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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
KZ’s interpretation of the 17 Affirmative Defenses filed by Dina Shacknai (#339 above). IANAL, so this is just for entertainment purposes only! (Bonus points if you can hum the Cell Block Tango while reading these...."She had it coming...")

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State A Cause of Action)
“I don’t like the allegations against me. I am not happy.”

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statutes of Limitation)
“I think too much time has gone by, even though the court has found differently. She's been dead a long time. Let's just all forget about it. It doesn't matter anymore.”

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE = (Liability of Third Party Tortfeasors)
“Somebody else killed her. I’m thinking about who I can blame. Jonah-- ah yes! He has a lot of money! Maybe I'll blame HIM! Ha! He's not even a party to this lawsuit.”

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Liability of Decedent)
“I didn’t do it. I think she killed herself.”

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Comparative Indemnity)
“If these other 2 defendants settle, or throw me under the bus, I should be allowed to sue them for whatever I have to pay. Those other 2 aren’t getting off the hook by settling without me.”

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Apportionment)
“I didn’t do it, but if I’d done it, how could you tell me that I was wrong? Don’t make me pay more than my share when you find me responsible for her killing.”

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Passive And Secondary Conduct)
“Maybe I was there, but I didn’t do it. Somebody else did it. But she had it coming.”

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Superseding Acts)
“Somebody else did it.”

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Causation)
“I didn’t do it. And even if I did, you can't prove it!”

TENTH AFFIRMATNE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate Damages)
“The plaintiffs and decedent failed to prevent us, the defendants, from killing her. It’s her own fault she’s dead.”

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Damages Set-Off)
“All this is the plaintiff’s fault, somehow they are benefitting from this lawsuit financially, and I should be able to get money out of them because this is costing me money! NO FAIR! She had it coming!”

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Civil Code § 1431.2)
“Even if you find against all 3 of us, I shouldn’t have to pay joint damages. I’m a special snowflake, and should be severed from all that.”

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches)
“You’ve been suing me for a long time, and I’m tired of all of this.”

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands)
“It’s Rebecca’s fault she’s dead.”

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Negligence Per Se)
“I think the plaintiffs and decedent possibly/ maybe violated some kind of ordinances at some point in time, and I’m looking into that as a defense against me killing Rebecca. Maybe they had a parking ticket, or something. Maybe a horn honking violation from many years ago. Or that shoplifting charge. Or their immigration papers aren’t valid. Or the dead father worked for the Nazis. Or… I just don’t like them at all, and want them to quit suing me, and I’ll just make something up that sounds good. Maybe that ex-husband Neil knows something embarrassing. I’ll harass him till I get something out of him that I can use. Or Jonah--yes.... he has money, and he probably did something I can dig up and blame on him. I'm sure he violated some city historic ordinance that caused me to kill Rebecca. My mean old ex-husband shouldn't get off scot free, when I'm getting SUED!”

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Standing)
“I don’t think the plaintiffs should be able to sue ME.”

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Unknown Defenses)
“I’m busy thinking up other ways to get out of these allegations.”
 
K_Z said:
KZ’s interpretation of the 17 Affirmative Defenses filed by Dina Shacknai (#339 above). IANAL, so this is just for entertainment purposes only! (Bonus points if you can hum the Cell Block Tango while reading these...."She had it coming...")

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State A Cause of Action)
“I don’t like the allegations against me. I am not happy.”

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statutes of Limitation)
“I think too much time has gone by, even though the court has found differently. She's been dead a long time. Let's just all forget about it. It doesn't matter anymore.”

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE = (Liability of Third Party Tortfeasors)
“Somebody else killed her. I’m thinking about who I can blame. Jonah-- ah yes! He has a lot of money! Maybe I'll blame HIM! Ha! He's not even a party to this lawsuit.”

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Liability of Decedent)
“I didn’t do it. I think she killed herself.”

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Comparative Indemnity)
“If these other 2 defendants settle, or throw me under the bus, I should be allowed to sue them for whatever I have to pay. Those other 2 aren’t getting off the hook by settling without me.”

