Wrongful death trial begins. Trial coverage and discussion #2

[Imp]

Because first responders were called in the early morning (6:45 a.m. or so) but the medical examiners did not show up until half a day later, was there concern that Rebecca's body would degrade the evidence of either murder or suicide by being left uncovered from the elements for that half of a day?

Why was it apparent that a medical examiner couldn't be found to come earlier in the day?

Why was Rebecca's body left for helicopter viewing and neighbors on balconies?

Was it not thought that this was disrespectful to anyone - let alone a young, nude woman?

Why didn't JS suggest that they shield Rebecca?

Doesn't SDSO feel this was just wrong?

Sorry, this is a sore point for me.

Same here. In fact, I can't formulate even one question that wouldn't violate TOS. :silenced:

 

[Imp]

IS THERE CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH KNIFE HANDLE?

Attention all Sleuthers who graciously continue to educate us on forensics, DNA, etc., I'm seeking your comments on the testimony of Sheriff's crime lab expert that testified how the knife handle believed used in sexual assault of RZ had epithelial cells that were not consistent with vaginal blood. I believe the data was only reported by crime reporter/author Caitlyn Rother and it's posted above.

Now, in Mary ZL Post below, she rejects this finding. Given the later discovered evidence suggesting the crime began with a sexual assault, I'd like to know if there is in-fact evidence the knife handle inserted in vagina. TIA.

MZL snip//

The San Diego Sheriff Department DNA technician was one heck of a liar. She tried to say that the DNA on the knife handle did not have enough DNA for it to be vaginally inserted. Attorney Greer had her clarify to the jury that the DNA swab was taken after it was swabbed once to test for blood, then treated with superglue fume to lift prints, then reswabbed from unknown area of the knife for the DNA that she claimed is not a vaginal source. Greer also pointed out that she did not bother divulging in her report that one of their sample was contaminated, and one of the inconclusive DNA from one of the door knob was a male contributor. She did not have clear answer to why there was no DNA on the paint brushes, the paint tube, or on the other door knobs. The ropes were not swabbed for DNA at crime scene but instead days later after it was coiled and bagged. The DNA found on the rope that was tied to the bed was minimal and is most likely transfer DNA.

I'm not knowledgeable about forensics or DNA, but when I read Mary's account, it seemed to me Mr. Greer did a good job deconstructing yet another problem with the investigation. The more he's able to discredit elements of the investigation, especially forensic elements, the better, imo.

 

[Lilibet]

Because first responders were called in the early morning (6:45 a.m. or so) but the medical examiners did not show up until half a day later, was there concern that Rebecca's body would degrade the evidence of either murder or suicide by being left uncovered from the elements for that half of a day?

Why was it apparent that a medical examiner couldn't be found to come earlier in the day?

Why was Rebecca's body left for helicopter viewing and neighbors on balconies?

Was it not thought that this was disrespectful to anyone - let alone a young, nude woman?

Why didn't JS suggest that they shield Rebecca?

Doesn't SDSO feel this was just wrong?

Sorry, this is a sore point for me.

Thank you for posting these questions! This is a huge sore point for me too. I hope Greer can let the jury hear this.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Thank you for posting these questions! This is a huge sore point for me too. I hope Greer can let the jury hear this.

It is a sore point for me as well. No one should be treated with such disrespect.

 

[K_Z]

I believe that the medical examiner is testifying on Monday... What questions do you guys feel should be top of Mr Greer’s list?

Just a few questions for Dr. Lucas, off the top of my head:

Explain why 13 hours elapsed between the call for the ME, and the arrival of the technician/s. Is this typical? If not, were there internal investigations to determine why such a long period of time elapsed for a technician to arrive to such a horrific and suspicious death scene? Were any policies and procedures changed as a result of this long lapse in arrival of the ME's office personnel? Were any workers or administrators disciplined?

Describe what evidence on the body may have been lost/ degraded as a result of the lengthy 13 hour exposure of the nude remains to the elements, heat, sun, and long arrival interval of ME technicians.

What efforts did the technician/s make to obtain core temperatures (rectal, liver temp, etc.) from Rebecca's body at the scene of her discovery, to attempt to more closely delineate time of death?

If no attempts were made to obtain core temperatures, why?

