Dina Shacknai wants Max's death reopened; gives ICU pic to media

[screecher]

*Lash*, thank you for your heartfelt post. You beautifully express sentiments and concerns that I felt but was able to articulate.

You and Inthedark bring up good points regarding the cyber stalking issues. I personally do not know how much of that was really done or if the PR people were just posturing and bashing. The PR show was so repulsive that it actually had the opposite of it's intended effect. It made me more suspicious and drew more attention to the lies and inconsistencies in the case.

I feel quite sad that even though I sympathize with Dina's plight I cannot sign her petition also for the reasons that you and Inthedark mention.

BBM

Yes, I totally agree. Lies and inconsistencies.

 

[K_Z]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer, or may stimulate discussion to explore.

Dina has (thus far) unsuccessfully petitioned the Coronado Police, and the Coronado City Council to reopen Max’s death investigation. The Coronado Police officially declined, and the Coronado City Council listened politely, but has not commented about Dina’s remarks during the open comment section of their meeting from 18 Sept. I seriously questioned the purpose of Dina’s City Council remarks, because from my knowledge of local government, the Council likely does not have authority to force the Coronado PD to reopen Max’s case, and has no authority over the San Diego Medical Examiner’s Office at all. (Save back door political posturing, or something similar.)

In conjunction with the above 2 efforts, Dina has made the rounds of cable talk shows, given interviews, and created maxshacknai.com—a website/ blog which appears to be designed to disseminate information, with the goal of persuading members of the public to link to her change.org petition to reopen Max’s case. The change.org petition is directed toward the California State Senate.

I have more than a passing familiarity with the structure and function of state government, and the committee structures in my state. I am baffled at what Dina hopes to accomplish with her change.org petition, even supposing that she gets 8000 signatures. Realistically, a portion of the signatures will not be California residents—Dina herself is not a California resident. Where does this petition “go”, assuming she gets 8000 signatures? Which lawmaker is she trying to persuade, and what position does this legislator hold, on which committees? What power does the committee/s have to reopen a case? Because I’m thinking that the best or only possible outcome of this petition is that somewhere there is a California State Senator who may be persuaded, who then has to muster support for a hearing….with the goal of……?? Sending another letter to someone? Or, perhaps the target State Senator will assemble a committee to review or investigate her claims? (That seems a VERY remote possibility, imo.) Where is this State Senate thing going? I am really puzzled—surely Dina’s PR firm and attorney have some hand in this and are providing Dina direction….and they are based in Arizona, not CA.

I certainly understand the emotional part of the petition, and that it makes supporters “feel good and supportive” to click over and sign the petition. I understand “backdoor politicking” and “hallway lobbying” also. I also understand that the max.com site dovetails quite nicely with the advertising/ PR plan Dina’s nonprofit, and has links back to the nonprofit.

However, I’m having a really hard time seeing the authenticity, and clarity of purpose, in the State Senate plan to present the petition. Does Dina even understand how incredibly complex the role of a traditional lobbyist is? The process of “presenting” this petition, and then having the issues it represents “go somewhere”, is so immensely convoluted and unrealistic, that it seems to be nothing more than a “feel good” click of the mouse for supporters.

Legislators are VERY busy people, with literally dozens of special interest issues coming at them every day, on top of amending statutes, and acting on new bills. The BEST lobbyists spend years learning the intricacies of the personalities and committee structure and function—and still have a convoluted path to getting their issues heard and acted on.

If there is something I’m missing, some aspect of California State government functioning I’m missing here, please enlighten me. Because I just don’t get it. Where can this petition go, realistically? Is it just a publicity exercise? An emotional salve?

 

[katydid23]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer, or may stimulate discussion to explore.

Dina has (thus far) unsuccessfully petitioned the Coronado Police, and the Coronado City Council to reopen Max’s death investigation. The Coronado Police officially declined, and the Coronado City Council listened politely, but has not commented about Dina’s remarks during the open comment section of their meeting from 18 Sept. I seriously questioned the purpose of Dina’s City Council remarks, because from my knowledge of local government, the Council likely does not have authority to force the Coronado PD to reopen Max’s case, and has no authority over the San Diego Medical Examiner’s Office at all. (Save back door political posturing, or something similar.)

In conjunction with the above 2 efforts, Dina has made the rounds of cable talk shows, given interviews, and created maxshacknai.com—a website/ blog which appears to be designed to disseminate information, with the goal of persuading members of the public to link to her change.org petition to reopen Max’s case. The change.org petition is directed toward the California State Senate.

I have more than a passing familiarity with the structure and function of state government, and the committee structures in my state. I am baffled at what Dina hopes to accomplish with her change.org petition, even supposing that she gets 8000 signatures. Realistically, a portion of the signatures will not be California residents—Dina herself is not a California resident. Where does this petition “go”, assuming she gets 8000 signatures? Which lawmaker is she trying to persuade, and what position does this legislator hold, on which committees? What power does the committee/s have to reopen a case? Because I’m thinking that the best or only possible outcome of this petition is that somewhere there is a California State Senator who may be persuaded, who then has to muster support for a hearing….with the goal of……?? Sending another letter to someone? Or, perhaps the target State Senator will assemble a committee to review or investigate her claims? (That seems a VERY remote possibility, imo.) Where is this State Senate thing going? I am really puzzled—surely Dina’s PR firm and attorney have some hand in this and are providing Dina direction….and they are based in Arizona, not CA.

I certainly understand the emotional part of the petition, and that it makes supporters “feel good and supportive” to click over and sign the petition. I understand “backdoor politicking” and “hallway lobbying” also. I also understand that the max.com site dovetails quite nicely with the advertising/ PR plan Dina’s nonprofit, and has links back to the nonprofit.

However, I’m having a really hard time seeing the authenticity, and clarity of purpose, in the State Senate plan to present the petition. Does Dina even understand how incredibly complex the role of a traditional lobbyist is? The process of “presenting” this petition, and then having the issues it represents “go somewhere”, is so immensely convoluted and unrealistic, that it seems to be nothing more than a “feel good” click of the mouse for supporters.

Legislators are VERY busy people, with literally dozens of special interest issues coming at them every day, on top of amending statutes, and acting on new bills. The BEST lobbyists spend years learning the intricacies of the personalities and committee structure and function—and still have a convoluted path to getting their issues heard and acted on.

If there is something I’m missing, some aspect of California State government functioning I’m missing here, please enlighten me. Because I just don’t get it. Where can this petition go, realistically? Is it just a publicity exercise? An emotional salve?

BBM

It seems that every single thing that DS does, in an effort to find answers, is judged, ridiculed, discounted and laughed at. Maybe she is not as knowledgeable and 'realistic' as you are. Maybe she does not understood the legislative process or the lobbyists as well as you claim to.

Maybe she is just a grieving and confused woman looking desperately for a way to answer the questions surrounding her son's death. Maybe it won't work, but at least she is giving it her all.

 

[Inparadise]

I have a question that perhaps someone can answer, or may stimulate discussion to explore.

Dina has (thus far) unsuccessfully petitioned the Coronado Police, and the Coronado City Council to reopen Max’s death investigation. The Coronado Police officially declined, and the Coronado City Council listened politely, but has not commented about Dina’s remarks during the open comment section of their meeting from 18 Sept. I seriously questioned the purpose of Dina’s City Council remarks, because from my knowledge of local government, the Council likely does not have authority to force the Coronado PD to reopen Max’s case, and has no authority over the San Diego Medical Examiner’s Office at all. (Save back door political posturing, or something similar.)

In conjunction with the above 2 efforts, Dina has made the rounds of cable talk shows, given interviews, and created maxshacknai.com—a website/ blog which appears to be designed to disseminate information, with the goal of persuading members of the public to link to her change.org petition to reopen Max’s case. The change.org petition is directed toward the California State Senate.

I have more than a passing familiarity with the structure and function of state government, and the committee structures in my state. I am baffled at what Dina hopes to accomplish with her change.org petition, even supposing that she gets 8000 signatures. Realistically, a portion of the signatures will not be California residents—Dina herself is not a California resident. Where does this petition “go”, assuming she gets 8000 signatures? Which lawmaker is she trying to persuade, and what position does this legislator hold, on which committees? What power does the committee/s have to reopen a case? Because I’m thinking that the best or only possible outcome of this petition is that somewhere there is a California State Senator who may be persuaded, who then has to muster support for a hearing….with the goal of……?? Sending another letter to someone? Or, perhaps the target State Senator will assemble a committee to review or investigate her claims? (That seems a VERY remote possibility, imo.) Where is this State Senate thing going? I am really puzzled—surely Dina’s PR firm and attorney have some hand in this and are providing Dina direction….and they are based in Arizona, not CA.

I certainly understand the emotional part of the petition, and that it makes supporters “feel good and supportive” to click over and sign the petition. I understand “backdoor politicking” and “hallway lobbying” also. I also understand that the max.com site dovetails quite nicely with the advertising/ PR plan Dina’s nonprofit, and has links back to the nonprofit.

However, I’m having a really hard time seeing the authenticity, and clarity of purpose, in the State Senate plan to present the petition. Does Dina even understand how incredibly complex the role of a traditional lobbyist is? The process of “presenting” this petition, and then having the issues it represents “go somewhere”, is so immensely convoluted and unrealistic, that it seems to be nothing more than a “feel good” click of the mouse for supporters.

Legislators are VERY busy people, with literally dozens of special interest issues coming at them every day, on top of amending statutes, and acting on new bills. The BEST lobbyists spend years learning the intricacies of the personalities and committee structure and function—and still have a convoluted path to getting their issues heard and acted on.

If there is something I’m missing, some aspect of California State government functioning I’m missing here, please enlighten me. Because I just don’t get it. Where can this petition go, realistically? Is it just a publicity exercise? An emotional salve?

Dina certainly did not make any friends with her very public criticism of CPD.......particularly with Chief Lou Scanlon. IMO, she has gone about this all wrong. Gore spoke at the Coronado Round Table this past Friday, and he spoke about the MS/RZ deaths: he stated that MS was an accidet, and RZ was a suicide, and that was that.....case closed. I do believe that Gore had/has some influence over Chief Scanlon on this, so Dina is not going to get anywhere barking up those trees. And her appeal to the public is not going anywhere.

 

[K_Z]

I'm not ridiculing Dina's efforts. Not at all.

I sincerely want to understand where this petition is headed. There is a great deal of information and debate available on the web about slactivism and e-petitions. While there have been some very limited successes, much of the evidence suggests that legislators are not moved by e-petitions, particularly petitions that are initited by non residents, or signed by individuals who are not residents of their state. In person, face to face discussions appear to be most effective, not form letters or mass email petitions, or change.org petitions. I would think Dina's PR firm and attorney would guide her in the most effective direction.

I'd be very interested to know what Dina's plan is for this petition effort. Because I do support the reopening of both cases together-- just not one case over the other. They are inextricably intertwined, imo. What is good for one case, is good for the other.

 

[K_Z]

Reposting of the original Snopes.com article on internet petitions.

http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Practical/Shop--ToDo/Activism/InternetPetitions.htm

The 2000s have seen the birth of an Internet phenomenon: the e-petition. It offers instant comfort to those outraged by the latest ills of the world through its implicit assurance that affixing their names to a statement decrying a situation and demanding change will make a difference. That assurance is a severely flawed one for a multitude of reasons.

Often petitions contain no information about whom they are ultimately intended for and instead are no more than outpourings of outrage. Expressions of outrage are fine and good, but if they don't reach someone who can have impact on the core problem, they're wasted. Thus, a petition that doesn't clearly identify the intended recipient may have some small value as a way for its signers to work off angst, but as an instrument of social change it fails miserably.

Even those that clearly identify the intended recipient don't come with a guarantee that the person slated to receive the document is in any position to influence matters. A misdirected petition is of no more use than an undirected one =97 though the voices it contains may be shouting, they won't be heard.

Even well-addressed, well-thought-out petitions have their problems, chief among them the lack of a guarantee that anyone is collecting and collating the signatures or will deliver the completed documents to the right parties. The mere existence of a petition doesn't warrant that anyone will do anything with it once it is completed.

Those in a position to influence anything know this and thus accord e-petitions only slightly more respect than they would a blank sheet of paper. Thus, even the best written, properly addressed, and lovingly delivered e-petitions whose every signature was scrupulously vetted by the petition's creator fall into the same vortex of disbelief at the receiving end that less carefully shepherded missives find themselves relegated to.

