Misplaced Pages

Murder of Danielle van Dam

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fighting for Justice (talk | contribs) at 06:29, 27 December 2006 (rvv; THEY ARE ADULTS NOW TROLL). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:29, 27 December 2006 by Fighting for Justice (talk | contribs) (rvv; THEY ARE ADULTS NOW TROLL)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
File:Westerfield.jpg
David Westerfield

David Alan Westerfield (born February 25, 1952), of San Diego, California was convicted, in 2002, for the murder and kidnapping of seven-year-old Danielle Van Dam. He also received an additional conviction, a misdemeanor, for possessing images of subjects under the age of 18 in a sexual pose on his computer. Westerfield, a successful, self-employed engineer who owned a luxury motor home, is currently incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison. He received the death penalty. Westerfield lived two houses away from Danielle. About three days before her disappearance, Danielle and her mother, Brenda, sold Girl Scout cookies to Westerfield, a divorced father of two adult children, who invited them into his home and chatted with Brenda.

The Crime

On the evening of February 1, 2002, Brenda and a couple of her friends went out to a bar. Her husband, Damon Van Dam, stayed behind to look after Danielle and her two brothers. Damon put Danielle to bed around 10:30 p.m., and she fell asleep. Damon also slept, until his wife returned around 2:00 a.m. with four of her friends. The six chatted for approximately a half hour, and then Brenda's friends went home. Damon and Brenda went to sleep believing that their daughter was safely sleeping in her room. The next morning, Danielle was missing. The couple frantically searched their home for her, but never found her. They called the police at 9:39 a.m.

Law enforcement officials interviewed neighbors and soon discovered that Westerfield and another neighbor were not home that Saturday morning. Westerfield eventually arrived home driving his SUV approximately 8 AM Monday. From that point on, he became the prime suspect. Westerfield stated that he didn't know where Danielle could be, and that he was at the same bar that Brenda had attended with her girlfriends. Brenda was able to confirm this, but denied that she and Westerfield had danced together, as he had claimed. Two eyewitnesses testified to seeing them dance together, however. Westerfield then said that he had driven around the desert and the beach and stayed at a campground. Law enforcement put Westerfield on 24 hours surveillance from February 4, as they found it suspicious that he had given his RV a cleaning when he returned from his trip. The RV, his SUV, and other property was impounded for testing on, February 5.

Arrest

On February 22, police arrested Westerfield for Danielle's kidnapping after two small stains of her blood were found on his clothing and in his motor home. Danielle's partially decomposed body was found February 27.. Due to decomposition and extensive animal feeding, it could not be determined if she had been sexually molested, nor was any semen found on her body, on leaves around her body, or on Westerfield's bedding , but police believe he raped her. His attorneys suggested the police were in a rush to solve the case, and had never considered other suspects. Westerfield didn't have a criminal record.

The Trial

Westerfield pleaded not guilty, and went on trial on June 4, 2002. The trial lasted two months and concluded on August 8. On August 21, the jury found him guilty and recommended that he be executed. In January 2003, Westerfield was transported to San Quentin State Prison.

Entomology

The science of entomology was a major focus during the trial. Three entomologist, consulted by the defense, testified that flies first laid eggs on her body sometime in mid-February - long after Westerfield was under police surveillance.. On the other hand, one of these entomologist, David Faulkner, conceded under cross-examination that his time estimate was based mostly on the fly larvae, and that his research could not determine a maximum time her body was outside. The other forensic entomologist, Neal Haskell, used the weather chart prepared by James Gripp(forensic artist),stated that the warm temperatures made it likely that insects immediately colonized in Danielle's corpse. Their third entomologist, Dr. Robert Hall, estimated initial insect infestation occurred between February 12 and February 23, however, under cross-examination Hall acknowledged that the insect infestation of the corpse wasn't "typical" because so few maggots were found in the girl's head. Prosecutor Jeff Dusek questioned Hall about why his calculations were compiled through a method less favorable to the prosecution. Also why he criticized the findings of the prosecutions entomologist, Dr. Madison Lee Goff, and favored the entomologist hired by the defense. Goff testified the infestation may have occurred February 9 to February 14, but stressed that other factors may have delayed insect arrival.. He explained that a covering, such as a blanket, might have kept flies at bay initially, but no covering was found, and he later said the longest delay by such a shroud was two and a half days.

