Max's Death - Dina's Independent Experts Summary Reports

[freespeech]

civil lawsuits are all about the financial aspect.

JMO

Sorry, but I thought Dina desired truth and justice for her poor son. I didn't realize that this was about winning money. Money will never bring him back nor will winning more money bring truth or do justice to his memory.

If Dina does win money how does she intend to use it to honor Max's memory, I wonder? I think it would be wonderful if she donated every penny to Max in Motion so that needy children could benifit in a way that would provide enriching opportunities. imo, that would honor Max since he loved friends and sports.

 

[freespeech]

Home owners insurance provides liability. It protects the homeowner. Not sure why you think it must be any more personal than that.

JMO

However, can the policy holder's insurance be enforced by a so called third party, if their combined gross negligence caused or contributed to the accident/injury in a major way? In other words Dina would be the third party but not really since she was Max's parent who also allowed him the scooter but did not provide supervision. If Max was told not to play with the scooter as he should have been then that should release Rebecca from liabliity when she used the restroom.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM

I beg to differ. Essentially Dina Romano has said/is saying Maxie was assaulted and thrown over railing or was caused to go over railing. That he was murdered.

The way your post is worded...sounds very much as though Maxie had an accident. And Dina Romano will go that way regarding the civil suit.

Either Maxie was murdered or he wasn't.
Either Maxie had a horrific accident or he didn't.

Do you know what Dina Romano is going to use to seek damages?

I don't know what Dina intends to do. My posts clearly reflect that it is just my opinion.

An insurance company can access the death certificate. I think we all can agree that Maxie's fall wasn't a suicide or natural causes.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

BBM - I'm not sure how familiar you're with the forum LHK that was used in Dr. Melinek's report. The particular forum does not just express opinions in both cases, they mock bloggers from this site by naming them on their forum. They have tried to publicly out identities of bloggers using their site as a playing field. They personally attack bloggers. This is not something we do here at WS. We do not personally attack each other let alone attack posters from another blog. Expressing your opinion on a case is much different than sleuthing and attacking bloggers.

I assume that the parents' attorneys are monitoring all web traffic not because they care that bloggers are attacking bloggers but to monitor the postings that can be considered libelous to their clients. In that regard, I've seen plenty and reported them.

JMO

 

[freespeech]

I assume that the parents' attorneys are monitoring all web traffic not because they care that bloggers are attacking bloggers but to monitor the postings that can be considered libelous to their clients. In that regard, I've seen plenty and reported them.

JMO

The same can also be said for Bremner and the Zahau family who have also been slandered as well as posters whose privacy has been illegally invaded.

 

[MyBelle]

The same can also be said for Bremner and the Zahau family who have also been slandered as well as posters whose privacy has been illegally invaded.

Bremner has the ability to file lawsuits and I have yet to see anything filed.

I've posted on message forums for years and have never assumed my privacy would be protected. The terms of service often note that privacy isn't guaranteed. Posters own their words.

JMO

 

[freespeech]

Here is only a small part of Dr. Melinek's summary on Max's accident. This small snippet shows how specious arguments formed her conclusions. In her report she only used Gomez's scenario to argue against but did not attempt to analyze any non homicidal theories. Fault with entire report can be analyzed similarly on the same premise but only a small portion was done for brevity.

'Max's center of gravity would have been too low to go over the banister with the scooter unassisted, even when taking into account the extra height of the scooter.'

(Melinek argues against Gomez's finding here. Remember that prior to Melinek's involvement Gomez's report was considered highly flawed. Here Melinek does not try to show how Max could fall over or raise his center of gravity on his own. The obvious ways would be to stand on something higher or actually be on the railing itself. No other person would need to be present for that which kind of makes her argument specious.)

'The pattern of injury on Max's back is not consistent with an impact/slide against the descending banister as depicted in Dr. Gomez's scenario, as there is no deep muscle injury as would be expected from a fall onto the back from a height; the skull fracture contusion indicates that the primary fall impact was against the top (vertex) of the head, and not the right front; and the hands have no "dicing abrasions" from grasping at the chandelier.'

(There was a possibility that Max did not fall on his back but eventually landed face down. Rebecca could not remember whether she turned him over or not. Why wasn't that used to propose an alternate scenario? Also why does she assume Max grabbed the chandelier? How does she know that he wasn't holding onto to the scooter when he went over?)

Though Dr. Melinek is a notable forensic pathologist that does not speak to other issues that may have influenced the work she presented in this case. Even brilliant people occasionally produce not so great work. I will not defer to her opinion simply because of her credentials. Either the work stands up under scrutiny or it doesn't not. Period.

An example, and this has happened. A renown surgeon accidently amputated the wrong leg. Does the victim wake up from the surgery and say I know that we discussed amputating my right leg and that's what was written on the consent I signed but when I woke up my left leg was gone. However, you are the doctor so I will defer to your expert opinion.

 

[time]

Just reminding everyone of this:

Melinek said that Max’s injuries were inconsistent with a fall and “it would be more accurate to certify that manner (of death) as a homicide.”

Bove said that Melinek proposed a scenario in which Max was assaulted, resulting in his facial and forehead injuries, with his back then contacting the stair railing.

Hallier said “an assault scenario is the only scenario that Dr. Bone and Dr. Melinek, in collaborative consultation, could identify that accounts for the multiple planes of injuries on Max’s body and the scene findings.”

However, Bove said he had "not taken a position" as to whether the incident that resulted in Max's injuries was intentional.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/...ible-homicide/

Also note that it says "Bove said that Melinek proposed a scenario". And, I believe Hallier was not telling the truth when she claimed “an assault scenario is the only scenario that Dr. Bove and Dr. Melinek, in collaborative consultation, could identify that accounts for the multiple planes of injuries on Max’s body and the scene findings.” Obviously, Bove did not agree with that. It's too bad these people have to claim things that are not true in order to support their 'scenario'.

 

[MyBelle]

Just reminding everyone of this:


http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/...ible-homicide/

Also note that it says "Bove said that Melinek proposed a scenario". And, I believe Hallier was not telling the truth when she claimed “an assault scenario is the only scenario that Dr. Bove and Dr. Melinek, in collaborative consultation, could identify that accounts for the multiple planes of injuries on Max’s body and the scene findings.” Obviously, Bove did not agree with that. It's too bad these people have to claim things that are not true in order to support their 'scenario'.

Dr. Bove and Dr. Melinek both believe the evidence is of an assault. I've yet to see any expert step forward and even try to disprove their analysis and conclusion. I think most professionals choose to give the benefit of the doubt to ensure justice be served. I doubt they are in the category of those who would rather sweep a child's murder under the rug rather than shine a spotlight on it.

JMO

 

[Inparadise]

Just reminding everyone of this:


http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/...ible-homicide/

Also note that it says "Bove said that Melinek proposed a scenario". And, I believe Hallier was not telling the truth when she claimed “an assault scenario is the only scenario that Dr. Bove and Dr. Melinek, in collaborative consultation, could identify that accounts for the multiple planes of injuries on Max’s body and the scene findings.” Obviously, Bove did not agree with that. It's too bad these people have to claim things that are not true in order to support their 'scenario'.

Shades of Gore if you ask me.

 

[MyBelle]

Shades of Gore if you ask me.

Gore's office didn't investigate Max's death. But I am betting he is very supportive of a homicide investigation now.

JMO

 

[freespeech]

Gore's office didn't investigate Max's death. But I am betting he is very supportive of a homicide investigation now.JMO

Don't you think this could be viewed as a tad self serving?

 

[freespeech]

Bremner has the ability to file lawsuits and I have yet to see anything filed.

I've posted on message forums for years and have never assumed my privacy would be protected. The terms of service often note that privacy isn't guaranteed. Posters own their words.

JMO

BBM

I don't agree. I see people stealing each others words, phrases and ideas all the time on the internet. Also, let us not forget about the tremendous power of written and spoken words to influence opinions, thoughts and beliefs or not.

I think people have a sixth sense that that helps them believe what they hear or read or not. It's almost like an instinct that when you hear a lie your gut kind of siezes up and says I don't believe that, that's hinky or something smells fishy, ykwIm?

However, even the best of us get fooled on occasion, no?

 

[Carioca]

Gore's office didn't investigate Max's death. But I am betting he is very supportive of a homicide investigation now.

