*Lash*
Justice 4 Rebecca
- Joined
- May 11, 2012
- Messages
- 3,003
- Reaction score
- 67
I just had the same thought! Thank you AP for the error :floorlaugh:
Look at the Google spike -
Estate of Rebecca Zahau et al v. Shacknai et al
- Thread starter *Lash*
- Start date
I just had the same thought! Thank you AP for the error :floorlaugh:
Look at the Google spike -
bourne
"The truth shall set you free." ~JUSTICE FOR REBEC
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 14
"Zahau's family went to court in May to demand that authorities turn over dozens of items seized in the investigations of Zahau's and Max's deaths. They also requested DNA and forensic evidence, photos, audio files, phone records, video, transcripts of witness interviews, and autopsy reports."
"On or about July 13, 2011, defendants intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously threatened to cause immediate physical harm to Rebecca by threatening to stalk, attack choke, gag, bound, and hang her at the premises," the 9-page complaint states."
"San Diego County investigated Zahau's death, and then announced that Zahau had killed herself. This "despite her body having been found nude, hands bound behind her back, legs bound, with a noose over her hair and neck, with a blue Massimo T-shirt tied three times around the noose, with the tail stuffed in her mouth as a gag, and unexplained clear plastic tape residue on her leg," the family said in their complaint in May.
"Not only were there signs of a struggle, such as an overturned chair in the room from which the rope was suspended, paint splattered on Rebecca's chest and the noose, wounds on her hand and blood on her body, and a painted taunt on the door of the bedroom saying, 'She Saved Him Can You Save Her' - there was a lack of evidence of suicide such as a suicide note," according to the May lawsuit."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/16/59387.htm
"On or about July 13, 2011, defendants intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously threatened to cause immediate physical harm to Rebecca by threatening to stalk, attack choke, gag, bound, and hang her at the premises," the 9-page complaint states."
"San Diego County investigated Zahau's death, and then announced that Zahau had killed herself. This "despite her body having been found nude, hands bound behind her back, legs bound, with a noose over her hair and neck, with a blue Massimo T-shirt tied three times around the noose, with the tail stuffed in her mouth as a gag, and unexplained clear plastic tape residue on her leg," the family said in their complaint in May.
"Not only were there signs of a struggle, such as an overturned chair in the room from which the rope was suspended, paint splattered on Rebecca's chest and the noose, wounds on her hand and blood on her body, and a painted taunt on the door of the bedroom saying, 'She Saved Him Can You Save Her' - there was a lack of evidence of suicide such as a suicide note," according to the May lawsuit."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/16/59387.htm
From 10:00 News, San Diego:
In response to the suit, Dina Shacknai said:
"Today marks the second anniversary of the death of my only child, Maxfield Aaron Shacknai. He was six years old when he died while under the care of Rebecca Zahau.
Yet today, instead of being able to merely mourn the loss of Maxie, my sister Nina Romano and I are dealing with a baseless lawsuit which has been filed against us. I have lost my only son and Nina has lost her only nephew. While we empathize with the Zahau family regarding their grief over the loss of Rebecca, for Nina and I to be named as parties to this frivolous lawsuit by the Zahau family is cruel and irresponsible. There is absolutely no truth to these allegations. Unfortunately, I have now been left with no alternative but to initiate significant measures to ensure the ongoing protection of myself, as well as my remaining family. The accusations are shameful and groundless and have no basis in fact or evidence.
I respectfully ask that the public continue to keep us in their prayers as we remember Maxie on this somber occasion."
In response to the suit, Dina Shacknai said:
"Today marks the second anniversary of the death of my only child, Maxfield Aaron Shacknai. He was six years old when he died while under the care of Rebecca Zahau.
Yet today, instead of being able to merely mourn the loss of Maxie, my sister Nina Romano and I are dealing with a baseless lawsuit which has been filed against us. I have lost my only son and Nina has lost her only nephew. While we empathize with the Zahau family regarding their grief over the loss of Rebecca, for Nina and I to be named as parties to this frivolous lawsuit by the Zahau family is cruel and irresponsible. There is absolutely no truth to these allegations. Unfortunately, I have now been left with no alternative but to initiate significant measures to ensure the ongoing protection of myself, as well as my remaining family. The accusations are shameful and groundless and have no basis in fact or evidence.
