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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
<snipped to address>

In terms of what other information the agencies listed might have that don't relate to her alibi, I wonder if these departments attempted to gather information about RZ's life before she moved to the United States and Dina wants to see if there was anything found that could help her defense. It also would be completely reasonable for a thorough psychological autopsy to be done on RZ during the investigation, and psychological autopsies involve gathering information on the deceased from very far in the past all the way through until death so that's another possibility. Again, this is jmo on some possibilities that in my opinion are reasonable for Dina's defense team to explore.

To the best of my knowledge, and I know someone with more knowledge will correct me if I'm wrong, there was no investigation into RZ's life or a psych autopsy done, by any agency, at any time. Dina has at some point tried to dig up dirt on RZ and her family, but I'm not counting her efforts.

There was no particular interest in why RZ might have killed herself, or whether another manner of death was a possibility. In fact, there was no particular interest in protecting, removing, or even covering her dead body as it lay in the courtyard exposed to the elements all day. RZ was of no particular interest to anyone that day. Everyone involved, from LE to her boyfriend, to the defendants in the WDS was occupied doing other things while totally disrespecting Rebecca in life, and in death.

SDSO "investigated" her death, and as far as I can tell, they took a 2-pronged approach. Prong #1 was to busy themselves asking questions of the main players (JS, AS, DS, NR) and taking their answers at face value, without so much as a follow-up question in most instances. Prong #2 was to set up a situation in which a model would re-enact the improbable-to-impossible "suicide" and film a video of it. They also did some miscellaneous odds and ends, apparently primarily to give the appearance they were actually interested in how Rebecca died. They took some stuff out of the mansion as "evidence," they gathered some cell phone records, they talked to a few incidental witnesses, etc. All of that went nowhere, of course, because the ultimate goal was to get the video done, show it during a press conference, and close the case as a suicide, IMO.
 
Yep. Obvious planning, cover up.
C'mon, what agency with a miniscule of professionalism would do what they did with Rebecca, beginning in the first 20 minutes? An agency who had an agenda.

Hmm, wondering if it had been Max laying on that ground, bound, bruised and gagged...would he not been tented, would he have had to wait for 13+ plus hours for the ME to appear?

I think not.
 
Respectfully snipped for focus.

Hi Mollyandme. I have a long-winded comment about your post involving Max’s medical records.

It is not necessary for either side in this WDS to go to the FBI/ DOJ/ etc to obtain Max's medical records.

As I’ve posted in the past, Dina (and Jonah) as Max’s parents have *full access* to copies of Max’s medical records at any time they wish to ask for them. Each can ask—there is not even any need for both to consent—they each had joint custody at the time of death. They have had this right to access since Max’s death in 2011—but they have to formally request records. Typically, the electronic medical record is not released to patients/ parents/ guardians in electronic format (like on a flash drive), but is released as a certified hard copy printed on paper. Copies include all labs requests and reports, imaging reports (but not the images unless requested separately, which will be released on a CR-ROM or DVD), all admin documents such as insurance records, “cover sheet” info, discharge summaries, consults, doc notes, nursing notes and charts, etc. Hospitals will sometimes give one copy for free to a parent/ patient, or guardian (or will send records to another provider if you’re seeking a consult at another facility), but in recent years, they charge 5-10 cents a page, or a flat fee for just a “hard copy”. It takes about 5 days to a week at bigger institutions, but sometimes you can actually physically go to the medical records office, and wait while they make the copies.

There is a great deal of information in Max’s medical records that is pertinent. Certainly Max’s entire records, including the EMS paramedic report (which Dina clearly DID make the effort to obtain, because she has posted it for public view on one of her websites), would have been very helpful in Dina’s WDS she filed against Jonah. That lawsuit was recently dismissed with prejudice against Dina.

It would be hard, IMO, to make a case that Max’s “entire” medical record would be relevant and admissible in the Zahau WDS. However, it would be “easy” to make the case that *portions* of the record that may provide Dina with an alibi, OR demonstrate that there is no documentation that validates her presence there the night of Rebecca’s death, should be admissible.

The “actual” nurses who cared for Max may no longer work for Rady, may have moved to Timbuktu, may have retired, etc. It is not necessary for them to be subpoenaed and deposed, or even for them to validate what is already in the official medical record documentation. This is not a murder case; it is a civil lawsuit. In fact, the documentation in the record, after such a long interval of nearly 5 years (nearly 6 years by the time of trial), would be considered *more* reliable, than asking a nurse if he or she remembers with absolute certainty that this parent was present on THIS specific night in question, for the ENTIRE night without leaving the room/ bedside. Often there is a place in a pediatric chart to record the presence or absence of a parent, or this can be mentioned in narrative notes, such as “mother ABS” (mother at the bedside). Nurses are not at the bedside, even in the ICU, continuously, and one day blurs into another when thinking about whether a given parent was at the bedside at a particular point in time.

Remember, even with a prominent family, these staffers care for hundreds of patients over the years. A given nurse, for example, might be able to testify that he or she remembered the patient’s mother being at the bedside intermittently, or even for long periods, but would be almost impossible to remember that at precisely 8 pm on a given day the mother came, sat by the bed, and never left for the next 9-10 hours. That’s when a nurse would rely on the notes they documented. And if they tried to state they absolutely “remembered” a parent being in the ICU at the bedside continuously, any good attorney would be able to ask enough simple follow up questions to make a case that the nurse may not have a precisely accurate memory of who was in and out of the patient’s room 5-6 years ago, unless it was documented in the record at the time.

So, the bigger question about Max’s records, as I’ve been posting for 3-4 years now, is WHICH SIDE is going to request his records—plaintiff, or defendant? Dina can get the records on her own without any kind of subpoena, BUT—she doesn’t have to “volunteer” anything that is, or is not in the records that is not favorable to her and her case. If the Zahau’s subpoena portions of Max’s records to look at what was documented about Dina’s presence or absence that night, they must share that in discovery EVEN if it “clears” Dina and provides an alibi. My long winded point is that Dina can get the records and submit them as an alibi any time she wants. The Zahau’s would have to go thru the subpoena process.

Dina clearly has “some” of Max’s records, the EMS run report in particular. She would be absolutely crazy to have not requested Max’s full record up till now, since she filed a WDS against Jonah. So, IMO, those records have already been gone thru with a fine toothed comb for ANYthing favorable to Dina’s case/ alibi, and I’m guessing there is nothing documented that puts her there, or not there during the hours in question.

There is really no need to track down individual nurses with deposition subpoenas, because if they didn’t want to be deposed in a civil case, their attorneys (via their insurance company) would just file motions that the documentation is their statement, and it’s very likely the courts would approve. This is not a criminal case, and the courts won’t just jerk around tangential 3rd parties just because one side or the other wants to depose them, when there is an available record, and the nurses are not being sued for negligence. The insurance company (attorneys) for the nurses has absolutely NO vested interest in this case.

The nurses record is the record, and will stand on its own, UNLESS "someone" can persuade these nurses to volunteer to testify or be deposed, and pay all their costs, time off work, travel costs, etc.

IMO, that's not gonna happen.

Thanks, those are some great points. To be honest, the only reason I brought up the possibility with the times on the medical records and which nurse or dr entered it was bc I remember when my kids were each born and after a surgery last year having the nurse scan my hospital bracelet anytime I was given a medication, etc. that is my most recent personal experience as a patient in a hospital to draw from so it was just a thought.

I do wonder if it's possible that the nurses caring for Max during the timeframe Dina says she was at the hospital and therefor could not have been present when RZ died, were questioned by detectives to confirm this and maybe one or more of them did say they saw her intermittently, or "thought" she was there but this was not strong enough so the GPS triangulation was done as well.

I know that when giving information to law enforcement about a patient, HIPAA requires that it be documented. Though Dina was not a patient I still would think even if not required by HIPAA, the hospital would have documented whatever information was given and by whom. I'm not sure where that information would be documented, but if any hospital employee was questioned to corroborate Dina's whereabouts, I'm pretty sure the hospital would have documentation of it, regardless of whether or not the information benefits Dina, the Zahau's case, or is ambiguous.
 
^^^ Dina Romano would be on camera for sure, especially considering Rady is a Childrens Hospital.

No getting around that.
 
... I can't imagine that at this late date a nurse is going to step up suddenly. ..

Well, not an honest one at any rate! At this point, after this much time and attention, I would find any health professional who suddenly stepped forward to vouch for D to be pretty suspect - and I think the jury would to. I'd certainly want to see their recent bank statements for any unexplained large deposits!
 
Mollyandme-- Thank you for your thoughts. K_Z pretty much summed up how I feel, but here is some additional info for your consideration.

Max's Medical Records-

---Dina Shacknai already has her sons medical records. Well before the Zahau WDS was filed in 2013. She supplied them to Dr. Judy Melinek for review. As mentioned, Dina also would have needed them in the WDS she brought against Jonah that has since been dismissed with prejudice.

Snip from Dr. Melinek's list of material used to conduct her case:

9. Pre-Hospital Care Report for Maxfield Shacknai from the Coronado Fire Department dated 07/11/2011 at 10:12 QCS 4192431 Run #: 2011-59527.

10. Sharp Coronado Hospital records for Maxfield Shacknai MR# 00-23-97-92 | from admit date 7/11/2011.

11. Children's Hospital - San Diego Radiology Reports from Maxfield Aaron Shacknai dated 7/11/2011 through 7/16/2011.

23. Rady Hospital Medical Records

http://media.utsandiego.com/news/documents/2012/08/06/Dr.Melinek_Report.txt

Rady's Surveillance Video-

---All 3 named defendants, Adam, Dina and Nina, including the plaintiffs have Rebecca's investigative file. Which would include witnesses interviews and phone records. Other evidence is in storage and can be reviewed by all parties. Dina claimed in the Federal WDS that the Rady's video surveillance was being held by the DOJ, this being the reason she needed Federal Subpoena Power. Zahau attorney Greer proved Dina's claim wrong in his reply in Fed Doc 64. The Coronado Police Department is holding the 27 CD's in evidence, not the DOJ. See attached exhibit.

Snip from Fed Doc 64 -

4. It should also be noted that prior to this action being filed, the San Diego Sheriff's Office and Coronado Police Department exhausted substantial resources investigating this case, including witness interviews, third party subpoenas of phone records and surveillance video, DNA and finger print analysis and an autopsy. Most of this evidence has now been produced to the parties, and we have ben advised by the authorities that the rest is kept in evidence storage and is available to the parties for review and analysis. In light of the extensive discovery received from the Coronado Police Department and the San Diego County Sheriff, and additional discovery completed thus far in the State Court action, I feel it is reasonable that all remaining discovery can be completed in the next six months.

5. In response to Defendant Dina Shacknai's assertion that the Rady's Children's Hospital surveillance video she allegedly needs to exonerate herself is being held by the Department of Justice, I submit as Exhibit B hereto, a true and correct copy of the relevant page from the Coronado Police Department's list of held evidence, produced during the course of State Court discovery, showing that the 27 CDs from the Rady's Children's Hospital surveillance are being held as, "Item 10," and were produced to the Coronado Police Department pursuant to a search warrant issued by the San Diego County Superior Court (rather than a Federal agency), a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

https://www.pacer.gov

Exhibit B-
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    91.1 KB · Views: 13
Thanks, Lash!! How could I forget about Dr. Judy Melinek and her "report"??

Yes, it's abundantly clear that Dina has had Max's medical records in full for years now.

And with all of the dozens upon dozens of motions filed by her attorneys in two different civil wrongful death cases in which she is a defendant, never ONE single time has any of those attorneys even alluded to evidence in the medical record that would provide an alibi. Never once has her attorneys even hinted that the nurses, or any other Rady staff, have, or will provide any kind of evidence that provides Dina with an alibi.

You know what else we don't know, but the parties do? The surveillance video subpoena timeframe goes from one hour BEFORE Max was admitted, to AFTER Rebecca's death. I've said before, and I'll repeat, that it is absolutely true that they have Dina entering and leaving, and moving about the hospital and grounds of Rady. They know which doors she typically used to enter and exit, etc. They have her on video for OTHER times-- just not the very important times related to her movements around the night Rebecca died. That's WHY it's such a big deal that she ISN'T on surveillance when they expected her to be. They also have Jonah, and I'm betting they have Adam and Nina, as well, entering and leaving Rady several times during that subpoena timeframe. And possibly Rebecca, as well, when they met with Jonah and Howard Luber for dinner at the hospital.

That the police resorted to cell triangulation so quickly says to me that even if they interviewed staff while investigating Dina (and I'm pretty sure they would have done that within 24-72 hours after Rebecca's death), whatever they learned from the chart, the cameras, and staff interviews prompted them to do the cell triangulation.

Simply put, IMO it's quite obvious they couldn't conclusively establish Dina anywhere she was *supposed* to be the night Rebecca died. So they looked for Dina's phone. Dina was very, very relevant and important as a potential suspect in the early phases of Rebecca's death/ murder investigation, whether or not they officially "called" her a suspect. Both she and Nina were under heavy suspicion in the early days, by their own admissions in interviews.

And there is a great deal more info that experts will have about the exact details of what was found on Dina's phone, and the details of which towers she pinged, how often, if the phone was ever shut off, etc. That will be important evidence at trial, IMO. And none of that, IMO, is favorable to Dina, or we would have heard about that by now.
 
In regards to the surveillance cameras at the hospital, search warrant 41432 asks for the recordings of all entrances at Rady Children's Hospital from July 11th through Wednesday, July 13th @ 8 am to be seized. They dont have the DVDs from inside the hospital according to the items seized. it's possible Dina wants to review the interior surveillance videos which don't appear to be in evidence, only the recordings of the entrances.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18782&d=1316730239
 
Thanks, those are some great points. To be honest, the only reason I brought up the possibility with the times on the medical records and which nurse or dr entered it was bc I remember when my kids were each born and after a surgery last year having the nurse scan my hospital bracelet anytime I was given a medication, etc. that is my most recent personal experience as a patient in a hospital to draw from so it was just a thought.

I do wonder if it's possible that the nurses caring for Max during the timeframe Dina says she was at the hospital and therefor could not have been present when RZ died, were questioned by detectives to confirm this and maybe one or more of them did say they saw her intermittently, or "thought" she was there but this was not strong enough so the GPS triangulation was done as well.

I know that when giving information to law enforcement about a patient, HIPAA requires that it be documented. Though Dina was not a patient I still would think even if not required by HIPAA, the hospital would have documented whatever information was given and by whom. I'm not sure where that information would be documented, but if any hospital employee was questioned to corroborate Dina's whereabouts, I'm pretty sure the hospital would have documentation of it, regardless of whether or not the information benefits Dina, the Zahau's case, or is ambiguous.

BBM for focus. I'm not sure I agree that LE formally asking staff members what they saw or remember about a *visitor* in the building or unit, has anything to do with HIPAA. This is more of an employer/ employee issue, than a patient issue. This is not an unusual occurrence. It happens all the time in ICU's and ER's because those areas typically have some patients who are victims of crimes, and police are concerned about who comes to see the patient. Sometimes in urban hospitals, rival gang members try to show up in ER's and ICU's to see the evidence of their "work", or try to finish them off. Or there are people subject to restraining orders who show up to see a patient. Estranged parents with custody issues, etc.

I think that the staff could definitely be interviewed as to that visitor issue by law enforcement investigators without that being a HIPAA violation at all. (Or the employee asked to write a statement about what they observed about a visitor.) Certainly that would be run up the chain of command in the facility, as well as consulting the facility attorneys.

It would be inappropriate, for example, for an employee to document in a patient chart that police were interviewing staff and investigating a visitor. Even in cases of child abuse by a parent, that is a sticky situation. Documentation on incident reports, or other internal reporting, is far different than the observations that a nurse or other caregiver documents in a patient chart.

At the most likely time that I believe some employees *could have* been interviewed, or had statements written, it would have been within days of Rebecca's death, not weeks or months later. At that point it was an active death/ criminal investigation. The hospital would have been willing to cooperate with that, IMO, since it involved questions about a visitor/s in their building (who happened to be the parent of a patient, aunt, father, etc). This is not an unusual situation. There is no medical negligence alleged, so it's just cooperating with LE as to what an employee observed (or not) about a visitor.

I think it's extremely likely that a few staff were interviewed within hours to days of Rebecca's death as to the visitors they observed on their unit and waiting areas, etc.
 
In regards to the surveillance cameras at the hospital, search warrant 41432 asks for the recordings of all entrances at Rady Children's Hospital from July 11th through Wednesday, July 13th @ 8 am to be seized. They dont have the DVDs from inside the hospital according to the items seized. it's possible Dina wants to review the interior surveillance videos which don't appear to be in evidence, only the recordings of the entrances.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18782&d=1316730239

It's an interesting thought-- one I've entertained from time to time.

Do you think the FBI/ DOJ actually has these "interior" surveillance videos, which *could* alibi Dina, but for some reason the FBI/ DOJ won't respond to official requests to share them? Why wouldn't the attorneys come right out and say that in their motions?

Why in the world would the FBI or DOJ have these videos? Have you seen a subpoena for them? Why would FBI/ DOJ refuse to cooperate? This case is really "nothing" to them. They would be more motivated to cooperate and get it off their plate, IMO, so they can get back to doing more important things.

I personally don't think any interior Rady surveillance was preserved. I don't think it exists any more, though it did at one time. Another area where investigators potentially dropped the ball.
 
Dina was interviewed by two special agents of the DOJ (aka FBI) on July 13th, 2011. IMO, they would have also spoken with nurses at Radys. From the investigative report:

image.jpg
 
^^^
What was then triangulation about?
Why did they need to point out where here phone was, since they knew where she was?
Or am I getting something wrong?

:moo:
 
Dina was interviewed by two special agents of the DOJ (aka FBI) on July 13th, 2011. IMO, they would have also spoken with nurses at Radys. From the investigative report:

View attachment 91812

Ah yes, the FBI - thanks for the reminder. FBI, the former employer of Sheriff Gore. Let me guess who brought them in - IMO that would be cronies of the family of Max.

Google Sheriff Gore and you'll come up with the Ruby Ridge case (for which he took the Fifth at trial) and the 9/11 pilots who trained in San Diego. The latest on the San Diego fiasco is that the FBI (under Gore) was recruiting these pilots to be FBI insiders - all of you should read about the missing 28 pages from the final 9/11 Special Report.

Ya, Gore is a doozie. So glad you brought that up. And reportedly Jonah's buddy by rumor.
 
^^^
What was then triangulation about?
Why did they need to point out where here phone was, since they knew where she was?
Or am I getting something wrong?

:moo:

No, you're not getting anything wrong. They wouldn't resort to cell phone triangulation if they had witnesses that had cooberated Dinas story of sitting vigil at the bedside of Max. It flies in the face of logic- this spin more than any of the rest is so tiring. If Gore had witnesses placing Dina at the hospital at the time of Rebecca's death not only would he have proudly stated it at the press conference he would have had them there front and center.

These are the parts of this case that boggle the mind- we are asked to accept the ridiculous and ignore the rational and logical. Not much longer and all of the propaganda, rhetoric, lies and deceits will fall away in a court of law with a judge and jury where factual evidence, truth and Logic will prevail- I for one cannot wait for this day. White will be white, black will be black and no amount of mind numbing mental gymnastics or " Because I say so" will pass for the unabashed truth of what actually happened to Rebecca.

Dina has no alibi- that much is obvious.

The desperation of Dina Shacknai is palpable and so very telling.
 
