Plea deal 'minutes away' when body found

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

[Bug]

Plea deal 'minutes away' when body found

By J. Harry Jones
STAFF WRITER

September 17, 2002

Minutes before Danielle van Dam's remains were found Feb. 27, David Westerfield's lawyers were brokering a deal with prosecutors:

He would tell police where he dumped the 7-year-old girl's body; they would not seek the death penalty.

Law enforcement sources told The San Diego Union-Tribune yesterday defense lawyers Steven Feldman and Robert Boyce were negotiating for a life sentence for the 50-year-old design engineer, a neighbor of the van Dams in Sabre Springs.

The deal they were discussing would have allowed Westerfield to plead guilty to murder and be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, said the officials, who spoke on condition they not be identified.

Prosecutors were seriously considering the bargain when Danielle's body was discovered off Dehesa Road that afternoon, nearly four weeks after she disappeared from her bedroom.

"The deal was just minutes away," one of the sources said.

It was aborted, but details were confirmed yesterday soon after a San Diego Superior Court jury recommended the death penalty for Westerfield.

The officials outlined this chronology:

Feldman and Boyce were at the downtown San Diego jail discussing the final arrangements with Westerfield when volunteer searchers found Danielle's remains beneath trees along Dehesa Road east of El Cajon.

When the lawyers left to meet with prosecutors, they noticed members of the news media gathering in the street and asked what was happening.

After being told a body had been found, they went directly to the nearby Hall of Justice and met with prosecutors. The defense lawyers were handed a copy of a Thomas Guide map of the Dehesa area on which a circle had been drawn indicating the location of the body.

Feldman and Boyce took the map back to Westerfield and later telephoned to say they no longer "had anything to discuss regarding a plea bargain."

Neither Feldman nor Boyce could be reached for comment last night.

Danielle was reported missing from her home the morning of Feb. 2, and Westerfield, who lived two doors away, quickly became the primary suspect. He was watched closely by police for weeks as authorities and volunteers searched from the Sabre Springs neighborhood to the Imperial County desert.

After DNA results linked Westerfield to the crime, he was arrested Feb. 22 and charged with kidnapping and burglary.

Three days later, even though Danielle's body had not been found, District Attorney Paul Pfingst announced murder and kidnapping charges would be filed that could carry the death penalty.

Many law enforcement officials feared Danielle's body might never be found. Then, on Feb. 27, volunteer searchers combing the Dehesa area, far from where police had focused, found Danielle's badly decomposed remains.

At that point, the official sources said yesterday, any opportunity Westerfield and his lawyers had to win a plea bargain evaporated.

---

J. Harry Jones: (619) 542-4590;

email

Copyright 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

[NYCVirago]

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!

[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.

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?

[BunnySlippers]

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.

[Amore]

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.

[BunnySlippers]

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.

[EllaMinnow]

I remember one theory that the dog killed her.

[let freedom sing]

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.

[Valpal1]

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.

[itsahoot]

--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.

[Amore]

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>

[Valpal1]

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.

[John Jamieson]

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.

[Amore]

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?

[UCANSEE2]

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)

[John Jamieson]

"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.

[cyncooper]

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.

[John Jamieson]

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

[let freedom sing]

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?

[John Jamieson]

"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".

[Valpal1]

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.