What pictures and video did you take during Rebecca's autopsy?

What did you do with Rebecca's larynx?

Were there detailed pictures, or video, taken of Rebecca's larynx during, and after it was dissected out?

Was the larynx preserved, or sent as a specimen?

Was the larynx discarded with blood and tissue in the usual manner?

If so, why? Because at the time of the autopsy, Rebecca's very unusual death circumstances were part of a murder investigation.

Why would you not preserve as evidence, video, still pictures, or the cartilaginous larynx, which was the source of the decedent's death injuries? (In formalin, etc.)

Describe, step by step, how you did the vaginal visual exam of Rebecca's vagina.

Did you know ahead of time she had an IUD?

Did you see the retrieval string of Rebecca's IUD during this visual exam, before the internal dissection exam?

Did you examine the cul de sac? Did you take pictures?

Why did you not document anything about the condition of Rebecca's cervix or cul de sac?

Is it possible there were small lacerations of the cervix that were not seen on visual exam, that could be a result of sexual penetration with an object?

Was there evidence internally in the lining of the uterus that Rebecca was menstruating, or was the condition of the uterine endometrium more consistent with break through bleeding from the IUD?

 

[Red Cross Jan]

It's a strange case but bottom line there's no evidence whatsoever that the guy's brother murdered the woman, and if he's found guilty we should ALL worry. God forbid I should be within a half-block of a crime being committed.

 

[Seattle1]

I'm not knowledgeable about forensics or DNA, but when I read Mary's account, it seemed to me Mr. Greer did a good job deconstructing yet another problem with the investigation. The more he's able to discredit elements of the investigation, especially forensic elements, the better, imo.

I believe this (sexual assault) could be one of those things that could carry a tetering Juror over the murder finish line, and trying to understand if science or lack of will kill the assault theory.

I guess It's just not clear to me if Plaintiffs obtained a "good" test sample (and high score result) before Sheriff lab re-processed and potentially ruined/contaminated the blood sample.

IIRC, this knife blood was late breaking evidence that was never noticed by Investigators. I believe it was said that a fresh eye that just happened to point out how the blood stains were present on the circumference of the knife handle, and patterned on RZ thigh. I want to say Sheriff had to re-test knife sample for evidence which if true kind of explains Sheriff lab degradation for lack of a better word. My brain and Science have never been pals!

Calling K_Z ,,,, Help!

 

[Lezah]

Just a few questions for Dr. Lucas, off the top of my head:

Explain why 13 hours elapsed between the call for the ME, and the arrival of the technician/s. Is this typical? If not, were there internal investigations to determine why such a long period of time elapsed for a technician to arrive to such a horrific and suspicious death scene? Were any policies and procedures changed as a result of this long lapse in arrival of the ME's office personnel? Were any workers or administrators disciplined?

Describe what evidence on the body may have been lost/ degraded as a result of the lengthy 13 hour exposure of the nude remains to the elements, heat, sun, and long arrival interval of ME technicians.

What efforts did the technician/s make to obtain core temperatures (rectal, liver temp, etc.) from Rebecca's body at the scene of her discovery, to attempt to more closely delineate time of death?

If no attempts were made to obtain core temperatures, why?

What pictures and video did you take during Rebecca's autopsy?

What did you do with Rebecca's larynx?

Were there detailed pictures, or video, taken of Rebecca's larynx during, and after it was dissected out?

Was the larynx preserved, or sent as a specimen?

Was the larynx discarded with blood and tissue in the usual manner?

If so, why? Because at the time of the autopsy, Rebecca's very unusual death circumstances were part of a murder investigation.

Why would you not preserve as evidence, video, still pictures, or the cartilaginous larynx, which was the source of the decedent's death injuries? (In formalin, etc.)

Describe, step by step, how you did the vaginal visual exam of Rebecca's vagina.

Did you know ahead of time she had an IUD?

Did you see the retrieval string of Rebecca's IUD during this visual exam, before the internal dissection exam?

Did you examine the cul de sac? Did you take pictures?

Why did you not document anything about the condition of Rebecca's cervix or cul de sac?

Is it possible there were small lacerations of the cervix that were not seen on visual exam, that could be a result of sexual penetration with an object?

Was there evidence internally in the lining of the uterus that Rebecca was menstruating, or was the condition of the uterine endometrium more consistent with break through bleeding from the IUD?

These are very interesting and thought provoking questions. Thanks for taking the time to post them K_Z. I am hoping to attend court Monday if I can wangle out of the school runs! Thanks also to the other guys who posted re questions on the lack of privacy screening and lapse in time for the examiner on the scene. If I get there, I will pay close attention should these questions be covered.

I will also be listening for details and responses regarding the lividity, rigor and SG hemorrhage details...

 

[Lezah]

It's a strange case but bottom line there's no evidence whatsoever that the guy's brother murdered the woman, and if he's found guilty we should ALL worry. God forbid I should be within a half-block of a crime being committed.

Ahhh....I wouldn’t worry too much....unless of course you admit being within 25 feet of a dead body for several hours when the person died in suspicious circumstances ...er...and you were the last known person to see the dead person alive....oh, and you were also the first person to find them dead....and you don’t have an alibi....and you told the police there was no one else in the house....then...

...I would probably worry.

 

[Verboten]

It's a strange case but bottom line there's no evidence whatsoever that the guy's brother murdered the woman, and if he's found guilty we should ALL worry. God forbid I should be within a half-block of a crime being committed.

Good try at minimizing. He was more than within a half-block of the crime. He was actually right there at the same house. He was the last person to see the victim alive and he was the person who found her dead. Take a listen to his polygraph and his 911 call -- he gives unrelated details to set his alibi up in the 911 call, claims to be cutting down a body & administering CPR (including chest compressions with her hands tied behind her back), but an hour later he claims he cut her down, THEN called 911. Even though he tries to give himself an out for his mistake with the, "if not before" comment, he'd already slipped up. You would know if, when you cut a hanging body down and jumped off a 3-legged table (body in hand!), you also were on the phone with 911 or not. These two links are really all any one needs to be certain of Adam's involvement:

Adam Polygraph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppRDQ7yfymg&feature=youtu.be

911 call: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyGs0d2d-ck&feature=youtu.be

Anybody else, LE would have HUNTED incessantly based on those major inconsistencies until they had enough evidence to put him UNDER the jail. But, him? They never did another lie detector test, even though his was inconclusive; and they left copious amounts of evidence uncollected and/or untested (including women's underwear in the trash can of the guesthouse where he was staying. Why? Cuz Jonah said don't worry your pretty little Law Enforcement heads about those li'l undies in there). Add in all the other coincidences, like the knots used to tie the body being the same ones he studied for that all-important maritime testing, which his team claims makes him such an accomplished man. This guy is all over this crime.

 

[K_Z]

I believe this (sexual assault) could be one of those things that could carry a tetering Juror over the murder finish line, and trying to understand if science or lack of will kill the assault theory.

I guess It's just not clear to me if Plaintiffs obtained a "good" test sample (and high score result) before Sheriff lab re-processed and potentially ruined/contaminated the blood sample.

IIRC, this knife blood was late breaking evidence that was never noticed by Investigators. I believe it was said that a fresh eye that just happened to point out how the blood stains were present on the circumference of the knife handle, and patterned on RZ thigh. I want to say Sheriff had to re-test knife sample for evidence which if true kind of explains Sheriff lab degradation for lack of a better word. My brain and Science have never been pals!

Calling K_Z ,,,, Help!

Since 2011, when Rebecca's autopsy report was first available to the public, I've said that IMO, Dr. Lucas' manner/ style of documentation is.....minimalist, to be generous.

IMO, there is rather a lack of concern for even the "usual" details of certain parts of the post mortem exam. As an example, the uterine polyp, IMO, received a very disporportional amount of real estate in the AR, which IMO, indicates a physician who "may" be more accustomed to medical events that cause death. The uterine polyp discussion was kind of an "aha! I finally found something to send to pathology!"-- rather than a completely incidental finding. And yet, the description of the death injuries was so "perfunctory" as to be rather a confirmation of cause of death, rather than something to be carefully investigated as to MANNER of death. I don't know if I'm explaining that clearly, but Rebecca's AR reads to me like a perfunctory documentation of confirmation bias. But I am not a forensic pathologist, medical examiner, or physician. However, in the course of a lot of my work as a clinician, educator, and consultant, I read an awful lot of patient records, and have opinions about the thoroughness and "tone" of documentation.

As another example, the sexual assault exam, and internal/ external GU exams were more perfunctory, IMO,-- rather than stimulating thought/ imagination/ inquisitiveness as to the full picture of her death circumstances. Like, "Ok, I have to do a sex assault exam here, and that includes X, Y, and Z. Check. And what time are we going to lunch guys?" It seems the ME was looking for obvious, "macro" evidence of sex assault, but was less concerned with more subtle investigation-- the blood evidence in the vagina, conditions inside the uterus, and connecting that to the blood evidence on the body (toes, inner thigh, etc.), and how the IUD (traction on the retrieval string, etc.) could have been part of any vaginal trauma that could have caused bleeding. He never even mentioned the presence of the retrieval string in the visual clear spec exam-- it was like he was surprised to find the IUD when he cut open the uterus. And that's pretty odd, IMO. (But then he saw the uterine polyp! Yay! Something to measure, dissect out, and send to pathology, finally!) <-----Yes, he "had" to discuss the polyp, and send it, but my issue is how much time/ effort he devoted to it, compared to the death injuries and her larynx, if that makes sense.

I think that all of the evidence processing, beginning with Rebecca's body, seems rather perfunctory and "lazy"-- like confirmation bias, going thru the motions, checking the boxes. Just my opinion, FWIW (not much).

And FWIW, I have been a consultant to a med mal firm, and have served as an expert witness. So when I have consulted on a case, I just point out inconsistencies, omissions, errors, and pose questions as I evaluate whatever records I'm provided with. And when I write up my findings, I support those areas with evidence from the literature, typical policies and procedures, professional practice standards, etc. I'm certainly not an ME or a forensic professional. My expertise is in living patients. But these are some of the things that stand out to me, with the little information we have had access to in the public domain.

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,

I'm seeing a lot of statements presented as facts without any links to back up what you are posting.

Please, if you make a statement of fact you must back it up with a link.

It takes literally one post where someone posts an opinion as a fact and then that "fact" takes off like wildfire. Then I get calls, letters, Facebook messages claiming I am running a site that allows gossip.

This is something I literally battle every single day.

Also, we are discussing the trial. Any other discussions that are not related to the trial need to be put elsewhere.

As far as the trial goes...WOW. I still believe it is murder but is the defense creating a strong reasonable doubt case?

Sometime Saturday I'll be posting my interview with Caitlin Rother. She wraps up the week's testimony for us and it is some great stuff.

Thank you all for being dedicated and basically the most amazing people on the planet!


Tricia

 

[Verboten]

I think that all of the evidence processing, beginning with Rebecca's body, seems rather perfunctory and "lazy"-- like confirmation bias, going thru the motions, checking the boxes. Just my opinion, FWIW (not much).

And FWIW, I have been a consultant to a med mal firm, and have served as an expert witness. So when I have consulted on a case, I just point out inconsistencies, omissions, errors, and pose questions as I evaluate whatever records I'm provided with. And when I write up my findings, I support those areas with evidence from the literature, typical policies and procedures, professional practice standards, etc. I'm certainly not an ME or a forensic professional. My expertise is in living patients. But these are some of the things that stand out to me, with the little information we have had access to in the public domain.

Your opinion & experience is invaluable. Your analysis & observations seem spot on to me. Thank you K_Z! :tyou:

 

[Verboten]

Hey Everyone,

I'm seeing a lot of statements presented as facts without any links to back up what you are posting.

Please, if you make a statement of fact you must back it up with a link.

It takes literally one post where someone posts an opinion as a fact and then that "fact" takes off like wildfire. Then I get calls, letters, Facebook messages claiming I am running a site that allows gossip.

This is something I literally battle every single day.

Also, we are discussing the trial. Any other discussions that are not related to the trial need to be put elsewhere.

As far as the trial goes...WOW. I still believe it is murder but is the defense creating a strong reasonable doubt case?

Sometime Saturday I'll be posting my interview with Caitlin Rother. She wraps up the week's testimony for us and it is some great stuff.

Thank you all for being dedicated and basically the most amazing people on the planet!


