Skip to comments.
Plea deal 'minutes away' when body found
San Diego Union Tribune ^
| September 17, 2002
| J. Harry Jones
Posted on 09/17/2002 5:28:16 AM PDT by Bug
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 641-655 next last
To: bvw
Who says Westerfield is innocent? Those who want to mock unfairly those -- like me -- who believe that according to the standards of presumption of innocence requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that a proper verdict was "Not Guilty [beyond a reasonable doubt]". Gimme a break -- you won't even concede that Danielle was murdered!
To: VRWC_minion
Your point is a very good one. Although I don't think he "sold out his son". The prosecution called Neil, not the defense.
I don't know why he wouldn't expose everyone involved. I agree it doesn't make sense. I still think there are others. Maybe DW will write a tell all book; can he under CA law?
To: RooRoobird14
You know, I somehow missed the "Westerfield is Innocent" club here at Free Republic. (didn't spend much time on the threads). On what basis/facts were these Freepers claiming his innocence? My personal favorite was that Brenda and Damon killed her and that Damon was actually a serial killer originally in Florida.
Don't laugh ... all of them took this story quite seriously.
To: UCANSEE2
I prefer to wait patiently to see what comes of this. I have indicated the same thing. And I'm confident it will turn out to be accurate, as was the evidence of the VD's swinging lifestyle, which people on your side were all too happy to believe. If you'll go back and look, you will see that I prefaced my remarks several times about the alleged plea discussion with words like "if this is true." If you're going to criticize me, please do so for things I have actually said instead of simply setting up a straw man and knocking it down.
244
posted on
09/17/2002 12:43:23 PM PDT
by
Amore
To: John Jamieson
Your point is a very good one. Although I don't think he "sold out his son". The prosecution called Neil, not the defense. But keep in mind the prosecution HAD TO call Neal since (by then) Feldman had already insinuated that Neal was the kiddie porn user.
To: BunnySlippers
I remember one theory that the dog killed her.
To: Amore
and I await further information to show that in fact such a deal WAS in the works. PDs seem standard procedure when there is a continued plea of innocence against evidence. Why would this case be any exception, except the prosecution wanted DW on death row.
To: John Jamieson
He can write a book, he just can't profit from it. Proceeds would be attached to the state's victim fund I think.
Prosecution called Neil in response to defense soliciting testimony from the computer experts that the porn could be Neil's.
Prosecution called Neil and gave him the chance to defend himself from the slurs cast on him by his father's lawyer.
248
posted on
09/17/2002 12:45:38 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: Illbay
--Not "painful" for me. I've relished every minute of it.--
---------------
I have enjoyed none of it, and my only reason for joining this fracus, was the weak case the prosecution presented. This is made much worse, by the fact that they knew he was guilty, without a doubt, and yet they came up with such a weak case.
Why was this evidence not presented to the Jury after the conviction, we could have saved a few tax dollars, there would have been little left to debate in the penalty phase.
For the information of all this who participated in this lengthy forum, I hope the healing of relationships can now happen. I never had enough evidence presented to me to convict this man, and probably would have held out for an aquittal.
And I would have been outraged at the prosecution's inability to present a better case, knowing that the man tried to confess. As a matter if fact I would rather have a full disclosure of the whole sordid mess, than the death penalty verdict.
That would have saved the taxpayer a bundle, and probably salvage some relationships on this board.
May God have mercy on his soul.
To: itsahoot
Yes, you're right, it's all the prosecution's fault. Nothing to do with the fact that DW did a very good job of erasing almost all of the physical evidence. < / sarcasm>
250
posted on
09/17/2002 12:48:43 PM PDT
by
Amore
To: BunnySlippers
Some of them still take it seriously. The link to a website on this theory was posted frequently to the threads, including this one.
The internet is full of whackjobs, even on FR.
251
posted on
09/17/2002 12:48:49 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
To: redlipstick
It happens. Mom and Dad from east Texas were in prison for 5 years each of life terms, before a Dallas reporter proved that the family dog did it.
To: itsahoot
Seriously though, what evidence that was not presented are you talking about? If evidence wasn't presented at trial it was because it was ruled inadmissible. Do you really think the prosecution withheld evidence supporting DW's guilt on purpose?
253
posted on
09/17/2002 12:52:39 PM PDT
by
Amore
To: cyncooper
Cyncooper made a point that many missed.
Just because her opinion was DW GUILTY, many assumed she was just as uninformed as most posters on these threads who came in with media fed responses.
Cyncooper was one of the most diligent posters in researching the facts , testimony, evidence in this case.
She was forced to prove herself, and stayed even when accused of being uninformed.
I think that no matter what happens with the Van Dam/Westerfield case, the experience has had a long-term effect on Free Republic. An experience many will not forget.
This case was a test. A test because it was a highly emotional subject. A test because the evidence was marginal. A test because the media involvment and spin was at a maximum. A test because the good/bad were hard to distinguish.
A test of character, endurance. A very revealing test.
Very few got good grades on this test. (and it didn't have anything to do with whether you believe DW guilty or not)
To: Valpal1
"slurs cast on him by his father's lawyer"
A little strong for what actually happened isn't it? The truth came out. I don't think there were any "slurs". Feldman didn't even cross.
To: BunnySlippers
My personal favorite was that Brenda and Damon killed her and that Damon was actually a serial killer originally in Florida. Don't laugh ... all of them took this story quite seriously.
Spending hours "researching" this theory.
To: UCANSEE2
I agree. I even enjoyed my buddy Kim. There are two sides to every issue and especially trials.
Congradulations to everyone that stayed with it. I thought you did a great job too, UCANSEE2.
John
To: John Jamieson
If we consider the case closed, we may miss another perp(s) and be leaving more young girls in danger. I won't be happy until the whole story is known. Getting half the cancer doesn't cure you. We KNOW there are more perps who won't care a twit, except about getting caught.
The cancerous VD "private" lifestyle is still intact-- no possible cure there, either. Where is CPS when you need them, kids?
To: Amore
"DW did a very good job of erasing almost all of the physical evidence"
One minute "overwhelming physical evidence" and the next minute "DW destroyed almost all of it"
That's kind of a dog ate my evidence argument, isn't it? "Your honor, we know this guy did it, but he destroyed all the evidence, so you'll just have to believe us".
To: John Jamieson
Nope, it was a slur. Implying the porn, the kiddie porn was his and that he viewed it and saved it is a slur, intended of course to create reasonable doubt as to who the owner of it really was.
It's pretty common for the defense to point the finger of accusation of others, what else are they going to do. They never argued it was there accidentally downloadeded with other types, did they? Nope, just pointed at the boy.
260
posted on
09/17/2002 1:07:43 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 641-655 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson