Posted on 12/12/2002 8:19:20 AM PST by Jaded
When a person goes in search of enlightenment, it's usually good advice to avoid an Internet chat room. And yet it was a random posting on the Internet that led to a key piece of evidence in the David Westerfield case.
At a luncheon in Mission Valley yesterday, prosecutors Jeff Dusek and George "Woody" Clarke told a number of anecdotes – some of them funny, others poignant and revealing – about what happened behind the scenes in the most publicized criminal trial in San Diego County history.
The luncheon was organized by the San Diego Crime Commission and about 100 people attended.
The lawyers talked about their late-night strategy sessions, about the emotional toll of the case on their spouses, about moments of inspiration that came from the strangest of places.
They also took some shots at the media coverage – especially the media's treatment of the parents of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam – and revealed some previously undisclosed statements they said were made by Westerfield. He is scheduled to be sentenced Jan. 3 for kidnapping and killing the Sabre Springs second-grader. A jury has recommended the death penalty.
It was Dusek who told the story about the Internet.
During the trial, he said, the lawyers were surfing a Web site where most of the postings were from people convinced of Westerfield's innocence. Several of the postings dealt with the subject of the blond hairs found in Westerfield's motor home.
Prosecutors said the hair proved that Westerfield kidnapped the girl. Westerfield's lawyers said their client often kept the motor home unlocked in the neighborhood and that the girl might have snuck inside at some point to play.
On the chat room, the discussion turned to speculation about whether the prosecution had bothered to find out the date of Danielle's last haircut. The consensus in the chat room was that of course they had.
Actually, they hadn't. They'd never thought to do so.
It turned out that Danielle's last haircut had been five days before her disappearance. After the haircut, her hair was eight inches long – the exact length of the hairs found in the motor home, which hadn't been parked in the neighborhood for several months.
Dusek also revealed the story behind the alleged scratch marks on Westerfield's arm. Pictures of the scratch marks were used as evidence at the preliminary hearing in March – but the jury at Westerfield's trial never heard about them.
The reason: An expert analyzed the marks after the preliminary hearing and couldn't conclusively match them to Danielle's fingers.
"Woody and I are still convinced it's scratch marks," Dusek told the audience. "What else could it be? But we didn't have proof."
Dusek said parts of the trial were particularly draining on his wife, who broke into tears after listening to a media commentator who suggested that the defense's opening statements were more effective that the prosecution's.
He also criticized the media for overhyping the testimony about the van Dams' spouse-swapping and the couple's use of marijuana on the night their daughter vanished.
Discussing what he called the media's vilification of the van Dams, Dusek cited an incident where the couple was lambasted on talk radio for wearing Danielle buttons on their lapels during their testimony at the preliminary hearing.
Noting that the couple immediately removed the buttons from their lapels after leaving the witness stand, one radio reporter suggested that the couple had been making a phony display of their grief to influence the judge.
In reality, the only reason they removed the buttons was because both prosecutors wanted to have them as mementos, Dusek said.
"They walk out of that courtroom without their badges and they get blistered on the radio that night," he said.
Dusek also revealed some statements he said Westerfield made at various points during the trial.
At the start of the trial, just after the prosecution had finished its opening statements, Westerfield was being led down a hallway when he turned to a bailiff and said, "They may as well send me to (San) Quentin right now."
During the penalty phase of the case, when Westerfield's lawyers called friends and family members to the witness stand in an effort to save their client's life, Westerfield looked at his lawyers with a confused expression on his face when one woman approached the stand.
"Who's that?" he asked.
"It's your aunt," his lawyers informed him.
Yesterday, neither Steven Feldman nor Robert Boyce, Westerfield's two main lawyers, returned phone calls seeking comment.
At one point during the presentation, a questioner asked Dusek what he thought about Feldman, whose hyperactive theatrics became well-known to everyone who followed the case.
He called Feldman "a very good attorney." Citing ethics guidelines, Dusek wouldn't comment on a report in the Union-Tribune that Westerfield's lawyers had been trying in February to broker a plea whereby their client would reveal the location of the girl's body in exchange for a life sentence rather than the death penalty.
"He promised a vigorous defense," Dusek said of Feldman. "He did not say his guy was innocent."
WESTERFIELD ATTORNEYS WANT LIFE SENTENCE
(12-16-2002) - Attorneys for David Westerfield say the convicted child killer should not get the death penalty, because of alleged police misconduct.
