Trial Starts for Man Accused of Killing Girl, 7

Forensic evidence and child pornography link David Westerfield to the kidnapping and murder of Danielle van Dam, the lead prosecutor told jurors Tuesday, while a defense attorney sought to portray the 7-year-old’s parents as liars who tried to mislead police to cover up their drug use and permissive sexual practices.

In his opening statement in Superior Court, Deputy Dist. Atty. Jeff Dusek said that Danielle’s blood and hair were found inside Westerfield’s recreational vehicle, along with carpet fibers from the Van Dam home. Some of the hair still had roots, suggesting a struggle, Dusek said.

But defense attorney Steven Feldman said there is no evidence that Westerfield was inside the Van Dam home, which is two doors from his own house in the upscale community of Sabre Springs.

He suggested that the blood, hair and fibers may have been left behind when Danielle and her mother, Brenda van Dam, came to Westerfield’s home selling Girl Scout cookies in the days before Danielle disappeared Feb. 2.

Westerfield, 50, a self-employed engineer, faces the death penalty if convicted.

He was arrested Feb. 22, five days before Danielle’s nude and decomposed body was found in a rural area 40 miles from her home.

Dusek gave a protracted description, in graphic detail, of child pornography he said was found in Westerfield’s home.

But Feldman said he will present evidence that Westerfield is sexually attracted to adult women, not children.

Early in Feldman’s highly animated statement, Judge William Mudd interrupted to instruct jurors, “This is not evidence, ladies and gentlemen. This is argument.”

Snapping his fingers, Feldman described the Van Dams sarcastically as “just like any other family.”

He went on to describe how the couple smoked marijuana at home and indulged in extramarital sex.

Feldman said the Van Dams’ lifestyle allowed many strangers to come into the home.

The night Danielle disappeared, he said, Brenda van Dam was at a local restaurant-bar dancing, smoking marijuana, drinking, “flirting” and asking numerous men if they would like to return to her home.

While his wife was at the restaurant-bar, Damon van Dam was home with Danielle and the couple’s two sons.

At a preliminary hearing, the father testified he tucked the children into bed at 10 p.m. and was horrified the next morning to find Danielle missing.

Prosecutor Dusek said that Westerfield, rebuffed in his advances toward two of Brenda van Dam’s female friends, left the restaurant early and then kidnapped Danielle.

Dusek told jurors that during the trial they would learn “what he did to Danielle van Dam, what he did with Danielle van Dam, where he took her, and where he dumped her.”

Feldman said that while Westerfield was open and talkative with police in the days after the disappearance, the Van Dams were not.

“It took six interviews [by police] to get to the bottom of the Van Dams’ story,” the defense attorney said. “Why?”

Justin Brooks, a law professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego, said that Feldman’s strategy of questioning the Van Dams’ lifestyle is relevant because it brings up questions of how many people had access to the house and might have murdered the girl.

“While such questions might seem inflammatory, it’s the legitimate role of the defense attorney to raise questions about whether there could be other suspects out there,” Brooks said.

In a week’s worth of debate over pretrial motions, Dusek had sought to limit Feldman’s ability to probe the Van Dams’ lifestyle.

Mudd ruled that he would allow limited examination of such issues, but only as it relates to the night Danielle disappeared.

The Van Dams sought to attend Tuesday’s session but, as potential witnesses, were barred by sheriff’s deputies.