Tricia

Looking forward to the Caitlin interview. I was hoping to see it here tonight -- I'll be eagerly awaiting the link.

As for reasonable doubt, it's not about reasonable doubt, as you know. Plaintiffs have created a strong preponderance of the evidence case, imo. And, defense has not changed that -- again, my opinion.

 

[Myvice]

I also agree that the case against AS is strong.

The inconsistencies in AS's 911 call and poly make him seem suspect to me and JS admitted on the stand that he would always have his brother's back.

I know I always get very nervous during the defense side of a case, even the Arias trial. But I think Mr. Greer has plenty of evidence to use in closing to connect AS to the murder.

 

[Tricia]

You are right. It is not about reasonable doubt. I am so used to thinking that way and that thinking spills out into my fingers. Preponderance of the evidence.

I'm sorry about not posting the interview tonight. I have to do some editing and just wasn't able to get to it.

I hope you are right. I have no doubt it was murder and Adam is the only one who could have done this in my opinion. Let's hope 9 out of 12 jurors feel the same way.

Looking forward to the Caitlin interview. I was hoping to see it here tonight -- I'll be eagerly awaiting the link.

As for reasonable doubt, it's not about reasonable doubt, as you know. Plaintiffs have created a strong preponderance of the evidence case, imo. And, defense has not changed that -- again, my opinion.

 

[Verboten]

You are right. It is not about reasonable doubt. I am so used to thinking that way and that thinking spills out into my fingers. Preponderance of the evidence.

I'm sorry about not posting the interview tonight. I have to do some editing and just wasn't able to get to it.

I hope you are right. I have no doubt it was murder and Adam is the only one who could have done this in my opinion. Let's hope 9 out of 12 jurors feel the same way.

Yes, let's hope 9 out of 12 feel the same! I have a very heavy sense of what this trial means to the Zahau family, yet I am not stressing the outcome as much as many others seem to be. Anything can happen, I guess, and especially when defendant can afford the best defense team money can buy; but I feel a great sense of calm based on the evidence presented so far. I feel Greer is going to get his "one feather more" weighing on plaintiff's side of the scale. We shall see.

As for the interview, we know you work hard & you'll have it up as soon as you're able. I'm just glad Caitlin commited to this weekly recap. I'll try to be patient, even if that's not my strong suit!

 

[Peaceful]

I just finally finished watching Jonah's testimony and wow! I sure did like the ending. I think Mr. Greer did a wonderful job of keeping his questioning professional and also bringing back around exactly what this trial is about.

Thank you all for all you continue to do.
I think the defense has done as good of a job as anyone could. I just really wish we could have had Dina testify also so we could really see how different their versions of what happened are. I do not believe Jonah when he says the Dr. gave them bad news that evening. I never have. I feel terrible he lost his precious son <modsnip> Losing max does not excuse what I believe happened to Rebecca. I am still so hopeful for justice.

 

[Jessica2012]

I mean no offense, but you weren't there to hear what RZ might have said about her faith. The story we're hearing from Jonah may not be accurate, either. Since he has a significant vested interest (financial and otherwise) in making it seem as though Rebecca believed in suicide, its fair and prudent to dismiss his version of the conversation.

Considering the evidence now revealed shows she was murdered, Jonah's allegations aren't even relevant.

With all due respect, many people do not feel the evidence shows she was murdered, but that she committed suicide. The only people that will have that say when the time comes are the 12 jurors.

Mary gave her testimony on the stand about Rebecca being religious and suicide being against her faith. Mary also has a significant vested interest in the outcome of this trial (financial and otherwise), and what she says also may not be accurate.

I don’t think Jonah ever tried to infer that Rebecca believed in suicide by saying she was not a fan of organized religion or religious around him. As far as I know, no one believes in suicide. But many still commit it.

 

[Jessica2012]

Thanks. I’m a convert myself. Reform Judaism now considers children to be Jewish if either parent is, as long as the children are brought up exclusively as Jews, including being Bar Mitzvahed. I wonder if perhaps the age difference between Adam and his partner is what they really objected to? (or, of course, they might be Conservative or Orthodox)

Adam and Jonah’s parents did not seem to object to the age difference between Jonah and Rebecca, which greater than the difference between Adam and Mary, so personally, I do not think that was a factor.