Rebecca Zahau Wrongful death trial begins. Trial coverage and discussion #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I daresay most people, even if asked what they were doing, wouldn't have volunteered that particular detail.

I know I wouldn't have. Why reveal that if one could just say they were asleep in bed, or had just woken up but hadn't gotten up yet, were stretching in bed trying to wake up...any number of plausible things.

I agree masturbation in and of itself is normal. But I don't think volunteering that one was doing it is.


I think being honest is normal for some people. Especially when a woman is dead and you are being grilled by detectives. I would like to think I would be totally honest in such circumstances. JMO
 
I didn’t name who murdered Rebecca. Adam is not telling the truth about giving CPR, with thrusting chest compressions and mouth to mouth resuscitation it would be impossible not to leave your dna in those areas, also the table and cutting her down. Adam has made himself look guilty by creating these stories. He may be innocent of her murder but I think he and other know what happened. So who is he protecting?

iirc, Adam said he gave chest compressions which are an acceptable form of CPR.

Why would they waste taxpayer money on DNA testing of areas of the body he admitted to touching? That makes no sense to me from a practical, budgetary standpoint.
 
I’m new to the thread but have been following in Facebook groups. I have to agree, sadly. IMO it’s a bit odd that this is the same police department that had issues in the McStay case, and now this one. Odd to have issues in two high profile cases in a relatively short amount of time. Brings a lot of questions to mind, JMHO :(

Yes that would be the truth.
 
I think being honest is normal for some people. Especially when as woman is dead and you are being grilled by detectives. I would like to think I would be totally honest in such circumstances. JMO

I certainly would be. Evidently not all would be so forthcoming and that is unfortunate because the truth usually does surface. Hiding it accomplishes nothing of value.
 
Completely agree. The precision required to pull off staging your own murder, with that crime scene, would be unlike anything I have ever seen. Suicidal people can be very rational in their final moments, because they have determined that they are ready to die with no turning back. But, that’s different than thinking intelligently enough to plan something this elaborate, IMO

I think everybody would agree with this. For some reason, the suiciders never want to answer to this. Figures.
 
I think being honest is normal for some people. Especially when as woman is dead and you are being grilled by detectives. I would like to think I would be totally honest in such circumstances. JMO

Considering the discrepancies between his deposition and his testimony, I wouldn't presume AS to be Honest Abe. But we can agree to disagree, since apparently we'll have to.
 
I certainly would be. Evidently not all would be so forthcoming and that is unfortunate because the truth usually does surface. Hiding it accomplishes nothing of value.

May I ask what you think AS admitting he was masturbating has accomplished of value?
 
Thanks, Verboten. You understood EXACTLY the point I was trying to convey. This has most definitely been an egregious miscarriage of justice from the start, as you stated. I'm hoping that once deliberations begin, the jury will make the right decision. They're actually in a position to use their voices to speak loud and clear for RZ. I hope they do so.

This speaks to the unadulterated truth. Thank you.
 
AS didn't have to remove DNA... he just didn't have to leave it. Hence gloves. Where he did leave it, it was wiped off and NO prints were found (as in the door knobs, door). Where his DNA should be and isn't (like her skin, mouth) means thathe is lying and that is why I think he is stone cold guilty. IMO of course.

You are right. He is stone cold guilty IMO.
 
There’s no trace evidence of JS anywhere, thats the issue. If he can commit such a complicated and multifaceted crime, involving torture, rape, murder, hanging, message painting, and leave not a speck of evidence of his presence, he is wasting his time on that tugboat...he could serve in the highest eschelons of espionage service.

He would be a phantom spy....never leaving traces of himself. Forget that amateur James Bond. AS didn’t even need super spy equipment. He figured out how to do all this and remove ALL....ALL traces of himself...during his first murder!!

Ya well, I think he easily carried this off because he had lots of help. IMO he also had lots of help afterwards from the flawed (proven!) investigation and he has lots of help right now with his highly paid defense of probably 40 people. Awful that this happens in this country frankly.
 
Exactly. He is either a criminal mastermind, able to foresee all of the potential ways he could be caught so he can cover all his tracks, or he is an innocent victim who had the very bad fortune to step out and see Rebecca first thing in the morning [before he had even had a cup of coffee..

I know I have a hard time talking before my cup o’ joe, and here he is dealing with his dead brother’s girlfriend who is hanging in the courtyard. I can only imagine how freaked out and frantic he must have been, IMO.

There is no way that Rebecca managed to get her DNA exactly in the areas she would have to have handled to tie the knots, if she was just rearranging the garage. No way that would ever happen, IMO.

Those that think Adam could have worn gloves and not gotten his DNA anywhere are not thinking about fibers, hair, sweat, saliva, etc. How did he manage that? Did he wear a hazmat suit?

How did he not leave footprint marks in the carpet?

How did he get Rebecca’s fingerprints on all those places? Did he cart her around like a rag doll, touching her fingers to the door, the bed leg, etc.? If he did, why are there no bruises on Rebecca that should show that?

Why did he not just dump her body somewhere? He could have taken her car, taken her somewhere far, far, away from the mansion. The car would be so much easier to clean that that entire room and balcony. He could have said Rebecca said she was going to take a walk to clear her head, and he went to bed. SO much easier!

Why would anyone EVER murder someone but make it look like a suicide that looks like murder? THEN call and cooperate all day long with police? IMO, it is not likely one bit.

IMO, what is most likely and what the evidence shows is that Rebecca took her life and it was not difficult for her to do what she did.

IMO.

BBM

I have to admit I'm still sitting on the fence in this case and on most days I have a hard time wrapping my head around suicide. You point out two things ^^ that keep me on the fence to thinking it could have been suicide.

I do often wonder *if* Adam did kill Rebecca could he not see the way it was carried through ... suicide may not be believed. When I think about that for too long I can't wrap my head around him killing her the way it was done and being sure that suicide would be believed. I'm having a hard time trying to convey what I mean. sorry!

I don't know. *sigh* I wish I did because clearly it keeps me up at night.

JMO, MOO, IMO, Etc
 
The description of RZ being only “sad, tired, preparing for the next day” comes from her sister who has an emotional and financial interest in having her death declared a murder and winning this case.

RZ own diary tells a different story:


“I find myself not being able to sleep for the first time in my entire life… now when I close my eyes my mind begins to race… thinking and brewing over many situations and trying to come up with a solution of some sort,” one of the messages read. “… if I am not thinking, I am crying.”

I've known about this since it happened but I haven't been following along closely until very recently and I definitely do not know as much as you guys do.....so sorry to ask such a basic question....I tried google but did not find anything but the snippet quoted above....can anyone tell me if Rebecca's dairy was released or parts of it or just snippets? If so, do you know where I could read about that. TIA!!
 
But yet we are to believe that a first time killer, a tugboat captain, not a Navy Seal...can commit a rage killing...or crime if unbrideled lust...and think clearly enough to remove ALL traces of himself in the way that was required.

...or a paid hit? Perhaps.
 
Hi Elisaa444! :seeya:

Personally, to me the suicide was fairly simple and not hard for her to do.

This is how I think it happened: I think she was in the shower when Jonah called, she got out, read the message, had a breakdown, painted the message on the door getting some of the paint on her, went down to get a knife from the kitchen and the rope from the garage, tried to cut the rope and the knife would not work so went and got another one.

She cut the ropes, slipped the loop around the bed frame, pulled the wicker chair to right near the balcony door, sat in it and wrapped her ankles (the paint on her hands was dry by now so none got on the rope), put the noose around her neck, and tied the t-shirt around it to keep it from slipping, wrapped her hands in front, took them out, stood up, hopped on the balcony kicking the chair over, one more hop to the railing (it was only 2’ wide), put the end of the t-shirt in her mouth (to not yell or bite her tongue), put the wrists ropes in back, slipped her hands in, pulled the end rope tightly (it was still in her hand when she was found), pushed up on her toes, leaned over the railing, and gravity did the rest.

IMO, the murder scenarios are too complicated and conveluted.

As for the diary entries, here was just a bit in Ann Rule’s book, and I think the one you mentioned and another that came out at trial. They may be in the San Diego Union Tribune article from the day that Dr. Alan Berman testified. Or in a News8 article. Those are the San Diego news outlets that I have been reading. The Under the Gavel podcasts possibly have a little more of the diary They have one that is an overview and then weekly court updates. For another very good history of the case, look for “Mid-Week Mystery, the Zahau case” on YouTube. The Under the Gavel podcasts can be found there, too.

I did quickly find this:

Also, writings found on Zahau’s phone showed her to have doubts about her relationship with Jonah Shacknai. Notes that “I feel this incredible emptiness,” and “I have no one to talk to” suggested depression, Berman said.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/sd-me-zahau-defense-20180327-story.html

I will look for more for you tomorrow. My eyes are not staying open anymore! :offtobed:

Good night!
 
Considering the discrepancies between his deposition and his testimony, I wouldn't presume AS to be Honest Abe. But we can agree to disagree, since apparently we'll have to.

Speaking of the veracity of AS' testimony, is there any question about how close he and JS actually were prior to July, 2011?

In 2011, I was an avid participant on another true crime forum called The Hinky Meter, whose owner, Val, shut it down not long after RZ died (unrelated timing).

Whether it was media reports or what our group considered reliable sleuthing, most of us believed there wasn't a strong relationship between AS and JS. I distinctly recall it being highlighted that AS was notably absent in multiple family reunion portraits, even before JS met RZ. Beyond that, it was entirely speculation, based on the diverse career choices between and lifestyles of the two brothers, that AS may have been presented an opportunity to receive money for coming to California on short notice.

I'm surprised, therefore, to hear AS testified to being a supportive brother and involved uncle. Can we be sure about how he depicted their relationship?

Does anyone else find it odd that AS appears much older and weathered than JS, though JS is the one who is older across an age gap? Has there ever been any question of AS having a drug history or receiving any psychological assessment?

Just things I've wondered about since he comes across oddly, imo.
 
So I am supposed to be getting up in two hours and starting my drive to LA. It is a business trip. Staying with my cousin. It's all good.

The reason I am still up is that we had a technical glitch in the first half of Keith Greer's interview. I was going to upload the interview and head to bed. That was over four hours ago.

CLICK HERE to listen to the interview.

If you can help the Zahau family here is the link to their https://www..com/rydrn-justice-for-rebecca

I feel like my head is made out of Jello and my legs have all the stamina of a clump of seaweed.

On Tuesday if I can stop with the Jello/Seaweed feeling thing we will hear from 12 times best selling author Caitliln Rother. Ms. Rother is going to update us on closing arguments which are Monday.

Take Care,
Tricia
 
I've been on several juries and since this case began, I have never found Mary credible. 20 calls in two days is an indication TO ME that something is terribly wrong. JMO

I don't see that as odd. A call to tell Mary what had happened. A call to let her know things were serious and Little Sister needed to come home. A call to let Mary know Little Sister's flight arrangements. A call to update on Max. A call to let her know Little Sister was on the plane. That's 5 right there.

And it said 20 contacts with Mary, so some were probably Mary calling her and some texts.

I can have 20 contacts with some of my friends in just a few hours lol.
 
Sometimes in our discussions, the debate is between suicide and murder, but the plaintiffs case has two hurdles. To win, Mr Greer needs to prove that not only was RZ murdered but she was murdered by AS.

The big hurdle here is...no physical evidence at all...just theories. The tugboat captain becomes Murder Assassin Extraordinaire...removing all traces of himself, without practice, during his very first try. Listen to his testimony again, look at the man...as the jury certainly will do...and ask yourself...is this the worlds most brilliant criminal genius?

Oh, some say...he had help...

But while the debate between murder and suicide is a worthy one...but the leap to convict Adam requires too many conspiracy theories for me. Was...everyone....totally incompetent...or in collusion with the Shacknai family? That’s a lot of people to smear. Not just the Medical examiner, the first responders, the first LE on the scene, the technicians, the fingerprint expert, the dna expert...all colluded to protect this guy... for what purpose?

There is not one scintilla of proof that any bribery or payoff took place. This is why we have been admonished NOT to make the allegations here in our discussion. (Though some still do) Because in all these years, no one, not one attorney looking to get at the really deep Shacknai pockets...could show one scintilla of evidence that Shacknai family money reached any other person or entity to corrupt this case!

Why would all these investigators let Adam get away with murder? Again, this requires believing they are all incompetent or corrupt. So no evidence of payoff...no physical evidence of Adam at the scene. And the jury must cannot just rule murder..they must take it up higher and say...it is this ONE man. No other person came through the open door...no other person had figured the family would be at the hospital and a crime would be easy. No other lover of RZ’s in the past had finally tracked her down...?

Do we really want this man destroyed with no physical evidence because we don’t know what else to think about this strange case? We want this man destroyed with no physical evidence and all his money given to the the Zahaus because we feel sorry for them? Do we want this man destroyed without physical evidence because all the really wealthy targets are unreachable? Do we want him destroyed because we don’t like his very rich brother?

If this case were just about murder or suicide...even though I believe it to be suicide...I might vote for the plaintiffs to try to get the case reopened.

But I think the case against AS is preposterous and weak. If emotion carries the day, I doubt it can survive an appeal.
 
Attorney Ann Bremner was initially hired (many years ago) to bring attention to RZ death investigation, and especially the San Diego Sheriff Office. IMO, there were, as Keith Greer called them "some exaggerations " during her media blitz including that the bedroom door was painted over before any hand writing analysis could occur. IMO, the "missing clothes" started this way as well. However, during the trial we learned the "missing clothes" were photographed on closet floor, and that RZ was actually buried in the long, tank dress! (Ref. MZL video deposition in Trial Overview Thread).

I don't get why Tricia texted Mr Greer about these non-issue "clothes" again on the eve of his closing argument! Thank you Mr Greer for job well done.
 
I hope Tricia doesn't mind that I've transcribed the majority of Keith Greer's latest interview:

TG: Everybody wanted to know why the defense did not call the medical examiner. The person who ruled this a suicide. The medical examiner you would think this person would be the first one the defense calls. Well Mr Greer said it was no surprise to him because every witness from the sheriff’s department that was called by the defense he was able to put massive holes into their suicide theory. Mr Greer is confident that the suicide theory fell apart because of the fact that he was able to show these witnesses and their stories just didn’t match up, didn’t make sense. Greer said he was anxious and couldn’t wait to get the medical examiner on the stand to blow holes through his theory that Rebecca’s death was a suicide.

The ME was supposed to go on the stand Monday March 26[SUP]th[/SUP] and Sunday night Greer received an email saying the defense was withdrawing the ME as a witness. Greer said in his personal opinion it was because of how he was able to blow holes in all of the sheriff’s department witnesses, the defense didn’t want to have the ME’s theory destroyed on cross.

Now let’s go to the second half of the interview, the one that recorded properly, with Keith Greer:

How are you going to explain the fact that Rebecca’s DNA was on the rope and Adam’s was not? That to me seems a very difficult task to take on.

KG: Well it’s interesting cause I learned a lot about DNA during this process and one of the things that all of the DNA experts were clear on was sometimes people don’t leave DNA, particularly after they’ve washed there’s going to be any of the cells that would shed will be cleaned off, and different people shed at different rates, some people shed a lot some people will not at all, so it’s interesting.

Here we have we know that Adam held the knife that cut her down, we know that Adam loosened up the wrist, the bindings on her wrist, and he said he wedged his hand underneath them in order to check her pulse we know that he took the gag out of her mouth we know that he says he gave her mouth to mouth resuscitation, he said he gave her chest compressions, so we’ve got him touching her all over after she’s hanged, but there’s no DNA. So it’s a question of did he not do that stuff? Well we know she’s cut down, we know there’s a knife there we know he’s touched it, we know the ropes are loose on her hands, there’s evidence that what he’s saying is true, yet no DNA.

And so part of it is where it’s tested, I know the rope on the bed, that’s tying the rope to the bed, they didn’t test in my opinion where the person who looped the rope around the bedpost would have been touching the rope. They tested a knot that wasn’t even associated with the rope being looped around the bed.

So part of it is where they test, where they do the swabbing, part of it is does the person leave DNA? Adam said that he showered that night and he also said he showered that morning. So we have both cases, if in fact he was there that evening then he had already showered just like he did the next morning he didn’t leave any DNA the next morning. What makes us [can’t hear] the night before?