Pornography

Some of the computers and loose computer media in Westerfield's office contained pornography. According to the prosecution computer expert, James Watkins, only 1% of these images were "questionable" - they could have been child pornography. Westerfield denied that this was for his enjoyment, and claimed that he was accumulating the images so he could send them to Congress as examples of smut on the Internet. . The judge, however, ruled it would be up to the jury to decide if the images were child pornography or not and they would do so in accordance with California law.

"The most explicit evidence, a set of brief movie clips found on a recordable CD in Westerfield's office, featured a girl of 11 or 12, pinned down by one adult male while another raped her. The clip was accompanied by an audio track of her high-pitched, frightened wail as she struggled with her attackers.".

After conviction

James Selby Confession

James Selby wrote to the police in 2003 confessing to the Van Dam murder. He was wanted for raping women in San Diego in 2001, and for kidnapping a 9-year-old Oklahoma girl from her bedroom in the middle of the night and raping her in 1999, and was charged with a spring 2001 sexual assault on a 12-year-old girl in Sparks, Nev., but police don't believe that he murdered Van Dam. Prosecutor Jeff Dusek, who did read the confession, viewed it as not credible. It is believed that James Selby was in the Tucson, Arizona area when Van Dam was kidnapped in February 2002. Selby is believed to be responsible for a series of rapes in Arizona from October 2001 to May 2002. Selby - a divorced father of three - worked as a handyman and machinist and traveled often between San Diego and Tucson. He had a prior rape conviction in Colorado. In addition, Selby admitted responsibility in the slaying of Jon Benet Ramsey. According to Deputy County Attorney Bradley Roach, "It was an aspect of his personality to confess to something to see what other people would say," said Roach. Selby committed suicide in his jail cell on November 22, 2004.

Notes

  • In media reports before Westerfield's conviction, it emerged that he supported the death penalty. Also, during his initial interrogation with police, Westerfield was asked what he thought should happen to the killer, and he replied that he should be put to death.
  • During the trial, Westerfield's lawyers, Steven Feldman and Robert Boyce, suggested that the child porn might have been downloaded by Westerfield's 18-year-old son, Neal. Neal denied this.
  • His lawyers say the evidence of Danielle in his RV was possibly transferred by virtue of locard considering that Danielle visited his home and was playing inside of the home with her little brother a few days before she disappeared. They also allege the police improperly collected and mishandled much of the evidence against Westerfield.
  • The prosecution alleged that Westerfield was a "Peeping Tom," spying on his neighbors with binoculars.
  • In a police interrogation room, Westerfield hinted that he was contemplating suicide. He said, "My life is over" and asked an officer to lend him his pistol. Westerfield's detainers did not let him sleep. Later, he said he was only joking in reference to the pistol comment. He also claimed the police denied him a lawyer, even after he had requested one approximately 22 times.
  • The Van Dams sued Westerfield, but the case was settled out of court. The Van Dams were awarded $416,000 from several insurance companies who insured Westerfield's home, SUV, and motor home. The settlement also prevented Westerfield from ever profiting from his crime.
  • The Van Dams' lifestyle became an issue during the trial. The defense suggested that the couple were known for letting each other have sex with other people, and claimed that this lifestyle might have brought the kidnapper to their home.
  • When the trial was over, the media, quoting unnamed police sources, reported that Westerfield's lawyers were just minutes away from negotiating a plea bargain when a private citizen's group, started by the Laura Recovery Center and concerned local citizens, found Danielle's body. According to these reports, under the deal, Westerfield would have taken police to the dump site in exchange for life without parole.
  • During the penalty phase of his trial, Westerfield's nineteen year old niece testified that when she was younger, her uncle entered Westerfield's daughter's bedroom where she was spending the night with her parents in the home, as she slept he rubbed some of her teeth using his finger. It woke her up and she bit him and Westerfield quickly left the room. Westerfield did not get charged for it.
  • Law Enforcement never found evidence to suggest Westerfield entered the Van Dam home in the middle of the night.
  • In the months following the end of the trial audio tapes of Westerfield being interviewed were released to the media. In one police interview he tells investigators that he doesn't feel emotionally stable. He is told that he failed a polygraph test. Westerfield tells him that he wants a retest and that he was not involved in Danielle's disappearance.
  • Two days after Danielle Van Dam went missing a haggard and bare-footed David Westerfield showed up at a dry cleaners dropping off two comforters, two pillow covers and a jacket that would later yield Danielle Van Dam's blood. When law enforcement first interviewed Westerfield he did not mention going to the dry cleaners. .