In motions filed Monday, defense lawyers asked the judge to throw out Westerfield's special circumstance conviction and sentence him to life in prison without parole, instead of lethal injection as jurors recommended.
They argue that those investigating the slaying of seven-year-old Danielle Van Dam violated the defendant's "due process" rights guaranteed under the Fifth, Eighth and 14th amendments to the Constitution.
Westerfield, 50, was found guilty November 22 of murder, the special circumstance allegation and possession of child pornography.
On January 3, Mudd will either uphold the jury's recommendation or sentence Westerfield to life without parole. By law, the judge is required to weigh the evidence and make an independent determination of whether the death penalty is the appropriate sentence, Westerfield's attorneys argue.
Can't wait for the spin on this. I have a full supply of Dramamine. I do know that here, it's much easier to reverse Life than Death.
My bet is on death.
This Judge won't be denied his kill, since he did as much as anyone to bring it about. The upper courts will need to knock this maniac down again.
The appeals court already had to overturn one of his porn rulings, where he forced the defense to have to look at the seized images at the police station. The appeals court made the prosecution give the defense their own copies.
This story came out time and time again in the news media. It came out way before the trial, and it was known then that it was a fabrication. Essential facts were 'twisted' to make them sound better. Certain facts were totally changed (such as the source of the offer).
BUT, you go ahead and swallow whatever the SDUT puts out.
Here is a clue that the whole thing is a fabrication....If this report is true, and Talking Points believes it is,
Ask yourself why Dusek won't confirm this story.
I was not referrning to what PROSECUTION did after DW had been arrested and charged. I am talking about what the Prosecution/Investigators, etc did before he was arrested. Before someone takes that and runs with it, the police did follow some other leads. They did check out convicted sex criminals in the area. My point is that once they locked onto DW, other seemingly potential 'leads' were not investigated. Sure, the police/prosecutor have no responsibility to follow leads once they decide you are the guilty person. You are on your own then. You are screwed. Especially if you are not guilty.
Read the article and notice that the lawyers excuse/plea for their client is totally acceptable by the media and public. Matter of fact people are making jokes about it. But Feldman should be disbarred?
______________________________________________
Prosecutors said the hair proved that Westerfield kidnapped the girl. Westerfield's lawyers said their client often kept the motor home unlocked in the neighborhood and that the girl might have snuck inside at some point to play.
Actually, they hadn't. They'd never thought to do so. Police had planted the hair in the Motorhome and never thought about Danielle having had previous visits to the Motorhome. Just like the planting of evidence on the jacket at the dry cleaners, police hadn't thought things through very well. They were under pressure to find someone to arrest and convict before the preliminary elections.
Dusek also revealed the story behind the alleged scratch marks on Westerfield's arm. Pictures of the scratch marks were used as evidence at the preliminary hearing in March – but the jury at Westerfield's trial never heard about them. The reason: An expert analyzed the marks after the preliminary hearing and not only couldn't conclusively match them to Danielle's fingers, but it was obvious they were not scratch marks from anyone's fingernails.
Against the information from the investigator, and against all reality , "Woody and I are still convinced it's scratch marks," Dusek told the audience. "What else could it be? But we didn't have proof." "Matter of fact, most things in this case we didn't have proof of, so we made it up or faked it." "The jury was in such a confused state most of the time that I could have said just about anything and they would suck it up", continued Dusek. "Have you ever seen STREET SMARTS?", Dusek asked. "With the average witness about equal to most of the guests on that show, it was very easy to lead them on a twisty,quirky road that no one was able to follow. I did this to keep the jury from noticing that most of my witnesses were basically not telling the truth". "I don't even think the Russian chess champion or even a computer would actually be able to follow the train of thought I led the jury on throughout the trial. The technique was to blur any real evidence by boring the jury to death or confusing them with a deluge of technical information they couldn't absorb. Then stick in the lies as 'the easy answer'. I had them jumping out of their seats wanting the 'easy answer'. If every one of my trials was like this, I would never lose a case. It was almost too easy, having a jury, the media, and the public ready to swallow whole anything we wanted to put before them. Like puppets on a string, they instantly responded to every lie and misinformation we 'leaked' and bought it all as truth", finished Dusek.
There were TWO males living in that house.
WHY do you think the son wasn't cross-examined? DW was protecting his son. Use your imagination as to the reasons, but do it objectively, if you can.
sw
SIGNONSANDIEGO NEWS SERVICES
December 16, 2002
SAN DIEGO – Convicted child killer David Westerfield should get life in prison without parole instead of lethal injection as jurors recommended, his attorneys argue in court papers filed today.
