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.
That is way too funny. If it were really true he would have confirmed it.
"He promised a vigorous defense," Dusek said of Feldman. "He did not say his guy was innocent."
Actually this is what Feldman said on 6/4 in the first afternoon session:
13 THE SCIENCE, THE SCIENCE IS GOING TO COME TO MR.
14 WESTERFIELD'S RESCUE, BECAUSE THE CRIME SCENE -- I'M SORRY, THE
15 RECOVERY SITE, LAW ENFORCEMENT COLLECTED UP AS MUCH AS IT COULD,
16 AND YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THE RESULTS. AND WHEN YOU HEAR THOSE
17 RESULTS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE CONVINCED BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT IT
18 WAS IMPOSSIBLE, IMPOSSIBLE FOR DAVID WESTERFIELD TO HAVE DUMPED
19 DANIELLE VAN DAM IN THAT LOCATION. THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW
20 BEYOND DOUBT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO HAVE PLACED HER THERE.
21 THEIR EVIDENCE.
22 SO WE HAVE DOUBTS. WE HAVE DOUBTS AS TO CAUSE OF
23 DEATH. WE HAVE DOUBTS AS TO THE IDENTITY OF DANIELLE VAN DAM'S
24 KILLER. WE HAVE DOUBTS AS TO WHO LEFT HER WHERE SHE RESIDED,
25 WHERE SHE REMAINED, AND WE HAVE DOUBTS AS TO WHO TOOK HER.
26 THANK YOU.
Dusek received alot of help from the Chat Rooms, is my guess.
The blurb about the marks on her arm were highly misleading. He knows darn well what else they could have been. He should have been honest and started with DW breaking up metal objects trying to dig himself out of the sand, where they were absolutely positive he had buried Danielle.
Other than than...Dusek leaves me ill.
sw
This may be old news to you, but I find it interesting. Quite interesting.
"Who's that?" he asked.
"It's your aunt," his lawyers informed him.
Hmmm, blueberry aunt?
Who's that?" he asked. "It's your aunt," his lawyers informed him.
Unless it's taped,straight from DW's mouth, I don't believe anything the prosecution puts out about what DW said. Remember the statesments contributed to DW while riding in the desert with Ott & Keyser? Never taped, but put out for public consumption as the truth. All these little tidbits prove nothing about Dw's guilt or innocence.
The bugs don't lie but the jurors believe they do. Yeah.......
"What else could it be? But we didn't have proof"
______________________________________________
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.