Posted on 09/17/2002 5:28:16 AM PDT by 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.
Copyright 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
In this day and age the mainstream press is only one channel of information.
If they were so mesmerizing, Rush Limbaugh wouldn't have 20 million listeners and FR wouldn't have 100,000 members.
Not necessary for me, since I am an ethical attorney. Attorney discipline is probaly pretty uneven throughout the various States.
I'm hoping the judge will have a heart-to-heart with him,and offer him life without parole in exchange for telling where other bodies were disposed of. I have a hard time believing that this was his first one. Not at his age. I know this won't bring any of them back from the dead,but it may help their greiving parents to finally be able to bury them.
Most people, when complaining about the press, complain that they embellish the facts with their own spin. I think that's true.
What is "spin" about the straightforward statement "these people told us thus and such"?
That's a statement of fact, or it is a false statement.
To me, it sounds like it's true.
But YOU are saying it is a "four month old press rumor." That would mean that, four months ago, some statement like "unnamed sources allege that..." was made.
That isn't what happened. This paper said "we spoke to LE sources and THIS IS WHAT THEY SAID."
Don't think so. Even if the Jury felt there might be accomplices, they could still find him guilty as long as the evidence established his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
This might be true, but it sure was gratifying to see that child murderer tremble in fear as the death sentence was handed to him.
The trial wasn't in the court room as much as it was in the media through a pattern of leaks -- for that explains the almighty sneer of her Nanciness. The evidence presented in the trial, as we followed it these months just does not pass the standard of reasonable doubt, unless one starts from a presumption of guilt.
Do you think that no juror heard of this rumored plea bargain that almost happened? The grapevine seems to have been red hot.
Nope,almost all of them were your basic FR "Bush is the new Messiah" Bush-Bot types. They HAD to claim he was innocent so they could justify having the parents given a death penalty for having sex with others.
and decrying how evil Amerika is. Anytime illegal drugs, or orgies, or gunplay with LEOs are involved, they seem to descend out of the trees to whine and bemoan the persecution of these upstanding citizens.
No. It just seems that way to you because there has never been a case in the recorded history of the world where you have ever thought the police were at fault.
Actually I don't fault you per se. I don't fault you at all.
But the posts on this site from the pro-Westerfield crowd to the anti-Westerfield crowd were viscious in extreme.
I spoke up ... not just because I was the target. But more people should have spoken up on the pro-Westerfield side decrying the tactics.
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.