug guys are wrong in this case runs contrary to the scientific method. A good scientist would allow that possibility.

[John Jamieson]

Where's the claim that DW said he knew where the body was? I missed it.