Interestingly he had no idea. If it was in fact him he did not have any idea that he wasn’t a shedder of DNA because he wiped off everything. The door knobs in and out of the room, no fingerprints no DNA, you can see on the doorframe on the door itself the area that’s been wiped clean cause the door’s white and there’s powder, the fingerprint powder shows up 8” above the door knob and 8” below there’s all kinds of powder yet it’s really clean white and the whole area of the door and around the door knob and on the door knobs themselves where it’s been wiped. No DNA on the paintbrushes, if Rebecca painted that herself you’d expect her DNA on there, there’s nobody’s. No DNA on the paint tube that was squeezed 20 some odd times to get that paint out, if Rebecca painted it you’d expect to have her DNA on there. And it’s not. So same with the knives that you’d expect her DNA, her fingerprints are on the carving knife, as if she’s holding the blade facing towards her and no DNA of hers on the handle, which is a porous surface, so I think the DNA evidence helps show that it was murder. Because if you’re gonna commit suicide are you gonna be wiping off, I don’t even know if she could, in the order that things were done.

TG: Finally, the judge decided to not give the jury the option to separate the two questions. So now I’m gonna give you a scenario here, let’s say there’s somebody that absolutely believes it was murder but they just can’t wrap their mind around the fact that there’s no physical evidence of Adam. Do they then have to say the preponderance of the evidence does not convict this person?

KG: [crosstalk] they jump right to Adam. First question is, uh not quoting it exactly, did Adam Shacknai touch Rebecca Zahau in a harmful or offensive manner? Yes or no. Did that conduct cause her death? Those are the first two questions. So the jury doesn’t get to say it was murder but we’re not sure who it was, it’s right to ‘did Adam do it’.

TG: The other thing too, I’m trying to think if I was on that jury, I might say ok the evidence really does show it was murder, he’s the only one that could’ve done it, even though there’s no physical evidence though it’s explained why there is no physical evidence, and we’re not sending him to death or to jail, it’s civil...

[snipped]

KG: When it comes to punitive damages those have to be proven by clear and convincing evidence so it’s more of a challenge obviously to meet the clear and convincing standard.

TG: So if they come back with $100 punitive that would give you an indication that maybe they weren’t quite sure about Adam.

KG: Well they’d probably come back with zero, it would either be something substantial or zero, they have to find that it’s clear and convincing first and if they do find that then they can come back with the larger number, but they may put a very large value on the damages caused by her mother losing her 32-year old daughter who was definitely a very important part of her life, taking care of her, consoling her, taking care of her financially, emotionally, it was a very strong relationship, so they could put a big number on that.

TG: How long do you think, I know this is a question that’s very difficult to answer, but normally what do juries take, 2 - 3 days maybe?

KG: Yeah, it could, I think they first come in they probably all I presume the vast majority say it’s murder if not all of them, I think all should but maybe there’ll be a straggler or some unique person in there that doesn’t, and then the next step of who else could it be? The defense on closing argument will probably throw out a few names of people that it could be, but then I think if the jury look at it and say there’s no evidence of those people, there’s no handwriting, no knot-tying, no motive, it looks like the only evidence we have is Adam and there’s nothing about anyone else, if they look at it logically and apply the law cleanly it shouldn’t be that long a process. I’d expect it by the end of the day on Tuesday.

TG: But don’t they, if they say it’s murder, they have to pretty much say it was Adam don’t they? They have to be either he is culpable or he’s not?

KG: Yeah, murder’s not even a question, I’m gonna recommend to the jury that they do that, just get that out the way, cause it changes how you look at the evidence. If you believe that it is murder you look at the evidence very differently than if you believe it’s suicide. Cause if you believe it’s murder then all of a sudden a lot of questions are answered, ‘cause she didn’t do this herself, so then the question is who did it? Who, other than her, did it? And then what evidence we have appears to point to Adam. Unless you take what the defense experts say which says the other evidence points to nobody. The door can’t be compared, the writing on the door can’t be compared to anything, and anybody could have tied the ropes that way, and he’s just an unusual guy and his mannerisms when he saw the body that morning, it’s open to interpretation. It’s a challenging case. But I think looking at the evidence it weighs in our favor, and hopefully the jury believes so too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
302
Total visitors
462

Forum statistics

Threads
609,130
Messages
18,249,937
Members
234,543
Latest member
Feelingstoned31
Back
Top