Let me put it this way: Westerfield is the person most likely to have murdered Danielle Van Dam. Unless Westerfield's attorney can show reasonable doubt--and given the defense's desperate and unsuccessful efforts to suppress evidence against Westerfield, that's not very likely--he's going to get convicted.
And on that you'll hang the poor soul nearest the body, eh?
By Jeff Dillon
SIGNONSANDIEGO
June 5, 2002
SAN DIEGO – The father of Danielle van Dam testified Wednesday that he initially lied to police officers about what went on at the family's home the night his daughter disappeared – and that he had previously had sex with two of the women who were there.
Damon van Dam testified that he didn't tell investigators that he had smoked marijuana with house guests and later snuggled in bed with a friend of his wife late at night after they came back from an evening at a local bar.
"You lied to the police, isn't that true?" Damon van Dam was asked by Steven Feldman, the lead defense attorney for suspect David Westerfield.
"Up to the point they told me the gravity of the situation, yes," Damon van Dam said.
"If by intimate relations you mean sex, yes," Damon van Dam said in response to a question from Feldman.
Feldman also grilled Damon van Dam about failing to tell police about Easton, Kemal and other people who would have been familiar with the layout of the family's house, who would have been familiar with the family's dog and who would have known the location of Danielle's bedroom.
Damon van Dam repeatedly said he hadn't considered those details relevant to his daughter's disappearance and that he initially omitted many other details while relating the "short version" of what had happened.
"When I was told it was important to tell the truth, I did," Damon van Dam said.
Dr. Norman "Skip" Sperber said the 7-year-old's four missing teeth could have been knocked loose by an impact with a "soft" object, but testified there were no signs they were hit by a hard, steel-like object or were carried off by predators.
"Animals will usually go after more nutritious tissues such as the liver, the kidney, muscles and such," Sperber said. "Rarely do they attack the face because I think there's not a lot of fat there."
Sperber kicked off the second day of testimony in the trial of David Westerfield, 50, who's accused in the kidnap and murder of Danielle. The girl's father, Damon van Dam, took the stand immediately afterward and answered questions about the family's activities the evening before Danielle's Feb. 1 disappearance.
Though he was matter-of-fact during his initial testimony and even cracked a joke about the mess in his garage, Damon van Dam began to visibly choke up when he was shown photos of Danielle's bedroom and asked to describe it to the jury.
Dusek had suggested Tuesday that the dental evidence showed Danielle had been killed by being forcibly suffocated, holding a hand over his own nose and mouth to show how a killer's hand might break loose a victim's upper teeth.
Sperber is a forensic expert who was part of the team that helped New York City authorities identify victims of the Sept. 11 attack and who has helped identify about 4,000 bodies during his career.
Questioned by Dusek, he said he had been called in on the Danielle case after her partially decomposed body was found in a wooded area off Dehesa Road on Feb. 27.
Sperber said he examined the body's teeth, jaw and head on Feb. 28 and compared them with Danielle's dental records and was "very certain" that the body was that of Danielle.
"There could not be anybody in the world with the same set of teeth," he said.
Four of the girl's upper front teeth were missing and others were loose, Sperber said. Those are teeth with relatively weak roots that children often knock out while playing.
Sperber said the remaining teeth showed no signs of chipping or other sharp trauma. He said animals rarely carry off teeth and that there were no signs any predators had been gnawing at her mouth.
Westerfield defense attorney Robert Boyce questioned whether the body was too decomposed for Sperber to rule out predation.
"Based on the lack of animal activity on the tissue, I would say I could," Sperber replied. There were animal teeth marks elsewhere on her body.
Really? How so? Based on evidence he is only guilty of living nearby. Got more to add to that? You should be paying attention. If the evidence starts to add up against DW, then we will know. Until then some folks are just fishin'.
I know it's all about sex to some people here, and they get quite a tingle from that (no offense), but evidence is important to others ...