Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #2

[MyBelle]

correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as opportunity and location, weren't 2 of the 3 defendants actually at the home where the murder took place that same evening? (nina over for a question of Rebecca, and adam, in the guest house) and the 3rd defendant's location not verified to the public as of yet, however, identified by a passerby of being at the home also? That could easily place the 3 defendants right there on the property where the murder occurred, on the same evening. don't get me wrong, im not stating what I think happened, just looking at opportunity of each of the defendants.

While the information hasn't been made public, the police were satisfied with all three alibis.

JMO

 

[IQuestion]

Hi, been gone from posting for a while BECAUSE, I have been busy reading and watching South Korean films by the director, Kim Ki-young (Housemaid). He actually did a trilogy of films, ALL WITH THE SAME SUBJECT with minor variances in the characters. And, you know what? Female suicide is NOT THE FOCUS of the films. The films actually depict the TROUBLED MASCULINITY OF MARRIED MEN in post war industrialization who CHEAT ON THEIR WIVES WITH YOUNGER WOMEN, and bring down the entire family structure by making poor choices, lack of self control and chasing after young women, even though they have beautiful and mature wives. Go figure? In the second of the trilogy, WOMAN OF FIRE (which is actually five films....yep, they did it with the vampire teen movies, too) the husband has an affair with the new, young rural girl brought in to assist the over-burdened wife. As in the theme of all of them, the young uneducated girl is the most vulnerable and exploited member of the household for whom her employers have little to no compassion. In the second film, the husband eventually feels so guilty about what he has wrought upon the household, he decides to commit suicide with the young rural girl by drinking poison.
And as he is dying, he decides to crawl towards his wife to ask for her forgiveness....instead, she takes a knife and stabs him in the back! Yep, she just loses it in the end, because he has messed up their happy home and stabs him, even though is he already dying from the poison! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman_of_Fire (I watched so many of the S. Korean, films, it was an endless soap opera....UGH.) Suicide is not the overriding theme...infidelity with an older married man and humiliating the pregnant wife seems to always be the issue, in the films.
In S. Korea, they refer to the audiences (mostly female) as "rubber shoes and handkerchief" types. It is always the same theme.... young women who have little opportunity for class mobility, and men who cheat on their wives with disastrous outcomes.
Anyway, just wanted to let y'all in on the trilogy and what it is REALLY ABOUT. The U.S. cinema adopted many of the themes in movies such as Fatal Attraction, The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Obsession etc.

 

[K_Z]

I'm sorry to be so blunt about poor Max's death, but as I posted many months ago in the EMS thread, there is simply no realistic expectation about Max's case that any physicians would have indicated his situation was highly survivable, let alone neurologically "intact" survivable. At the point he was admitted to the FIRST ER-- Coronado Sharp-- he had been in a full arrest for more than 25 minutes at least. The statistics (please reference the EMS thread if questions) are simply incredibly dismal for multitrauma induced cardiac arrest at the scene, in pediatric victims.

And that's what will be testified to by expert witnesses, if the issue ever makes it to a judge/ jury. This unfortunate child never had a realistic chance at survival, let alone survival with any kind of intact neuro status. Despite what Nina might report the nurses told her. He died at the bottom of the steps. His youthful heart was resuscitated, after about a half an hour of cardiac arrest, and the physiological sequelae of resuscitation produced "a second death". And, the EMS crew had an incredibly difficult time placing airways and lines in this child-- so much so, that instead of going directly to Rady Children's hospital, they diverted to Coronado Sharp ER (a hospital with limited ICU facilities, and essentially no pediatric ICU facilities), in order to get the airway secured and lines placed. (So, one has to ask, why did Nina and Dina expect Rebecca to do what even EMS crews with their advanced training and equipment could not accomplish?)

Max had a devastating injury of the junction of the brainstem and spinal cord, as well as a 7 1/2 inch sagittal (vertical, top of head) skull fracture, as a result of his fall, and a quite prolonged cardiac arrest until arrival at Coronado Sharp ER. No amount of CPR was going to "save him", started "within 2 min" or not. The damage was too extreme. CPR was not the issue, and never was, despite Dina and Nina's criticisms/ complaints. It will not be hard to produce expert witnesses to testify to this.

And lest we forget, this case is not about various theories of "how" Max died. But it is about how defendant perceptions about how Max's death occurred became a motive for the murder of Rebecca Zahau. That's pretty understandable to a jury, IMO. And IMO, the evidence of who knew what, and when, is clearly all there, documented in Max's medical records.

 

[K_Z]

New documents (101, 102) posted on San Diego ROA yesterday. Dina is seeking a court order for discovery for ADT Security Corp. to produce any records they have for the Spreckles Mansion for the relevant time period. ADT has not responded to their requests, apparently. (Remember the reported unlocked back door of Spreckles?)

Will post the 18 page document shortly, but my summary hits the high points.

 

[K_Z]

Hi, been gone from posting for a while BECAUSE, I have been busy reading and watching South Korean films by the director, Kim Ki-young (Housemaid). He actually did a trilogy of films, ALL WITH THE SAME SUBJECT with minor variances in the characters. And, you know what? Female suicide is NOT THE FOCUS of the films. The films actually depict the TROUBLED MASCULINITY OF MARRIED MEN in post war industrialization who CHEAT ON THEIR WIVES WITH YOUNGER WOMEN, and bring down the entire family structure by making poor choices, lack of self control and chasing after young women, even though they have beautiful and mature wives. Go figure? In the second of the trilogy, WOMAN OF FIRE (which is actually five films....yep, they did it with the vampire teen movies, too) the husband has an affair with the new, young rural girl brought in to assist the over-burdened wife. As in the theme of all of them, the young uneducated girl is the most vulnerable and exploited member of the household for whom her employers have little to no compassion. In the second film, the husband eventually feels so guilty about what he has wrought upon the household, he decides to commit suicide with the young rural girl by drinking poison.
And as he is dying, he decides to crawl towards his wife to ask for her forgiveness....instead, she takes a knife and stabs him in the back! Yep, she just loses it in the end, because he has messed up their happy home and stabs him, even though is he already dying from the poison! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman_of_Fire (I watched so many of the S. Korean, films, it was an endless soap opera....UGH.) Suicide is not the overriding theme...infidelity with an older married man and humiliating the pregnant wife seems to always be the issue, in the films.
In S. Korea, they refer to the audiences (mostly female) as "rubber shoes and handkerchief" types. It is always the same theme.... young women who have little opportunity for class mobility, and men who cheat on their wives with disastrous outcomes.
Anyway, just wanted to let y'all in on the trilogy and what it is REALLY ABOUT. The U.S. cinema adopted many of the themes in movies such as Fatal Attraction, The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Obsession etc.

Thanks for watching these and reporting on them! They don't sound relevant to this lawsuit at all, IMO. I think the very few persistent layperson references to that video have always been planted as a distraction and a red herring. JMO! (And thanks for "taking one for the team" by watching those videos.)

 

[IQuestion]

Thanks for watching these and reporting on them! They don't sound relevant to this lawsuit at all, IMO. I think the very few persistent layperson references to that video have always been planted as a distraction and a red herring. JMO! (And thanks for "taking one for the team" by watching those videos.)

K_Z, Yep, it was one of the most difficult things I researched on this case! Your comment made me giggle, because the films are pretty high drama/trauma theater combined with Hitchcock-ian skewed camera angles flashing not-so-subtle symbolism. IE, clueless mature woman's position in household usurped when the older husband cheats with young lass. I don't recommend any of my pals try "binge-viewing" them, but I would like to
"loop play" them in SDSO's lunch rooms for six months. It is a dark day in law enforcement when "vintage DVD's from S. Korea" are actually used as collateral/back-up/or motivating factors for the death of a child and a woman! Or, that "losing weight" is a sign of possible suicidal tendencies proffered from the most portly of investigators at the press conference. (I guess for some people, losing weight can't possibly be a healthy choice? If losing weight is the sign of deep depression.....did anyone tell Nutri System?) If I hadn't seen/heard it with my own eyes/ears, I would have accused someone of making it up....depressed people are just as likely to gain weight due to lack of motivation.
I have had a problem with "the ALL MALE PRESS CONFERENCE assembled to explain the mental state of a young woman"....REALLY? I am still doubtful of their explanations. The only woman "seen" was (a female employee) on their "muted" video who tied her hands behind her back. VOILA!!! case solved, not by a far cry....How can you have a female detective be involved from day one, fail to get info from phone (during critical 30 day time period), not attend the autopsy of the victim, and not speak at the press conference, either?

 

[*Lash*]

:loveyou: Much thanks IQuestion for all your research!!!

 

[*Lash*]

Respectfully snipped for context-

And lest we forget, this case is not about various theories of "how" Max died. But it is about how defendant perceptions about how Max's death occurred became a motive for the murder of Rebecca Zahau. That's pretty understandable to a jury, IMO. And IMO, the evidence of who knew what, and when, is clearly all there, documented in Max's medical records.

I agree. If a jury is looking for motive, Dina's perception of how Max died and her belief Rebecca lied about performing CPR all could be seen as motive to murder Rebecca.

If the case does make it to trial, Maxie's medical records should show the who knew what and when. If the medical records differ from the answers Nina gave in her interview what will a jury think? What IF the medical records show Dina and Nina knew Monday or Tuesday Max would not survive? The first question I think a jury might ask, why would Nina lie in her interview? What reason could there be to lie about the details of your nephews condition? What was she trying to hide? In my opinion, the answer would be motive.

 

[Gilgamesh]

The Housemaid video has always seemed like a completely irrelevant distraction to me, too.

 

[bourne]

I'm sorry to be so blunt about poor Max's death, but as I posted many months ago in the EMS thread, there is simply no realistic expectation about Max's case that any physicians would have indicated his situation was highly survivable, let alone neurologically "intact" survivable. At the point he was admitted to the FIRST ER-- Coronado Sharp-- he had been in a full arrest for more than 25 minutes at least. The statistics (please reference the EMS thread if questions) are simply incredibly dismal for multitrauma induced cardiac arrest at the scene, in pediatric victims.

And that's what will be testified to by expert witnesses, if the issue ever makes it to a judge/ jury. This unfortunate child never had a realistic chance at survival, let alone survival with any kind of intact neuro status. Despite what Nina might report the nurses told her. He died at the bottom of the steps. His youthful heart was resuscitated, after about a half an hour of cardiac arrest, and the physiological sequelae of resuscitation produced "a second death". And, the EMS crew had an incredibly difficult time placing airways and lines in this child-- so much so, that instead of going directly to Rady Children's hospital, they diverted to Coronado Sharp ER (a hospital with limited ICU facilities, and essentially no pediatric ICU facilities), in order to get the airway secured and lines placed. (So, one has to ask, why did Nina and Dina expect Rebecca to do what even EMS crews with their advanced training and equipment could not accomplish?)

Max had a devastating injury of the junction of the brainstem and spinal cord, as well as a 7 1/2 inch sagittal (vertical, top of head) skull fracture, as a result of his fall, and a quite prolonged cardiac arrest until arrival at Coronado Sharp ER. No amount of CPR was going to "save him", started "within 2 min" or not. The damage was too extreme. CPR was not the issue, and never was, despite Dina and Nina's criticisms/ complaints. It will not be hard to produce expert witnesses to testify to this.

And lest we forget, this case is not about various theories of "how" Max died. But it is about how defendant perceptions about how Max's death occurred became a motive for the murder of Rebecca Zahau. That's pretty understandable to a jury, IMO. And IMO, the evidence of who knew what, and when, is clearly all there, documented in Max's medical records.

I believe for most everyone, a doctor calling their child "braindead" is the equivalent of their pronouncing their child "dead". After all, a child who is braindead is essentially a vegetable. The braindead child would not be able to wake up, which means the child would NEVER be able to walk, talk, eat, play soccer, laugh, read stories, perform on stage, etc.

Therefore, I have absolutely no doubt that, when, according to Nina's crosstalk interview, Dr. Peterson abruptly told Dina that Tues evening that Max would "never walk or talk again", in other words, BRAINDEAD, Dina the self-proclaimed "doctor" and "scientist" took his words for what it meant. And then Dina sought her sadistic and heinous, humiliating vengeance upon Rebecca for her one and only child's BRAINDEATH for according to Dina and Nina's continual interviews, "because Rebecca never performed CPR within 2 minutes" (in other words, never saved Max) and that led to Max's brain death. And Rebecca's murder was most vile and degrading, equipped sensationally with noose, gag, RED ropes, feet and hands tied behind her back, nudity...And let's not forget the infamous painted cryptic message on door "SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER" which aha, makes perfect sense within its context, doesn't it?

A reasonable jury would clearly see how Dina's blame game came to be that fateful Tuesday evening from Dr. Peterson's words that Dina's son "would never walk or talk again"...and how that propelled Dina into her vicious, violent, brutal, savage murder of Rebecca.

 

[bourne]

The Housemaid video has always seemed like a completely irrelevant distraction to me, too.

I think the video is relevant insofar as who purchased it, and when and where it was found. E.g., video might have been planted to further humiliate Rebecca by her murderer.

 

[bourne]

New documents (101, 102) posted on San Diego ROA yesterday. Dina is seeking a court order for discovery for ADT Security Corp. to produce any records they have for the Spreckles Mansion for the relevant time period. ADT has not responded to their requests, apparently. (Remember the reported unlocked back door of Spreckles?)

Will post the 18 page document shortly, but my summary hits the high points.

Looks like Dina is trying extremely hard to get Jonah involved in this murder case...That can only mean one thing. She's running scared and knows she's about to be BUSTED. :jail:

 

[screecher]

I think the video is relevant insofar as who purchased it, and when and where it was found. E.g., video might have been planted to further humiliate Rebecca by her murderer.

I strongly suspect it was to humiliate Jonah. The video series seems to parallel his life/marriage with the first wife (iirc, Jonah cheated on the first wife with Dina) and then his second marriage with Dina.

Yeah, imo, more than likely, Dina left that video for Jonah.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

refresh my memory, please. At one point did the Sheriff also say that there was information he had not publicly released but he might change his mind? It was during the period where RZ's family and their attorney were publicly berating the Sheriff's office.

MyBelle, the Sheriff said he would release the entire file if the Zahaus continued to release just snippets, such as the edited 911 call that Adam made - edited down to a few sentences to make him look bad.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Hi, been gone from posting for a while BECAUSE, I have been busy reading and watching South Korean films by the director, Kim Ki-young (Housemaid). He actually did a trilogy of films, ALL WITH THE SAME SUBJECT with minor variances in the characters. And, you know what? Female suicide is NOT THE FOCUS of the films. The films actually depict the TROUBLED MASCULINITY OF MARRIED MEN in post war industrialization who CHEAT ON THEIR WIVES WITH YOUNGER WOMEN, and bring down the entire family structure by making poor choices, lack of self control and chasing after young women, even though they have beautiful and mature wives. Go figure? In the second of the trilogy, WOMAN OF FIRE (which is actually five films....yep, they did it with the vampire teen movies, too) the husband has an affair with the new, young rural girl brought in to assist the over-burdened wife. As in the theme of all of them, the young uneducated girl is the most vulnerable and exploited member of the household for whom her employers have little to no compassion. In the second film, the husband eventually feels so guilty about what he has wrought upon the household, he decides to commit suicide with the young rural girl by drinking poison.
And as he is dying, he decides to crawl towards his wife to ask for her forgiveness....instead, she takes a knife and stabs him in the back! Yep, she just loses it in the end, because he has messed up their happy home and stabs him, even though is he already dying from the poison! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman_of_Fire (I watched so many of the S. Korean, films, it was an endless soap opera....UGH.) Suicide is not the overriding theme...infidelity with an older married man and humiliating the pregnant wife seems to always be the issue, in the films.
In S. Korea, they refer to the audiences (mostly female) as "rubber shoes and handkerchief" types. It is always the same theme.... young women who have little opportunity for class mobility, and men who cheat on their wives with disastrous outcomes.
Anyway, just wanted to let y'all in on the trilogy and what it is REALLY ABOUT. The U.S. cinema adopted many of the themes in movies such as Fatal Attraction, The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Obsession etc.

Then you would know Rebecca mimiked her suicide to the one in The Housemaid - down to having her hair UNDER the rope.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

I'm sorry to be so blunt about poor Max's death, but as I posted many months ago in the EMS thread, there is simply no realistic expectation about Max's case that any physicians would have indicated his situation was highly survivable, let alone neurologically "intact" survivable. At the point he was admitted to the FIRST ER-- Coronado Sharp-- he had been in a full arrest for more than 25 minutes at least. The statistics (please reference the EMS thread if questions) are simply incredibly dismal for multitrauma induced cardiac arrest at the scene, in pediatric victims.

And that's what will be testified to by expert witnesses, if the issue ever makes it to a judge/ jury. This unfortunate child never had a realistic chance at survival, let alone survival with any kind of intact neuro status. Despite what Nina might report the nurses told her. He died at the bottom of the steps. His youthful heart was resuscitated, after about a half an hour of cardiac arrest, and the physiological sequelae of resuscitation produced "a second death". And, the EMS crew had an incredibly difficult time placing airways and lines in this child-- so much so, that instead of going directly to Rady Children's hospital, they diverted to Coronado Sharp ER (a hospital with limited ICU facilities, and essentially no pediatric ICU facilities), in order to get the airway secured and lines placed. (So, one has to ask, why did Nina and Dina expect Rebecca to do what even EMS crews with their advanced training and equipment could not accomplish?)

Max had a devastating injury of the junction of the brainstem and spinal cord, as well as a 7 1/2 inch sagittal (vertical, top of head) skull fracture, as a result of his fall, and a quite prolonged cardiac arrest until arrival at Coronado Sharp ER. No amount of CPR was going to "save him", started "within 2 min" or not. The damage was too extreme. CPR was not the issue, and never was, despite Dina and Nina's criticisms/ complaints. It will not be hard to produce expert witnesses to testify to this.

And lest we forget, this case is not about various theories of "how" Max died. But it is about how defendant perceptions about how Max's death occurred became a motive for the murder of Rebecca Zahau. That's pretty understandable to a jury, IMO. And IMO, the evidence of who knew what, and when, is clearly all there, documented in Max's medical records.

Too bad Rebecca didn't give Max CPR - like she lied about to many people. Max may have lived if she hadn't been busy staging the scene instead.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Thanks for watching these and reporting on them! They don't sound relevant to this lawsuit at all, IMO. I think the very few persistent layperson references to that video have always been planted as a distraction and a red herring. JMO! (And thanks for "taking one for the team" by watching those videos.)

Again, all you have to do is watch The Housemaid to know Rebecca fashioned her suicide after this one - down to having her hair under the noose. The Housemaid is what was taken into evidence - not the trilogy.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Respectfully snipped for context-


I agree. If a jury is looking for motive, Dina's perception of how Max died and her belief Rebecca lied about performing CPR all could be seen as motive to murder Rebecca.

If the case does make it to trial, Maxie's medical records should show the who knew what and when. If the medical records differ from the answers Nina gave in her interview what will a jury think? What IF the medical records show Dina and Nina knew Monday or Tuesday Max would not survive? The first question I think a jury might ask, why would Nina lie in her interview? What reason could there be to lie about the details of your nephews condition? What was she trying to hide? In my opinion, the answer would be motive.

The jury (will never happen) would only be interested in real evidence like the DNA and fingerprint that prove Rebebba Zahau killed herself.

 

[*Lash*]

Too bad Rebecca didn't give Max CPR - like she lied about to many people. Max may have lived if she hadn't been busy staging the scene instead.

Just to clarify so readers are not misinformed, it is your opinion someone staged the scene in Max's death. LE did not release proof of anyone staging a scene and ruled Max's death an accident.

This thread is about Rebecca's WDS, not what may or may not have happened to poor Max.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

I believe for most everyone, a doctor calling their child "braindead" is the equivalent of their pronouncing their child "dead". After all, a child who is braindead is essentially a vegetable. The braindead child would not be able to wake up, which means the child would NEVER be able to walk, talk, eat, play soccer, laugh, read stories, perform on stage, etc.

Therefore, I have absolutely no doubt that, when, according to Nina's crosstalk interview, Dr. Peterson abruptly told Dina that Tues evening that Max would "never walk or talk again", in other words, BRAINDEAD, Dina the self-proclaimed "doctor" and "scientist" took his words for what it meant. And then Dina sought her sadistic and heinous, humiliating vengeance upon Rebecca for her one and only child's BRAINDEATH for according to Dina and Nina's continual interviews, "because Rebecca never performed CPR within 2 minutes" (in other words, never saved Max) and that led to Max's brain death. And Rebecca's murder was most vile and degrading, equipped sensationally with noose, gag, RED ropes, feet and hands tied behind her back, nudity...And let's not forget the infamous painted cryptic message on door "SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER" which aha, makes perfect sense within its context, doesn't it?

A reasonable jury would clearly see how Dina's blame game came to be that fateful Tuesday evening from Dr. Peterson's words that Dina's son "would never walk or talk again"...and how that propelled Dina into her vicious, violent, brutal, savage murder of Rebecca.

No, a reasonable jury is going to want real evidence. Like the DNA, fingerprints, footprints, diaries, boarding her dog, sending her sister home, and how quiet she was on that Tuesday. REAL evidence.