50 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Spring 2006
By Leann Long, BS
A Tragedy Unfolds
On the morning of February 2,
2002, the parents of Danielle
van Dam were forced to face
their worst nightmare when they
discovered the empty bed of their
7-year-old daughter. Danielle was
last seen the night before when
Damon van Dam put his beautiful blue-eyed daughter to bed.
The distraught parents immediately reported Danielle as missing,
and an extensive search involving hundreds of volunteers began.
Authorities assumed that the innocent young child was abducted
from her bed while she slept on the
night of February 1, 2002.
Only 4 days after the young victim disappeared, police began keeping a 24-hour
surveillance of their main suspect, Daniel
Westerfield, a 50-year-old self-employed
engineer and twice-divorced father of two.
Westerfield lived two doors down from the
van Dam family. Police quickly focused in
on him when they learned he had left for
a solo camping trip to the desert the same
morning Danielle was discovered missing.
As soon as Westerfield returned from his
camping trip, police began investigating
his activities.
While under investigation, Westerfield
was reported as being extremely cooperative. Police obtained warrants to search
Westerfield’s home, RV, and car. The
searches turned up valuable evidence,
including the following:
• Child pornography on Westerfield’s
computer
• Danielle’s fingerprints in Westerfield’s RV
• A drop of Danielle’s blood in Westerfield’s
RV
• A drop of Danielle’s blood on
Westerfield’s jacket
• Fibers similar to Danielle’s bedroom
carpet in Westerfield’s RV
• Dog hairs that could have come from
the van Dam’s dog in Westerfield’s RV
• Blond hairs that could have belonged to
Danielle in Westerfield’s RV and house
Although Danielle was still missing by
February 22, 2002, it was assumed that
she was no longer alive and might never
be found. Westerfield was presumed to be
responsible for her alleged death and was
arrested. On February 26, 2005, he was
arraigned on charges of kidnapping, murder, and misdemeanor possession of child
pornography.
On February 27, 2002, almost a month
after she was reported missing, the body of
Danielle van Dam was discovered 25 miles
away from her home along a desert road
east of San Diego. The evidence found
during the investigation of Westerfield and
his suspicious alibi provided a convincing
case for the prosecution during the trial.
However, his defense lawyers presented
a significant amount of evidence to raise
doubts in the minds of the jurors.
Uncertainly Guilty
The prosecution could not present any
evidence that directly linked Westerfield
to Danielle. There were no traces of evidence that Westerfield had been in the
van Dam’s house. No one saw Westerfield
and Danielle together, and none of his
DNA was found on her body. The defense
asserted that only someone who was familiar with the van Dam’s house could have
been able to sneak in and take Danielle
undetected.
The lifestyles of Brenda and Damon van
Dam, Danielle’s parents, were also brought
into question during the trial. The two
admitted to smoking marijuana the night
before Danielle was abducted and also to
openly having sex with other people. The
night Danielle was taken from the house,
the van Dams, as they often did, had many
guests over at their house until the early
hours of the next morning. The defense
claimed that the van Dam’s reckless and
wild behavior put their daughter at risk
and that any of their past guests could have
been responsible for Danielle’s kidnapping
and death.
The night Danielle was kidnapped,
several witnesses reported seeing Brenda
Spring 2006 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER 51
dancing closely with Westerfield at a local
bar. The defense suggested that hairs,
from both Danielle and the van Dam’s
dog, could have been transferred onto
Westerfield while they were dancing, consequently ending up in his home and RV.
Brenda also testified that she and
Danielle had visited Westerfield’s house
the week Danielle disappeared to sell
Girl Scout cookies. During the trial,
it was confirmed that Westerfield kept
a pile of laundry near his front door.
Westerfield’s defense argued that the
blood on his coat and Danielle’s hairs
that were found in his house could have
been left during that visit.
Various neighbors also testified that
the van Dam children were often left to
play unsupervised and could have gotten
into Westerfield’s RV. If Danielle had
been playing in the RV, she easily could
have deposited her hair, her fingerprints,
her blood, dog hairs, and carpet fibers
from her bedroom in the RV.
Despite all of the previously mentioned factors, the defense case mostly
hinged on bugs.
Creepy-Crawly Contradictions
The prosecution claimed that Danielle was
killed within the first few days after she
was kidnapped, as it would not have been
possible for Westerfield to kill and dump
her body once he was under police surveillance, which began on February 5, 2002.
However, the defense argued that the state
of Danielle’s remains indicated that she
was killed after Westerfield was under surveillance. Proving this in court would clear
Westerfield’s name.
Initially, the defense brought to the stand
forensic entomologist David Faulkner.
Forensic entomologists study insects, and
when a body has been decomposing for
more than 48 hours forensic entomologists can give a more precise estimation
of time of death than medical examiners.