I respectfully ask that the public continue to keep us in their prayers as we remember Maxie on this somber occasion."
Why does she always say "my only son"? Something is just wrong with that. I wouldn't even like "my only child". It seems to take away from Max, like he would be worth less if she had other children. Dina has had several decades of child bearing years. It's not anyone elses fault she does not have another child to fall back on.
Funny also, the bonkers poster on the news articles also used the the word "shameful" directed at the Zahau's.
Doesn't Dina know how shameful it is to accuse the Zahau's of filing a "frivolous lawsuit" that she is claiming is "cruel and irresponsible"?
Let's not forget how cruel she was in pointing the finger at Rebecca or a teenager and claiming they murdered Max.
Sorry, Dina, that just isn't so and, like I said, almost no one believe Rebecca committed suicide.
Funny also, the bonkers poster on the news articles also used the the word "shameful" directed at the Zahau's.
Doesn't Dina know how shameful it is to accuse the Zahau's of filing a "frivolous lawsuit" that she is claiming is "cruel and irresponsible"?
Let's not forget how cruel she was in pointing the finger at Rebecca or a teenager and claiming they murdered Max.
Sorry, Dina, that just isn't so and, like I said, almost no one believe Rebecca committed suicide.
Thank you fearless contributor, GILGAMESH, for providing DS's response....and of course she had to make one. (Isn't that what PR people tell their client's to do?) 1] I told you before, she CAN NOT say suicide...why? She always avoids that part. Is it because she doesn't believe it herself or knows it is not?2] Perhaps cruel and irresponsible are the same words people might use to describe the way Rebecca's body was left on display for hours on end? Perhaps cruel and irresponsible are words many professionals might use to describe an adult condemning a 12 yr old on TV? I wouldn't even know how to make life calm and normal for a youngster who experienced so much trauma in a 48 hour time period. Absolutely heartbreaking and horrific!
3] Initiate significant measures? Does that mean more rounds of opinions and eye-rolling with Pat?
You crack me up! :drumroll:
'Initiate significant measures?' That sounds to me like something you say when you are trying to threaten someone but you have no artillery.
K_Z
Verified Anesthetist
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 6,657
- Reaction score
- 2,498
Personally, I'm glad the Zahaus are initiating significant measures to hold Becky's killers accountable for something. Since other officials failed to initiate significant measures to hold Becky's killer/s accountable, IMO.
And, BTW, if I was initiating significant measures to keep my family "safe" from some perceived threat, I sure wouldn't issue a press release saying that. I'd simply initiate my significant measures, and move right along.
This is fear mongering and victim posturing, IMO. "Poor, poor me. These evil ones are attacking poor me, and I'm afraid." Not too long ago, DS had no reservations about repeatedly going on the attack against a dead woman and her family, who have largely avoided the media.
What DS should have said, if she said anything at all, is that she was deeply saddened by the whole situation, and looked forward to clearing her name. And expressed sympathy for the Zahaus. As it is, this comment does her no favors in the court of public opinion. IMO. But DS is her own worst enemy, IMO.
And, BTW, if I was initiating significant measures to keep my family "safe" from some perceived threat, I sure wouldn't issue a press release saying that. I'd simply initiate my significant measures, and move right along.
This is fear mongering and victim posturing, IMO. "Poor, poor me. These evil ones are attacking poor me, and I'm afraid." Not too long ago, DS had no reservations about repeatedly going on the attack against a dead woman and her family, who have largely avoided the media.
What DS should have said, if she said anything at all, is that she was deeply saddened by the whole situation, and looked forward to clearing her name. And expressed sympathy for the Zahaus. As it is, this comment does her no favors in the court of public opinion. IMO. But DS is her own worst enemy, IMO.
K_Z
Verified Anesthetist
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 6,657
- Reaction score
- 2,498
Another thought.
The Zahaus have filed a civil suit. Monetary damages. So DS stating she is "initiating significant measures" is really, IMO, a euphemism announcing intentions for initiating measures to conceal, shelter, or otherwise fraudulently hide one's true monetary assets from any potential judgement.
I wonder if an attorney approved that statement before it was released? I hope the Zahau attorneys will make use of comments like these in pursuit of their case. There are many comments made by DS in the MSM articles they can use.
The Zahaus have filed a civil suit. Monetary damages. So DS stating she is "initiating significant measures" is really, IMO, a euphemism announcing intentions for initiating measures to conceal, shelter, or otherwise fraudulently hide one's true monetary assets from any potential judgement.
I wonder if an attorney approved that statement before it was released? I hope the Zahau attorneys will make use of comments like these in pursuit of their case. There are many comments made by DS in the MSM articles they can use.
K_Z
Verified Anesthetist
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 6,657
- Reaction score
- 2,498
Gosh. Comments (hundreds of them) on MSM articles are running (my estimate) 90+% for murder of Rebecca Zahau, vs the official "suicide" ruling.
Very interesting, as most of these commentors are new to the case, by their own admission. Seems that there is an extraordinarily small percentage of readers who think suicide could be a possible explanation. Hmmm.
Two years out, that is VERY interesting. Does not bode well for the named defendants, IMO.
Very interesting, as most of these commentors are new to the case, by their own admission. Seems that there is an extraordinarily small percentage of readers who think suicide could be a possible explanation. Hmmm.
Two years out, that is VERY interesting. Does not bode well for the named defendants, IMO.
Mrs. Holmes
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
- Messages
- 683
- Reaction score
- 2
Counter lawsuit?
*Lash*
Justice 4 Rebecca
- Joined
- May 11, 2012
- Messages
- 3,003
- Reaction score
- 67
Agree, her PR team likely told Dina she needed to respond. I tend to believe a PR team would have suggested she wait until the two year anniversary of her sons death. Smart tactic from a PR stand point. However in my opinion, there comes a time when morals should trump tactics. Yesterday was a day to remember and mourn Maxie. Instead of privately devoting the day to Maxie, the anniversary was used to respond to the civil suit.
From the snip taken from Dina's response -
“Yet today, instead of being able to merely mourn the loss of Maxie, my sister Nina Romano and I are dealing with a baseless lawsuit which has been filed against us,” the statement said.
Dina had a choice. She chose Maxie's anniversary to use in her response to this "frivolous" lawsuit. She cannot blame the Zahau lawsuit. Dina could have responded Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, skip Tuesday and respond later this week. Dina made yesterday about the lawsuit, no one else. Own it, Dina always avoids taking ownership of her actions. In my opinion, Dina's choices continue to send loud and clear messages of her true intentions.
Yeah, Dina the victim, again! She just had to wait until Max's anniversary date to respond.
Oh, snap, that is probably what it means.
And, I think there is about one person making 9/10% of those comments claiming Rebecca's death is a suicide.
Oh, snap, that is probably what it means.
And, I think there is about one person making 9/10% of those comments claiming Rebecca's death is a suicide.
Maybe... but what would she counter with, libel? Maybe our legal beagles can chime in on whether you can do that in this case. I don't think that is counter suit though? IDK
Since it is now past the timeframe for a wrongful death suit based on Max's death, it must not be that (unless she filed yesterday and we just don't know it yet). Or maybe she is going to fess up with her real motive and theory that Rebecca killed Max so therefore she was not only justified in killing Rebecca, but should not be held accountable! :floorlaugh:
justice be served
The Angry Norwegian
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,480
- Reaction score
- 1,422
OJ Simpson was found not guilty of criminal murder charges and in a civil trial received a judgment. If that can happen, then the door is open for just about anything happening. Murder charges have no statute of limitations. I would say Dina is going to have her work cut out for her. Ouch!
But OJ Simpson was tried in criminal court first. Here we have police saying this was suicide.
No evidence whatsoever of murder (per police), let alone against specific persons.
So I am curious as to how this could possibly work.
justice be served
The Angry Norwegian
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,480
- Reaction score
- 1,422
Yes, but in my belief there was evidence ignored. The whole purpose of the filing is to bring the evidence to an open court proceeding, no? Boy, i sure hope there is some legal precedent to pursue what may easily be a murder when the authorities seemed to present an open and shut case with no "noise" allowed from the dessenting parties.