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Apportionment)
“I didn’t do it, but if I’d done it, how could you tell me that I was wrong? Don’t make me pay more than my share when you find me responsible for her killing.”

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Passive And Secondary Conduct)
“Maybe I was there, but I didn’t do it. Somebody else did it. But she had it coming.”

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Superseding Acts)
“Somebody else did it.”

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Causation)
“I didn’t do it. And even if I did, you can't prove it!”

TENTH AFFIRMATNE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate Damages)
“The plaintiffs and decedent failed to prevent us, the defendants, from killing her. It’s her own fault she’s dead.”

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Damages Set-Off)
“All this is the plaintiff’s fault, somehow they are benefitting from this lawsuit financially, and I should be able to get money out of them because this is costing me money! NO FAIR! She had it coming!”

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Civil Code § 1431.2)
“Even if you find against all 3 of us, I shouldn’t have to pay joint damages. I’m a special snowflake, and should be severed from all that.”

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches)
“You’ve been suing me for a long time, and I’m tired of all of this.”

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands)
“It’s Rebecca’s fault she’s dead.”

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Negligence Per Se)
“I think the plaintiffs and decedent possibly/ maybe violated some kind of ordinances at some point in time, and I’m looking into that as a defense against me killing Rebecca. Maybe they had a parking ticket, or something. Maybe a horn honking violation from many years ago. Or that shoplifting charge. Or their immigration papers aren’t valid. Or the dead father worked for the Nazis. Or… I just don’t like them at all, and want them to quit suing me, and I’ll just make something up that sounds good. Maybe that ex-husband Neil knows something embarrassing. I’ll harass him till I get something out of him that I can use. Or Jonah--yes.... he has money, and he probably did something I can dig up and blame on him. I'm sure he violated some city historic ordinance that caused me to kill Rebecca. My mean old ex-husband shouldn't get off scot free, when I'm getting SUED!”

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Standing)
“I don’t think the plaintiffs should be able to sue ME.”

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Unknown Defenses)
“I’m busy thinking up other ways to get out of these allegations.”
Click to expand...

K_Z, you are really something! I believe your "interpretation" is right on! LOL and half-joking.
 
Based on Dina's latest pleadings which speak to a distinct possibility of vulnerability in being held accountable for Rebecca's death, the tide has turned IMO and her lawyers are starting to cover all angles. My read is Dina's insurance company is pushing for a settlement as going to trial looks to be unwise on their part. After all, Dina hasn't been able to produce any defensible position so far - I can't imagine that at this late date a nurse is going to step up suddenly. Just my opinion based on the tone and tenor of these latest filings.
 
Law Enforcement talked to Dina's witnesses and know their names. Just because she didn't go on Tricia's True Crime Radio to tell the posters in this forum the names of the witnesses, does not mean she does not have them.


*********************************************************

1. Rebecca Zahau's naked body was found hanging from the balcony of her multi-
millionaire boyfriend, Jonah Shacknai's Coronado mansion on July 13. Just two
days earlier, Jonah's son Max, was found at the base of the stairs, unconscious.
Max later died from his injuries. Jonah's brother Adam, found Rebecca's body
hanging from the balcony and cut her down. Adam was the only person home
when Rebecca died.

"We concluded beyond a shadow of the doubt, that neither Jonah or Dina (Max's
mother, and Jonah's ex-wife) were at the house that night. Jonah and Dina were
at the hospital at Max's bedside, or at the Ronald McDonald house, across the
street from the hospital," Lt. Nesbit told RadarOnline.com.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...br />police-willing-reopen-case-ruled-suicide

2. “There is irrefutable evidence including multiple eyewitnesses that Dina Shacknai was at the hospital with Max when this witness purported to see her at the Spreckles mansion,” a source familiar with the investigation told RadarOnline.com. Max was on life support at this time, and she hardly left his side."

