Rebecca Zahau Wrongful death trial begins. Trial coverage and discussion #4

[MzOpinion8d]

The defense did provide a chart but I hate to break it to you but neither it nor the hanging, gagged, bound mannequin is evidence that can be considered by the jury. Bummer, huh?

As if either one of us actually believes that mannequin won't have any impact on any juror's decision.

 

[Tortoise]

The distance RZ was from the ground means that the rope was about 7.5 feet up in the air. Not exactly eye level. Holding onto the body would also decrease your reach. If it was relevant to the Plaintiff's case they would likely have introduced more evidence. Or how about, he came across the body, didn't take time to measure the distance as compared to his reach and got the table. If he tried to cut her down and then needed something to step on this would be a longer delay in actually cutting her down. There are plenty of logical explanations that IMO are more believable than what would amount to a pointless lie.

I think that should be holding on to the body, and the knife, and the cellphone with his three arms.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Indeed. But now that they are aware Dina's was wrongfully accused in the court of public opinion, they also have the option of re-opening the investigation into Max's death. Isn't that wonderful?

I wish they would re-open the investigation into Max's death. But SDSO will never re-open either of these investigations, at least not while the current Sheriff is still in office.

 

[MyBelle]

Apparently I misunderstood what you were asking for.

However, that Rebecca died and Adam was on the premises is a fact, and it's also fact that Adam's DNA and fingerprints are *not* found on items on which they should have been found is also fact.

You say there's no evidence he was at the "crime scene" because of this. By the same logic, he also wasn't at the "finding her body" scene, either. So which is true?

Oh. Dear. You are under the mistaken impression that there is a "finding her body scene" which has relevance. When did that take place? To find Adam guilty in this case, he must be proved to be the cause of death. It isn't happening in my lifetime. Sorry.

 

[MyBelle]

As if either one of us actually believes that mannequin won't have any impact on any juror's decision.

It can't have an impact on the jury decision because it wasn't introduced as evidence during the trial. If the defense discovers it was discussed, he can move for a mistrial.

 

[Tortoise]

The Plaintiff's own witness testified the knots weren't all that unusual.

Describing the overhand knot — the kind used to tie shoelaces — Philpott noted, “Children can do it, gorillas can do it, birds can do it, people of all kinds can do it.”
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/sd-me-zahau-day5-story.html

Why did the defense expert need to practice the knots 50 or 60 times?

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Why did the defense expert need to practice the knots 50 or 60 times?

Probably because he wasn't a Tugboat captain [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

 

[Tortoise]

Oh. Dear. You are under the mistaken impression that there is a "finding her body scene" which has relevance. When did that take place? To find Adam guilty in this case, he must be proved to be the cause of death. It isn't happening in my lifetime. Sorry.

Of course it has relevance, massive relevance at that.

Greer did not waste his time playing the 911 call yesterday for nothing. Or explaining that his DNA wasn't at the finding the body scene.

Do you believe he didn't do mouth to mouth resuscitation? Because you'd have to, if you wanted to rely on the absence of DNA inside the house as evidence he didn't murder Rebecca.

 

[Tortoise]

The defense did provide a chart but I hate to break it to you but neither it nor the hanging, gagged, bound mannequin is evidence that can be considered by the jury. Bummer, huh?

No not a bummer. The distance between Rebecca's neck and the ground is part of the evidence and it's a very unfortunate fact for the defense case.

 

[MyBelle]

It was pretty unconscionable for SDSO to do that to Dina...saying they had used phone pings to determine her whereabouts, knowing that was flimsy evidence as she could have left her phone and the hospital and been anywhere. They had the option to cut that speculation off and chose not to.

Did they? Have a link? Thanks.

 

[MyBelle]

Apparently I misunderstood what you were asking for.

However, that Rebecca died and Adam was on the premises is a fact, and it's also fact that Adam's DNA and fingerprints are *not* found on items on which they should have been found is also fact.

You say there's no evidence he was at the "crime scene" because of this. By the same logic, he also wasn't at the "finding her body" scene, either. So which is true?

Adam's DNA wasn't found at the scene of the death in the house. If you have evidence that he was there, please provide it. The Plaintiff failed to provide it at trial. Thanks.

 

[MyBelle]

No juror can *admit* it had an impact on their decision. But as I said, neither you nor I actually believe it won't have an impact.

You have no clue what I believe. That said, the jurors will be interviewed after their verdict.

 

[Tortoise]

<Snipped to address>

This is ABSURD. The plaintiff never used the word pervert, so the defense introduces it?! That would be like defending a man falsely accused of rape by repeatedly calling him a rapist. It's a horrible tactic. Even when defending registered sex offenders the idea is to NOT draw the juries attention to that fact (even if it's a Romeo/Juliet offense.) I cannot imagine what this attorney's reason for doing this is. Unless it's to give him grounds for suing the attorneys?!

Gives Adam a reason to appeal also. My attorney called me a pervert.

Its desperate if it's a plan, but why else would the experienced attorney screw up the defense if not on purpose?

 

[Tortoise]

<snipped to address>

I would go with "the mansion was unlocked

Was it unlocked? I didn't follow this case all the way through so I may have missed it, but apparently Nina went there and couldn't get in.

 

[Tortoise]

Did I imagine it or see it somewhere else perhaps, but I heard Greer say yesterday that the investigators did not do a sound test to see if it might have showed up which part of the mansion Rebecca screamed/was attacked at, did he also say something about not doing a reconstruction at the mansion to see how far the bed would move? I mean how difficult would it be to test a weight plummeting over the balcony attached to the bed?

I'll re-watch the video. I may have gotten it from a post here and Greer didn't mention it at all.

Second thoughts, I think he did say it because I remember him saying that Jonah had vacated the mansion and they had their perfect opportunity.

The so-called investigation really beggars belief.

 

[Really?]

Proof of guilt = nautical knot

 

[Brit]

Brit, the only person who has said that RZ encouraged AS to come to SD ...is from AS... no one else.

You need to decide if what he says is credible, believable in light of the other testimony and the inconsistencies in his statements you have heard.

AS also testified that ZR told him that if he wants to come to SD, he needs to ‘follow his heart’... IMO that is what you say to someone when they choose their own path, not the one that you are recommending they take...think about when may you say this in your own interactions and experiences..

Just my opinion....




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

All great points. For some reason I didn't realize that had only come from AS. But everything you said makes sense.

 

[Tortoise]

I'll tell you what I found very powerful yesterday and that was Greer bringing out the paint tube and reminding the jury that there was no human DNA on it whatsoever, after it had been squeezed over 20 times. Not even unidentified DNA belonging to the store workers who unpacked the stock and placed it in a bag. None.

 

[Brit]

Long distance LE interviews in a criminal investigation involving a death of a child?
If that is what the family demanded, it won't surprise me if LE re-opens the investigation.

But there was no criminal investigation at that time of Max's accident. At the time XZ left it was viewed as a terrible accident and decided that this wasn't the place for a 13 year old girl to be at, JS testified that they both decided this. I just don't understand all this harping on XZ, a 13 year old girl, who told LE her account of what happened that day with Max, and also said the same story in deposition. XZ did not change her story, so there is no need at this point to even question her word. On the other hand AS has changed his story and been caught in obvious lies during testimony. I think there is alot to question with him. And if the investigation does get reopened I really hope that LE really looks into AS testimony story. Like, did he really not know those specific knots, maybe they will question his employer and fellow co-workers.

 

[Brit]

The Plaintiff's own witness testified the knots weren't all that unusual.

Describing the overhand knot — the kind used to tie shoelaces — Philpott noted, “Children can do it, gorillas can do it, birds can do it, people of all kinds can do it.”
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/sd-me-zahau-day5-story.html

In testimony, after making that statement when prompted by webb, Philpott stated its not so much the difficulty of making the knot, its the AMOUNT of knots all lined up against each other that makes making the knots in this case so difficult. I will say, that I don't know how to make these types of knots, they might be easy to tie, but I have no knowledge of these knots, and NOT ONE WITNESS INCLUDING JONAH HAD EVER SEEN HER MAKING THESE KNOTS AND DID NOT KNOW IF SHE KNEW THESE KNOTS.