Deputy DA appointed to seat on bench
By Kristen Green
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
October 4, 2003
A national DNA expert who helped prosecute the O.J. Simpson and David Westerfield cases has been appointed a San Diego County Superior Court judge.
Deputy District Attorney George "Woody" Clarke, 52, was named to the bench yesterday by Gov. Gray Davis.
"I think the governor has made a good choice," said District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis. "It's our loss, but a great addition to the bench."
William S. Dato, 48, a partner with the firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, was also made a judge. He specializes in civil litigation.
Both Dato and Clarke were appointed to fill vacancies on the bench.
Clarke's work on a death-penalty case in the 1980s led him toward specializing in DNA.
Though DNA analysis had yet to be developed, Clarke used another scientific technique – blood group evidence – during his co-prosecution of David Allen Lucas. The Spring Valley carpet cleaner murdered three people between 1979 and 1984 and was sentenced to death.
By the time the trial ended, DNA was emerging as a form of evidence.
Clarke became an early proponent of the field, grasping DNA's power as a forensic tool at a time when the technique's legitimacy was being tested in criminal courts. The FBI later called on Clarke to lecture at its academy in Quantico, Va.
During his 21 years in the county District Attorney's Office, Clarke has risen to the top of his field. He is regularly called upon by prosecutors nationwide to assist in DNA cases.
"On these kinds of cases, there's no one that's as knowledgeable as him," said San Diego defense attorney Bob Grimes.
In 1995, Clarke was asked to join the Simpson prosecution team. He has said the criminal trial helped advance public awareness of DNA evidence.
Last year, he served as co-prosecutor in the Westerfield trial. He helped secure a conviction of Danielle van Dam's killer by utilizing a variety of DNA evidence, including fingerprints, hair and fibers.
Clarke serves as coordinator of the San Diego DNA Project, which reviews the cases of defendants convicted and imprisoned. He also coordinated a county program that investigated unsolved sexual assault cases using DNA.
His appointment to the bench is a great loss for the District Attorney's Office and for prosecutors who need assistance on DNA cases, colleagues said.
In recent years he has been training others in the DNA field, but it will take years for someone to get fully up to speed, said former county District Attorney Paul Pfingst.
"You just don't replace a hall of famer," he said.
Clarke has assisted in drafting state and federal legislation and in training attorneys, police officers, scientists and legislators on the use of DNA evidence.
He has testified before both houses of the state Legislature, as well as the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.
Colleagues said Clarke will do a fine job on the bench. Becoming a judge is something he has been talking about for years.
"It's just another way to serve the community," Clarke said last night.
Grimes said Clarke will be well-received by the defense bar because he will be able to listen to cases with an open mind.
"He's someone who's going to have a real balanced view of the system," Grimes said.
Clarke was named 2003 Outstanding Prosecutor of the Year by the California District Attorneys Association and 2003 Prosecutor of the Year by the San Diego Deputy District Attorneys Association.
He fills a vacancy left by the resignation of Judge Dana Sabraw. Dato will fill the spot left by Judge Joan Irion's promotion to the state Court of Appeal. Both will earn $139,784. Dato is an adjunct professor at the University of San Diego School of Law and at the California Western School of Law. He was involved in a case where the state appellate court in 2002 threw out an $88.5 million award to the attorneys. The award would have been split by several law firms, including Dato's, for their role in helping secure smog-fee refunds for motorists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another one BITES the dust. Hope y’all are doing well.
Grimes said Clarke will be well-received by the defense bar because he will be able to listen to cases with an open mind.
"He's someone who's going to have a real balanced view of the system," Grimes said.
"Balance." That's what I'm talkin' about. I like my balance, now.
Balance.
Pro, con. To, fro. Balance.
Because you gotta keep it even to be fair, right?
Back, forth. Up, down. Balance.
Hear me say something about serving the community. That's what I wanna do, serve the community. Balance.
Open mind.
I've got a copy of Bill O'Reilly's new book in front of me (gift to my husband...yuk)
Anyway..on pages 161 thru 165 he writes about the Westerfield "confession", LOL.
Ya'll read thru it at the bookstore, it won't take long.
"Little Danille was brutally raped and murdered and buried in a desert." (Buried?) pg 161 first paragraph.
Most of what he says, we could pick apart, bit by bit...but he swears "that's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God"..
Oh, and BTW, he does say he lost his complaint against Feldman. The one he foamed at the mouth over...where Feldman and Westerfield were just about ready to reveal where the body was, BUT someone found it, and they said "no deal". (O'Reilly doesn't touch or question the idiocy behind not letting Westerfield just "confess" thus sparing the State the trial).
He opines the California Bar didn't agree with his official charges against Feldman. Suprised?
Bill will forever believe the California Bar covered up for Westerfield's lawyers.
"The club almost always sticks together". says Bill O'Reilly.
That's my 2 cents today. Really, people. It's worth a read to see how he "spins it"..Regards, sw
Clarke was used by Dusek , not to support the TRUTH, but to ensure the TRUTH was hidden. He was used because the prosecutor knew they really had no case, but had to win. Because they knew the evidence, once reviewed by a jury, would be rejected.
SO THEY HAD TO LIE AND COVER AND CONFUSE.
Feldman was gagged, ignored, hands tied, etc. I also believe he was a stroke of luck for the Prosecution as well.
The police suggested Feldman to DW, since DW didn't seem to have the brains to know when to call a lawyer, and who to call.
They knew Feldman well, and knew what his tactics would be. They made sure they had a jury immune to Feldman's best weapon (bug defense). They assumed he would circle the wagons around that one point, and didn't have time to pursue any other options.
IMHO, had DW not asked for speedy trial, he likely would have not been convicted.
He received his reward.