Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Interview with Bob Grimes
Aired August 16, 2002 - 10:28 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: For the seventh day today, six men and six women on a journey in -- a jury, that is, in San Diego, California, again will consider the murder charges against David Westerfield. He's accused of killing 7-year-old Danielle van Dam. Some observers say that the jury is taking an unusually long time.
San Diego criminal defense attorney Bob Grimes has been tracking the case, and he joins us now this morning.
Good morning to you. Thanks very much for being with us -- Bob.
BOB GRIMES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Morning -- Martin.
SAVIDGE: Well is it a long time? Are you surprised by how long the deliberations have gone?
GRIMES: You know, in many cases it would be a long time. In this case they've had two months of testimony and approximately 200 exhibits, and the whole country is watching them, so they're going to take it very methodically. I don't think there's any problems yet, by the time of deliberation, I think they're working on it and they're going to go back to work this morning. This is their seventh day.
SAVIDGE: Yesterday the defense attorney got up before the judge and had a number of requests. One of them was that the jury be sequestered. This is seven days into their deliberations, why would he bring it up now?
GRIMES: Well our -- the defense attorney, Steve Feldman, said that he believes that the media has created what he calls a lynch mob mentality. And what his fear is is that there's so much publicity on this case that the jury's going to be exposed to a lot of other people's opinions and maybe even some facts or arguments that he can't confront in court and can't test whether the things are true or not that the jury's hearing. And that's what he's worried about, the jury being influenced by things outside of court. And that's why he wants the judge to sequester them, but Judge Mudd is not going to do that.
SAVIDGE: I'm wondering here, you know you mentioned he brought up the massive media coverage and the sequestering of the jury, could he be planting the seeds of maybe an appeal already?
GRIMES: Well, you know that's actually part of what he's doing. Because if he turns out to be able to prove after the case is over, if Westerfield is convicted, that some of the jury was influenced by out- of-court influences, including the media, then he'd be able to go to the appellate court and say look, I warned the trial judge about it. Judge Mudd wouldn't sequester the jury. This is what's happened. It's a miscarriage of justice, and that would be possible grounds for appeal.
SAVIDGE: We -- the only insight we really get as to what the jury may be thinking or deliberating on are the messages that it sends to the judge. Yesterday it wanted to hear the transcripts of Jennifer Shen. What do you make of that? What is that insight that we get from that?
GRIMES: Well the fact that the jury asked for Jennifer Shen's transcript of her testimony, and specifically it was the part of her testimony which, as a police criminalist, she testified to some very distinctive orange fibers which she said were found both on Danielle's body, including on a necklace Danielle was wearing, about the only thing she was wearing at the time her body was found, and it was found in Westerfield's SUV. Of all the fiber evidence that they could have asked for, I think this is the most pleasing and encouraging to the D.A. because this was pretty powerful evidence. This -- it's (ph) fiber evidence go to a pretty strong.
So you know reading a jury's notes is kind of like reading tealeaves, and sometimes we're wrong on our speculation of what it means. But I think the D.A. was probably encouraged by having this particular orange fiber evidence reread to the jury.
SAVIDGE: The other things that have been requested, the videotape of the interview that was done by Westerfield with police and pictures of pornography, what do we make of this?
GRIMES: Well the pictures of the pornography are something that the D.A. has argued is showing motive for kidnapping a 7-year-old victim. Westerfield seemed like normal, middle-aged, middleclass guy, according to all his friends and neighbors. And -- but among the 8,000 pornographic images on his computer, there were approximately 60 or 80 of young kids. And if the jury interprets the D.A.'s, you know, opinion of that and believes that he really had a sexual interest in young children, then that could give them the motive which otherwise wouldn't exist. And the D.A. argued that very strongly. And well, the jury I think is going to really take a close look at that to see if it looks to them like the guy had such a prurient interest in little kids that that would charge -- cause him to have a motive to commit this crime.
SAVIDGE: I can't let you go without asking when do you think we'll get a verdict?
GRIMES: Well, you know I frankly have been expecting it could happen any day now. I don't know if they're going to go a full day or not today, Friday. I think Judge Mudd is going to leave it up to the jury. But I would expect that we might have a verdict either today or early next week. If it goes much longer than that, then that would indicate that they're voting, they're in some kind of disagreement and that there would at least be a possibility the hung -- of a hung jury. We aren't at that point yet. But if we went too much more then a few more days that would at least be a possibility. SAVIDGE: All right, Bob Grimes, a criminal defense attorney, thanks very much for your insights this morning.
GRIMES: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
