For those that don't know, David Westerfield was the creep who raped and murdered the little girl in CA. The jury has given him the works.

According to the San Diego Union Tribune, Westerfield had agreed to work out a plea bargain in which he would lead the cops to where the girl's body was buried if the jury did not sentence him to death. His attorney was not able to get the deal worked out in time because cops found the body on their own, and so the trial began. His attorney made up "possible scenarios" that he KNEW were false in order to lead the jury into a "reasonable doubt" situation. For instance, he said that the girl could have been murdered by some of the people her parents had over for "sexual purposes" even though he KNEW that Westerfield was the one who killed the little girl. This is sickening. Thank God the jury didn't fall for his lies.

Rule 5200 of California's rules of professional conduct for attorneys states, "A lawyer shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law."

He should be disbarred in my opinion.

Did you really expect anything less from a lawyer?

[quote:0ab67680a0="SB54"]Did you really expect anything less from a lawyer?[/quote:0ab67680a0]

When it comes to a crime this heinous? YES

It's called greed buddy I've been telling this to poeple for years and it's true people (even the best) will do anything for money if they need it bad enough.

[quote:7679db6216="ConfusedYouth"]It's called greed buddy I've been telling this to poeple for years and it's true people (even the best) will do anything for money if they need it bad enough.[/quote:7679db6216]

How could anyone think (especially a lawyer who is most likely already very well off) they need the money bad enough to get a child killer off?

I dont have answers but I know greed does awful things I mean look at Enron or World Com its happening all over the place... Its sick and sad that someone would try to get a known muderer off but they still do it...

Actually, that's how our system works. It is certainly not a perfect system, but defense attorneys must work toward their client's best interest and make sure that his rights are not violated. Anything else is un-Constitutional.

[quote:0ba6ee298b="J_Lively"]Actually, that's how our system works. It is certainly not a perfect system, but defense attorneys must work toward their client's best interest and make sure that his rights are not violated. Anything else is un-Constitutional.[/quote:0ba6ee298b]

Rule 5200 of California's rules of professional conduct for attorneys states, "A lawyer shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law."

[quote:304286b456="DaveTooner"]Rule 5200 of California's rules of professional conduct for attorneys states, "A lawyer shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law."[/quote:304286b456]

That is a good thing. This type of procedure is so common place that I thought it was what defense attorneys were supposed to do.

However, it would still have to be proven that his client actually admitted guilt. Yes, common sense says that if the guy knew where the body was, he killed her, but it is not that cut and dry in a court hearing. The burden of proof, for both the murder trial and if there was to be a trial for misconduct on the part of his attorney, would lie in the hands of the prosecutors.

I understand the anger the public feels when a seemingly guilty person gets off easily because of an error on the part of the investigators or because there was some damning evidence the judge refused to allow the jury to hear, but without these guidelines being enforced we would lose our rights and much of our freedom. I like the fact that the police must have a good reason to get a warrant to search my home.

I thought he was inocent so why not his lawyer?I still think he is inocent.If you ever get in serious trouble I bet you all would be looking in the yellow pages for Westys lawyer.:mad: :mad:

Originally posted by goldy
I thought he was inocent so why not his lawyer?I still think he is inocent.If you ever get in serious trouble I bet you all would be looking in the yellow pages for Westys lawyer.:mad: :mad:

The man admited he did it, he knew where the body was, he had her blood in his car and house, he had child porn, WHAT MORE PROOF DO YOU NEED?????????

Why would I want sicko Westerfield's lawyer? Westerfield's in the slammer right now.

If every man with dirty pictures in his room was put in jail you probly would have a ring side seat!He did not know where the body was.Children are still being killed and abused .Will you put this on Westy too?Jail is full of inocent men and I think they added one more.I hope some day you will have to eat your words.They are saying now he killed the child in the room and then took her away.Should have been a lot of blood and D& A left. The parents used a dust buster to clean up befor the police arrived because they wanted to give a good impression.Me The house could have went to pot I would have put all of my being on finding my baby.:confused:

So westys lawyer knew he was guilty? What about the lawyers who had to defend Tom MCvey? The lawyers who will have to defend the snipers?.Should they just walk up with a white flag?

The fact is that Westerfield admited to his lawyer that he was guilty and he agreed to show authorities where the body was so they wouldn't give him death.

Goldy, I never said all people with child porn were guilty of killing kids. The fact that Westerfield had it simply made the rest of the evidence more convincing.

If the lawyer knows the client is guilty he should not try to trick the jury into thinking he's innocent. That is the difference here.

Who told you the attorney knew he was guilty?Were you in the room?I will never believe that.So if he fessed up why does he not tell us now how he was able to stay in a room for two hrs. without makeing a sound?This bit of info. would be helpful for our armed service men who have to lay in fox holes for hrs. while defending our country.He had the shakes and he sweats and with that he most have given off and oder in such closed quarters.The VanDans are young and smart they knew better than to go over the house with a dustbuster befor the cops came.Me who never went to collage knows not to touch anything befor the police get there.Tell me why did they do that?

It was in the news, I forget who broke the story. But I can tell by the tone of your posts that you are probably a moron who believes in "the vast right-wing conspiracy" and the "moon hoax" so I am not even going to bother with you. All that matters is that bastard is going to have justice served to him.

yep I might be a loose goose but just like you I have my own thoughts.You and no one else can change that by name calling.They said mean things about the Whright Brothers too.But that did not stop them from inventing the airplane.What you say about Westy wont keep him in jail if he is inocent.

Originally posted by goldy
yep I might be a loose goose but just like you I have my own thoughts.You and no one else can change that by name calling.They said mean things about the Whright Brothers too.But that did not stop them from inventing the airplane.What you say about Westy wont keep him in jail if he is inocent.

True, but he is a guilty child killer so he will stay. That is, until they give him the works.