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/20...ca-zahau-died/

3. "The sheriff has determined that cell phone evidence and video cameras at the hospital
confirmed that Jonah Shacknai was at the hospital standing vigil for Max the entire time when
Rebecca Zahau’s suicide occurred. Video cameras at the hospital also showed Dina was there
during that time period."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...sitter*rebecca*za hau*s*death*no*murder.html

4. In the audio interview of Nina Romano, she states that Dina had nurses as witnesses and
was also on surveillance footage.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/15145788/sister?clienttype=printable

5. In Ann Rule’s "Two Strange Deaths in Coronado" (written with the input of Anne Bremner and
Mary a Zahau), she states on page 214:

"The bicyclist must have been mistaken. Numerous witnesses place Dina in the hospital at
Max's bedside throughout Tuesday night.

"She (Ann Rule) did not travel to Coronado or to Arizona, where Shacknai lives, to conduct her
research, Rule said, but talked extensively with Zahau's loved ones, who believe she was killed.
She also has a long*time friendship with Seattle attorney Anne Bremner, who is representing."

http://patch.com/california/coronad...n*rule*turns*her*attention*to*spraecafa 7a51

6. From A Boy Interrupted, Phoenix Magazine, Aug. 2012

"Dina says she got the news at the hospital. Jonah was sobbing. he said, Rebecca's killed
herself," Dina recalls. As Dina was leaving the hospital, a Coronado police detective paid her a
visit. "Are you aware of what happened?" he asked.

The detective would have confirmed at that time with the nurses that Dina had been there all
night, IMO.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...Spreckels*M ansion*2011*Death*303178091.html

7. However, regardless of our lack of complete information thus far, I could not comment on Mr. Greer's statement as I was with my son Maxie at Rady’s Hospital in Pediatric Intensive Care, praying for his recovery, and watching him fight for his life, trying to breathe on his own while on a ventilator.”

She adds:

“It would be impossible for me to hear any disturbances at Jonah's home as I was with our son
alone at a hospital miles away. As well, my sister, Nina was with her son, and our close friend,
none of whom heard a disturbance as they were five blocks from Jonah's house on Ocean Blvd.
My sister and I would again publicly like to extend, for the fourth time since 2012, our offer to
share all of the information we have with the Zahau’s and ask that they reciprocate. Perhaps an
exchange of accurate data could help both families find answers, healing, and resolution.”

Source:
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...nsion*2011*Death*303178091.html#ixzz3fL53Fpju


*********************************************************

Please post any links you have that refute this information. Thanks!
 
Nope. Don't buy it. This wouldn't have come this far if she had witnesses. Nope. Nope. Nope. Sounds again like whistling in the dark.

No offense to poster #Inthedark ��
 
"Please post any links you have that refute this information. Thanks!"

At this time this is still all hearsay, There are no links to refute hearsay. No names, quotes, etc...from these particular people who allegedly witnessed Dina sitting vigil all night.​
 
Your interpretation of Dina's Answer to the SAC is vey cute, KZ! Really witty, but it doesn’t really show what the Defense’s really mean, so here is….

LuckyLucy2’s interpretation of the 17 Affirmative Defenses filed by Dina Shacknai (#339 above)! (Please play the theme to The Housemaid while reading.)


GENERAL DENIAL”I had nothing to do with Rebecca’s death, and you did not miss out on any money because she killed herself and I don't owe you anything for that.”

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State A Cause of Action)
”The Zahaus’ stupid made-up story doesn’t even make any sense”

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statutes of Limitation)
”It is ridiculous this has gone on this long.”

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE = (Liability of Third Party Tortfeasors)
“Rebecca Zahau caused her own death”

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Liability of Decedent)
“I didn’t do it. Rebecca Zahau killed herself and the Plantiffs know that.”

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Comparative Indemnity)
“The Zahaus are not due any money because Rebecca Zahau was the only person responsible for her death.”

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Apportionment)
“The way this ridiculous SAC is constructed, the Plaintiffs must find us all responsible. But that won’t happen because none of us were involved.”

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Passive And Secondary Conduct)
“The way this ridiculous SAC is constructed, the Plaintiffs must make us all pay. But that won’t happen because none of us were involved.”

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Superseding Acts)
“You can’t change the fact that Rebecca Zahau committed suicide.”

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Causation)
“The Zahaus are not due money from me because Rebecca Zahau committed suicide”

TENTH AFFIRMATNE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate Damages)
“The Zahaus have made so much money off of their numerous donation campaigns and from the sale of Ann Rule’s book that they are owed nothing. That brought in more money than Rebecca would ever have made on her own.”

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Damages Set-Off)
“If anyone is at fault it is Mary Zahau. Why didn’t she get on a plane and come be with Rebecca Zahau? She should have known she might kill herself that night. Those damages should be applied to the Plantiffs and used to offset my costs of fighting a sham lawsuit,”

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Civil Code § 1431.2)
“ The People of the State of California find and declare as follows:
a) The legal doctrine of joint and several liability, also known
as "the deep pocket rule", has resulted in a system of inequity and
injustice that has threatened financial bankruptcy of local
governments, other public agencies, private individuals and
businesses and has resulted in higher prices for goods and services
to the public and in higher taxes to the taxpayers.
b) Some governmental and private defendants are perceived to have
substantial financial resources or insurance coverage and have thus
been included in lawsuits even though there was little or no basis
for finding them at fault. Under joint and several liability, if they
are found to share even a fraction of the fault, they often are held
financially liable for all the damage. The People--taxpayers and
consumers alike--ultimately pay for these lawsuits in the form of
higher taxes, higher prices and higher insurance premiums.
c) Local governments have been forced to curtail some essential
police, fire and other protections because of the soaring costs of
lawsuits and insurance premiums.
Therefore, the People of the State of California declare that to
remedy these inequities, defendants in tort actions shall be held
financially liable in closer proportion to their degree of fault. To
treat them differently is unfair and inequitable.Each defendant shall be
liable only forthe amount of non-economic damages allocated to that
defendant in direct proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault, and
a separate judgment shall be rendered against that defendant for that
amount.”


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=civ&group=01001-02000&file=1430-1432


THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches)
“The person really responsible for Rebecca’s death committed suicide and the Zahaus should have sued her.”

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands)
“It’s Rebecca’s fault she committed suicide.”

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Negligence Per Se)
"The Zahaus have lied in their SAC, have taken evidence out of the country, and have tried to frame innocent people, therefore should not receive anything. "

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Standing)
“Rebecca Zahau had no money of her own, and therefore the Zahaus are not due damages.”

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Unknown Defenses)
“I will probably have more to add to this because the Zahaus are such money hungry liars.”
 
*Lash* said:
"Please post any links you have that refute this information. Thanks!"

At this time this is still all hearsay, There are no links to refute hearsay. No names, quotes, etc...from these particular people who allegedly witnessed Dina sitting vigil all night.​
Click to expand...

Something coming straight from the mouth of Lt. Nesbit is not "hearsay". He worked on the case and would know.
 
K_Z said:
KZ’s interpretation of the 17 Affirmative Defenses filed by Dina Shacknai (#339 above). IANAL, so this is just for entertainment purposes only! (Bonus points if you can hum the Cell Block Tango while reading these...."She had it coming...")

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State A Cause of Action)
“I don’t like the allegations against me. I am not happy.”

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statutes of Limitation)
“I think too much time has gone by, even though the court has found differently. She's been dead a long time. Let's just all forget about it. It doesn't matter anymore.”

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE = (Liability of Third Party Tortfeasors)
“Somebody else killed her. I’m thinking about who I can blame. Jonah-- ah yes! He has a lot of money! Maybe I'll blame HIM! Ha! He's not even a party to this lawsuit.”

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Liability of Decedent)
“I didn’t do it. I think she killed herself.”

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Comparative Indemnity)
“If these other 2 defendants settle, or throw me under the bus, I should be allowed to sue them for whatever I have to pay. Those other 2 aren’t getting off the hook by settling without me.”

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Apportionment)
“I didn’t do it, but if I’d done it, how could you tell me that I was wrong? Don’t make me pay more than my share when you find me responsible for her killing.”

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Passive And Secondary Conduct)
“Maybe I was there, but I didn’t do it. Somebody else did it. But she had it coming.”

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Superseding Acts)
“Somebody else did it.”

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Causation)
“I didn’t do it. And even if I did, you can't prove it!”

TENTH AFFIRMATNE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate Damages)
“The plaintiffs and decedent failed to prevent us, the defendants, from killing her. It’s her own fault she’s dead.”

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Damages Set-Off)
“All this is the plaintiff’s fault, somehow they are benefitting from this lawsuit financially, and I should be able to get money out of them because this is costing me money! NO FAIR! She had it coming!”

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Civil Code § 1431.2)
“Even if you find against all 3 of us, I shouldn’t have to pay joint damages. I’m a special snowflake, and should be severed from all that.”

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches)
“You’ve been suing me for a long time, and I’m tired of all of this.”

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands)
“It’s Rebecca’s fault she’s dead.”

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Negligence Per Se)
“I think the plaintiffs and decedent possibly/ maybe violated some kind of ordinances at some point in time, and I’m looking into that as a defense against me killing Rebecca. Maybe they had a parking ticket, or something. Maybe a horn honking violation from many years ago. Or that shoplifting charge. Or their immigration papers aren’t valid. Or the dead father worked for the Nazis. Or… I just don’t like them at all, and want them to quit suing me, and I’ll just make something up that sounds good. Maybe that ex-husband Neil knows something embarrassing. I’ll harass him till I get something out of him that I can use. Or Jonah--yes.... he has money, and he probably did something I can dig up and blame on him. I'm sure he violated some city historic ordinance that caused me to kill Rebecca. My mean old ex-husband shouldn't get off scot free, when I'm getting SUED!”

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Standing)
“I don’t think the plaintiffs should be able to sue ME.”

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Unknown Defenses)
“I’m busy thinking up other ways to get out of these allegations.”
Click to expand...

KZ, this is totally awesome! What a great fun elucidative read! I believe you are right on the money in these legal defenses :)
 
Who again is the money grubbing leach???

Bwabaahaha. Wanting her twin's money??? Hilarious!!!

Guess Dina is the real extorted here. Well, who would have guessed that?

Couldn't get anything from JS, now going after her own sister.

WOW.
 
K_Z: The 15th is my favorite!

"horn honking violation" :lol:
 
jury are gonna be like what the hell? A true nutter.
 
LuckyLucy2 said:
Something coming straight from the mouth of Lt. Nesbit is not "hearsay". He worked on the case and would know.
Click to expand...

Lt. Larry stated that cell phone triangulation proved "beyond a shadow of the doubt" that Dina was not at the mansion at any point on the night RZ died. If Lt. Larry actually believes that, he needs to go back to suspicious death investigator school.

As it stands, Lt. Larry's assertion has zero credibility. All the plaintiffs need to do to refute Nesbit is pop an expert on the stand to explain what cell phone triangulation can and cannot prove, and Lt. Larry will look like the fool and tool he apparently is for making that statement.
 
K_Z said:
BBM for focus.


For a very long time, I have thought that there IS someone with connections to the SDSO who has been moving about on various forums and media comment sites posting aggressively on this case, with the goal of swaying/ bullying public perception toward the suicide finding, and by doing so, intentionally sheltering/ assisting at least one of the named defendants. Maybe not with the "blessing" of SDSO, but someone who seeks attention because of what they "know". A busybody, a meddler. ...the parties to the lawsuit know SOOO much more. We do not have all the evidence. They have the entire investigation, plus all the discovery. And it's still building for another year until trial.
Click to expand...

So very well said K_Z I, for one, totally agree with your assessment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 152 more.
Total: 407 (members: 153, guests: 254)

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
254
Total visitors
407
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,546
Messages
18,241,078
Members
234,397
Latest member
Napqueenxoxo
Back
Top