BBM. More at link.

 

[screecher]

Why doesn't Dina Romano present Maxie's case to the AG???

Anyone know why???

 

[K_Z]

Why doesn't Dina Romano present Maxie's case to the AG???

Anyone know why???

Excellent question, mittymick.

My take on this is that because RZ's family already has asked the AG to reopen Rebecca's case-- and quite a while ago, Dina doesn't want to "go there". The AG is still considering that request.

Dina and her supporters do not want Rebecca's case reopened; they are satisfied with the suicide ruling. I believe that Dina and her supporters do not want to appear to "hitch their wagons" and tie the 2 cases together. Dina and her supporters, IMO, do not want to remind the AG that they only support Max's case being reopened. Rebecca's family, by contrast, is not opposed to having both cases reinvestigated.

I firmly believe that the best oppoortunity for both cases to be reopened is for both families to work together. Both families petitioning the AG would be more persuasive than either family alone, imo.

If Dina is earnest, and I think she IS earnest (but misguided), I believe she should seriously consider a partnership with the Zahau family to reopen BOTH cases.

Dina wouldn't have to actually talk to any of the Zahau's or anything to do this-- the attorneys for both families could arrange much of it, and put forth the appearance that both families were in agreement and working together. That is what PR firms and attorneys are skilled at-- and Dina has a very skilled attorney and a very skilled PR firm to help her. A skillfully written press relase, and maybe a single press conference, could potentially be enough.

There is really nothing to lose by doing this, and it would go a long way to rehabilitating Dina's public image. It would help Dina with the appearance of being reasonable, and pursuing a realistic plan that has a chance of success. IMO.

I don't believe her change.org petition will accomplish what she is seeking.

 

[time]

BBM

It seems that every single thing that DS does, in an effort to find answers, is judged, ridiculed, discounted and laughed at. Maybe she is not as knowledgeable and 'realistic' as you are. Maybe she does not understood the legislative process or the lobbyists as well as you claim to.

Maybe she is just a grieving and confused woman looking desperately for a way to answer the questions surrounding her son's death. Maybe it won't work, but at least she is giving it her all.

Ridiculing? Why are you saying this, that's awful to say about a poster when a very good point was made.

I don't see how sending a petition to the California State Senate makes any sense either.

 

[time]

Excellent question, mittymick.

My take on this is that because RZ's family already has asked the AG to reopen Rebecca's case-- and quite a while ago, Dina doesn't want to "go there". The AG is still considering that request.

Dina and her supporters do not want Rebecca's case reopened; they are satisfied with the suicide ruling. I believe that Dina and her supporters do not want to appear to "hitch their wagons" and tie the 2 cases together. Dina and her supporters, IMO, do not want to remind the AG that they only support Max's case being reopened. Rebecca's family, by contrast, is not opposed to having both cases reinvestigated.

I firmly believe that the best oppoortunity for both cases to be reopened is for both families to work together. Both families petitioning the AG would be more persuasive than either family alone, imo.

If Dina is earnest, and I think she IS earnest (but misguided), I believe she should seriously consider a partnership with the Zahau family to reopen BOTH cases.

Dina wouldn't have to actually talk to any of the Zahau's or anything to do this-- the attorneys for both families could arrange much of it, and put forth the appearance that both families were in agreement and working together. That is what PR firms and attorneys are skilled at-- and Dina has a very skilled attorney and a very skilled PR firm to help her. A skillfully written press relase, and maybe a single press conference, could potentially be enough.

There is really nothing to lose by doing this, and it would go a long way to rehabilitating Dina's public image. It would help Dina with the appearance of being reasonable, and pursuing a realistic plan that has a chance of success. IMO.

I don't believe her change.org petition will accomplish what she is seeking.

Yes, the California AG would be the next logical, legal route, not the California State Senate, so I have to fully agree with your analysis.

 

[K_Z]

Maybe she is just a grieving and confused woman looking desperately for a way to answer the questions surrounding her son's death. Maybe it won't work, but at least she is giving it her all.

Snipped and BBM. Agreed.

Dina has had the ear of both Dr. Drew, and Dr. Phil, who have been sympathetic to her quest. The Dr. Phil show has helped the Zahau family in their quest for reopening Rebecca's case, and Dr. Phil recently hosted both families on an episode.

Another option might be for Dina to ask the Dr. Phil show to assemble an independent group of experts to review Max's case, and the reports of Bove and Melinek, and provide a truly independent review that could be persuasive to California state authorities, or the Coronad PD. And it might not cost Dina anything-- the TV show might very well pick up the cost for the panel of independent experts. The publicity from the TV show could reach many more people than the petition on her website/ blog. And could drive members to her site to click and sign the petition. And then the petition could potentially have more direction and purpose-- as a supportive document to the findings of an independent panel of experts.

Just thinking outside the box.

 

[Inparadise]

Snipped and BBM. Agreed.

Dina has had the ear of both Dr. Drew, and Dr. Phil, who have been sympathetic to her quest. The Dr. Phil show has helped the Zahau family in their quest for reopening Rebecca's case, and Dr. Phil recently hosted both families on an episode.

Another option might be for Dina to ask the Dr. Phil show to assemble an independent group of experts to review Max's case, and the reports of Bove and Melinek, and provide a truly independent review that could be persuasive to California state authorities, or the Coronad PD. And it might not cost Dina anything-- the TV show might very well pick up the cost for the panel of independent experts. The publicity from the TV show could reach many more people than the petition on her website/ blog. And could drive members to her site to click and sign the petition. And then the petition could potentially have more direction and purpose-- as a supportive document to the findings of an independent panel of experts.

Just thinking outside the box.

From the very beginning since Dina began her media campaign, she seems more focused on blaming Rebecca for what happened to Max rather than having an open mind and allowing things to progress in a natural manner. If she were really wanting to find out the truth, she should not try to be so controlling and accepting of only one outcome.....that is not the way that this works.

 

[K_Z]

Deja vu:

Nearly one year ago:

http://www.change.org/petitions/justice-for-rebecca

The Present:

http://www.change.org/petitions/tel...n-the-investigation-into-max-shacknai-s-death

Of note, the 4 destinations of the Max Shacknai petition are (according to the link when you click):

* The California State Senate (no senator specified; there are 40 senators)
* The California State House (who will take responsibility for this?)
* Casey Tanaka Mayor, City Of Coronado (presumably, informational only)
* Louis Scanlon Chief Of Police, Coronardo Police Dept (presumably, informational only)

The one destination in the Rebecca Zahau petition:

* Kamala D. Harris Attorney General of California

The RZ petition was closed with 1643 supporters.
The MS petition currently has 1543 supporters.

 

[MyBelle]

Why doesn't Dina Romano present Maxie's case to the AG???

Anyone know why???

Because she isn't asking that a different agency be appointed to investigate.

Coronado didn't investigate Max's death to any degree. Her first step would be to request for an investigation, she's done that and they have now refused. I think her next step will be to file a wrongful death lawsuit.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

Ridiculing? Why are you saying this, that's awful to say about a poster when a very good point was made.

I don't see how sending a petition to the California State Senate makes any sense either.

She has been ridiculed here, on this forum, for months. There was an in depth sleuthing of her education and her fledgling career, calling her inept and possibly even a fraud. Her pictures asnd interviews were put up and discussed, sometimes viciously, line by line. Then she was attacked and again ridiculed when she announced her non-profit for Maxie. Lots of posts about her being a 'rich' mom who didn't care about her son, only about what schools he was accept into. There was even a few recent posts discussing whether she actually snuck in and pushed Max over the balcony railing just to get revenge upon RZ. So YES, imo, there has been a lot of ridiculing.

In the OP I was discussing, it was said something like " Doe she even know anything about lobbyists and legislation? What is her true agenda, is it just for sympathy and donations?' [ I call that ridiculing someone's intentions.]

 

[elfie]

It's difficult not to have sympathy for Dina. I can only begin to imagine the anguish she is experiencing at the loss of her beautiful son, Max. I truly believe that his death was the result of a horrendous accident and I don't think she is being well served by those around her that continue to suggest otherwise. But that being said, she needs to see it for herself.

She should ask Jonah for access to the mansion and come in with a forensics team to evaluate all of the available data. It is paramount that they evaluate how the scooter figures into the entire scenario by matching up the paint transfer to and from the banister base, to see what position the scooter would have necessarily been in at the time of contact.

It's good that she is trying to work through her pain constructively, and I wish her much comfort and many happy memories of the time she did have with Max.

 

[freespeech]

It's difficult not to have sympathy for Dina. I can only begin to imagine the anguish she is experiencing at the loss of her beautiful son, Max. I truly believe that his death was the result of a horrendous accident and I don't think she is being well served by those around her that continue to suggest otherwise. But that being said, she needs to see it for herself.

She should ask Jonah for access to the mansion and come in with a forensics team to evaluate all of the available data. It is paramount that they evaluate how the scooter figures into the entire scenario by matching up the paint transfer to and from the banister base, to see what position the scooter would have necessarily been in at the time of contact.

It's good that she is trying to work through her pain constructively, and I wish her much comfort and many happy memories of the time she did have with Max.

BBM

I totally agree that it is paramount that someone match up how the scooter came into contact with the banister. I didn't read Dr. Bove's report. Did he address this because this is an extremely important factor in how this accident occurred?

 

[K_Z]

Her first step would be to request for an investigation, she's done that and they have now refused. I think her next step will be to file a wrongful death lawsuit.
JMO

Snipped and BBM.

I completely agree. I think there may be more than one civil lawsuit in the near future.

I think that the refusal to reopen Max's case will accelerate the first wrongful death filing. I think she preferred to have Max's case reclassified a homicide going into that first suit, but she can still move forward with the accident ruling. She is not in as strong a position, imo, with the ruling an accident.

The more interesting question is whether she will refuse to settle out of court, and insist it go to a trial? My prediction is she will eventually settle if the case is against Jonah, but it will take several years of pre-trial manuvering to get there. I think it's unlikely Jonah will want to take it to court, and may offer to settle to keep it out.

It will also be interesting to see if she hires another specialty lawyer to handle the wrongful death suit. Angela Hallier specializes in alimony cases, iirc.

All speculation, of course. But with the interviewers and reporters also questioning wrongful death suits, it's not "wild" speculation. Dina herself acknowledged recently that a civil lawsuit would be a "last resort." There is about 9 months left on the statute of limitations for filing. So there is still time for other actions before next July.

Edited to add:
I don't know if that kind of suit (wrongful death) is what Gloria Allred would be interested in taking on or not. She seems to favor feminist issues, and a wrongful death case is not exactly a feminist issue. From what I've read, Gloria Allred represented Dina in a civil matter against Jonah involving the dissolution of a prenuptual agreement.

 

[time]

I agree Dina is gearing up for a suit. Perhaps all the publicity has to do with warning or scaring Jonah as far as what is to come. Just a hypothetical, but ....

Are there reasons that Dina actually would not want it to come to trial either? I can see some. I'm also not convinced that Jonah would avoid a trial and just pay her off.

 

[Jessica2012]

From the very beginning since Dina began her media campaign, she seems more focused on blaming Rebecca for what happened to Max rather than having an open mind and allowing things to progress in a natural manner. If she were really wanting to find out the truth, she should not try to be so controlling and accepting of only one outcome.....that is not the way that this works.

Mary who began her media campaign, one year before Dina,she seems more focused on blaming people for what happened instead of "keeping an open mind, and allowing things to progress in a natural manner".In interviews Dina has stated support of Rebecca's family in finding out what happened to their "beautiful daughter and sister". Sadly, no matter what is written about her, or what she is judged for, she has a lot of the same questions as many on here who are completely against her. One example is she questions who was in the house the day Maxie fell. She states much of the evidence that was initially there disappeared.

Both these families have one cause, and strength is in numbers. Regardless of what the outcome may be, it in my opinion would be more beneficial if all of us considered this to be one fight, and not two different ones. Whatever happens happens, wipe the slate clean, and start over unified. Dina may uncover the answers the Zs are looking for, and in my opinion she will. Her interviews have brought such a different way of thinking for me about both of these investigations. Both families had to take the word of authorities as to what happened. Evidence to the contrary strangely disappeared. That is very bizarre.