Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prosecutor: Westerfield Guilty 'Beyond Possible Doubt'(Many Still Find Van Dam's Culpable)
Court TV ^ | August 7, 2002 | Harriet Ryan

Posted on 08/06/2002 8:53:49 PM PDT by FresnoDA

Prosecutor: Westerfield guilty 'beyond possible doubt'

Photo
Lead prosecutor Jeff Dusek traced the fingerprint, blood and fiber evidence linking defendant David Westerfield to a murdered girl.

SAN DIEGO — Calling the murder of Danielle van Dam an "evil, evil crime" that shattered notions of suburban safety, a prosecutor urged jurors Tuesday to convict her neighbor, David Westerfield, of capital charges.

Before a courtroom filled to capacity for closing arguments, prosecutor Jeff Dusek said the 50-year-old engineer snuck into the second-grader's bedroom last February, snatched her from her canopy bed, killed her and then "dumped this 7-year-old child naked in the dirt like trash for animals to devour."

"He's guilty of these crimes. He's guilty of the ultimate evil. He's guilty to the core," Dusek told jurors at the end of a closing studded with drama despite its three-and-a-half-hour length.

Dusek shouted and jabbed his finger at the defense table when he discussed Westerfield and the child pornography the prosecution says reveals a motive in the killing. But when he mentioned Danielle's death, his voice dropped to a whisper, forcing jurors to lean forward when he said, for example, of the moments before her killing, "This was not an easy time. This was not fast."

 

Westerfield listened to the prosecutor's closing argument Tuesday.

At one point, he slammed his hand again and again on the jury box rail to simulate, he said, Danielle's head striking Westerfield's headboard as he raped her. The image was too much for Brenda van Dam, Danielle's mother. She leapt up from her seat at the back of the courtroom and ran to the door in tears.

Westerfield's lawyer, Steven Feldman, began his closing late Tuesday afternoon. He is to conclude Wednesday morning and then Dusek will have one final opportunity to convince the panel to convict Westerfield of felony murder, kidnapping and child pornography charges.

The six women and six men who have heard evidence in the two-month long trial appeared to pay close attention to Dusek's summation, which focused on the forensic evidence connecting Westerfield to Danielle's disappearance and problems with his alibi for the weekend she vanished.

A spot of her blood on a jacket Westerfield took to the dry cleaners, Dusek said, "in itself tells you he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That alone. But it doesn't stop there."

He also listed fiber, fingerprint and hair evidence linking Westerfield to Danielle and said, "all of it comes back to his lap." Of two blond strands found in the defendant's recreational vehicle and genetically matched to Danielle, he said, "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt? Proof beyond a possible doubt."

Dusek pointed to an autopsy photo showing Danielle's badly decomposed remains and ticked off the fiber and hair evidence technicians gleaned from her body.

"From Danielle herself, she helps to solve this case," he said.

Westerfield gazed straight ahead, and in the back row of the courtroom, Brenda and Damon van Dam held hands and stared at the floor. A row in front of them and three seats to their right, Westerfield's sister, who was attending the trial for the first time and was in the company of her husband and son, stared at the image.

Dusek also attacked Westerfield's claim that he spent the weekend Danielle vanished on a 560-mile solo road trip in his recreational vehicle.

"He gives us a bogus story that just doesn't wash," said Dusek, referring to his account of driving from his home to the beach then to the desert then to another part of the desert before returning to the beach.

He said Westerfield spent that weekend sexually assaulting Danielle and then after killing her, searching for a place to dump her body.

The prosecutor listed other potential suspects, including the van Dams, their friends, Westerfield's teenage son and even "the bogeyman," but said each was investigated and cleared.

He criticized what he said were defense attempts to implicate Westerfield's son, Neal, in the crime and said testimony about the van Dam's risque sex life, which included swinging, was irrelevant.

"All the sex, the alcohol, who's doing this, who's doing that. That's got nothing to do with her kidnapping," Dusek said.

With Westerfield's mug shot projected on the courtroom wall next to a passport photo of Danielle taken the day she vanished, Dusek said, "I think at times we've lost track of the other person. We've lost track of Danielle, what happened to her, what he did to her."

The prosecutor downplayed bug evidence presented by the defense suggesting Westerfield was under surveillance when Danielle's body was dumped and therefore couldn't have been responsible.