They also asked Superior Court Judge William Mudd to strike a special circumstance of murder during a kidnapping.
They argue that those investigating the slaying of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam violated the defendant's "due process" rights guaranteed under the Fifth, Eighth and 14th amendments to the Constitution.
Westerfield, 50, was found guilty Nov. 22 of murder, the special circumstance allegation and possession of child pornography.
On Jan. 3, Mudd will either uphold the jury's recommendation or sentence Westerfield to life without parole.
By law, the judge is required to weigh the evidence and make an independent determination of whether the death penalty is the appropriate sentence, Westerfield's attorneys argue.
"If the trial judge decides the weight of the evidence does not support a death sentence, the court has the power, and indeed the obligation, to reduce the penalty to life imprisonment," they wrote. "The question before the court is squarely one of law and justice: Should this court order Mr. Westerfield's death?"
Westerfield's attorneys reminded Mudd that he found that San Diego police Detective Mo Parga lacked credibility when she testified in pretrial hearings that she didn't know she was violating the defendant's rights while he was detained by officers.
Mudd said on the record that he was troubled by the fact that Parga didn't know that a search warrant was being prepared for Westerfield's car, motorhome, trailer, home and him, according to the defense documents.
The attorneys also state that two San Diego police detectives may have been ordered to violate Westerfield's rights when they tried to speak to him or show him photographs in jail the day after the Sabre Springs second-grader's body was discovered.
"Here, the state's misconduct was extreme, blatant, outrageous and undermined the integrity of the judicial process," the attorneys wrote.
"This misconduct was not simply the isolated action of a single rogue officer, but a concerted effort on the part of numerous police officers to violate this capital defendant's constitutional rights.
Hopefully, Westerfield will write a best-seller, take the profits and hire one hell of an investigation team to settle the issue of his guilt.
The van dams are going to sue him for the profits, tho. Nice people. Doesn't look like they want him to have the financial means to dig up the real dirt in this case.
Gloria Allred, Mother of Court TV's anchor, Lisa Bloom is representing the Van Dams.
Brenda hires Allred...CTV has daughter to anchor trial...round the clock free CTV biased opinion coverage against DW....and the dye is cast. History will repeat itself.
sw
Just how did Feldman "smear" the names of the VD's?
All he did was point out the truth:
The parents lied for approximately 17 hours when their daughter first turned up missing...they only "came clean" when Barb Easton told LE the truth.
Brenda Van Dam was inviting TOTAL STRANGERS from the bar back to the VD home on the night Danielle disappeared.
Damon and Brenda were both smoking dope and drinking the night Danielle disappeared.
The VD's had a lock reversed on a door leading to the garage...anyone accessing the garage would have access to the entire house.
The VD's did not check on their children, even after the security system indicated a breach, not once, but twice.
The VD's had engaged in "wife-swapping" with the Kemals in the master bedroom, just feet from Danielle's room, on at least one prior occassion.
Nope, Feldman did not "smear their names", he just "told the truth", unlike the VD's themselves...
Westerfield was protecting his son from any further involvement in the trial, or the public humiliation of his viewing habits.
JMO...sw
The father had the DSL line, perfect high-bandwith connection for quickly downloading graphic files. The son was also used to using his dad's social security number, which is used to verify age. Also, why would neat and organized DW hide his porn. Men are King of their Castle, they don't runaround fretting about porn in their own office.
If DW is so compassionate about "Children", he would have turned his son in if his son were guilty.
Guilty of what? Those images are downloaded in bulk, not one at a time. Doubtful he ever saw whatever it was that you go on and on whining about. If the porn is so terrible write your congressmen and have it be a more serious crime than a misdemeanor.
Why isn't anyone asking the DA to explain the reason he went forward with this trial, when we keep hearing DW was begging to plea?
That would have saved poor Damon and Brenda the agony of having to face that big meanie Feldman. They also might have learned how the amazing Westy pulled off his caper.
Why doesn't that toad Alex Roth ask Dusek who it was from the DA's office that committed the ethics violation by leaking the news of the plea bargain.
Is there to be a investigation? Much like the one where they couldn't find the officer who was quoted in SDMag. as saying words to the effect, "Danielle was hit in her bed and that's was it".
I have to go look through my wardrobe, I think I'll dress up as a 6 foot 2 inch dwarf for the LOTR: The Two Towers midnight show.
Even though I'm sure Wormtongue will keep reminding me of Dusek, I plan on having a good time anyway!
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.