My thoughts exactly, justice be served.
"In the vicinity" has always struck me as an intentionally vague and deflective answer to that difficult question, and that made Gore so visibly uncomfortable.
Attorney Bremner said Jonah Shacknai is seen on hospital surveillance video on the night of Zahau's death, but Dina Shacknai is not.
Sheriff Gore confirmed as much during his news conference.
"We don't have her (Dina Shacknai) on surveillance tape," Gore confirmed. "Her position was determined thorough GPS triangulation on her cell phone, which put her in the vicinity of Rady Children's Hospital."
http://www.760kfmb.com/story/16068012/mixed-dna-all-over-zahau-death-scene-some-evidence-not-tested
BBM and colored by me.
Even more troubling that Dina wasn't seen on any Rady surveillance video, is that Gore's reluctant admission that they resorted to cell phone triangulation to attempt to establish the location of
her phone as a proxy for an adult who was alive and well, with
no corroborating evidence that DINA actually USED her phone during the time in question.
Remember that San Diego is a very densely populated area, with excellent cell tower coverage. And the best that Sheriff Gore (reluctantly!) admits is that the triangulation ONLY places the phone "in the vicinity". That triangulation report is MUCH more detailed than that, as well as a forensic exam of the phone. There are
multiple ways that a phone (even in 2011) can be "located", some of which use signal strength, in addition to a simple GPS location. How did the investigators actually DO the triangulation? Their report should be quite detailed. The
methods used will determine the accuracy of the location triangulated. That will be revealed in discovery, I'd think.
They know, or SHOULD know quite a bit about Dina's phone use during the time in question, and should have compared that to her use during a known time period a day or 2 before.
*They know the exact area that was triangulated, down to a few yards, including the "overlap" areas on towers, and the signal strength.
*They also know if her phone was accessed in any way during that time, such as checking emails or texts-- even if there was no reply, or calls made.
*They know if Dina's phone was powered off at any time during the triangulation period.
*They know if other apps on the phone were open or used during the time in question
*They know if the phone was plugged in and charging, and if it was (stationary), the exact times the phone was plugged in from the internal clock on the phone
*They know what Dina's previous pattern of travel near Rady was since Max was admitted, and what her phone use was, by comparing the time in question (triangulation period), going back to when Max was admitted.
This is huge-- it is possible to triangulate Dina's phone location when Rebecca was still alive, and Dina was definitively proven to be in Max's ICU cubicle. Simple enough to compare those 2 results, right? Do the reports for both times match?
Gore also does not address the presence of Dina on surveillance video OUTSIDE of the time in question-- and remember,
the subpoena for the Rady video is for ALL video surveillance cameras, and goes from BEFORE Max was admitted, to after Rebecca's death. Was Dina "invisible" for that entire period, starting with Max's admission? Surely she IS seen on video prior to Rebecca's death, in the time from when Max was admitted.
They definitely know where Dina typically parked on the hospital campus, which doors she entered the facility, and her usual pattern of travel to the ICU main entrance within Rady.
ICU entrance door cameras capture everyone who enters or leaves, and there is typically more than one camera view. This is commonplace in all ICU's, and certainly commonplace in an urban tertiary care pediatric hospital. There is simply no way Dina snuck into, or out of, the ICU, or was invisible, or out of camera range when entering or leaving the unit. If she is not on any of the multiple views in all parts of the hospital, then quite simply, she wasn't there. There is no other conclusion.
Much of this is known to investigators, and will have to be explored in Dina's deposition, and in open court, if the case make it that far. Just because
we don't have all this info, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