"Everyone's different, has a different estimation, approximation, some might even say guess," said Dusek. He added, "This is not an exact science. This is not DNA."

The prosecutor told jurors repeatedly that he did not have to prove to them why Westerfield killed Danielle, only that he did, but he said he was certain jurors wanted to know, "Why would a regular, normal 50-year-old guy kidnap and kill a 7-year-old child?"

There was no answer, he said, just another question. Pointing to print outs of some 85 images of child pornography found on computers and discs in Westerfield's home, Dusek said, "Why would a normal 50-year-old guy have pictures of young naked girls?"

With some of the images of elementary-school aged girls, naked and exposing their genitals, flashing on the courtroom wall behind him, Dusek pointed at Westerfield and said, "These are his fantasies."

Westerfield stared toward the empty witness stand, never looking at the photos.

Dusek acknowledged that "if (Westerfield) is the guy, that destroys all our senses of protection."

"That's the scariest part — he was a normal guy down the street," said Dusek.

Defense lawyer Feldman promised jurors the heart of his argument Wednesday, but in a little more than an hour before the panel, he seemed to be hoping for a hung jury. He presented jurors with a list of "Jury Responsibilities," several of which seemed aimed at encouraging any panelist for acquittal not to cave to pressure from other jurors.

One "responsibility" read "All of you have the right to have your feelings respected."

Just before court broke for the day, Feldman held up a blank piece of posterboard and said, "This is the only evidence they have of David Westerfield in the van Dam residence."

He suggested the van Dam's swinging lifestyle endangered their children.

"You don't know what pervert is coming in the door when you're in the bar, drunk, making invites," he said.

 
Comprehensive case coverage


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 1,141-1,144 next last
To: The Other Harry
I'm tough as a juror and voted for the death penalty once, but I would be hard pressed to vote guilty in this case. I think it is a lot more likely that this guy was framed than OJ was framed, for example. The police had to arrest someone--tremendous pressure was on. With all the comings and goings of weird people in that house, it could have been anybody. And, I think it is more than a coincidence that the mother and Westerfield danced at a club that night. Smells awfully fishy to me. I feel deep down that the parents were involved.
21 posted on 08/06/2002 9:39:47 PM PDT by Pushi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
I feel so stupid sometimes. I thought s/he was yawning because s/he was SLEEPY. LOL

I really appreciate having this thread to come to when I got home. Thanks, everybody!

BTW, I've got the nicotine patch on myself right now. Been about 4 days now. Looks like it might be going to work. I sure hope so. I've been smoking 46 years now. Way too long!
22 posted on 08/06/2002 9:41:49 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
I'll keep you in my prayers. You WILL do it.

I did it for 12 years and then started again. Duh !!!!!!

I find it's helpful now, if I'm tempted, to think of what our youngest daughter and son-in-law (parents of our youngest granddaughter) said when I told them I was quitting.

They told me my granddaughter thanked me. She wants me to be around for her to grow up. That's hard to argue with.

God willing, I will be.

23 posted on 08/06/2002 9:48:13 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Karson
I just answered you on another thread!! LOL.
24 posted on 08/06/2002 9:48:13 PM PDT by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA
I’ve only been watching these threads loosely so my opinion is based on general impressions, but I wanted to post them anyway as a “view from the gallery.” My “two cents:”

Things that point to a guilty verdict:

Blood
Fingerprint
DNA
Hair
Fibers
Child Pornography
Orange fibers in DW’s wash room with no identified source
Use of bleach to clean a MH
Untimely trip to the dry cleaner
Untimely solo 500 mile trip in a MH
Absence of bug infestation in Danielle’s head

Things that point to a not guilty verdict:

Bug infestation, late date
Opportunity to kidnap, house was full
Lack of evidence in the VD home
Parents’ lifestyle

IMHO, a not guilty verdict in this case would be like the one with O.J. Simpson – where a civil trial for wrongful death would probably prevail on preponderance of evidence. So either way, Westerfield’s life is trashed.

In both this case and the OJ case, I’ve wondered if there was an accomplice – someone perhaps that the accused felt obligated to protect.

With Danielle, I wonder if she wandered out of the house unnoticed rather than being taken from her bed.

God knows the truth and I pray that His will be done in this verdict. And for everyone involved, I pray for peace.

25 posted on 08/06/2002 9:49:59 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pushi
I feel deep down that the parents were involved.

