Contact the author
Unposted.com: The trial of David Westerfield
| I kind of wished I played the Lottery that day to tell you the truth because maybe it was my day to win the Lottery. Who the heck knows? Brenda Van Dam Extract from the Larry King Show - December 3rd 2002 |
Trial: Westerfield's jacket
Feldman: "If any of the items would have had blood on it, you would've spotted it?"
Clerk: "Yes,"
April 30th 2005 - James Allen Selby
March 2005 - The confession
01/12/03 - MEET THE EXPERTS !
01/12/03 - "new secret" motions unsealed !
01/08/03 - The videotaped interrogation
01/06/03 - The others
1981 - Adam Walsh
1989 - Tiffany Sessions
1991 - Jared Michael Negrete
1994 - Amanda Dougherty
1999 - Michael Negrete
THE INTERVIEW
Intro
David Westerfied
My theory about DNA - I
Computer and porn
12/7/02 - CHILD PORN RING & VAN DAM CASE
12/6/02 - BABYSITTER & TRIAL DINNER
BRENDA VAN DAM on Larry King Live - 12/03/2002
DANIELLE VAN DAM killed at home
Danielle's discovery: WILL MEDIA TELL THE TRUTH?
Video rape: 1 LITTLE GIRL AND 2 MEN
|
Identifying Danielle's bedroom Danielle's bedroom (2), Van Dams vacuuming Danielle's last day |
Blood on jacket (updated)
Fingerprints
DEATH SENTENCE
MEET THE JURY
WHY WESTERFIELD BECAME SUSPECT!!!
(updated)
|
PLEA BARGAIN MY POINT OF VIEW |
|
NEWS |
TRIAL EVIDENCE
Neal Westerfield
Molestation in the family
What is a penalty phase - definition
Penalty phase and the niece
Niece testimony (transcript)
Niece cross-exam (transcript)
My questions
My comments
Events related on this site are not fictional and are available through public records, conclusions and comments are made by the author.
Penalty Phase - Niece testimony
August 28th 2002 - During penalty phase the prosecution brought a witness, Westerfield's niece. The purpose of her testimony is not only to destroy Westerfield's image but also to provide some kind of explanation to Danielle's death.
Jenny L., the niece, testified that 12 or 15 years ago, when she was 5 or 7-year old, during a family reunion at Westerfield's house, David Westerfield (her uncle) came into the bedroom where she and her sister were asleep, put his finger in her mouth and played with her teeth. She pretended to remain asleep but when Westerfield put his fingers in her mouth a second time, she said, she bit him "as hard as she could." She said he then went to where her sister was sleeping, adjusted his running shorts, and left the room.
Later she told her mother: "Uncle Dave was in my room and he was being weird and it bothered me."
She didn't mention him rubbing her teeth, she didn't mention Westerfield adjusting his running shorts, she didn't mention her story to anybody else.
She mentioned all the above for the first time August 28th 2002. Twelve or 15 years later.
Answering a question from the prosecutor, the niece said she never saw if Westerfield was doing anything with his other hand.
Her mother testified that she confronted Westerfield, who explained that Jenny was fussing in her sleep and he comforted her. The explanation sounded reasonable, the mother said, and the incident was never brought up again.
In testimony the mother didn't mention anything about "rubbing teeth or adjusting his running short". The mother didn't mention a "hardly bitten" finger on Westerfield's hand. She explained that her daughter had received classes at school concerning potential sexual abuse and what to do if it happened.
Parents were very aware of how to react if their child was approached and didn't feel the need to report this "event" to police or authorities. They kept socializing with Westerfield and kept going to his house with their kids for years later.
Now, in the penalty phase, this event coming from the memory of a girl that was 5 or 7 years old takes a different aspect. There is nothing sexual in her declaration but there is mention of teeth and that's the reason why she was called to testify.
For those of you that missed the point, I believe the idea is to put in people's mind that Westerfield is a sexual predator getting off every 12 years by rubbing little girl's teeth, suggesting by that he rubbed Danielle's teeth like his niece pretends he did to her 12 or 15 years ago and this could be the reason why Danielle's teeth were missing.
Jenny's own mother didn't feel the need to investigate what her daughter related years ago any further and the girl didn't relate to her mother exactly what she said on the stand.
What is this testimony? Hearsay.
Why this "important" witness was not called to testify during trial?
Still, prosecution has no proof Westerfield kidnapped or killed Danielle Van Dam so they need to convince the jury with gossips and events barely corroborated by the own parents of the "victim".
I heard this from a TV reporter after the niece's testimony: "Westerfield entered the room and touched the little girl while he was touching himself".
How long will it take for the same reporter to accuse the niece's parents of being part of some child molester ring because the parents didn't report the "crime" to authorities?
This is degrading justice. As I say, there is still no evidence or proof David Westerfield committed any crime. Now we are at the stage where gossips are trying to be used to sentence a man to death.
Westerfield is being tried by the media; making a point to distort the truth as much as they can. This is a witchhunt, nothing else.
Our laws state : "Innocent until proven guilty".
If David Westerfield is guilty of anything why can't someone simply proove it?
Niece testimony from transcript