Footnotes

  1. "Free Republic". "Judge Orders Motions Sealed In Trial Of David Westerfield: Live TV coverage of hearings also banned". Retrieved October 12. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  2. Ryan, Harriet, Court TV (June 6, 2002), "Grieving mother recalls day she found her daughter missing". Retrieved on December 18, 2006.
  3. Hughes, Joe, San Diego Union-Tribune (February 7, 2002), [http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/20020207-9999_1n7girl.html "Anxiety, worries grip missing girl's parents"]. Retrieved on September 24, 2005.
  4. Court TV (February 28, 2002), Missing 7-year-old girl believed found near wooded area outside San Diego . Retrieved on October 9, 2006
  5. Green, Kristen, San Diego Union-Tribune (June 21, 2002), "Experts: DNA evidence links defendant, victim". Retrieved on December 20, 2006.
  6. "CourtTV". "When Was Danielle Van Dam Killed?". Retrieved September 19. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  7. "San Diego Union Tribune". "Jury appears weary of sparring by insect experts". Retrieved September 19. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  8. Ryan, Harriet, Court TV (July 30, 2002), “Prosecution's bug expert struggles on stand”. Retrieved on October 8, 2006.
  9. Bean, Matt, Court TV (June 25, 2002), Jury sees graphic child pornography taken from Westerfield's home. Retrieved on October 8, 2006.
  10. "San Diego Union Tribune". "Child killer has proclaimed innocence in cards, visits". Retrieved October 16. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  11. Mudd, Judge William (July 9, 2002), Unsealed trial transcripts, page 6 of document (page 7664 of transcripts). Retrieved on October 11, 2006.
  12. Bean, Matt, Court TV (June 25, 2002), "Jury sees graphic child pornography taken from Westerfield's home". Retrieved on October 8, 2006.
  13. "KFMB stations, San Diego, California". "Local 8 News Exclusive David Westerfield's Letters from Death Row Part 2". Retrieved October 6. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  14. "Tucson Citizen". "Rapist's 'confessions' could reopen a case". Retrieved October 6. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  15. Boyce, Robert (May 7, 2002), Reply to opposition to Defendant’s motion to suppress statements, pages 2 and 9. Retrieved on October 7, 2006.
  16. Westerfield, David (March 24, 2003), Death-row letter, pages 3 and 4. Retrieved on October 8, 2006.
  17. Boyce, Robert (May 7, 2002), Reply to opposition to Defendant’s motion to suppress statements, page 2. Retrieved on October 8, 2006.
  18. San Diego Union Tribune(January 9, 2003) "Westerfield failed polygraph test" access date September 19, 2006
  19. "San Diego Union Tribune". "Clerk says defendant was 'very distant' ". Retrieved November 8. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help); line feed character in |work= at position 42 (help)

External links

Critical examinations of the evidence can be found at:

Categories: