The judge presiding over the penalty phase of convicted child killer David Westerfield banned all still photography from his courtroom Tuesday, angrily extending a ban that had originally applied to only one pool reporter.

"The bottom line is very simple," said Judge William Mudd to lawyers from the San Diego Union Tribune. "What should the sanction be? Money? Contempt? Jail? Oh no, that would be a field day. Where can I hurt 'em most? How can I control my courtroom? The sanction is to get rid of him — and that is what I'm going to do."

David Westerfield was convicted on August 21 of first-degree murder of Danielle van Dam, his 7-year-old neighbor, as well as possession of child pornography. He now faces death in a penalty phase scheduled to begin Wednesday. The penalty phase will be covered live on Court TV.

On the day the jury handed down its verdict after 10 days of deliberations, San Diego Union-Tribune photographer Dan Trevan snapped shots of the victim's parents holding each other in the gallery after the verdict was read. Mudd banned Trevan from the courtroom last Friday, but Tuesday extended the ban after an extended battle over just who was, and who wasn't considered a "spectator."

California law 908 states that photographing or filming the spectators in a courtroom is not permitted, but lawyers for the San Diego Union Tribune argued at length Tuesday that the van Dams, both of whom testified during the lengthy trial, were participants, not spectators, and therefore could be photographed.

Judge Mudd thought otherwise. "Witnesses sit in the witness chair and testify. Spectators sit in a seat and observe," he said, his face reddening as he poked forcefully toward the jury box and spectators' seating area in the courtroom.

"I respectfully submit that they were trial participants, they were not spectators," continued Edward Davis of Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich, a lawyer for the paper.

Mudd cut him short.

"Your client knew that he was not to take pictures of anyone that was not in this box," said the judge. "You've made your record, I've made mine. There will be no still photography in this courtroom."

Davis equated Mudd's ruling with the judge's perception of his treatment in the local media, which has been less than favorable. "I think it would be extremely unfair for this court to do what it thinks the media has done to it, that is to tar and feather this journalist really when he was just doing his job," said the lawyer.

In a written statement released Friday afternoon, the paper's editor, Karin Winner said, "In taking the picture, our photographer was following the rule as it has been interpreted by many local judges, that is, once witnesses, such as the van Dams, have testified and later seat themselves in the gallery, there is no objection to photographs."

But Judge Mudd, who grew increasingly frustrated throughout the half-hour proceeding, dismissed the lawyer's assertion that the photographer simply did not understand Mudd's take on the law correctly.

"The argument that he didn't even understand is a bunch of cow manure," said Mudd. "This is going to be exhibit A in the rights versus the obligations of the media," said Mudd. "You have all of the rights, but none of the obligations."

Media wrangling aside, Mudd also attended to more serious matters Tuesday, setting aside a decision on a motion Feldman filed to dismiss the death penalty verdict based on Westerfield's constitutional right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

Citing the atmosphere of celebration that attended his client's guilty verdict, Feldman also asked Judge Mudd to modify the instructions the jury will receive before deliberating Westerfield's fate to include a request to approach the task in an objective, dispassionate manner.

But Judge Mudd, who was not easily convinced of anything on Tuesday, said no.