SAN DIEGO -- The latest bug expert to testify in the trial of accused child killer David Westerfield gave a variety of dates Tuesday when insects may have infested the body of Danielle van Dam before it was discovered.

WESTERFIELD TRIAL Judge William Mudd Issues Death Penalty Sentence Hear Jury's Death Penalty Recommendation Watch The Jury's Verdict Being Read Share Your Thoughts DANIELLE VAN DAM 1994-2002 Watch Danielle Video Montage E-mail: daniellevandam @yahoo.com Send mail to: P.O. Box 501515 San Diego, 92150

Madison Lee Goff, an entomologist and chairman of the Forensic Sciences Department of Chaminade University in Honolulu, testified that insects could have entered the girl's body anywhere from Feb. 1 to Feb. 12.

Watch LIVE Coverage Of Trial Thursday @ 9 a.m.

However, as a rebuttal witness for the prosecution, Goff also cast doubt on the earlier testimony for the defense of entomologists Neal Haskell and David Faulkner -- who said he doubted the child's body was available to insects before Feb. 14 to 16.

The defense has contended that there was no way Westerfield could have placed the victim's body where it was found in the East County, because he was under close surveillance by police beginning Feb. 5.

The Sabre Springs second-grader was determined to be missing Feb. 2. Her body was found Feb. 27.

Goff said forensic entomology provides "estimates of what happened, a minimum amount of time insects were feeding on that body." He said determining a time of death was outside the area of expertise in the field.

Along those lines, Goff testified that after receiving data from the prosecution, he estimated when insects would have entered the body by using temperature data from Singing Hills Country Club -- which is in the Dehesa Valley -- and Brown Field, which is farther away but provided more complete data.

Video

Different Methods Yield Different Results

Goff (pictured, right) gave two variables on each, for a total of four estimates.

"The body was available prior to the second of February" using the Singing Hills data, Goff testified, with an absolute minimum date of Feb. 12.

From Brown Field information, the body was found to be available to insects between Feb. 4 and Feb. 9.

Video

Insight From Attorney Gretchen von Helms

"This is an estimate, OK?" Goff warned jurors. "We don't have a stopwatch. We're looking at plus or minus a day."

Goff explained that cold nighttime temperatures could retard the development of the flies, which could push back the time estimate.

According to previous testimony, there was frost in the Dehesa area every morning between Feb. 1 and Feb. 9.

Ants would also inhibit blow fly infestation.

"Ants are very voracious predators," Goff said. "They can retard decomposition by taking away all of the eggs."

Goff said numerous ants were present at the recovery scene when he went to see it last week.

Mature beetles, also considered to be predators, were also found with the body, Goff said, which would "indicate a longer period of insect activity."

He said Haskell went wrong by adding a temperature from a mass of blow fly maggots in the body.

Goff said data on maggot mass temperatures was unsupported by previous studies.

"By doing this, he comes up with a shorter timeline," Goff said. He explained that higher temperatures meant faster fly development.

Defense attorney Steven Feldman was able to get Goff to concede that the longest delay in infestation that he'd seen was two-and-a-half days, when a body was wrapped in blankets. Usually, infestation occurred anywhere from minutes to an hour after death.

Then Feldman focused on one of Goff's dates, which used data from Brown Field.

"So, you're saying that 9 February is a reasonable date (for fly infestation) whatever your disagreement with Doctors Faulkner and Haskell?" Feldman asked.

"Yes," Goff answered.

Westerfield, 50, is charged with murder, kidnapping and special circumstance allegations that could lead to the death penalty if he's convicted of killing his 7-year-old neighbor. He is also charged with misdemeanor possession of child pornography.

There will be no testimony Wednesday. The defense rebuttal case begins Thursday morning. The jury is expected to begin deliberations next week.