Entomologists are able to calculate an estimated time of death by determining when
a body was colonized by bugs.
Dead bodies immediately start attracting thousands of flies and other insects.
Flies are used most often to determine
time of death. They feed on the corpse and
lay eggs that quickly turn into maggots,
which also feed on the decaying body. A
fly’s lifespan, and consequently the speed
of a body’s decomposition, is dependent
on the temperature. Entomologists have
to consider temperature when trying to
determine how much time has elapsed
since death.
Falkner testified that Danielle’s body
was not outside and available to insects
until February 16 through 18, weeks after
Westerfield was placed under police surveillance. The defense brought in additional entomologists to offer their own
expert testimonies. Entomologist Neal
Haskell reported that Danielle’s body was
infested with insects between February
12 and 21, and entomologist Robert Hall
claimed her body was initially infested
between February 12 and 23.
The prosecution then had entomologist
Madison Lee Goff offer his expert testimony. He testified that insect infestation
occurred between February 9 and February
14, but also claimed that other factors may
have resulted in a delay in bug arrival.
There were a few non-entomologist forensic experts whose proposed time frames
included the first few days after Danielle’s
disappearance—before Westerfield was
under police surveillance—but each of
the entomologists offered a time frame
confirming the body was dumped after
Westerfield was being monitored by police.
However, the entomologists’ inconsistent
timetables also depicted the unreliability
of determining the time of insect infestation, and the prosecution was able to convince the jury that the field of entomology
was inexact.
Reasonably Doubting the Death
Penalty
Although the jury, with large support
from the community, turned over a guilty
verdict in the case based on the evidence presented, it cannot be known for
sure whether or not Westerfield was truly
guilty. After Westerfield’s sentence was
given, some people felt the death penalty
was too harsh with there being so much
evidence to question—especially the evidence about the bugs.
It would have been invaluable if the
testimonies and findings of the forensic
experts had not varied so much. If the
52 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Spring 2006
forensic entomologists would have been
able to consistently and accurately pinpoint Danielle’s time of death, they would
have been able to shred most of the doubt
that accompanied the case.
This is not the first case where the study
of a decomposing body has offered critical information about a victim’s time of
death, and unfortunately, nor will it be the
last. It will be extremely valuable if in the
future, forensic experts are able to narrow
the time of death of a decomposing body
to a smaller and more definite time frame.
How can this be accomplished without
studying decomposing bodies? It can’t,
which is why the body farm was created.
Examining the Expired
In Knoxville, Tennessee, there is a threeacre wooded plot surrounded by razor
wire and wooden fences where about 40
lifeless bodies are currently decomposing. One is lying out in the open where
it can sunbathe each day, while another is
refrigerated in darkness. A headless corpse
might be decaying in the woods while a
dismembered cadaver lies buried in mud.
Of course, all of this is done in the name
of science.
While teaching at the University of
Tennessee, forensic anthropologist Bill
Bass was repeatedly faced with the challenge of informing detectives how long a
victim had been dead. After coming up
short when consulting the literature, he
realized the only way to be able to analyze
the time of death of badly decayed bodies
would be to study bodies as they decompose. In the early 1980s he was granted
land to begin the University of Tennessee
Forensic Anthropology Facility, or as it has
been nicknamed, the body farm.
The meager beginnings of the body farm
consisted of just one body, corpse 1-81,
in a 16-square-foot chain-link enclosure.
Experiencing temperatures in the 80s, Bass
and his graduate students watched and
carefully observed corpse 1-81 go through
all four of the broad stages of decomposition—the fresh stage, the bloated stage,
the decay stage, and the dry stage—in a
matter of 2 weeks.
The time that each stage of decomposition lasts varies, as the stages are greatly
affected by the environment and tem-
perature. The fresh stage of decomposition
begins immediately following death and
continues until the corpse begins to bloat.
The bloated stage is a result of bacteria
consuming the stomach and intestines.
Microbes release waste gases that cause the
abdomen of a body to inflate. The decay
stage begins once the abdomen collapses
because it is no longer bloated with gases.
During this third stage, the remains are
comparatively dry. When only small bits
of tissue remain on a body and it is little
more than a skeleton, the body has entered
into the dry and final stage of decomposition.
Corpse 1-81 gave observers a lot of
information during the short amount of
time they had to observe it, and the skeletal remains of the corpse were the first of
many used by Bass to help teach students
how to identify human bones by their
size, shape, and texture. However, the
studies done at the body farm have greatly
advanced over the past 25 years.
Most of the initial research performed
on Bass’s self-proclaimed “death acre” concentrated on observing and recording the
basic succession and timing of decomposition. They were seeking the answers to
basic questions that would help in investigations, such as the following:
• How long before limbs start to fall off?
• In what environment did the body
decay?
• Was the body in shade or direct sunlight
during decomposition?
• Was the body clothed during decomposition?
• Where was the body during decomposition (indoors, outdoors, car)?
• Did the body decompose in land or in
water?
• From how far away can humans detect
the odor of decomposition?
The answers to those questions are
much less of a mystery today, but when
it comes to decomposition and analyzing
human remains, there is not a formula that
works 100% of the time. For that reason,
graduate students from the university continue to record and analyze each stage of
decomposition, constantly adding to the
information available to law enforcement
officials, medical examiners, crime scene
investigators, and other forensic experts.
As climate and insects are the two most
influential factors on how quickly a body
will decompose, the bodies that are studied are still put in a variety of situations.
Hoping to encompass most conditions,
the students study corpses in various settings—from being locked in the trunk of
car to being submerged under water. The
researchers analyze the soil as well as the
bodies, as byproducts of decomposition
seep into the ground and can provide valuable information about how long a body
has been laying a particular spot. Data that
has been taken from the body farm has
helped solve many cases around the nation
and continues to advance what is known
about human decomposition.
Eager to enhance science, over 300
people have donated their bodies to be
observed at the body farm. Each body is
allowed to decompose for about a year
before it is replaced with a new body to
study.
Plentiful donors will be very beneficial
for Tyler O’Brien if he receives the grant
he is seeking in the amount of $400,000
to $500,000. If all goes as he hopes,
the biological anthropology professor at
University of Northern Iowa will start
another body farm. Bodies in a body farm
in Iowa would be exposed to many different types of weather, including wind,
rain, sun, snow. There would also be
different rodents, plants, and bugs than
in Tennessee. O’Brian believes it is very
important to study how bodies react in different environments. Although his request
has been denied in the past, many in his
community are in favor of the research.
There is still a lot to be learned about the
rates at which dead bodies decompose, but
the research collected at the body farm during the past 25 has provided crucial information in several murder investigations. If
O’Brian’s grant is approved, even more will
be learned about the rate at which human
bodies decompose in various environments.
Hopefully, in the future forensic experts
will be able to accurately pinpoint the time
of death of human remains so that in cases
where a victim’s time of death is crucial to a
verdict, justice can be served.
References
Bass, B., & Jefferson, J. (2003). Death’s acre.
New York: G. P. Putman’s Sons.
Baum, M. D., & Tolley, T. (2000). Pastoral
putrefaction down on the body farm. CNN.
com. Retrieved November 30, 2005, from
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/
10/31/body.farm/
Courttv.com. (2002). Danielle van Dam
murder case. Retrieved November 20,
2005, from http://www.courttv.com/trials/
westerfield/timeline/time_of_death.html
Dvorak, T. (2005). Iowa scientist seeks funds
for body farm. Associated Press. Retrieved
November 30, 2005, from http://www.cnn.
com/2005/TECH/science/11/28/body.farm.
ap/
Epler, K. (2002). Defense begins case in
Westerfield trial. North County Times. Retrieved
November 30, 2005, from http://www.nctimes.
com/articles/2002/07/03/ export13362.prt
Epler, K. (2002). Expert: Fingerprints are
Danielle’s. North County Times. Retrieved
November 30, 2005, from http://www.nctimes.
com/articles/2002/03/13/ export4969.prt
Epler, K. (2002). Hair in Westerfield home
similar to Danielle’s. North County Times.
Retrieved November 30, 2005, from http://
www.nctimes.com/articles/2002/06/25/
export12739.prt
Epler, K. (2002). Many in community
support jury’s decision. North County Times.
Retrieved November 30, 2005, from http://
www.nctimes.com/articles/2002/08/22/
export16664.prt
Epler, K. (2002). Three DNA experts
link blood, hair to Danielle. North County
Times. Retrieved November 30, 2005, from
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2002/06/21/
export12485.prt
Epler, K. (2002). Westerfield’s defense
worked to raise a reasonable doubt. North
County Times. Retrieved November 30,
2005, from http://www.nctimes.com/articles/
2002/08/09/export15808.prt
Ramsland, K. (2005). The body farm. The
Crime Library. Retrieved November 20, 2005,
from http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_
mind/forensics/bill_bass/4.html
Weiss, M. (n.d.) Forensic entomology.
Retrieved January 9, 2006, from http://www.
ndsu.nodak.edu/enomology/topics/forensic.
htm
Wikipedia.com. (2005). Body farm. Retrieved
November 30, 2005, from http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Body_Farm
About the Author
Leann Long, BS, is the Assistant Editor of
The Forensic Examiners and a staff writer
and editor for the American College of
Forensic Examiners.
Spring 2006 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER 53