Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Westerfield Sentencing Today

Aired January 03, 2003 - 11:07   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: In the meantime, criminal defense attorney Bob Grimes has been following this case very closely. He is down at the San Diego courthouse.
And, Bob, I just want to get a perspective from you on what we expect to happen today, because ultimately, the judge has the final discretion as to whether David Westerfield will actually get the death penalty.

BOB GRIMES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTY.: That's correct, Carol.

The judge is supposed to re-evaluate essentially all of the evidence himself, make an independent decision as to whether the death penalty is warranted, and he has the absolute authority to reduce the sentence to life without possibility of parole if he decides to do so.

LIN: And the defense attorneys, they're actually trying to give him a basis for doing so. David Westerfield's attorneys are saying that there were gross errors on the police department's part in their investigation.

GRIMES: That's what they're saying. They have really two arguments for life without parole. One, is the judge's inherent power to reduce any death penalty life without parole just on the basis of the good record, et cetera, of the defendant, and the other, as you mentioned, is they're claiming police misconduct, things like visiting Westerfield in jail when he already had a lawyer, things like that, and they think that that is a separate basis for reduction to life without parole.

LIN: So what do you think the chances are?

GRIMES: Well the chances, frankly, are not very good. I think Judge Mudd (ph) will give it an independent view. He's a very independent judge, a very strong judge, but I don't think the defense has any chance on the police misconduct theory. On the other theory that it should be reduced because of his good record, his family ties, it's true that he's unlike most death penalty defendants in California, in the absence of any criminal record, but I think the judge is likely to agree with the jury that the circumstances of the murder of the 7-year-old victim are probably sufficient for the ultimate penalty.

LIN: So how did the hearing work today, because we do understand that Brenda Van Dam, Daniel Van Dam's mother, will get a chance to actually say something? GRIMES: That's what I'm told also, and she has the absolute right to make a statement. A lot of the Van Dams' sad, tragic story, of course, has already been heard by the judge during what we call the victim impact part of the trial, during the penalty phase. So Judge Mudd (ph) doesn't really need much more evidence. He's really heard it all, but if she wants to make a brief statement today, she's entitled to do that, and the judge will let her do so.

LIN: And why is that? Because she's not going to have any sort of legal impact on the case. Is it just simply to allow the victim's mother to vent?

GRIMES: That's really part of it. Under California law, there's a lot of attention given to the rights of victims, and they're input at a sentencing in any case is very important, and particularly in a death penalty case, and so even though her side of the story and her statement has already been made, this is her final opportunity to talk about the life and death of her daughter and what it has meant to her family, and if she wants to make a statement, even if it's a little bit repetitive of what the judge has already heard, he will give her that opportunity.

LIN: So, does David Westerfield then get a chance to respond or say anything envoy his behalf today?

GRIMES: He also has that absolute right. From what we've seen of Westerfield, he declined to testify during the trial. Now he is trying to blame that on his lawyer, Steve Feldman, and I think Westerfield will probably say nothing today, go up to prison, file an appeal, say it's all his lawyer's fault, because he was -- that's what, apparently, his position is now, that he wanted to testify and his lawyer talked him out of it.

LIN: All right, so still some unanswered questions, maybe not so straight and clear as we might think at today's sentencing. We'll see what happens.

Thank you very much, Bob Grimes.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired January 3, 2003 - 11:07   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: In the meantime, criminal defense attorney Bob Grimes has been following this case very closely. He is down at the San Diego courthouse.
And, Bob, I just want to get a perspective from you on what we expect to happen today, because ultimately, the judge has the final discretion as to whether David Westerfield will actually get the death penalty.

BOB GRIMES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTY.: That's correct, Carol.

The judge is supposed to re-evaluate essentially all of the evidence himself, make an independent decision as to whether the death penalty is warranted, and he has the absolute authority to reduce the sentence to life without possibility of parole if he decides to do so.

LIN: And the defense attorneys, they're actually trying to give him a basis for doing so. David Westerfield's attorneys are saying that there were gross errors on the police department's part in their investigation.

GRIMES: That's what they're saying. They have really two arguments for life without parole. One, is the judge's inherent power to reduce any death penalty life without parole just on the basis of the good record, et cetera, of the defendant, and the other, as you mentioned, is they're claiming police misconduct, things like visiting Westerfield in jail when he already had a lawyer, things like that, and they think that that is a separate basis for reduction to life without parole.

LIN: So what do you think the chances are?

GRIMES: Well the chances, frankly, are not very good. I think Judge Mudd (ph) will give it an independent view. He's a very independent judge, a very strong judge, but I don't think the defense has any chance on the police misconduct theory. On the other theory that it should be reduced because of his good record, his family ties, it's true that he's unlike most death penalty defendants in California, in the absence of any criminal record, but I think the judge is likely to agree with the jury that the circumstances of the murder of the 7-year-old victim are probably sufficient for the ultimate penalty.

LIN: So how did the hearing work today, because we do understand that Brenda Van Dam, Daniel Van Dam's mother, will get a chance to actually say something? GRIMES: That's what I'm told also, and she has the absolute right to make a statement. A lot of the Van Dams' sad, tragic story, of course, has already been heard by the judge during what we call the victim impact part of the trial, during the penalty phase. So Judge Mudd (ph) doesn't really need much more evidence. He's really heard it all, but if she wants to make a brief statement today, she's entitled to do that, and the judge will let her do so.

LIN: And why is that? Because she's not going to have any sort of legal impact on the case. Is it just simply to allow the victim's mother to vent?

GRIMES: That's really part of it. Under California law, there's a lot of attention given to the rights of victims, and they're input at a sentencing in any case is very important, and particularly in a death penalty case, and so even though her side of the story and her statement has already been made, this is her final opportunity to talk about the life and death of her daughter and what it has meant to her family, and if she wants to make a statement, even if it's a little bit repetitive of what the judge has already heard, he will give her that opportunity.

LIN: So, does David Westerfield then get a chance to respond or say anything envoy his behalf today?

GRIMES: He also has that absolute right. From what we've seen of Westerfield, he declined to testify during the trial. Now he is trying to blame that on his lawyer, Steve Feldman, and I think Westerfield will probably say nothing today, go up to prison, file an appeal, say it's all his lawyer's fault, because he was -- that's what, apparently, his position is now, that he wanted to testify and his lawyer talked him out of it.

LIN: All right, so still some unanswered questions, maybe not so straight and clear as we might think at today's sentencing. We'll see what happens.

Thank you very much, Bob Grimes.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com