I just heard but haven’t been able to confirm or post a link: Westerfield, the guy near San Diego arrested for kidnapping, murdering and dumping 7 year old Danielle van Dam’s body in the desert, guilty with “special circumstances.” Still hunting for the story.
Here’s the CNN link.
Oh thank god.
Rest in peace, Danielle. We did what we could for you. 
Amazing the amount of coverage this generated here in San Diego. Lots of weird stuff has happened around here since I moved here. (Coincidence? I sure hope so.)
Esprix
I hope he rots in there.
Cheering for his conviction won’t bring the little girl back, but dammit–I’m so happy the jury saw through the bullshit that the defense shovelled throughout the whole trial.
Honestly, raping and killing a child is bad enough, but to have your defense team work out a strategy to blame the parents of the little girl because of their ‘alternative’ lifestyle is absolutely disgusting.
If there ever was a crime that warrants the death penalty, it’s one like this. And none of this waiting 10-15 years bullshit, either. I’d want it done at sunrise tomorrow.
Be nice, though and give him a lethal injection and as he lays there with his miserable life draining away, I’d like to put on a red devil costume - horns, tail, and pitchfork - jump on his chest and scream “Come on home to daddy, you sorry sack of shit. I got BIG plans for you. BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!”
Rape? From what I understand the body was too decomposed for there to be any definitive indication of rape.
I think what the defense did was despicable, but I still think that the evidence was way too weak to ask for the death penalty.
Uh, bio…where did anyone say rape? “Special Circumstances” means that the murder was carried out along with some other serious stuff. Kidnapping is serious stuff and killing the victim after kidnapping said victim makes the culprit eligible for execution.
Monty scroll upwards - Java mentions ‘raping and killing the child is bad enough’
I suppose the simultaneous conviction on child pornography charges and the body’s nudity may be suggestive of there being some kind of sexual assault. Let’s just hope it wasn’t so.
“Special Circumstances” depending on your jurisdiction can cover such things as lying in wait/ambush, kidnapping, and even the victim being a child in and of itself, etc. In this case the combination of kidnapping and murder makes it Capital.
Thanks, wring. I swear I used the search function of my IE and it didn’t ping on Java’s posting!
I did too. the difference was “rape” vs. “raping” 
Dratted search engine didn’t even find it with “rap” in the field. I’d complain about computers in general, but I love the things (no, not in THAT way!).
You’re going to really hate me for saying this guys, but I’ve read the available media reports too. “Suggestive of” (and I’m not trying to seriously imply that this little girl was NOT sexually assaulted) just doesn’t cut it in court. If there is no EVIDENCE (and by that I mean evidence which is admissible to the specific court trying the case) supporting that claim, then the presumption of innocence still applies to that particular charge. The prosecution has to prove EVERY SINGLE CHARGE. The law does NOT allow is to infer guilt on one charge because another, separate charge has been proven.
There’s a reason why it’s called the “burden of proof**”.
I just wish everyone would stop watching so much CSI - evidence and proof are two entirely different things, and it’s extremely important that we don’t start assuming the second on the basis of the first.
reprise you’re getting confused I suspect. He wasn’t charged w/rape. He was charged w/kidnapping, murder, possesion of child porn.
People in this thread have suggested that he raped the girl, too (a highly likely probability), but that wasn’t part of the charge, 'cause as you point out, there wasn’t evidence of it.
reprise you’re getting confused I suspect. He wasn’t charged w/rape. He was charged w/kidnapping, murder, possesion of child porn.
People in this thread have suggested that he raped the girl, too (a highly likely probability), but that wasn’t part of the charge, 'cause as you point out, there wasn’t evidence of it.
Just last night I heard the first thing I’d heard since the start that could lead me to think he might not have done it: the bug evidence. According to forensic experts, the insect evidence indicated that her body could NOT have been dumped prior to around the 12th or 14th, I think it was. But Westerfield was under 24/7 police surveillance from the 5th on, and could not have dumped her body without being observed by a police officer.
Anyone got an explanation for that?
An accomplice?