Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #5

[LuckyLucy2]

Ah yes, SDSO's Lt. Larry Nesbit.

I fixed his quote for him @ http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...ego-police-willing-reopen-case-ruled-suicide/


“We concluded beyond a shadow of the doubt from cell phone triangulation, that neither Jonah or Dina's phone were at the house that night. Jonah and Dina's phone were at the hospital at Max’s bedside, or at the Ronald McDonald house, across the street from the hospital, or somewhere within the range of our cell phone triangulation efforts,” Lt. Nesbit told RadarOnline.com.



Oh, and regarding cell phone triangulation ...



https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...ven-close-to-accurate-everyone-falls-it.shtml

I have a feeling Lt. Larry Nesbit knows what he is talking about, and will be a witness for the Defense. We know there are numerous witnesses that know Dina did not leave Max's room that night. The jury is definately going to believe Max's nurses. And the cell phone triangulation, for that matter.

And "fixing" someone's words to make them say something they didn't is getting pretty desperate., IMO. Is that how the Zahaus plan on "fixing" their evidence, too?

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Was doing a bit of Googling and I just unearthed an article we've all probably seen from November 2011, headlined Mixed DNA "all over" Zahau death scene; some evidence not tested. It's from CBS8.com @ http://www.cbs8.com/story/16068012/...some-evidence-not-tested?clienttype=printable

This little tidbit is worth repeating:

The "vicinity of Rady Children's Hospital" is another of Gore's countless imprecise statements and hedges. A real piece of work, that one.

IMO, Anne Bremner is the "real piece of work". She knew that the mixed DNA was of too low levels to even test, yet still used it to thy to frame innocent people to make her own piece of Jonah's $. Just like the "rope missing from photo" escapade.

Were there prints and DNA on the knives?

The small knife had Rebecca’s DNA, and only Rebecca’s DNA. No fingerprints were developed from this item. The large knife had Rebecca’s fingerprints, and only Rebecca’s fingerprints.[/B]

A low level of DNA material was found on this knife as well, but it was not enough for any comparison.[B

Were there prints and DNA on the rope?

[Rebecca’s DNA was found on the rope, particularly in areas that would have to be manipulated to tie the knots. Only Rebecca’s DNA was found on these items [other than one “artifact,” which is a fragment of material that could be DNA, but does not contain enough information to determine who, or what, it came from (animals and plants also have DNA that can be left behind). The rope could not be fingerprinted.

www.sdsheriff.net/coronado

Anne also mentioned the "missing rope" a few times, too.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cellphone-records-leave-medicis-shacknai-stuck-in-catch-22/

http://www.cbs8.com/story/15466715/questions-linger-in-coronado-mansion-hanging-death

 

[inthedark14]

I have a feeling Lt. Larry Nesbit knows what he is talking about, and will be a witness for the Defense. We know there are numerous witnesses that know Dina did not leave Max's room that night. The jury is definately going to believe Max's nurses. And the cell phone triangulation, for that matter.

And "fixing" someone's words to make them say something they didn't is getting pretty desperate., IMO. Is that how the Zahaus plan on "fixing" their evidence, too?

Just a question but why didn't Gore mention these nurses who were witnesses during his 2nd press conference when he admitted that that only confirmation of DS at the hospital was cell phone triangulation?

ALWAYS MOO

 

[LuckyLucy2]

^ You would need to ask him.

I don't think he "admitted" that was the "ONLY" way they checked Dina's story. As I recall it, he said, "We have her on cell phone triiangulation". And I will look for that link. Do you have one for your quote? TIA

But, perhaps he thought the cell phone triagulation was more importlant, or perhaps, under the pressure of a news conference he just did not think to mention it.

 

[justice be served]

JMO but I am getting the sense that desperation is setting in for the defendants and their eponymous followers. Good luck in trying to defend this case.

 

[screecher]

JMO but I am getting the sense that desperation is setting in for the defendants and their eponymous followers. Good luck in trying to defend this case.

Yes [emoji38]

 

[justice be served]

Just a question but why didn't Gore mention these nurses who were witnesses during his 2nd press conference when he admitted that that only confirmation of DS at the hospital was cell phone triangulation?

ALWAYS MOO

What an insightful question! My guess is that Sheriff Gore wasn't briefed on that specific topic and that he really wasn't prepared for rationally thinking individuals to challenge his almighty stance on the suicide meme.

 

[justice be served]

^ You would need to ask him.

I don't think he "admitted" that was the "ONLY" way they checked Dina's story. As I recall it, he said, "We have her on cell phone triiangulation". And I will look for that link. Do you have one for your quote? TIA

But, perhaps he thought the cell phone triagulation was more importlant, or perhaps, under the pressure of a news conference he just did not think to mention it.

'You would really need to ask him?' - okay, well let's just hope that he is asked in a deposition.

And I would love to hear him defend a triangulation as 'more important' than eye witnesses. GMAB please.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

JMO but I am getting the sense that desperation is setting in for the defendants and their eponymous followers. Good luck in trying to defend this case.

I sincerely doubt the Defendants need luck since they have the truth on their side.

 

[bourne]

Ah yes, SDSO's Lt. Larry Nesbit.

I fixed his quote for him @ http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...ego-police-willing-reopen-case-ruled-suicide/

“We concluded beyond a shadow of the doubt from cell phone triangulation, that neither Jonah or Dina's phone were at the house that night. Jonah and Dina's phone were at the hospital at Max’s bedside, or at the Ronald McDonald house, across the street from the hospital, or somewhere within the range of our cell phone triangulation efforts,” Lt. Nesbit told RadarOnline.com.



Oh, and regarding cell phone triangulation ...



https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...ven-close-to-accurate-everyone-falls-it.shtml

Your technical edits are superb, accurate, and precise! Had there been more truthfulness and correct information given, the press conference Gore had would not be such a sham.

 

[Imp]

Just a question but why didn't Gore mention these nurses who were witnesses during his 2nd press conference when he admitted that that only confirmation of DS at the hospital was cell phone triangulation?

ALWAYS MOO

No kidding! You'd think if Gore had nurse eye witnesses to Dina's bedside vigil, they'd be the first thing he'd mention, right? Along with an explanation for why Dina wasn't picked up by any of the Rady surveillance cameras during the period in question during which the nurses witnessed her at Max's bedside. Maybe she's a ghost?

Instead, Gore goes with cell phone triangulation, which quite frankly absolutely reeks of desperation to make the "facts" and "evidence" fit the quickie suicide ruling. In my experience, cell phone triangulation is just one of several tools used by LE when someone's story isn't adding up. It provides additional information, but never absolute confirmation of anything. The general location of Dina's cell phone is hardly confirmation of her whereabouts, especially when she claims to have been in a location with multiple security cameras and hospital personnel. It's just absurd!

 

[justice be served]

No kidding! You'd think if Gore had nurse eye witnesses to Dina's bedside vigil, they'd be the first thing he'd mention, right? Along with an explanation for why Dina wasn't picked up by any of the Rady surveillance cameras during the period in question during which the nurses witnessed her at Max's bedside. Maybe she's a ghost?

Instead, Gore goes with cell phone triangulation, which quite frankly absolutely reeks of desperation to make the "facts" and "evidence" fit the quickie suicide ruling. In my experience, cell phone triangulation is just one of several tools used by LE when someone's story isn't adding up. It provides additional information, but never absolute confirmation of anything. The general location of Dina's cell phone is hardly confirmation of her whereabouts, especially when she claims to have been in a location with multiple security cameras and hospital personnel. It's just absurd!

Yes, Imp, the absurdity of it is overwhelming. But let's just keep debating the lame LE stance! Sorry, but I am so tired that this idiocy has taken so long and our justice system moves so slowly if at all.

 

[screecher]

Dina Romano, little Max's 'mother' wasn't with Max at Rady.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

^ Yes, she was and the Zahaus are going to look like the money hungry liars they are when this all comes out at trial. They are going to look mighty deplorable when Max's nurses talk about how Dina was with him there in his ICU room all night long. That is something I'm really looking forward to seeing.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Dina Romano, little Max's 'mother' wasn't with Max at Rady.

Do you have a link that proves that? I have seven that say otherwise.

 

[justice be served]

^ Yes, she was and the Zahaus are going to look like the money hungry liars they are when this all comes out at trial. They are going to look mighty deplorable when Max's nurses talk about how Dina was with him there in his ICU room all night long. That is something I'm really looking forward to seeing.

We are all looking forward to the nurses testifying to Dina being in the hospital room all night long. Why is it that it needs to go to trial to uncover this information?

 

[justice be served]

Do you have a link that proves that? I have seven that say otherwise.

Produce the witnesses and not 7 quotes that are garbage in-garbage out. Some 2-3 years later after this lawsuit was filed we are still waiting for a breathing body to come forward with ironclad evidence that Dina did not leave the hospital that night. What's so hard about that? Because it obviously is impossible to do. And the other two defendants admit they were there. Having to go to trial speaks for itself in lieu of having a witness step forward.

 

[*Lash*]

I have a feeling Lt. Larry Nesbit knows what he is talking about, and will be a witness for the Defense. We know there are numerous witnesses that know Dina did not leave Max's room that night. The jury is definately going to believe Max's nurses. And the cell phone triangulation, for that matter.

And "fixing" someone's words to make them say something they didn't is getting pretty desperate., IMO. Is that how the Zahaus plan on "fixing" their evidence, too?

BBM-

Who is "we"?

This is not known, just assumed by some. I've never seen one name, let alone numerous witnesses saying Dina did not leave Max's room. Not one nurse, doctor, hospital staff, etc...Just Dina's cell phone triangulation. No, we do not know there are numerous witnesses.

 

[*Lash*]

Yes, Imp, the absurdity of it is overwhelming. But let's just keep debating the lame LE stance! Sorry, but I am so tired that this idiocy has taken so long and our justice system moves so slowly if at all.

No kidding! Such an active thread for a WDS with really no activity at the moment.

 

[K_Z]

Two new entries on San Diego ROA for the case, #339 (9 pages), and 340 (2 pages), both filed by attorneys for defendant Dina Shacknai:

340 04/06/2016 Notice of Jury Fee Deposit filed by Shacknai, Dina. Shacknai, Dina (Defendant) Notice of Payment of Advance Jury Fee by Dina Shacknai

339 04/06/2016 Answer filed by Shacknai, Dina. Shacknai, Dina (Defendant) Answer by Defendant, Dina Shacknai to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml
Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...ina_Shacknai_to_Plaintiffs__1460126455541.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...vance_Jury_Fee_by_Dina_Shac_1460126456947.pdf

*Will forward to Bessie for posting in docs thread. Links above good for a few hours.

This is interesting. Dina wants money from the other defendants in the event she is found responsible, and they settle out their part in the case. Kind of like "we all hang together".

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Comparative Indemnity)

6. As and for a separate, distinct affinnative defense to the Complaint, Defendant is
infonned and believes and on that basis alleges that, should she be held liable to Plaintiffs, which
Defendant does not admit but merely states for purposes of asserting this affirmative defense, then
Defendant is entitled to comparative indemnity from all other entities and individuals who are
responsible for Plaintiffs' alleged injuries, losses, and damages, if any exist.

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Apportionment)

7. As and for a separate, distinct affirmative defense to the Complaint, Defendant is
informed and believes and on that basis alleges that she is not legally responsible in any way for
the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiffs in the Complaint; however, if Defendant is found to
be legally responsible, which Defendant does not admit but merely states for purposes of asserting
this affirmative defense, then Defendant alleges that her legal responsibility, if any, is not the sole
and proximate cause of the damages alleged, and that the damages awarded to Plaintiffs, if any, are
to be apportioned according to the respective fault and the legal responsibility of all entities and
individuals, including their agents, who contributed to and/ or caused the alleged injuries and
damages according to proof presented at the time of trial.

A brief discussion of comparative indemnity:

http://www.neildymott.com/liability...derations-when-contemplating-settlement-trial

Comparative indemnity is premised on joint liability for the same wrong. In California, a strictly liable defendant may pursue a claim for comparative indemnity against another strictly liable party, or a party whose liability is based on negligence. However, under current California law, a tort defendant who settles in good faith with the plaintiff is generally relieved of all further liability in the case, whether to the plaintiff or other non-settling defendants. This foreclosure of liability is based on the public policy seeking to encourage settlement before trial, and is implemented under California Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6, which authorizes a hearing on the issue of good faith settlements. Under section 877.6, only settlements in good faith preclude claims for indemnity from the non-settling defendants. Thus, a settling defendant who utilizes the protections authorized by a good faith hearing will be insulated from claims for indemnity from subsequent claims from other, non-settling defendants.