So do I. I wonder if some or all of the jurors feel the same. I understand that some didn't take kindly to the van Dam behavior in the courtroom.

Jeff Dusek maybe be able to slough off the lifestyle, strangers in the home, Barbara Easton, etc., but can/will jurors?

26 posted on 08/06/2002 9:52:26 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Thank you for those prayers. Means a lot.
27 posted on 08/06/2002 9:53:02 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pushi
I feel deep down that the parents were involved.

That lurks around in the back of my mind. Given the circumstances, that seems to me as possible as the notion that Westerfield kidnapped and killed her. I can imagine them introducing her to some pervert friend of theirs, and things getting beyond that.

That's very speculative, I know. But it seems no less speculative that DW.

28 posted on 08/06/2002 9:54:39 PM PDT by The Other Harry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
You're most welcome. : )
29 posted on 08/06/2002 9:54:45 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
So do you after reading your logs,hummmm
30 posted on 08/06/2002 9:57:19 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pushi
This is a resounding NOT GUILTY, which under American law means "case not proven."

DW cannot have entered the VD home and taken Danielle. In fact, NO ONE could have taken her unless he or she was already in the home with the VDs consent, and even that is stretching it. What I really am saying is that, either Danielle was outside and in public, and taken by a perp whether stranger or DW--- or it is an inside job by her parents, to cover up an accidental death or worse.

DW cannot have placed the body at Dehesa, and Danielle was either alive until the 12th/14th era and then the body placed on Dehesa on Feb 15/16 night.... or if she was killed earlier the body was refrigerated (possibly accounting for its partial drying or "mummification")-- until Feb 15/16 night, once again.

We need among other things to focus on just when anyone outside her family last saw Danielle alive, and where. Was she already taken by 3 or 4 pm Friday, or did she vanish only between 7 and 9 on Saturday morning, perhaps after going out early to play since everybody else was sleeping in after a long night of drinking and sex.

31 posted on 08/06/2002 9:58:21 PM PDT by crystalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
A civil trial wouldn't do any good. From what I understand, everything he owns had to be signed over to the attorney - including his patents!

I agree with you in the possibility that she could have wandered outside and been snatched. The deposit of her body is too much like Samantha's. And the backpack found by the park has never been explained.

However, I've felt from the beginning that Damon had something to do with it. Especially hearing him say to Brenda during an interview something to the effect of "be careful with the timeline".

One thing I do know for sure, I am praying to all get out for God's hand in this! That man may be guilty. If he is, let the jury convict. But I feel he is NOT guilty. If he isn't, let the jury acquit.
32 posted on 08/06/2002 10:01:07 PM PDT by JudyB1938
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: fatima
Keep trying, fatima. Sooner or later you might say something that relates.
33 posted on 08/06/2002 10:02:20 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
You are the best.:))))
34 posted on 08/06/2002 10:03:58 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA
"That's the scariest part — he was a normal guy down the street,"

Yeah. And the Van Dams were Ozzie and Harriet. Some neighborhood. Astonishes me how two adult parents managed to become completely void of the normal desire to safeguard their own child's environment and future, including the use of judgment and discernment in selecting one's own associates. It's a jungle out there...

35 posted on 08/06/2002 10:05:09 PM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PFKEY
Bump for prayers,fatima
36 posted on 08/06/2002 10:06:44 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JudyB1938
I also am praying earnestly for God's will to be done and I trust that it will be!
37 posted on 08/06/2002 10:07:33 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA
I do hope the City and taxpayers of San Diego understand Dusuck's premise. That DW committed this crime because he had viewed the child porn videos. Therefore, over the next several months, all jurors, trial watchers, LE officers, prosecution staff, defense attorneys will be subject to serious consideration/investigation should another child go missing in the San Diego area. After all, just watching those videos will lead you to murder. They have now all seen them, they too are suspect.
38 posted on 08/06/2002 10:09:54 PM PDT by kayti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatima
Thank you so very much (blush!) Hugs!!!
39 posted on 08/06/2002 10:10:35 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: FresnoDA
I see the defense is going for the "Westerfield left no trace of his being in the Van Dame house" routine. The child was known for sneaking out of the house, and I think the prosecutor's explanation that she was outside the house when Westerfield saw her, so he had no reason to go into the house. This is very plausible to me.
40 posted on 08/06/2002 10:11:58 PM PDT by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 1,141-1,144 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson