03073 – July 3rd 2002 – Transcript of David Westerfield Trial Day 16 – afternoon 1

The full Marcus Lawson report on what he found on Westerfield’s computers is available here
TRIAL DAY 16 – PART 3 – afternoon 1
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, TUESDAY, JULY 3, 2002, 1:28 P.M. (afternoon 1)


WITNESS:
Marcus Lawson (President of Global Compusearch, testified about what was on Westerfield’s computer drives, zip, cds – Cross-examination continued)


(THE FOLLOWING OCCURRED OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.)
(END OF PROCEEDINGS OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELCOME BACK, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
AN UPDATE ON THE 12TH, THE WEEK FROM FRIDAY. ONE OF YOU KINDLY BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THE FACT THAT BASED ON THE REPRESENTATIONS I HAD MADE THAT ONE OF YOU HAS MADE A DOCTOR’S APPOINTMENT FOR THAT DAY THAT IS GOING TO TAKE ALL DAY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE PRECURSOR TO THAT, THE PRE-TEST, IS GOING TO OCCUR ON THURSDAY LATE MORNING. SO YOU WILL DEFINITELY HAVE OFF THE 12TH OF NEXT WEEK, AND DEPENDING ON WHERE WE’RE AT IN THE TRIAL, WE MAY HAVE A VERY SHORT SESSION ON THURSDAY MORNING.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU KNEW AND UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU CAN LET YOUR EMPLOYERS KNOW THAT IF YOU WANT TO GO TO WORK ON THE 12TH, WHATEVER YOUR CIRCUMSTANCES ARE, YOU WILL BE FREE ON THE 12TH.
ALL RIGHT. MR. CLARKE.
MR. CLARKE: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. PROCEED?

THE COURT: YES. AS SOON AS THE THUNDERING MASSES ARE QUIET, I THINK IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE.
OKAY. MR. CLARKE.
MR. CLARKE: THANK YOU.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: MR. LAWSON, I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS YOUR ATTENTION ON FEBRUARY 4TH OF THIS YEAR. DO YOU RECALL PROVIDING TESTIMONY ABOUT SOME OF THE VARIOUS SCREEN PRINTS OR AT LEAST ONE SCREEN PRINT THAT RELATED TO THAT DAY?
A.: YES, SIR.
Q.: ISN’T IT CORRECT THAT THERE’S NO DEMONSTRATION IN ANY OF THE RECORDS IN THAT MACHINE THAT ANY PORN. SITES WERE ACTUALLY VISITED THAT DAY?
MR. FELDMAN: SORRY. OBJECTION. WHICH MACHINE THAT REFERS TO.
THE COURT: BE SPECIFIC, COUNSEL.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: ANY MACHINE.
A.: THAT THERE — I’M SORRY. COULD YOU ASK YOUR QUESTION AGAIN.
Q.: SURE.
ISN’T IT CORRECT THAT FROM THE EXAMINATION CONDUCTED BY YOU OF THE VARIOUS COMPUTERS IN THIS CASE BY WAY OF YOUR EXAMINATION OF THE HARD DRIVES THAT THERE’S NO INDICATION ANY WEB SITE WAS ACTUALLY VISITED THAT DAY?
A.: CAN I THUMB THROUGH AND LOOK?
Q.: SURE.
A.: THE WEB SITES THAT WERE VISITED APPEAR TO BE THE PINK FOR FREE, THE DAILY-TOON, AND POSSIBLY THE TEENS DOT COM.
Q.: OKAY.
LET’S TALK ABOUT PINK FOR FREE. ISN’T IT CORRECT THAT WHAT WAS RECEIVED WAS AN E-MAIL THAT DAY WHICH WAS OPENED?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: ISN’T IT CORRECT THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT WEB SITE WAS ACTUALLY VISITED? WHAT I MEAN IS CLICKING ON A WAY TO GET TO THAT WEB SITE AS OPPOSED TO RECEIVING AN E-MAIL FROM THEM.
A.: IN HOT MAIL WHEN YOU RECEIVE AN E-MAIL SUCH AS THIS FROM A PORNOGRAPHIC SITE OR FROM ANY SITE THAT WANTS YOU TO VISIT, YOU HAVE TO CLICK ON THE LINK TO GO THERE.

Q.: THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN ON THAT DATE, CORRECT?
A.: YES, IT DID.
Q.: TO WHICH SITE?
A.: TO THE PINK FOR FREE SITE.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
MR. CLARKE: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE A DOCUMENT I WOULD LIKE MARKED NEXT IN ORDER.
THE COURT: OKAY. 158.
THE WITNESS: I’M SORRY. NOT PINK FOR FREE. JOIN FOR FREE.
MR. CLARKE: OKAY.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: PINK FOR FREE WAS THE PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE, CORRECT?
A.: THEY BOTH ARE.
Q.: OKAY.
A.: I BELIEVE THEY’RE EVEN RELATED. I THINK THE SAME COMPANY OWNS SEVERAL THAT ARE NAMED SIMILAR NAMES.
MR. CLARKE: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE HAD MARKED AS COURT’S EXHIBIT 158 WHAT APPEARS TO BE A THREE-PAGE DOCUMENT LABELED INTERNET EXPLORER HISTORY.
(THREE-PAGE DOCUMENT ENTITLED “INTERNET EXPLORER
HISTORY” MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 158 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: MR. LAWSON, CAN YOU TAKE A MOMENT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
A.: (THE WITNESS COMPLIED.)
OKAY.
Q.: WHAT DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE?
A.: IT APPEARS TO BE A HISTORY OF U.R.L.’S, ANOTHER NAME FOR, AS WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT H.T.M.L. PAGES, BASICALLY SITES ON THE INTERNET THAT WERE VISITED.
Q.: OKAY.
CAN WE CALL THEM WEB SITES? IS THAT FAIR?
A.: YES.
Q.: AND ARE THEY READ FROM BACK TO FRONT SO TO SPEAK IN TERMS OF THE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF THE WEB SITES VISITED?
A.: THEY APPEAR TO START AT 15:50:38 AND END AT 20:29:18.
Q.: JUST SO WE’RE CLEAR, WHAT’S THE DATE?
A.: 2/4/02.
Q.: AND WHEN YOU USE THE TERM 1550 AS THE STARTING POINT, WHAT TIME IS THAT?
A.: 5:50? IS THAT RIGHT?
Q.: HOW ABOUT 3:30?
A.: I’M TERRIBLE. I WAS NEVER IN THE MILITARY. SO 3:50.
Q.: IN THE AFTERNOON?
A.: YES.
Q.: PROCEEDING TO WHAT TIME AFTER THAT?
A.: 2029. 9:00 O’CLOCK, 9:30.
Q.: 8:29?
A.: OKAY.
Q.: DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT?
A.: OKAY. I’LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.
Q.: NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE — DOES THIS IN FACT REFLECT THE HISTORY OF WEB SITES VISITED ON FEBRUARY 4TH FROM THE PARTICULAR MACHINE THAT YOU DESCRIBED IN YOUR EARLIER TESTIMONY TODAY?
MR. FELDMAN: VAGUE AS TO WHICH MACHINE.
THE COURT: WHICH MACHINE. SUSTAINED.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: YOU DESCRIBED VISITS ON FEBRUARY 4TH DURING DIRECT EXAMINATION. DO YOU RECALL THAT EARLIER TODAY?
A.: YES.
Q.: DOES THIS HISTORY REFLECT — AND DID THAT RELATE TO A SPECIFIC MACHINE?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHICH MACHINE?
A.: I HAD NAMED IT H. P. ONE, HEWLETT-PACKARD ONE.
Q.: ONE OF THE OFFICE COMPUTERS?
A.: ONE OF THE OFFICE COMPUTERS, CORRECT.
Q.: DOES THIS EXHIBIT WHICH HAS BEEN MARKED EXHIBIT —
THE COURT: 158.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: — 158, DOES THAT REFLECT THE HISTORY OF WEB SITES VISITED BY THE H. P. MACHINE IN THE OFFICE, I THINK YOU CALLED IT H. P. ONE?
A.: YES. DOES IT? I DON’T KNOW. I DIDN’T CREATE THE DOCUMENT, SO I DON’T KNOW.
Q.: DO YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION FROM THE VARIOUS MATERIALS THAT YOU WERE PROVIDED IN THIS CASE?
MR. FELDMAN: VAGUE AS TO TIME. ACCESS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU MAY ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: COULD I HAVE CREATED A SIMILAR DOCUMENT AS THIS? IS THAT YOUR QUESTION?
MR. CLARKE: YES.
THE WITNESS: YES. I COULD HAVE CREATED A SIMILAR DOCUMENT AS THIS.
MR. CLARKE: ALL RIGHT.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT DOCUMENT THAT APPEARS TO BE INACCURATE IN TERMS OF REFLECTING THE VARIOUS WEB SITES THAT WERE VISITED?
A.: NO. I DON’T SUPPOSE SO. I WOULDN’T KNOW. I DIDN’T CREATE IT.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
WOULD YOU FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE BEING ABLE TO COMPARE THAT TO THE DATA THAT YOU HAVE THAT YOU USED FOR YOUR EXAMINATION?
A.: WE COULD COMPARE THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I HAVE IN MY NOTEBOOK, YES.
Q.: ARE THEY SUFFICIENTLY COMPLETE THAT YOU COULD THEN COMPARE THAT TO THE MATERIAL CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT 158 TO DETERMINE IF 158 IS ACCURATE?
A.: FOR THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I BROUGHT, YES.
Q.: DOES THAT MEAN THERE ARE SOME SCREEN PRINTS YOU DIDN’T BRING?
A.: ABSOLUTELY.
Q.: HOW MANY SCREEN PRINTS DIDN’T YOU BRING TO COURT?
A.: NO. NO. EXCUSE ME. I’LL TAKE THAT BACK. SCREEN PRINTS I DIDN’T MAKE.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
ARE YOUR SCREEN PRINTS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLETE TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE IF THIS EXHIBIT IS ACCURATE?
A.: ACCURATE IN THE SENSE THAT THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I HAVE CAN BE COMPARED TO THIS, YES.
Q.: AND THEN BE ABLE TO TELL US IF EXHIBIT 158 IS AN ACCURATE DOCUMENT?
A.: I DIDN’T CREATE THE DOCUMENT, SO — I CAN TELL YOU FROM THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I HAVE AND I CAN COMPARE THEM WITH THIS DOCUMENT, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT FROM WHAT I DID, FROM THE SCREEN PRINTS I MADE, THAT THAT PORTION OF IT IS ACCURATE.
Q.: LET’S TRY IT A DIFFERENT WAY. LET’S TAKE THE FIRST ENTRY. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE ON PAGE 3. IS THAT CORRECT? AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF PAGE 3. EXHIBIT 158.
A.: YES.
Q.: THAT’S AN ENTRY ON 2/4/2002 AT THREE —
A.: 3:50.
Q.: AND IT SAYS DAVID WESTERFIELD AT HOST DOT — I’M SORRY. DAVID WESTERFIELD AT HOST, THEN WRITTEN IN W.W.W. DOT U.B.O.C. DOT COM.
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: IS THAT AN ACCURATE ENTRY?
A.: I WOULDN’T KNOW. I WOULD ASSUME THAT IT IS, BUT I DON’T KNOW. I DIDN’T CREATE THE DOCUMENT.
Q.: I UNDERSTAND THAT. WHAT I’M ASKING YOU IS DOES THAT DOCUMENT ACCURATELY REFLECT THAT ENTRY AT THAT TIME AND DATE FROM THAT COMPUTER. IF YOU CAN TELL US.
A.: NO, I CAN’T TELL YOU.
Q.: IN THIS THREE-PAGE DOCUMENT CAN YOU INDICATE FOR US WHERE THERE IS AN ENTRY REGARDING JOIN FOR FREE DOT COM. AS A WEB SITE VISIT?
A.: NO. NOT ON THIS DOCUMENT.
Q.: IF THIS DOCUMENT ACCURATELY REFLECTED WEB SITE VISITS BY THAT MACHINE, THE H. P. NUMBER ONE I BELIEVE IT IS FROM THE OFFICE, —
A.: M-HM.
Q.: — IF THAT WAS ACCURATE, WOULD IN FACT IT BE THE CASE THAT JOIN FOR FREE DOT COM. WAS NOT VISITED ON THAT COMPUTER BETWEEN THE TIMES — ON THAT DATE BETWEEN THE TIMES DESCRIBED?
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT AND ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE AND ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: IT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. SUSTAINED.
/ / /
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DO YOU HAVE ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT DOCUMENT 158 IS INACCURATE?
MR. FELDMAN: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE AND IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: ASKED AND ANSWERED. SUSTAINED.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: AS FAR AS THE WEB SITE VISITS THAT OCCURRED FROM THAT MACHINE ON FEBRUARY 4TH, DOES THAT INCLUDE VISITS TO BANKING SITES?
A.: ACCORDING TO THIS DOCUMENT?
Q.: WHAT HAPPENED — WHICHEVER DOCUMENTS HELP YOU — I’M SORRY — HELP YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION, YOU CAN REFER TO ANYTHING YOU HAVE.
MR. FELDMAN: WELL, YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. IT’S ARGUMENTATIVE. THERE’S NO FOUNDATION FOR 158.
THE COURT: HE’S NOT LIMITED IT TO THIS DOCUMENT.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE SO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE WITNESS: AND I CAN’T ANSWER THAT QUESTION WHETHER THERE WAS OR WAS NOT. I DON’T HAVE ANY INFORMATION THAT WOULD TELL ME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: SO YOU DIDN’T LOOK AT THE WEB SITES VISITED ON THAT PARTICULAR DATE ON THAT COMPUTER.
A.: YES.
Q.: IS IT THE CASE YOU —
A.: I DON’T RECALL THEM IN MY MEMORY WHETHER THERE WAS A PARTICULAR VISIT TO A BANKING SITE OR NOT.
Q.: OKAY.
DO YOU RECALL FROM YOUR MEMORY IF THERE WAS ANY VISIT TO A NEWSPAPER WEB SITE?
A.: YES. THAT I RECALL.
Q.: DO YOU RECALL IF THERE WERE ANY VISITS TO ANY GAMING SITES, GAMES?
A.: YES.
Q.: HOW ABOUT —
A.: THE PIGGS-HAUSE DOT COM. SITE WAS VISITED I BELIEVE.
Q.: DO YOU RECALL APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY VISITS TO WEB SITES THERE WERE ON FEBRUARY 4TH BETWEEN THE TIME PERIODS THAT WE’VE DESCRIBED EARLIER?
A.: HAVE I HAD SPECIFIC WEB SITES OR VISITS TO THE SAME WEB SITE REPEATEDLY OR. . .
Q.: LET’S TALK ABOUT EACH TIME SOMEBODY CLICKS TO GO TO THAT WEB SITE.
A.: THERE WERE NUMEROUS VISITS TO — I BELIEVE IT’S THE “SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE” WEB SITE. I’M NOT POSITIVE ABOUT THAT. THERE WERE NUMEROUS VISITS TO THAT IN THE LATER EVENING HOURS I WOULD SAY 6:00 TO 7:00 O’CLOCK, AREA. I CAN’T GIVE YOU A NUMBER SPECIFICALLY, BUT PROBABLY OVER A DOZEN I WOULD GUESS.
Q.: WERE THE VARIOUS WEB SITES VISITED IMPORTANT IN YOUR EXAMINATION IN THIS CASE?
A.: SOME OF THEM WERE, YES.
Q.: BUT YOU DON’T HAVE DOCUMENTS WITH YOU TODAY THAT CAN REFLECT THOSE SITES THAT WERE ACTUALLY VISITED ON THAT DATE BETWEEN THOSE HOURS.
A.: I BROUGHT THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I MADE.
Q.: WHICH ARE JUST SOME OF THE SCREEN PRINTS.
A.: THAT’S CORRECT. NO. THEY’RE ALL THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT I MADE. I DIDN’T SCREEN PRINT EVERYTHING THAT WAS ON THE COMPUTER.
Q.: WHEN YOU MADE SCREEN PRINTS, WERE YOU LOOKING AT SITES THAT WERE VISITED?
A.: YES.
Q.: AND SELECTIVELY PRINTING THEM AS OPPOSED TO PRINTING THEM EACH?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: AND THAT’S WHY YOU DON’T HAVE ALL OF THE SCREEN PRINTS, CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: NOW, I THINK THERE WAS SOME DESCRIPTION OF WHAT SPAM IS. DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A.: YES, SIR.
Q.: HOW MUCH OF THE E-MAIL THAT YOU EXAMINED, AND LET’S USE THE GATEWAY COMPUTER AND THE TWO OFFICE COMPUTERS, HOW MUCH OF THAT E-MAIL WAS SPAM?
A.: I WOULD BE GUESSING, BUT I WOULD SAY PROBABLY, LOOKING AT THE IN BOXES OF THOSE COMPUTERS, PROBABLY FIFTY PER CENT.
Q.: SPAM’S PRETTY COMMON, ISN’T IT?
A.: YES.
Q.: INCLUDING FROM PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITES?
A.: YES. IF THE PERSON IS ACCESSING PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITES, THEN THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO GET MORE PORNOGRAPHIC SPAM. IT’S NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO RECEIVE IT WITHOUT VISITING A PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE, BUT THE MORE PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITES YOU VISIT, THE MORE PORNOGRAPHIC SPAM YOU WILL RECEIVE.
Q.: IN YOUR EXPERIENCE HAVE PEOPLE RECEIVED SPAM-TYPE
E-MAILS FROM PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITES WITHOUT EVER HAVING MADE A VISIT?
A.: YES. THAT DEFINITELY CAN HAPPEN.
Q.: I’M SORRY. WITHOUT EVER HAVING BEFORE MADE A VISIT TO A PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE?
A.: I’M SURE THAT CAN HAPPEN.
Q.: IT DOES HAPPEN, DOESN’T IT?
A.: I WOULD ASSUME THAT IT DOES. I’VE NEVER ENCOUNTERED THAT SPECIFICALLY TO KNOW FOR CERTAIN THAT NO ONE WHO HAS EVER VISITED A PORNOGRAPHIC SITE HAS EVER RECEIVED A PIECE OF PORNOGRAPHIC SPAM.
Q.: I’M ASKING A DIFFERENT QUESTION. AND THAT IS: IS IT THE CASE — WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL US IN TERMS OF CAN A PERSON WHO’S NEVER VISITED A PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE RECEIVE AN
E-MAIL FROM SUCH A SITE THAT’S IN THE SPAM?
A.: YES. YES, THAT CAN HAPPEN.
Q.: YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL I’M FINISHED, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
A.: YES.
Q.: OTHERWISE THE COURT REPORTER WILL GET ANGRY AT BOTH OF US.
A.: I’M SORRY.
Q.: IS IT THE CASE THAT A PERSON NEVER VISITED A PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE CAN RECEIVE SPAM-TYPE E-MAIL FROM A PORNOGRAPHIC WEB SITE WITHOUT EVER BEFORE HAVING VISITED IT?
A.: THAT CAN HAPPEN, YES.
Q.: NOW I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE ATTACK VIDEOS, AND BY ATTACK VIDEOS DO YOU KNOW WHAT I’M REFERRING TO?
A.: YES.
Q.: AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT YOU HAD VIEWED THEM. IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: DID NOT LISTEN TO THEM, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: NO.
MR. FELDMAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT, SIR.
THE WITNESS: THAT IS CORRECT. I DID NOT LISTEN TO THEM.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: HAVE YOU DESCRIBED THEM AS ALLEGEDLY SHOWING THE RAPE OF A YOUNG ASIAN WOMAN?
A.: YES.
Q.: DON’T THEY SHOW A RAPE?
MR. FELDMAN: WELL, YOUR HONOR, THAT’S ARGUMENTATIVE AND CALLS FOR A CONCLUSION AND IS SPECULATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED AS TO THE USE AND THE FORM OF THE QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DO THOSE VIDEOS, ATTACK VIDEOS, SHOW A RAPE?
MR. FELDMAN: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER THAT.
THE WITNESS: I DON’T KNOW WHETHER THEY DO OR NOT.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DO THEY LOOK LIKE A RAPE?
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, JUST A CONTINUING —
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DO THEY INVOLVE A YOUNG GIRL?
A.: CAN YOU —
MR. FELDMAN: VAGUE AS TO THE TERM YOUNG.
THE COURT: DEFINE IT.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DO THEY INVOLVE A GIRL UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN?
A.: I DON’T KNOW.
Q.: DO THEY INVOLVE TWO ATTACKERS?
A.: YES.
Q.: BUT YOU DIDN’T HEAR THE SOUND?
A.: NO, SIR.
Q.: YOU DON’T KNOW WHO DOWNLOADED THOSE ATTACK VIDEOS, DO YOU?
A.: NO. NO, SIR.
Q.: YOU DON’T KNOW HOW RECENTLY THEY WERE VIEWED BY ANYONE, DO YOU?
A.: MAY I CHECK —
Q.: SURE.
A.: — MY REPORT?
Q.: IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT CAN AID IN THAT ANSWER.
A.: (PAUSE.)
THE LAST ACCESS DATE THAT I HAVE FOR ATTACK FOUR, WHICH IS ONE OF THE ATTACK SERIES, IS 11/18/01.
Q.: WHAT IF A PERSON VIEWED THAT PARTICULAR ATTACK, — AND LET ME JUST ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS FIRST. THAT WAS ONE OF THE VIDEOS CONTAINED ON ONE OF THE C.D.’S, CORRECT, THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: WHEN ONE VIEWS A PARTICULAR FILE, A MOVIE IN THIS CASE, FROM A C.D., CAN THAT BE VIEWED WITHOUT LEAVING ANY RECORD OF WHEN THAT WAS VIEWED?
A.: NO.
Q.: WHERE IS THE RECORD LEFT?
A.: THERE’S A LINK FILE THAT’S CREATED IN THE MACHINE THAT IT’S VIEWED IN. AND THE LINK FILE WILL HAVE THE NAME OF THE FILE.
Q.: AND THAT CAN NEVER BE DELETED?
A.: OH, IT COULD BE DELETED. YOU ASKED IF THERE’S A RECORD OF THAT. AND THERE IS. YOU TAKE A C.D. AND WITH ANY GIVEN IMAGE OR MOVIE AND YOU PUT IT IN THE COMPUTER AND PLAY IT ON A GIVEN DAY, THERE WILL BE A LINK SHOWING THAT NAME.
Q.: BUT THAT —
A.: SHOWING THAT FILE NAME.
Q.: AND THAT’S SOMETHING THAT CAN JUST BE DELETED?
A.: IT CAN BE DELETED.
Q.: HOW DIFFICULT IS THAT?
A.: TO DELETE IT? ANYBODY CAN DELETE IT.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
AS FAR AS THE VIEWING OF THOSE ATTACK VIDEOS, COULD THAT HAVE BEEN VIEWED ON FEBRUARY 1ST, 2002?
MR. FELDMAN: SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: COULD THEY HAVE BEEN? CERTAINLY.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: IS THAT TRUE WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THE MOVIES CONTAINED IN THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: YES.
Q.: IS THAT ALSO TRUE WITH RESPECT TO ALL OF THE STILL IMAGES CONTAINED IN THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: COULD THEY HAVE BEEN VIEWED? YES.
MR. CLARKE: COULD I HAVE JUST A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: SURE.
(PAUSE.)
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: AS FAR AS THE USE OF E-MAIL, MR. LAWSON, CAN A PERSON USE E-MAIL USING A DIFFERENT NAME THAN THEIR OWN?
A.: CERTAINLY.
Q.: HAVE YOU ENCOUNTERED THAT IN YOUR CASE WORK BEFORE?
A.: PEOPLE USING DIFFERENT NAMES THAN THEIR OWN IN THEIR E-MAIL ADDRESS?
Q.: YES.
A.: YES.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
IF I COULD REFER YOUR ATTENTION TO AND I THINK IT’S SCREEN PRINT NUMBER 103 THAT YOU DESCRIBED EARLIER, DO YOU HAVE THAT HANDY?
A.: I’LL FIND IT.
ALL RIGHT.
Q.: AND I BELIEVE YOU HAD DESCRIBED THAT THAT PARTICULAR SCREEN PRINT REFLECTED OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHOSE E-MAIL ADDRESS IS IDENTIFIED AS D. N. WEST 1 AS JOINING FREE DRIVE.
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT’S FREE DRIVE?
A.: FREE DRIVE IS AN INTERNET-BASED FILE STORAGE SERVICE THAT’S OFFERED FOR PEOPLE WHO WISH TO STORE FILES REMOTELY, NOT IN THEIR COMPUTER.
Q.: ANY TYPES OF FILES?
A.: ANY TYPE OF FILE.
Q.: NOW, IN THAT PARTICULAR SCREEN PRINT 103, WAS THERE A PASSWORD ASSIGNED AS FAR AS FREE DRIVE DOT COM. WAS CONCERNED TO THE NAME D. N. WEST 1?
A.: YES, THERE IS.
Q.: WHO SELECTS THAT PASSWORD?
A.: THE USER.
Q.: WHAT’S THE NUMBER ON THAT PASSWORD?
A.: 5203.
Q.: IS THAT NUMBER FAMILIAR TO YOU FOR ANY REASON?
A.: NOT PARTICULARLY.
Q.: DO YOU KNOW MR. DAVID A. WESTERFIELD’S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER?
A.: NO.
(DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN MR. CLARKE
AND MR. DUSEK.)
MR. CLARKE: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE A DOCUMENT I WOULD LIKE COURT’S EXHIBIT NEXT IN ORDER.
THE COURT: 159.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, 159?
THE COURT: 159.
MR. CLARKE: YOUR HONOR, JUST FOR THE RECORD AT THIS POINT I WOULD HAVE IT IDENTIFIED AS A ONE-PAGE DOCUMENT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(ONE-PAGE DOCUMENT MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 159
FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: MR. LAWSON, IF I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT’S BEEN MARKED EXHIBIT 159. COULD YOU TAKE A MOMENT JUST TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THAT IS.
A.: (THE WITNESS COMPLIED.)
IT LOOKS LIKE A LAW ENFORCEMENT PRINTOUT OF AN ARREST RECORD.
Q.: IN YOUR EXPERIENCE — YOU’VE HAD EXPERIENCE AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
A.: YES, SIR.
MR. FELDMAN: EXCUSE ME. COULD WE SEE THE DOCUMENT, PLEASE.
THE COURT: SURE.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, I WANT TO ADDRESS THE COURT ON THIS DOCUMENT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BOB.
(SIDEBAR DISCUSSION, OUT OF THE HEARING OF THE JURY,
AS FOLLOWS:

(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.)

(END OF SIDEBAR DISCUSSION.)
MR. CLARKE: PROCEED, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: MR. LAWSON, REFERRING YOU BACK AGAIN TO EXHIBIT 159, JUST SO WE’RE CLEAR IN TERMS OF AN ARREST, DOES THAT DOCUMENT APPEAR TO REFLECT THE ARREST OF MR. WESTERFIELD IN THIS CASE?
A.: YES, IT DOES.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
DOES THAT HAVE IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF MR. WESTERFIELD?
A.: YES, IT DOES.
Q.: INCLUDING A NAME?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT IS THE NAME THAT’S LISTED?
A.: DAVID ALAN WESTERFIELD.
Q.: IS THERE A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER LISTED?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT IS THAT?
MR. FELDMAN: HEARSAY.
THE COURT: DULY NOTED. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: 005-52-5203.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: COULD YOU JUST READ ONCE AGAIN THE LAST FOUR DIGITS.
A.: 5203.
Q.: IS THAT THE SAME NUMBER AS THE PASSWORD THAT WAS REGISTERED UNDER THE NAME D. N. WEST 1 AT THE FREE DRIVE DOT COM. WEB SITE?
A.: YES, IT IS.
Q.: NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO — WE ARE GOING TO SHIFT TOPICS HERE. PERHAPS I CAN GET THAT EXHIBIT OUT OF THE WAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO THE LOOSE MEDIA, AND I BELIEVE YOU DESCRIBED THAT YOU VIEWED THEM IN SAN DIEGO. IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: WERE COPIES MADE FOR YOU OF THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: YES. THEY WERE COPIED TO A HARD DRIVE, A QUANTUM HARD DRIVE. EACH INDIVIDUAL PIECE WAS PUT ON THE HARD DRIVE.
Q.: THE HARD DRIVES THAT WERE COPIED OR HARD DRIVE OR HARD DRIVES, HOWEVER MANY THERE WERE, THAT WERE COPIED FROM THE LOOSE MEDIA, DID YOU TAKE THOSE BACK TO YOUR HOME IN WASHINGTON?
A.: NO.
Q.: WHY NOT?
A.: I DON’T ACCEPT ANY MEDIA THAT CONTAINS ANYTHING THAT IS ALLEGED TO BE CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN OUR OFFICE UNLESS IT’S ACCOMPANIED BY A FEDERAL COURT ORDER FOR BOTH ITS TRANSPORTATION AND ITS POSSESSION.
Q.: IS THAT BECAUSE YOU’RE AFRAID IT MIGHT BE A CRIME?
MR. FELDMAN: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: NO. OVERRULED.
YOU MAY ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: YES. I DON’T WANT TO GET ANYONE IN MY OFFICE OR MYSELF IN TROUBLE FOR A TECHNICAL VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW, SO THAT IS — THAT’S THE STANDING RULE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR OFFICE.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: TECHNICAL OR A FULL VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW?
A.: IF IT’S ACCOMPANIED BY A STATE COURT ORDER SIGNED BY A STATE JUDGE, IT WOULD BE MY OPINION THAT IT WOULD BE LAWFUL FOR US TO BE IN POSSESSION OF IT TO DO OUR JOB. BUT, NEVERTHELESS, —
Q.: ABSENT — YOU DIDN’T HAVE A COURT ORDER IN THIS CASE, RIGHT?
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, AGAIN THIS IS MISLEADING. OBJECTION AND REQUEST SIDEBAR.
THE COURT: NO. THE OBJECTION IS SUSTAINED.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: YOU DIDN’T TAKE THOSE HARD DRIVES COPIED FROM THE LOOSE MEDIA TO WASHINGTON BECAUSE YOU WERE AFRAID YOU MIGHT BE COMMITTING A CRIME BY DOING SO, CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: NOW I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS IN ON THE ZIP — SPECIFIC ZIP DISKS AS WE’VE USED THAT TERM AND THE C.D.’S THAT WERE PART OF THE LOOSE MEDIA. OKAY?
A.: OKAY.
Q.: IN PARTICULAR WAS THERE A ZIP NUMBER 16333?
A.: I’LL REFER TO MY REPORT.
Q.: FINE.
A.: I’M SORRY. YOU SAID A C.D. OR A ZIP?
Q.: A ZIP DISK.
A.: I DON’T HAVE ANYTHING SHOWING THE NAME OF A PARTICULAR ZIP. BUT I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT’S THE CASE, THAT ONE OF THE ZIP DRIVES WAS NAMED THAT.
Q.: SO YOUR REPORT AND THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DON’T LIST THE ZIP OR C.D. NUMBERS, IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: NOT IN THIS NOTEBOOK, NO.
Q.: IS IT BACK IN YOUR OFFICE?
A.: YEAH. IT MIGHT BE.
Q.: ON WHAT?
A.: WHAT I RECALL PRINTING OUT FROM THE HARD DRIVE THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE R. C. F. L. WAS WHAT’S REFERRED TO AS A FILE TREE THAT EXPLAINED WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF MEDIA WERE THAT WERE COPIED TO THIS INDIVIDUAL HARD DRIVE, AND THEN THAT WOULD TELL ME WHICH WERE C.D.’S AND WHICH WERE ZIPS.
Q.: BUT TODAY WITH WHAT YOU HAVE YOU CAN’T TELL US, FOR INSTANCE, THE NUMBERS OF EACH OF THE ZIPS OR C.D.’S FROM THE LOOSE MEDIA.
A.: NO, SIR.
Q.: DO YOU RECALL ONE OF THOSE ZIP DISKS HAVING STILLS OF YOUNG CHILDREN?
A.: YES.
Q.: UNDRESSED?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHEN WAS THAT ZIP DISK CREATED?
A.: (PAUSE.)
Q.: AND IF YOU COULD JUST TELL US IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO A SPECIFIC DOCUMENT WHICH ONE IT IS.
A.: SCREEN PRINT 164.
Q.: AND THE DATE?
A.: IS THE FILE WOULD HAVE BEEN CREATED ON 12/13/99.
Q.: IF A PERSON WERE EIGHTEEN YEARS OLD TODAY, WHAT WOULD THEY HAVE BEEN IN DECEMBER OF ’99?
A.: YOU ARE ASKING ME TO DO MATH. AGAIN.
Q.: IT’S NOT A MATH. QUIZ. IT’S NOT A MATH. QUIZ.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, I’LL STIPULATE THE ANSWER IS FIFTEEN.
THE COURT: YOU’RE QUICKER.
THE WITNESS: ALMOST EVERYONE IS QUICKER AT MATH. THAN ME.
MR. CLARKE: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: I WILL TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THAT IF NECESSARY.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: OKAY.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: WAS THERE ANOTHER ZIP DISK THAT HAD STILL ANIME’S OF A YOUNG GIRL, A SEPARATE ZIP DISK IN THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: YES.
Q.: I ASSUME YOU CANNOT TELL US THE NUMBER OF THAT DISK.
A.: NO.
Q.: CAN YOU TELL US WHEN IT WAS CREATED?
A.: YES, I CAN.
3/18/99.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
AND WITHOUT DOING THE MATH., SAME YEAR AS THE EARLIER DISK.
A.: THANK YOU. YES.
Q.: DO YOU RECALL A C.D. THAT CONTAINED BOTH STILL IMAGES OF YOUNG GIRLS PLUS A VIDEO CALLED IAKA OR I-A-K-A? DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A.: NOT SPECIFICALLY. BUT I BELIEVE THERE — I BELIEVE YOU THAT THERE IS. I DON’T RECALL THAT SPECIFIC FILE NAME.
Q.: WELL, I DON’T WANT YOU TO BELIEVE ME. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS CAN YOU GIVE US AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WITH ANY OF THE MATERIALS YOU’VE BROUGHT WITH YOU TODAY.
A.: WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE FILE?
Q.: THE C.D.
A.: WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE C.D.?
Q.: WELL, IS THERE A NUMBER TO THE C.D. FIRST OF ALL?
A.: I DON’T KNOW. I CAN’T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A C.D. THAT CONTAINS THOSE ITEMS?
A.: YES.
Q.: ARE YOU GUESSING?
A.: NO. I DON’T KNOW THE NAME OF IT. I DON’T —
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
WHAT DO YOU REMEMBER ABOUT THAT C.D.?
A.: THERE WERE A NUMBER OF IMAGES THAT WERE CATEGORIZED IN FOLDERS AND SUBFOLDERS ON THE C.D. WHAT I ASKED YOU WAS IF YOU WOULD GIVE ME THE NAME OF THE SPECIFIC FILE THAT YOU’RE LOOKING FOR. I’LL SEE IF I HAVE THE SCREEN PRINTS OF IT.
Q.: I THINK IN PARTICULAR THE VIDEO, IF THAT WILL HELP, IS SPELLED I-A-K-A.
A.: I-A-K-A. AND IT’S AN A.B.I.?
Q.: I DON’T KNOW. IF YOU CAN TELL US.
A.: (PAUSE.)
NO, I DON’T HAVE A SCREEN PRINT WITH THAT NAME.
Q.: SO YOU CAN’T TELL US?
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: TELL US WHAT? REPHRASE THE QUESTION, COUNSEL.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: SO YOU CAN’T TELL US IF THAT FILE EVEN CAME OFF ONE OF THE LOOSE MEDIA.
A.: NOT BY MEMORY, NO.
Q.: AND YOU HAVE NOTHING WITH YOU THAT CAN HELP US DETERMINE THAT.
A.: NO, SIR.
Q.: YOU DON’T KNOW WHO DOWNLOADED THE IMAGES AND/OR MOVIES AS PART OF THE LOOSE MEDIA ON ANY OF THE ZIP DISKS, CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: YOU DON’T KNOW WHO DOWNLOADED ANY OF THE STILL IMAGES OR MOVIES ON ANY OF THE C.D.’S, CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: WOULD IT BE CORRECT TO SAY THAT AS FAR AS DAVID NEAL WESTERFIELD HAVING BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATION OF THOSE ZIP DISKS OR C.D.’S, THAT THAT WOULD BE SPECULATION ON YOUR PART?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: NOW, AS FAR AS THE C.D.’S AND ZIPS THEMSELVES, DID THEY HAVE ANY ACTUAL MARKINGS ON THE C.D.? LET’S USE THE C.D.’S. DID THEY HAVE ANY MARKINGS ON THE C.D. ITSELF?
A.: I DON’T KNOW. I DIDN’T SEE THE ORIGINAL C.D.’S.
Q.: YOU’VE NEVER SEEN THEM?
A.: NO.
Q.: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SHOWN ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THEM?
A.: NO.
Q.: I WOULD LIKE TO REFER YOU TO AN EXHIBIT NUMBERED 102, A SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS. ASK YOU IF YOU WOULD TO TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK AT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.
A.: (THE WITNESS COMPLIED.)
Q.: HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THEM?
A.: YES.
Q.: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SHOWN ANY OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS BEFORE?
A.: NO.
Q.: IN PARTICULAR, WITH REGARD TO THE PHOTOS ON EXHIBIT 102, WERE YOU EVER SHOWN PHOTOGRAPH I WITH A PLACARD 12 IN IT?
A.: NO.
Q.: WITH RESPECT TO PHOTOGRAPH J, HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A PHOTOGRAPH, THAT IS, THAT PHOTOGRAPH, DEPICTING WHAT’S PROBABLY FAIR TO CALL LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: NO.
Q.: WERE YOU GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE LOOSE MEDIA WHEN YOU WERE IN SAN DIEGO?
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
MR. FELDMAN: VAGUE AS TO OPPORTUNITY.
THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: I’VE NEVER — I RECEIVED MY COPIES OF THE MEDIA AND WAS QUESTIONED FROM MISS JONES WHO WORKS IN MR. FELDMAN’S OFFICE. SO I’VE NEVER HAD ANY CONTACT WITH ANY MEMBERS OF THE R. C. F. L.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DID YOU EVER GO TO THE R. C. F. L.?
A.: NO.
Q.: DID YOU EVER ASK TO GO THERE TO VIEW THE ORIGINAL MEDIA?
A.: NO.
Q.: AS AN EXAMINER, WOULDN’T IT BE IMPORTANT TO YOU TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL MEDIA THEMSELVES?
A.: IF I WERE ALLOWED TO. I HAVE NEVER BEEN ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL PIECES OF ORIGINAL EVIDENCE.
Q.: DID YOU ASK IN THIS CASE?
A.: NO.
Q.: SO YOU WERE NEVER DENIED THAT OPPORTUNITY IN THIS CASE?
A.: NO.
Q.: SO YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT MARKINGS ARE ON THOSE C.D’S AND ZIP DISKS, CORRECT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: DO YOU KNOW WHERE THEY WERE FOUND?
A.: IN THE DEFENDANT’S OFFICE.
Q.: IS IT IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHERE THEY WERE FOUND IN TRYING TO DETERMINE WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM?
A.: THAT CAN BE HELPFUL, YES.
Q.: IT CAN BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL, CAN’T IT?
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: C.D.’S CAN BE LABELED OR ARE LABELED, CORRECT? AND I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT EXTERNAL MARKINGS WITH A PEN OR WHATEVER, I’M TALKING ABOUT THE ELECTRONIC LABELING OF THEM. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I’M REFERRING TO?
A.: YES, SIR.
Q.: DO YOU KNOW HOW THE C.D.’S AS PART OF THE LOOSE MEDIA WERE LABELED?
A.: I REMEMBER THEM HAVING A TYPICAL C.D. NUMBERING SYSTEM THAT IS COMMON WHEN C.D.’S ARE COPIED IN A C.D. WRITE MACHINE FOR INSTANCE.
Q.: WERE ALL OF THESE C.D.’S LABELED WITH NUMBERS?
A.: AS I RECALL, THEY WERE.
Q.: ISN’T IT CORRECT THAT ONE OF THEM WAS LABELED SPECTRUM?
A.: I DON’T RECALL.
Q.: WOULDN’T THAT BE IMPORTANT TO KNOW IF YOU WERE TRYING TO DETERMINE WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREATION OF THOSE C.D.’S?
A.: YES.
Q.: YOU DIDN’T DO THAT IN THIS CASE, CORRECT?
A.: I DIDN’T HAVE ACCESS TO THE ORIGINAL MEDIA.
Q.: YOU NEVER ASKED TO SEE THEM, CORRECT?
MR. FELDMAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: IT’S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: WOULDN’T THE LABELING OF A C.D. BE IMPORTANT IN HELPING TO TRY TO DETERMINE WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT?
MR. FELDMAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED. OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: ARE YOU AWARE OF THE NAME OF THE DEFENDANT’S BUSINESS?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT’S THAT?
A.: SPECTRUM DESIGNS I BELIEVE.
Q.: INCIDENTALLY, WITH REGARD TO THE LABELING OF THE C.D.’S, DID YOU REVIEW ANY OF THE REPORTS DONE BY THE
R. C. F. L. IN THIS CASE?
A.: YES, SIR.
Q.: DON’T THOSE REPORTS LIST THE NAME SPECTRUM AS THE LABELING ON ONE OF THE C.D.’S IN THE LOOSE MEDIA?
A.: FROM MEMORY I DON’T RECALL IF THEY DO OR NOT.
Q.: WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO LOOK AT?
A.: THE REPORT ITSELF?
Q.: TO FIND OUT ANY LABELING THAT EXISTED ON THESE C.D.’S.
A.: YES.
Q.: YOU DIDN’T DO THAT, CORRECT?
A.: I DIDN’T DO WHAT?
Q.: DIDN’T REVIEW THE REPORTS FOR DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THE LABELING OF THE C.D. WAS CONTAINED IN THEM.
A.: WHAT I SAID IS I DON’T REMEMBER SEEING THAT IN THE REPORT OR NOT. THAT THERE WAS ANY MENTIONING OF LABELING IN THE C. D.’S.
Q.: HOW ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION OF FILES ON THESE C.D.’S AND ZIP DISKS. DID YOU REVIEW THAT?
A.: YES.
Q.: THEY WERE HIGHLY ORGANIZED, WEREN’T THEY?
A.: IF YOU WANT TO DEFINE HIGHLY. . . THEY WERE ORGANIZED BETWEEN FOLDERS AND SUBFOLDERS, AND THE FOLDERS AND SUBFOLDERS GENERALLY DEPICTED WHAT WAS — THE FOLDER WAS NAMED.
Q.: WELL, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE HAVEN’T YOU SEEN FILES INVOLVING PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIAL THAT WEREN’T ORGANIZED VERY WELL?
A.: YES.
Q.: THIS CASE REPRESENTED AN EXAMPLE OF WELL-ORGANIZED FILES, CORRECT?
A.: YES.
Q.: THE C.D.’S AND ZIP DISKS HAD FILES COMMONLY USING THE PREFIX I. E. A., CORRECT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: DID YOU EXAMINE THE COMPUTERS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WITH RESPECT TO THE DEFENDANT’S BUSINESS THAT PREFIX
I. E. A. WAS COMMONLY USED?
A.: I DID NOT NOTICE THAT IT WAS COMMONLY USED.
Q.: DID YOU LOOK FOR IT?
A.: YES.
Q.: WASN’T THAT IMPORTANT?
A.: YES.
Q.: AREN’T THERE MANY, MANY FILES PREFIXED BY I. E. A. RELATING TO THE DEFENDANT’S BUSINESS?
MR. FELDMAN: VAGUE. I. E. A.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. FELDMAN: I’M SORRY. VAGUE. MANY, MANY, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: NOT THAT I RECALL.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DID YOU RECORD THAT ANYWHERE?
A.: RECORD THAT THERE WEREN’T ANY OR THAT I DIDN’T NOTICE ANY?
Q.: THE EXISTENCE OF THESE BUSINESS FILES LABELED STARTING WITH THE PREFIX I. E. A.
MR. FELDMAN: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER THAT.
THE WITNESS: AND I’M NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT. MAYBE I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: PART OF YOUR TASK IN THIS CASE WAS TO TRY TO HELP DETERMINE WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE C.D.’S AND ZIP DISKS. RIGHT?
MR. FELDMAN: MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE. OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU MAY ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS LOOKING AT, YES.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: WOULDN’T IT BE IMPORTANT IN THAT EXAMINATION TO SEE IF THERE’S ANY SIMILARITIES HELD BY FILES ON THE C.D.’S AND THE ZIP DISKS IN TERMS OF FILE NAMES AND C.D.’S, I’M SORRY, AND FILE NAME PREFIXES CONTAINED ON THE VARIOUS COMPUTERS?
A.: YES.
Q.: TODAY CAN YOU TELL US HOW MANY, EVEN APPROXIMATELY, THERE ARE FILE NAMES ON THE OFFICE COMPUTERS THAT START WITH
I. E. A. RELATING TO A BUSINESS?
A.: NO, I CAN’T.
Q.: DID YOU RECORD THAT ANYWHERE?
A.: NO.
Q.: AS FAR AS THE MATERIALS THAT YOU REVIEWED, WERE YOU ASKED TO REVIEW ANY POLICE REPORTS?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT POLICE REPORTS?
A.: THE FORENSICS REPORTS FOR THE — THERE WERE, AS I RECALL, THERE WERE SEVERAL DIFFERENT DETECTIVES THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE FORENSICS REPORTS FROM THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL FORENSICS LABORATORY. AND I’M TRYING TO RECALL IF THERE WERE ANY REPORTS THAT WERE ALSO WRITTEN BY THE LEAD DETECTIVE IN THE CASE. I DON’T RECALL. THE ONLY REPORTS THAT I RECALL SPECIFICALLY SITTING DOWN AND READING ARE THE FORENSICS REPORTS.
Q.: SO REPORTS DONE BY COMPUTER EXPERTS?
A.: YES.
Q.: WERE YOU ASKED TO REVIEW ANY TRANSCRIPTS OF WITNESSES’ STATEMENTS?
A.: THE TRANSCRIPT THAT I — THE ONLY TRANSCRIPT THAT I RECALL REVIEWING WAS THE TESTIMONY OF I BELIEVE IT’S DETECTIVE WATKINS.
Q.: NOW, TRANSCRIPT. I THINK YOU SAID TESTIMONY. IS THAT SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM SIMPLY A TRANSCRIPT OF AN INTERVIEW?
A.: YES.
Q.: OKAY.
YOU’VE BEEN IN LAW ENFORCEMENT PREVIOUSLY, RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: YOU KNOW WHAT TESTIMONY IN COURT IS.
A.: YES.
Q.: DO YOU KNOW WHAT A — OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW WHAT A TRANSCRIPT OF —
A.: YES.
Q.: — OF RECORDED STATEMENTS OF A WITNESS —
A.: YES.
Q.: YOU MENTIONED MR. WATKINS. WHAT WAS IT THAT YOU WERE ASKED TO REVIEW?
A.: HIS TESTIMONY IN TRIAL, IN THIS TRIAL. I THINK IT WAS A WEEK AGO ROUGHLY.
Q.: NOW, MAKING THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN TESTIMONY AND TRANSCRIPTS OF A STATEMENT, —
A.: M-HM.
Q.: — WERE YOU ASKED OR DID YOU REVIEW, RATHER, ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OR TESTIMONY OF ANY OTHER WITNESSES?
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. THIS IS IMPROPER. I REQUEST SIDEBAR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, THERE’S A FIFTH AMENDMENT ISSUE. I’M NOT TRYING TO ARGUE.
THE COURT: OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION, BOB, COME TO SIDEBAR.
(SIDEBAR DISCUSSION, OUT OF THE HEARING OF THE JURY,
AS FOLLOWS:

(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.)

(END OF SIDEBAR DISCUSSION.)
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: MR. LAWSON, WERE YOU ASKED OR DID YOU OTHERWISE REVIEW TRANSCRIPTS OF ANY STATEMENTS BY A DAVID NEAL WESTERFIELD?
A.: YES.
Q.: DAVID NEAL WESTERFIELD I ASSUME IT’S YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS THE SON AS OPPOSED TO DAVID A. WESTERFIELD, THE DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE. IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: AND YOU REVIEWED A TRANSCRIPT OF HIS STATEMENTS, CORRECT?
A.: CORRECT. IT WAS A TRANSCRIPT OF HIS — I BELIEVE HIS INTERVIEW WITH TWO SAN DIEGO POLICE DETECTIVES.
Q.: DID THOSE STATEMENTS PLAY ANY ROLE IN THE CONCLUSIONS YOU REACHED IN THIS CASE?
A.: NO.
Q.: AS FAR AS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO YOU THINK MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN DOWNLOADING PARTICULAR MATERIAL, WOULD IT BE IMPORTANT TO YOU TO KNOW WHAT THAT PERSON SAYS?
A.: YES.
Q.: AND YOU READ THOSE STATEMENTS, CORRECT?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHY DID YOU IGNORE THEM?
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION.
MR. FELDMAN: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: DID THOSE STATEMENTS PLAY ANY ROLE IN YOUR CONCLUSIONS IN THIS CASE AS TO THE ORIGIN OF THOSE C.D.’S AND ZIP DISKS?
MR. FELDMAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: I BELIEVE HE’S ANSWERED IT, BUT I WILL ALLOW YOU TO ANSWER IT ONE MORE TIME, SIR.
THE WITNESS: DID IT? NO.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: WHY NOT?
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q.: I BELIEVE YOU DESCRIBED, MR. LAWSON, PLAYED AT LEAST
— FIRST OF ALL, ARE YOU THE ONLY PERSON THAT WORKED ON THIS CASE FROM YOUR PARTICULAR BUSINESS?
A.: NO.
Q.: WHO ELSE DID?
A.: MY WIFE CAME TO SAN DIEGO WHO IS ALSO A FORENSICS EXAMINER IN OUR OFFICE, BROUGHT A SECOND FORENSICS MACHINE TO SAN DIEGO DURING THAT FIRST WEEK IN JUNE AND HELPED ME TO ACQUIRE THE MEDIA AND DO AN INITIAL EVALUATION.
Q.: I BELIEVE YOU DESCRIBED THE FACT THAT YOUR — AT LEAST YOUR BUSINESS HAD PUT IN A NUMBER OF HOURS. CORRECT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: WAS YOUR WIFE PAID FOR HER TIME DOWN HERE?
A.: NO.
Q.: CAN YOU TELL US, LET’S SAY UP TO AND INCLUDING TODAY, APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH YOU EITHER HAVE BILLED OR WILL BILL IN TOTAL MR. FELDMAN IN THIS CASE?
A.: YOU’RE NOT GOING TO ASK ME TO DO THE MATH. AGAIN, BUT I WOULD ESTIMATE WE PROBABLY HAVE SPENT BETWEEN 125 TO ROUGHLY 150 HOURS. MY COMPANY’S RATE FOR COURT-APPOINTED CASES IS $135.00 AN HOUR.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT COULD BE AS MUCH AS WHAT, ALMOST $20,000.00 OR WOULD BE ALMOST $20,000.00?
A.: I’LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.
MR. CLARKE: THANK YOU.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. FELDMAN.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: I’M JUST GOING TO TRY TO GO IN THE SAME SEQUENCE THAT MR. CLARKE WENT.
THAT YOU’RE A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS, DID THAT ADVERSELY AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE A MEMBER OF THE CUSTOMS DEPARTMENT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?
A.: NO.
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE ANSWER WAS NO.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: YOU TOLD US ON DIRECT EXAMINATION YOU WERE A MEMBER OF THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION. THAT’S A FEDERAL AGENCY, ISN’T IT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: IT’S FEDERALLY CHARTERED TO INTERDICT NARCOTICS, ISN’T THAT RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: YOU WERE A FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, THAT’S RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: DID THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR BEING A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT AGAIN AS TO TIMING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO OTHER WORK THAT YOU’VE DONE, UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, . . .
THOSE ARE JOBS THAT REQUIRED YOU TO HAVE INTEGRITY, RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: YOU HAVE TOLD THE JURY THE TRUTH TODAY, HAVEN’T YOU?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: YOU HAVEN’T HELD ANYTHING BACK, HAVE YOU?
A.: NO.
Q.: HOW MANY DIFFERENT COMPUTERS DOES IT APPEAR NEAL WESTERFIELD HAD ACCESS TO?
A.: FOUR.
MR. CLARKE: WELL, EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION. FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. CLARKE: MOVE TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE LAST ANSWER.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: BASED ON YOUR REVIEW OF THE COMPUTERS THAT YOU TESTIFIED TO ON DIRECT AND ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, WERE YOU ABLE TO FORM AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON KNOWN AS D. N. WEST OR NEAL WESTERFIELD MAY HAVE ACCESSED THOSE COMPUTERS?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. LACK OF FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: YOU TOLD US YOU CHECKED FOUR COMPUTERS. RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: WITH REGARD TO THE FIRST COMPUTER YOU CHECKED, WAS THAT A GATEWAY?
A.: YES.
Q.: DID YOU LOOK TO SEE WHETHER THERE WAS AN E-MAIL ADDRESS OR ADDRESSES?
A.: YES.
Q.: DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS AN E-MAIL ADDRESS D. N. WEST?
A.: I DON’T BELIEVE THERE WAS IN THE D. N. WEST E-MAIL ADDRESS IN THE GATEWAY. THERE WERE SCHOOL DOCUMENTS.
Q.: OH. SCHOOL DOCUMENTS. OKAY.
SO DID THAT SUGGEST THAT THAT COMPUTER HAD BEEN ACCESSED BY A DAVID ALAN WESTERFIELD?
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE IN THE SAME BOAT WE WERE BACK BEFORE, MR. FELDMAN. NEXT QUESTION.
MR. FELDMAN: YES, YOUR HONOR.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO EACH OF THE COMPUTERS, DID IT APPEAR TO YOU AS THOUGH SOMEONE NAMED D. N. WEST WAS ACCESSING THE COMPUTERS?
A.: YES.
MR. CLARKE: WELL, EXCUSE ME. LACK OF FOUNDATION AS TO WHO.
THE COURT: WELL, JUST THE NAME. I’LL LIMIT THE QUESTIONING TO THE NAME HE SAW, COUNSEL, AND THAT’S ALL YOU’RE GOING TO GET.
MR. FELDMAN: THAT’S ALL I ASK.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
MR. FELDMAN: I’M SORRY.
THE COURT: OR ASK IT AGAIN.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO THE COMPUTERS THAT YOU REVIEWED, DID YOU CONCLUDE THAT A PERSON NAMED D. N. — THAT A PERSON UTILIZING THE NAME D. N. WEST HAD ACCESSED THOSE FOUR COMPUTERS?
A.: YES.
Q.: DO YOU HAVE A FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD SON?
A.: HE’S TWELVE.
Q.: DOES YOUR TWELVE-YEAR-OLD HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR COMPUTER?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, YOU’RE AWARE THAT THERE’S A SERIES OF DEVICES IN PLACE TODAY THAT PREVENT CHILDREN FROM ACCESSING COMPUTERS, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: WERE THOSE DEVICES IN PLACE IN 1999 ARE YOU AWARE?
A.: I BELIEVE SOME OF THEM WERE.
Q.: DO YOU HAVE A WAY TO KEEP CHILDREN OFF THE COMPUTER IF YOU’RE NOT IN THE HOUSE?
A.: THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT FILTERING SOFTWARES THAT ONE CAN BUY THAT WILL FILTER THEIR ACCESS TO CERTAIN SITES OR NOT ALLOW THE COMPUTER TO BE TURNED ON AT ALL.
Q.: WITH REGARD TO ANY OF THE COMPUTERS THAT YOU INSPECTED IN THIS CASE, DID YOU NOTICE ANY OF THOSE FILTERING DEVICES TO WHICH YOU JUST MADE REFERENCE, SIR?
A.: NO.
Q.: DID YOU NOTICE ANYTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT A CHILD, FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD, A SIXTEEN-YEAR-OLD, WHATEVER, FROM TURNING THE COMPUTER ON AND OFF?
A.: NO.
Q.: DID YOU NOTICE ANYTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT A FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD BOY TO GO SURFING LOOKING FOR NEWS?
A.: NO.
Q.: IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, AS A HUMAN BEING, ISN’T THAT COMMON FOR FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD BOYS TO DO?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. LACK OF FOUNDATION. RELEVANCE.
MR. FELDMAN: FOUNDATION?
THE COURT: I THINK EVERY PARENT IN THE ROOM COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
YOU MAY ANSWER, MR. LAWSON.
THE WITNESS: YES. WE’VE ACTUALLY HAD THAT COME UP AS AN ISSUE IN AT LEAST TWO CASES IN MY OFFICE.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: SO IS IT THE CASE THAT AS AN INVESTIGATOR, AS A FORENSIC CONSULTANT, YOU HAVE INVESTIGATED CASES OF WHAT APPEAR TO BE THE PATRIARCH WE WILL SAY OF THE FAMILY ACTUALLY I GUESS ACCESSING THE INTERNET OR PORN. SURFING AND IT ACTUALLY TURNED OUT TO BE A YOUNGER MEMBER OF THE FAMILY?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: WITH REGARD TO THIS I. E. A., MR. CLARKE’S MENTIONED I. E. A., DO YOU ATTACH ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO THE INITIALS
I. E. A.?
A.: I NOTICED THAT A GOOD NUMBER OF THE PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES IN THE GATEWAY AND ON THE LOOSE MEDIA HAD AN I. E. A. DESIGNATOR FOLLOWED BY A NUMBER. AND AT THE TIME I DID NOTICE THAT. AND AT THE TIME I MADE THE ASSUMPTION —
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. LACK OF FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: YOU USED THE WORD ASSUMPTION. SUSTAINED.
MR. FELDMAN: OKAY.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO YOUR OBSERVATIONS REGARDING I. E. A., HAVE YOU SEEN — YOU HAVEN’T SPECIFICALLY SEEN THOSE THREE INITIALS CONNECTED WITH ANY PARTICULAR J PEG OR M PEG, HAVE YOU?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. VAGUE AS TO WHICH.
THE COURT: YES. BE SPECIFIC.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: AS TO ANY FORM OF COMPUTER DIGITAL REPRODUCTION, BE IT AVI, DOT MOV, DOT J PEG, DOT J P-E-G, ANY OF THOSE, —
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. IN THIS CASE, ANY CASE?
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU MAY ANSWER.
MR. FELDMAN: ANY CASE.
THE WITNESS: HAVE I SEEN THAT BEFORE? YES.
MR. FELDMAN: YES.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: I JUST DIDN’T WANT TO FORGET. IF A PERSON GOES TO A WEB SITE, IF A PERSON IS SURFING, PORN. SURFING, OR ANY TYPE OF SURFING, AND GOES TO A WEB SITE AND CLICKS TO A WEB SITE AND IS SHOWN A VARIETY OF PHOTOGRAPHS, —
A.: YES.
Q.: — HYPOTHETICALLY SAY I WANT TO GO TO HAWAII AND I TYPE W. W. W. HAWAII DOT COM., AND IT TAKES ME TO A SITE THAT HAS A HUNDRED PICTURES OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS, ALL RIGHT? —
A.: YES.
Q.: — IF I WANTED TO DOWNLOAD ANY OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, I WOULD JUST HAVE TO CLICK ON THE PARTICULAR THUMBNAIL, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: YOU USE THE RIGHT MOUSE BUTTON TO CLICK ON IT, AND THEN YOU WOULD SAVE IT, YES.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
WITH REGARD TO THE SEQUENCE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS, DO THEY HAVE COMMON I DON’T KNOW IF DENOMINATOR IS THE RIGHT WORD, BUT COMMON LETTERS OR NUMBERS?
A.: THEY OFTEN DO, YES.
Q.: SO THE MERE PRESENCE OF THE SAME INITIALS IS — ONLY MEANS OR CAN INFER AT LEAST THAT A PARTICULAR IMAGE MAY HAVE BEEN DOWNLOADED FROM THE SAME SITE.
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS CONCERNING YOUR REPORTS. YOU ACTUALLY PREPARED A DOCUMENT THAT YOU INTENDED TO BE A CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN YOU AND US, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: YOU USED THE WORD PRELIMINARY AND THE WORD REPORT. CORRECT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: THEN YOU AND I HAD HAD A CONVERSATION, RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: I TOLD YOU WE HAVE TO GIVE THAT TO MR. CLARKE, RIGHT?
A.: RIGHT.
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. I THINK COUNSEL IS LEADING THE WITNESS.
THE COURT: HE IS LEADING. SUSTAINED.
ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN.
/ / /
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU DO AFTER I TOLD YOU THAT MATERIAL NEEDED TO GET DISTRIBUTED TO MR. CLARKE IMMEDIATELY?
A.: I BELIEVE I MADE SURE THAT YOU HAD ALL THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT ACCOMPANIED IT. AND I ASSUMED THAT YOU GAVE IT TO MR. CLARKE.
Q.: YOU FED. EX.’D THEM DOWN TO ME, DIDN’T YOU?
A.: YES.
Q.: WITH REGARD TO THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT YOU SHOWED US ON DIRECT EXAMINATION, DID THEY REPRESENT A PARTICULAR PATTERN OF PORNOGRAPHY ACCESS?
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION. MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE. WELL, LACK OF FOUNDATION AS TO ACCESS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. HE CAN ANSWER THAT.
YOU MAY ANSWER, SIR.
THE WITNESS: IN THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT WE DISCUSSED TODAY, YES, I DID.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: AND WHAT KIND OF PATTERN?
A.: THE IMAGES THAT WERE ON THE WEB SITES THAT ARE ACCESSED IN AND AROUND THE DATE AND TIME OF THE D. N. WEST AT HOT MAIL DOT COM. TENDED TO BE EITHER ANIME’ OR TEEN PORNOGRAPHY, WITH THE ONE EXCEPTION ON THE ONE DAY THAT WE SAW WHERE THERE WAS BESTIALITY. AND I’M TRYING TO THINK OF THE RIGHT WORD. BONDAGE.
Q.: WERE YOU ABLE TO TELL IF DAVID ALAN WESTERFIELD, MY CLIENT, EVER ACCESSED ANY PORNOGRAPHY SITES?
A.: I’M CERTAIN THAT HE DID. THERE WERE A GREAT NUMBER OF PORNOGRAPHIC SITES THAT HAD BEEN ACCESSED ON ALL — ON BOTH OF THE OFFICE COMPUTERS.
Q.: AND DID THOSE SITES SHOW A PARTICULAR PATTERN?
A.: THEY TENDED TO, YES.
Q.: OF?
A.: ADULT WOMEN IN NUDE CONTEXT.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR ABOUT THESE NUDE WOMEN?
A.: THE SITE THAT I NOTED THAT WAS VISITED MOST OFTEN THAT I WAS FAIRLY CERTAIN WAS NOT ATTRIBUTED TO DAVID NEAL WESTERFIELD WAS — IS A SITE CALLED PROJECT VOYEUR DOT COM. AND IT’S PRIMARILY PEOPLE WHO SEND PICTURES OF THEIR WIVES AND GIRLFRIENDS. AND MOST OF THE IMAGES THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE TENDED TO BE WOMEN IN THEIR THIRTIES NUDE.
Q.: WAS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT BREAST SIZE IN ANY OF THE SITES THAT YOU WERE NOTICING?
A.: I DON’T RECALL. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN, BUT I DON’T RECALL.
Q.: MR. CLARKE ASKED YOU QUESTIONS CONCERNING AN ALLEGED RAPE SCENE AND ASKED YOU WHETHER YOU HAD HEARD IT. I’M JUST TRYING TO FOCUS YOU ON THE SERIES OF ATTACK J PEGS. IS IT THE CASE BASED ON YOUR TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE THAT YOU CAN’T TELL WHETHER SOMETHING’S REAL OR NOT ON THE INTERNET?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: PEOPLE ARE PAID TO FAKE, AREN’T THEY?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: JUST BECAUSE YOU HEAR SOUNDS OR SEE SIGHTS DOESN’T MEAN WHAT YOU’RE SEEING OR HEARING IS REAL, ISN’T THAT TRUE?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: THEY MIGHT LOOK YOUNG OR THEY MIGHT LOOK OLD. IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THESE PEOPLE ARE PAID?
A.: YES.
Q.: SO THEY’RE ACTORS AND ACTRESSES, RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHETHER IT’S IN A VIDEO THAT’S DEPICTING A RAPE SCENE OR A VIDEO DEPICTING STRAIGHT SEXUAL INTERCOURSE.
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: SO MERELY BECAUSE A VIDEO LOOKS A PARTICULAR WAY DOESN’T MEAN WHAT IT’S DEPICTING IS ACTUALLY OCCURRING, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: AND IS THAT THE CASE WHETHER YOU HEAR IT OR NOT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: DOES SOUND MAKE A DIFFERENCE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY’S BEING PAID FOR THE ACTION?
A.: NO.
Q.: DOES SOUND MAKE A DIFFERENCE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON IS FAKING SOMETHING?
A.: I WOULDN’T THINK SO.
Q.: MR. CLARKE ASKED YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT DELETING FILES. AND I GUESS THE ABILITY — I’M NOT REAL SURE ABOUT THAT. WHAT DID YOU UNDERSTAND THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT DELETIONS TO MEAN?
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. ARGUMENTATIVE AS PHRASED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
JUST REPHRASE IT.
/ / /
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: DO YOU RECALL MR. CLARKE ASKING YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT DELETING FILES?
A.: YES.
Q.: WAS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING HE WAS TALKING ABOUT DELETING FILES OF THE FOOTPRINTS THAT LED TO SITES?
A.: WHAT I UNDERSTOOD HIS QUESTION TO BE WAS THE DELETION OF FOOTPRINTS IS A GOOD WAY TO PUT IT OF VIEWING THE VARIOUS IMAGES ON THE LOOSE MEDIA, WHETHER THEY WERE C.D.’S OR ZIPS.
Q.: NOW, HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT DELETING THOSE FOOTPRINTS?
A.: THOSE PARTICULAR LINK FILES WOULD, I WOULD THINK, I’VE NEVER TRIED TO DELETE THEM, I WOULD THINK THEY WOULD BE —
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION. LACK OF FOUNDATION.
MR. FELDMAN: THEN MOTION TO STRIKE ALL THE TESTIMONY ON CROSS.
THE COURT: WE WILL DEAL WITH IT LATER, MR. FELDMAN.
KEEP GOING.
MR. FELDMAN: YES, YOUR HONOR.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: SIR, YOU’RE A COMPUTER FORENSIC EXPERT, RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: AND YOU DON’T HAVE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AS TO HOW TO DELETE THE FOOTPRINTS THAT WE HAVE JUST MADE REFERENCE TO ON THE C.D.’S, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: NO.
Q.: WHEN YOU SAY NO, YOU AGREE, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT. I WOULDN’T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.
Q.: HAVE YOU EVER READ — IS THAT SOMETHING THAT I COULD MAYBE FIND IN “COMPUTER EDGE”? DO YOU KNOW WHAT “COMPUTER EDGE” IS?
A.: THE ONLY WAY THAT I WOULD KNOW TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT WOULD BE TO DO IT AND TRY AND LOOK AT IT AGAIN WITH THE FORENSICS TOOL AND SEE IF THAT WORKED.
Q.: DID YOU NOTICE ANY EVIDENCE IN — ON ANY OF THE MEDIA OF THE EXISTENCE OF A FORENSICS TOOL DESIGNED TO DELETE FOOTPRINTS?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. LACK OF FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: NO.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: MR. CLARKE ASKED YOU WHETHER OR NOT ALL OF THESE PICTURES COULD HAVE BEEN VIEWED ON FEBRUARY THE 1ST, 2002. THEY COULD HAVE BEEN VIEWED ANY TIME SINCE THEIR CREATION, ISN’T THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S RIGHT.
Q.: AND ANY OPINION YOU HAD WOULD REALLY BE JUST SPECULATIVE.
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: IN THE ABSENCE OF SOMETHING ON ONE OF YOUR FORENSICS PROGRAMS THAT WOULD GIVE THE DATE OF —
A.: IF I FOUND A LINK FILE IN ONE OF THE COMPUTERS THAT MATCHED A FILE NAME ON ONE OF THE LOOSE PIECES OF MEDIA, YOU WOULD HAVE A MORE REASONABLE BASIS FOR ASSUMING THAT PARTICULAR PICTURE HAD BEEN VIEWED.
Q.: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER NEAL WESTERFIELD KNOWS HIS FATHER’S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER?
A.: I DON’T KNOW IF HE DOES OR NOT.
Q.: DO YOU THINK THAT IF — IS THERE A FORENSIC REASON WHY THE OWNER OF A COMPUTER THAT PRESUMABLY IS HIS PERSONAL COMPUTER WOULD USE HIS SON’S E-MAIL TO SIGN ONTO THE COMPUTER IN ANY MANNER?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
YOU NEED NOT ANSWER.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON WHY THE OWNER OF A PERSONAL COMPUTER WOULD USE ANOTHER PERSON’S NAME TO SIGN ON WHERE THAT INDIVIDUAL HAS UNIQUE AND UNRESTRICTED INDIVIDUAL ACCESS?
MR. CLARKE: SAME OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SAME RULING.
YOU NEED NOT ANSWER, SIR.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: YOU TALKED ABOUT REPORTS THAT YOU READ FROM THE REGIONAL COMPUTER FORENSICS LAB. ONE OF THOSE REPORTS WAS PREPARED BY A MAN NAMED ARMSTRONG, ISN’T THAT RIGHT?
A.: I BELIEVE SO, YES.
Q.: AND YOU TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION IN EVALUATING YOUR CONCLUSIONS THAT THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL COMPUTER FORENSICS LAB. CONCLUDED —
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: — NONE OF —
THE COURT: APPROACH THE BENCH.
BOB.
(SIDEBAR DISCUSSION, OUT OF THE HEARING OF THE JURY,
AS FOLLOWS:
(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.)
(END OF SIDEBAR DISCUSSION.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. FELDMAN.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WITH REGARD TO THE HARD DRIVE THAT YOU WERE EVALUATING, YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS BY MR. CLARKE ABOUT LOOSE MEDIA AND DID YOU ASK FOR THIS MEDIA OR THAT MEDIA. THE EN CASE SOFTWARE REQUIRES YOU TO UTILIZE HARD DRIVES, DOES IT?
A.: NO. IT DOESN’T REQUIRE YOU TO USE HARD DRIVES.
Q.: WELL, WAS THERE A PROBLEM IN YOU USING C.D.’S AND ZIP DISKS INSTEAD OF HAVING THE DATA TRANSFERRED TO A HARD DRIVE?
A.: NO.
Q.: WHY DID YOU ASK FOR IT TO BE TRANSFERRED TO A HARD DRIVE?
A.: I DON’T RECALL THAT I DID.
Q.: OKAY.
ULTIMATELY WHAT DID YOU END UP WITH FOR PURPOSES OF YOUR FORENSIC EVALUATION? WHAT I’M ASKING YOU, WHAT I’M REALLY TRYING TO ASK YOU IS HOW MUCH DATA DID YOU HAVE. DID YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF HARD DRIVES; DID YOU HAVE SOME C.D.’S? WHAT DID YOU HAVE; WHAT WERE YOU LOOKING AT?
A.: THERE WERE A TOTAL OF SIX HARD DRIVES THAT WERE PRESENTED TO ME.
Q.: OKAY.
I WANT YOU TO TELL ME.
A.: IN ONE OF THOSE HARD DRIVES CONTAINED INDIVIDUAL COPIES OF THE INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF LOOSE MEDIA COPIED TO ONE HARD DRIVE.
Q.: DID THAT PROCESS IN ANY MANNER AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO RECONSTRUCT DATES OF ACCESS OR ANY OF THAT?
A.: YES.
Q.: HOW SO?
A.: WHEN C.D.’S ARE COPIED TO A HARD DRIVE SUCH AS THAT, IT WILL CHANGE THE DATES OF THE — OF SOME OF THE SUBFOLDERS AND FOLDERS ON THE C.D. TO THE CURRENT DATE THAT THE C.D. IS BEING COPIED.
Q.: IN OTHER WORDS, IF I HAVE A C.D. BURNER AND I CREATE AND I TRY AND BURN A C.D., WHAT I’M GOING TO GET IS THE DATE I CREATE IT, IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE SAYING?
A.: ON MANY OF THE FOLDERS AND SUBFOLDERS. THAT’S NOT TRUE OF ALL OF THE DATES OF ALL OF THE FILES ON THE MEDIA, BUT MANY OF THE FOLDERS WILL ASSUME THE DATE OF THE DATE THE C.D. IS BEING COPIED.
Q.: SO, IN OTHER WORDS, HAD YOU GOTTEN A COPY OF THE C.D.’S, THE DATES WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN I GUESS APPROPRIATE FOR THE KIND OF INVESTIGATION YOU NEEDED TO DO.
A.: I’M SORRY. COULD YOU ASK ME THAT AGAIN?
Q.: SURE.
IF YOU HAD GONE TO EITHER THROUGH MY OFFICE OR DIRECTLY TO MR. WATKINS OR THE R. C. F. L. AND SAID YOU WANTED A COPY OF THE C.D., A C.D., AND THEY DID A STANDARD DISK COPY OR WHATEVER IT’S CALLED, WOULD THE COPY OF THE C.D. THAT RESULTED IN ANY WAY AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO RECONSTRUCT THE ORIGINAL DATA?
A.: YOU WOULD HAVE TO USE A FORENSIC SOFTWARE TO DO SO. YOU CAN’T JUST COPY IT FROM ONE C.D. TO ANOTHER. YOU HAVE TO USE A NORTON GHOST OR EN CASE AND MAKE YOUR COPY.
Q.: I’M SORRY. DID YOU MAKE IT APPARENT THAT AT LEAST FROM THE SAN DIEGO LAB. YOU WANTED THE HARD DRIVES TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH EN CASE SOFTWARE SO THAT YOU COULD UTILIZE THAT FORENSIC TOOL?
A.: YES.
Q.: WITH REGARDS TO THE ISSUE OF LABELING A C.D., WE’VE LEARNED THERE’S A PROGRAM CALLED ADAPTEK. HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF ADAPTEK?
A.: YES.
Q.: THAT’S A PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS YOU TO CREATE A C.D. THAT YOU CAN BOTH READ AND WRITE, IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: THE C.D. ITSELF ALSO HAS TO BE A READ/WRITE C.D., BUT YES.
Q.: SO IF I USE ADAPTEK SOFTWARE, CAN I CREATE A LABEL TO SAY ANYTHING I WANT IT TO SAY?
A.: I THINK THAT YOU CAN, BUT I’M NOT SURE.
Q.: WELL, YOU CREATE C.D.’S FROM TIME TO TIME, DON’T YOU?
A.: YES.
Q.: THERE’S A COMMAND AS YOU ARE CREATING A C.D. THAT ASKS YOU TO NAME IT, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: I DON’T KNOW. IS THAT CALLED A VOLUME?
A.: I’M NOT SURE WHAT IT’S CALLED SPECIFICALLY. TECHNICALLY I’M NOT SURE WHAT IT’S CALLED.
Q.: ONCE THE C.D.’S NAMED, THE NAME STAYS FOREVER, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: BUT THE NAME DOESN’T COME WITH THE COMPUTER, IT COMES WITH THE PERSON THAT’S CREATING THE C.D., ISN’T THAT TRUE?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: SO THAT MEANS THAT I COULD TAKE THIS LAPTOP COMPUTER IF IT HAD A C.D. BURNER AND CREATE ONE DISK, ONE C.D. DISK THAT SAID, HYPOTHETICALLY, SPECTRUM DESIGN, RIGHT?
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: AND YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW WHETHER IT WAS DAVID WESTERFIELD’S SPECTRUM DESIGN OR STEVE FELDMAN’S RIPPING HIM OFF.
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION.
THE WITNESS: YES.
MR. CLARKE: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. CLARKE: MOVE TO STRIKE THE ANSWER.
THE COURT: THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE ANSWER.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL MERELY ON THE BASIS OF THE NAME ON THE C.D. WHO THE CREATOR OF THE C.D. IS.
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: YOU MIGHT WANT SOME OTHER FORENSIC DEVICES TO HELP YOU SUCH AS FINGERPRINTS, RIGHT?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. I THINK THIS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WE DIDN’T ASK YOU OR DID WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT YOU PRINTING UP EVERY SINGLE SCREEN PRINT THAT — EVERY SINGLE SCREEN PRINT, A COPY OF EVERY SINGLE SCREEN? DID WE EVER TALK ABOUT THAT?
A.: NO.
YOU WANT TO MAKE THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN EVERY SINGLE SCREEN PRINT AND EVERY SINGLE SCREEN.
Q.: YES.
A.: BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN, AS FAR AS I AM AWARE, YOU HAVE SEEN EVERY SCREEN PRINT THAT I HAVE MADE IN THIS CASE. CERTAINLY NOT EVERY SCREEN I’VE LOOKED AT. I’VE LOOKED AT THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SCREENS. SO. . .
Q.: WHAT’S INVOLVED IN MAKING A SCREEN PRINT? YOU PUT TOGETHER THE BINDER THAT WE’VE HAD MARKED — I’M SORRY — IF YOU LOOK ON THE OUTSIDE, IT GIVES US AN EXHIBIT NUMBER.
THE COURT: 157.
MR. FELDMAN: THANK YOU.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: — WE HAVE HAD MARKED 157, AND IT HAS A SERIES OF SCREEN PRINTS, SIR. WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO CREATE ONE OF THOSE? HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN?
A.: THE SCREEN PRINT PROGRAM RUNS IN THE BACKGROUND OF MY INVESTIGATIVE MACHINE. AND WHEN I AM VIEWING SOMETHING ON THE SCREEN THAT I WANT TO CAPTURE FOR LATER REPORT OR WHATEVER, I HIT PRINT SCREEN BUTTON.
Q.: HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE?
A.: I’M EMBARRASSED TO SAY, BUT OUR PRINTERS ARE FAIRLY SLOW. WE DON’T HAVE ANY COLOR LASER PRINTERS ATTACHED TO OUR FORENSIC MACHINES. THEY ARE ALL INK JET PRINTERS. AND IT TAKES A MINUTE OR SO TO PRINT OUT ANY GIVEN SCREEN PRINT.
Q.: AND IF THERE’S MORE DETAIL TO THE SCREENS, IT TAKES LONGER?
A.: IT TAKES LONGER, THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: AND IF THERE’S BIGGER PICTURES, IT TAKES LONGER THAN IF THERE IS JUST LANGUAGE ACROSS, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
Q.: SO THE MORE DETAIL IN THE PARTICULAR SCREEN PRINT, THE LONGER IT TAKES TO PRINT, IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: THAT’S CORRECT.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, JUST ONE MOMENT.
THE COURT: SURE.
(PAUSE.)
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: SIR, DO YOU HAVE 158 UP THERE? IT’S THE COMPUTER PRINT —
A.: YES.
Q.: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SHOWN THIS BEFORE THIS AFTERNOON?
A.: NO.
Q.: AND IT SAYS IN THE LEFT CORNER PRINTED BY J. WATKINS, R 1 OF THE F. B. I. CARD. IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: IT’S DATED JUNE THE 28TH.
A.: YES.
Q.: HMMM.
YOU JUST GOT IT FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY?
A.: YES.
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION TO COUNSEL’S COMMENTS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: DID YOU JUST GET IT FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY?
A.: ON THE STAND HERE, YES.
Q.: THERE’S A NUMBER OF — YOU HAD A SCREEN PRINT THAT I’M SORRY I THINK IT WAS NUMBERED — WHAT I’M AFTER ARE THE SCREEN PRINTS THAT ARE FEBRUARY THE 4TH AT I THINK 4:00 O’CLOCK OR 4:50. AND I JUST DON’T — KNOW THEY WERE SEPARATELY MARKED I THINK IN THE ONE-FORTY SEQUENCE IN OUR COURT.
THE COURT: IT WAS 142 AND 143.
MR. FELDMAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE REPORTER: MR. FELDMAN.
(THE REPORTER HANDED THE EXHIBITS TO MR. FELDMAN.)
MR. FELDMAN: THANK YOU.
I’VE GOT THEM.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU WHAT’S BEEN PREVIOUSLY MARKED 142-A AND 142-B. NOW, I DON’T UNDERSTAND SOMETHING. WE’VE BEEN GIVEN THIS LIST OF WHAT PURPORTS TO TO BE INTERNET EXPLORER HISTORY.
MR. CLARKE: EXCUSE ME. OBJECTION TO COUNSEL’S PREFATORY COMMENTS, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
I HAVEN’T EVEN HEARD THE QUESTION YET.
MR. CLARKE: I THINK THAT’S WHAT I MEANT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: GO AHEAD, MR. FELDMAN.
MR. FELDMAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WE SEE IN 142 THAT IT SAYS 2/4/02 AT 4:47 P.M. OR THEREABOUTS. IS THAT RIGHT?
A.: YES.
Q.: 1647, IF YOU WILL TRUST ME, IS ABOUT 4:47 P.M. AND I WASN’T IN THE MILITARY EITHER.
IN LOOKING AT 158, WE DON’T SEE AN ENTRY 16 — WE DON’T SEE ANY ENTRIES IN THE 1600S. DOES 158 MEAN THAT THE ACTIVITY THAT’S DEPICTED IN 142 NEVER HAPPENED?
A.: NO.
Q.: SO IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT WHAT WE SEE OCCURRING AT 2/4/02 AT 4:47 P.M., THIS SURFING AROUND TEEN DREAMER AND LESBIAN BORDELLO, SIR, THAT’S NOT REFLECTED IN 158?
A.: NO, IT’S NOT.
Q.: DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHY THAT IS?
A.: NO. I DIDN’T CREATE THE DOCUMENT AS I SAID. SO I REALLY DON’T FEEL COMFORTABLE COMMENTING ON WHAT IT IS OR WHAT IT ISN’T OR HOW IT WAS MADE.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
A.: I KNOW THIS IS THE DOCUMENT THAT —
Q.: THIS — I’M SORRY. YOU SAY THIS. YOU ARE REFERRING TO 142-A?
A.: 142-A IS A DOCUMENT THAT I MADE FROM MY SCREEN PRINT PROGRAM WHILE I DID MY EN CASE EXAMINATION OF THIS COMPUTER. SO THAT I CAN TESTIFY TO KNOWING ABOUT. THIS I CAN’T.
Q.: WHEN YOU SAY THIS, YOU ARE REFERRING TO 158?
A.: TO 158.
Q.: 158 DESCRIBES A SERIES OF WE WILL CALL THEM HITS AT
W. W. W. DOT “UNION TRIB.” DOT COM SOMEWHERE BETWEEN LOOKS LIKE 5:50 P.M. OR SO, 5:20 P.M. OR SO, AND INTO ALMOST 8:00 O’CLOCK, P.M. CAN YOU DRAW ANY INFERENCES FROM THAT?
MR. CLARKE: OBJECTION. VAGUE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: WE SEE IN 158 AN ADDRESS DAVID WESTERFIELD AT COLON HOST W. W. W. DOT ROHAN DOT S. D. S. U. DOT E. D. U. 2/04/02 AT 1745 HOURS. DIDN’T YOU NOTICE THAT E-MAIL ADDRESS SOME PLACE ELSE IN ONE OF YOUR SCREEN PRINTS?
A.: YES.
Q.: DO TWO PEOPLE HAVE THE SAME E-MAIL? CAN TWO PEOPLE HAVE THE EXACT SAME E-MAIL ADDRESS?
A.: NO. TWO PEOPLE CAN SHARE AN E-MAIL ADDRESS, BUT. . . YOU WOULDN’T HAVE TWO PEOPLE HAVING THE EXACT SAME E-MAIL ADDRESS.
Q.: ALL RIGHT.
CAN YOU IN READING — YOU USED THE WORD U.R.L. IN DESCRIBING SOME OF THE WORDS THAT APPEAR ON 158. I ALREADY KNOW U.R.L. I THINK STANDS FOR UNIFORM RESOURCE LOCATOR. DOESN’T IT?
A.: YES.
Q.: WHAT’S THAT?
A.: THE UNIFORM RESOURCE LOCATOR IS THE SPECIFIC NUMBER THAT’S GIVEN TO A GIVEN WEB SITE SUCH THAT IT’S TRACKABLE ON THE INTERNET. IT’S LIKE THE HOME ADDRESS, IF YOU WILL, SIMILAR TO THE ADDRESS ON THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE, ONLY IT’S THE INTERNET ADDRESS FOR A GIVEN SITE.
Q.: AND IS THERE — I DIDN’T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. I APOLOGIZE.
WE SEE ON 158 ON THE — IF YOU LOOK AT THE PIECE OF PAPER ON THE FAR LEFT ON THE PAPER IT SAYS U.R.L., THEN IT SAYS DATE AND TIME, AND THEN IT SAYS LOCATION. WE SEE A WHOLE BUNCH OF WORDS IN LOCATION, NOT JUST WORDS, BUT I GUESS SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS. DO ANY OF THEM HAVE ANY PARTICULAR MEANING?
A.: THE WORLDWIDE WEB DESIGNATOR IS HERE WITH, FOR INSTANCE, HERE AT THE VERY TOP ENTRY IS WORLDWIDE WEB DOT PIGGS-HAUSE DOT COM.
Q.: YOU SAID HERE. I’M SORRY. WHAT YOU JUST REFERRED TO, SIR, I BELIEVE IS PAGE 1 OF COURT EXHIBIT 158, LINE 1. IS THAT CORRECT?
A.: YES.
Q.: SO WE SEE DAVID WESTERFIELD AT H.T.T.P. COLON FRONT SLASH FRONT SLASH W. W. W. DOT P-I-G-G-S HYPHEN H-A-U-S-E DOT COM. FRONT SLASH BOARD FRONT SLASH QUESTION MARK TOPIC EQUALS TOPIC ONE.
A.: CORRECT.
Q.: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
A.: THAT THIS — THIS IS — WHAT IT’S REPRESENTING IS A VISIT TO APPARENTLY A VISIT TO THE PIGGS-HAUSE DOT COM. WEB SITE. AND THE SLASH BOARD SLASH IS LIKELY A DESIGNATOR FOR A BULLETIN BOARD THAT’S ON THAT PAGE FOR DISCUSSING WHATEVER IS THE POINT OF INTEREST FOR THE PAGE.
Q.: OKAY.
PAGE 2 THERE’S AN ENTRY. IT SAYS U.R.L., IT SAYS 1750 AND 32 ALL THE WAY DOWN AT THE BOTTOM 1750. AND I’M SHOWING
YOU —
MR. FELDMAN: AND FOR THE RECORD, COUNSEL, IT’S THE THIRD ENTRY UP FROM THE BOTTOM, PAGE 2, COURT EXHIBIT 158.
THAT SAYS DAVID WEST AT H.T.T.P. COLON FRONT SLASH FRONT SLASH, AND IT KEEPS GOING FOR ANOTHER LINE OR TWO.
BY MR. FELDMAN:
Q.: CAN YOU DRAW ANY MEANING FROM ANY OF THIS?
A.: THE — ALONG THAT FIRST LINE THAT YOU STARTED TO READ IT WAS DOT HOT MAIL DOT M.S.M. DOT COM. THEN FORWARD SLASH, SOME LETTERS, FORWARD SLASH, GET MESSAGE, CRUM BOX, WHICH IN MY EXPERIENCE I RECOGNIZE THAT USUALLY TO MEAN THE IN BOX FOR THE
— FOR A HOT MAIL ACCOUNT.
Q.: SO IT APPEARS, THEN, THAT SOMEONE, DAVID WEST AT H.T.T.P. COLON FRONT SLASH FRONT SLASH W. W. W. DOT HOT MAIL DOT M.S.M. DOT COM. APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ACCESSING E-MAIL.
A.: YES.
Q.: YOU SAID CRUM BOX. IS IT C-R-U-M B-O-X?
A.: YES. I’M SORRY.
Q.: CAN YOU TELL WHAT WAS BEING ACCESSED?
A.: NO.
Q.: YOU CAN’T TELL WHETHER THE GUY CLICKED?

A.: NOT FROM THIS.
BUT IN YOUR SCREEN PRINTS CAN YOU TELL IF SOMEBODY CLICKED?
A.: YES.

MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, WOULD YOU CONSIDER THIS AN APPROPRIATE TIME FOR RECESS?

THE COURT: SURE.
JUDGING FROM ALL THE NODDING HEADS OVER THERE, I WOULD SAY THE WHOLE GROUP DOES.
ALL RIGHT. PLEASE REMEMBER THE ADMONITION OF THE COURT NOT TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY AMONG YOURSELVES OR WITH OTHERS NOR FORM OR EXPRESS ANY OPINION ON THE MATTER UNTIL IT IS SUBMITTED TO YOU FOR DECISION.
PLEASE BE OUTSIDE THE DOOR AT 3:15, A QUARTER PAST 3:00.
MR. FELDMAN: THANK YOU.


(RECESS, 3:00 O’CLOCK, P.M., TO 3:15 O’CLOCK, P.M.)

6969

03074 - July 3rd 2002 - Transcript of David Westerfield Trial Day 16 - afternoon 2
03072 - July 3rd 2002 - Transcript of David Westerfield Trial Day 16 - morning 2