JMO

I'm a futures trader. As any trader knows, continuation is more likely than change. Jonah was delighted with Gore's conclusions. Jonah has yet to publicly support Dina in her quest. Betting that Gore would be supportive of a homicide investigation into Max's (or Rebecca's) death is an extremely poor risk/reward ratio.

 

[time]

Dr. Bove and Dr. Melinek both believe the evidence is of an assault. I've yet to see any expert step forward and even try to disprove their analysis and conclusion. I think most professionals choose to give the benefit of the doubt to ensure justice be served. I doubt they are in the category of those who would rather sweep a child's murder under the rug rather than shine a spotlight on it.

JMO

Bove did NOT come to any conclusion about assault... that link has been supplied many time.

Why would experts come forward to try to dispel Melinek and Halliers "Summary of reports" ... you'd have to think they have merit to put that kind of time into it. I haven't seen any 'professionals' step forward to support what Melinek has said although we have two experts who have disagreed with her and one, who just didn't agree with her. Who are 'they' anyway?

Just because one (or many or most) believe it was an accident does not mean they are sweeping a murder under the rug... geesh :banghead:

 

[MyBelle]

Bove did NOT come to any conclusion about assault... that link has been supplied many time.
Why would experts come forward to try to dispel Melinek and Halliers "Summary of reports" ... you'd have to think they have merit to put that kind of time into it. I haven't seen any 'professionals' step forward to support what Melinek has said although we have two experts who have disagreed with her and one, who just didn't agree with her. Who are 'they' anyway?

Just because one (or many or most) believe it was an accident does not mean they are sweeping a murder under the rug... geesh :banghead:

BBM. Dr. Bove did come to a conclusion about assault. Dr. Melinek agreeded and Rady did request a CPS investigation. That's three experts. The only expert I've seen come to a conclusion of accident was the ME who was basing his conclusion on reports provide by LE who never investigated the case as a homicide.

I've yet to see any expert refute the analysis of the three experts. All I've seen on the Internet are a few posters fearful of a homicide investigation into a child's death.

JMO

 

[TorisMom003]

BBM. Dr. Bove did come to a conclusion about assault. Dr. Melinek agreeded and Rady did request a CPS investigation. That's three experts. The only expert I've seen come to a conclusion of accident was the ME who was basing his conclusion on reports provide by LE who never investigated the case as a homicide.

I've yet to see any expert refute the analysis of the three experts. All I've seen on the Internet are a few posters fearful of a homicide investigation into a child's death.JMO

Bolded by me

I'm sorry but where have you seen this at? I have not seen any of that at all. If anything I have seen people wanting Max's death investigated more because the explaination given did not make sense. I've seen people that want BOTH cases reinvestigated but never any that were fearful of an investigation happening.

 

[time]

BBM. Dr. Bove did come to a conclusion about assault. Dr. Melinek agreeded and Rady did request a CPS investigation. That's three experts. The only expert I've seen come to a conclusion of accident was the ME who was basing his conclusion on reports provide by LE who never investigated the case as a homicide.

I've yet to see any expert refute the analysis of the three experts. All I've seen on the Internet are a few posters fearful of a homicide investigation into a child's death.

JMO

Dr. Bove's Report:

"I have not taken a position as to whether the actual incident that resulted in Maxfield Shacknai’s injuries was intentional."

 

[MyBelle]

Dr. Bove's Report:

"I have not taken a position as to whether the actual incident that resulted in Maxfield Shacknai’s injuries was intentional."

His job was to analyze the scenario presented by LE that they said justified their conclusion it was an accidental fall and he did so, pointing out their serious flaws in analysis and conclusion.

Determining intent is the job of criminal investigators, not an engineer.

JMO

 

[time]

His job was to analyze the scenario presented by LE that they said justified their conclusion it was an accidental fall and he did so, pointing out their serious flaws in analysis and conclusion.

Determining intent is the job of criminal investigators, not an engineer.

JMO

Melinek asked Bove to prove an Assault Scenario (and/or homicide) not just analyze LE's scenario. There is no physical evidence to support a claim of assault. Melinek wanted Bove to prove her theory, he couldn't. Neither Melinek nor Bove set out to look at possible accident scenarios that were possible.