No, you're not getting anything wrong. They wouldn't resort to cell phone triangulation if they had witnesses that had cooberated Dinas story of sitting vigil at the bedside of Max. It flies in the face of logic- this spin more than any of the rest is so tiring. If Gore had witnesses placing Dina at the hospital at the time of Rebecca's death not only would he have proudly stated it at the press conference he would have had them there front and center.

These are the parts of this case that boggle the mind- we are asked to accept the ridiculous and ignore the rational and logical. Not much longer and all of the propaganda, rhetoric, lies and deceits will fall away in a court of law with a judge and jury where factual evidence, truth and Logic will prevail- I for one cannot wait for this day. White will be white, black will be black and no amount of mind numbing mental gymnastics or " Because I say so" will pass for the unabashed truth of what actually happened to Rebecca.

Dina has no alibi- that much is obvious.

The desperation of Dina Shacknai is palpable and so very telling.

Thank you!!! So well put that, yes, it is mind-numbing indeed.
 
New entry today on the SD ROA, #341, which is 12 pages:

341 04/01/2016 Answer (to Second Amended Complaint with Proof of Service) filed by Romano, Nina. Romano, Nina (Defendant) Answer

Here is the document; will send to Bessie to post in docs. Link will expire in a few hours.

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...CTL_ROA-341_04-01-16_Answer_1460414907543.pdf



3. This answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that
Rebecca Zahau felt responsible for the life threatening injuries suffered by six year old Maxfield
Shacicnai, the son of boyfriend Jonah Shacicnai. This answering defendant is informed and
believes and thereon alleges that Maxfield's life threatening injuries occurred while under Rebecca
Zahau's supervision and care and the injuries were such that Maxfield was not expected to survive.
Further discovery has revealed that, although Rebecca Zahau was a medical assistant and
presumptively capable of performing CPR on Maxfield Shacknai and while it was presumed she
had performed CPR on Maxfield, she actually failed to perform any CPR on Maxfield Shacicnai
thereby contributing to Maxfield Shacknai's brain injuries consistent with a lack of oxygen. This
answering defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Rebecca Zahau's failure to
perform CPR on Maxfield Shacicnai and related feelings of responsibility were contributing
factors to Rebecca Zahau's decision to end her own life.

4. This answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the
news that Maxfield was unlikely survive, combined with Rebecca Zahau feeling extreme guilt at
the fact that Maxfield had suffered life threatening injuries while under Rebecca Zahau's
supervision and care and other ongoing depression related to her relationship with Jonah Shacicnai
as reflected in notes uncovered by the San Diego County Sheriffs Department, and a phone
message from Jonah Shacknai which was accessed by Rebecca Zahau in the early morning hours &#8226;
of July 13, 2011, were contributing causes in Rebecca Zahau's decision to commit suicide by
hanging.

Well, now....isn't THAT interesting??

But WAIT!! Nina and Dina have said they thought Max was going to survive on day 2, right? He just needed a tutor? Remember that? But now they say they knew all along he was going to die? And Rebecca knew that, too???

Man, what a hot mess this is.
 
KZ, thank you for continuously keeping everyone updated with links.
Does anyone know what "is informed and believes" legally means?
 
New entry today on the SD ROA, #341, which is 12 pages:



Here is the document; will send to Bessie to post in docs. Link will expire in a few hours.

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...CTL_ROA-341_04-01-16_Answer_1460414907543.pdf





Well, now....isn't THAT interesting??

But WAIT!! Nina and Dina have said they thought Max was going to survive on day 2, right? But now they say they knew all along he was going to die? And Rebecca knew that, too???

Man, what a hot mess this is.

Yes, I could have written this response myself and I would have done a better job of proof-reading! There's nothing new here and it is a copy-cat of the last Answer filed.

Don't any of the defendants think it pertinent to absolve themselves by offering proof that they were elsewhere? Wouldn't that be the reasonable response? This is so telling - basically a regurgitation of the flawed, half-witted "investigation" by SDSO.

Thank you K_Z, you truly are the best ever!
 
lolol

How many times have we all read all the above right here at Websleuths???

lolol

And there we have it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
250
Total visitors
419

Forum statistics

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