8 Die in Crash on Taconic State Parkway #2

[OneLostGrl]

Okay, so the movie company just paid Dan for the documentary, even though it didn't end up having an exhumation in it. I thought the exhumation was a separate deal from the documentary. Thank you.

I hadn't been going to watch that documentary, but I accidentally came across the pictures from it (shudder) last night so I guess I might as well watch it.

IMO It's worth a watch so you can make up your own mind instead of going on what others got from it. I know I came away from it with a different take then others here, you just may too.

 

[twinkiesmom]

IMO It's worth a watch so you can make up your own mind instead of going on what others got from it. I know I came away from it with a different take then others here, you just may too.

I totally agree....And it's worth it to watch several times because there are all sorts of hidden things in the documentary.

One of the scenes with Jay and the computer..I think there is a pack of cigarettes on a pile of books in the background.

The other thing I noticed this time...Danny mixes up the order of whose car was in front leaving the campground...in one scene he says he's first and then he reverses it. I'm not trying to make it out into a huge deal or anything, but this is the last time he kisses her goodbye before she dies, and he doesn't keep it straight how they left the campground.

I am also amazed at how close Danny and Jay are....it dawned on me this viewing that she married into the family...She was not born a Schuler. I'm not accusing them of anything, nor do I believe anything to be going on there, but she really has assumed Diane's place in a lot of ways. I wonder how the family dynamic worked with Diane in the picture...I'm sure they were amazed by her abilities, but she was not an easy one to get along with.

I think the Schuler grandparents must have provided daycare for Erin and Bryan as the grandmother mentioned Diane picking the kids up nightly around 7 pm. I was wondering how Diane could have fit the nightcap in with picking up kids from daycare, but since it was family providing the care, they could have believed her to be putting in long hours when she was getting a drink with Sheila (drinking buddy per the Post article).

 

[Nova]

Twinkiesmom, thank you for all your hard work. I didn't mean to send you on an extended search over such a trivial matter.

***

Here's an actual New York State case where a mother went to court and prevented a widow from exhuming her late husband's body:

http://www.forchellilaw.com/cs07_1.html


The relevant law is summarized as follows:

"According to the law, even if a spouse wants the deceased to be disinterred after the burial, (whether for purposes of cremation, reburial elsewhere, or otherwise) if another close family member, such as a parent, opposes the exhumation, it will not be allowed unless the person seeking disinterment has a good and substantial reason for disturbing the dead."

If one of the Hances objected, the burden would be on Dan Schuler to convince a court that the exhumation was necessary. Given the testing and retesting already done, a court may not have agreed.

NOTE: THIS IS STILL JUST SPECULATION ON MY PART THAT THIS IS WHY DAN WAS UNABLE TO HAVE DIANE EXHUMED. I HAVEN'T FOUND A DIRECT EXPLANATION.

***

Per this link, the Bastardis wanted the exhumation done so that additional testing could be done on Diane's hair to test for chronic alcohol usage:

http://www.topix.com/forum/nyc/TU72QFIDL50OG24MM

***

It's weird. There are dozens of on-line sources announcing the pending exhumation, but I can't find a single one saying the exhumation was cancelled.

The Wiki entry says there was an uproar when it was announced the film company might pay for the exhumation, so maybe the doc makers backed off. (I doubt it.) The Wiki entry also mentions differing opinions as to whether the time passed since burial would affect tests such as BAC.

 

[Nova]

NOTE to twinkiesmom: I'm convinced the film company planned to pay for the exhumation and re-autopsy. I've been though countless on-line sources that say so, while I was looking for some mention that the exhumation was cancelled.

My memory of the film is that it is said that Dan wasn't able to get the exhumation done for legal reasons. Since it didn't happen, IMO there was no need to disclose on camera who was paying for it.

 

[rpd113]

Maybe even Danny realized the futility of it.

 

[nomoresorrow]

Maybe even Danny realized the futility of it.

That's what I gathered after Danny and Jay met with Dr. Spitz and he told them that the (initial) autopsy appeared to have been done well.
JMO

 

[twinkiesmom]

NOTE to twinkiesmom: I'm convinced the film company planned to pay for the exhumation and re-autopsy. I've been though countless on-line sources that say so, while I was looking for some mention that the exhumation was cancelled.

My memory of the film is that it is said that Dan wasn't able to get the exhumation done for legal reasons. Since it didn't happen, IMO there was no need to disclose on camera who was paying for it.

Yes, the film was advertised that way, and it was great PR for the film.

The filmmakers may have gone into this figuring there was a great mystery to be solved and that was their approach. It's likely that Barbera negotiated so much money for Danny up front that there wasn't enough left over for an autopsy....and that money was tied up in trust for Bryan...untouchable. It's also possible that the filmmakers lost their funding due to the economy or that someone figured out it would be much cheaper to simply retest the samples and then DNA test them. This is not rocket science.

The reautopsy would have been a huge investment for the same results.

Werner Spitz's fees are $400 per hour plus $5000 per day. Plus you have to add Ruskin's fees on top of that since he was arranging the work. Aunt Jay mentions a $30,000 fee that the Schulers can't afford to pay. The filmmakers appear on camera talking to Ruskin saying they can't afford to pay for Ruskin's appearance.

Consultant physicians, even medical examiners, don't work without a contract or the money there up front to pay them. There's no way you're going to get Spitz to sign off on an exhumation for a reautopsy without his being under contract. There's no way he's under contract without the $$.

If the Hances had stopped the exhumation, the Schulers would have said so on film. Jay clearly said the money wasn't there.

The drama over Ruskin not revealing the retesting to the Schulers was clearly manufactured. Ruskin went to the media in Sep of 2010 (2 articles) claiming he believed that the results of the original toxicology testing were valid. He also split with the Schulers and Barbera over participation in the documentary.

 

[twinkiesmom]

***

Per this link, the Bastardis wanted the exhumation done so that additional testing could be done on Diane's hair to test for chronic alcohol usage:

http://www.topix.com/forum/nyc/TU72QFIDL50OG24MM

***
.

You've just found a better reason why it wasn't done. Once that body's exhumed, the body becomes evidence again. It's a simple court order for the Bastardis to get a crack at their own expert re-autopsy. With Diane buried, all the litigants have to live with the the official autopsy results.

 

[rpd113]

The drama over Ruskin not revealing the retesting to the Schulers was clearly manufactured.

It speaks to Danny's denial and hubris that he had Jay out there making a fool of herself when he already knew the results.

 

[BuzzieCat]

Twinkiesmom, thank you for all your hard work. I didn't mean to send you on an extended search over such a trivial matter.

***

Here's an actual New York State case where a mother went to court and prevented a widow from exhuming her late husband's body:

http://www.forchellilaw.com/cs07_1.html

If one of the Hances objected, the burden would be on Dan Schuler to convince a court that the exhumation was necessary. Given the testing and retesting already done, a court may not have agreed.

NOTE: THIS IS STILL JUST SPECULATION ON MY PART THAT THIS IS WHY DAN WAS UNABLE TO HAVE DIANE EXHUMED. I HAVEN'T FOUND A DIRECT EXPLANATION.

***

Per this link, the Bastardis wanted the exhumation done so that additional testing could be done on Diane's hair to test for chronic alcohol usage:

http://www.topix.com/forum/nyc/TU72QFIDL50OG24MM

***

It's weird. There are dozens of on-line sources announcing the pending exhumation, but I can't find a single one saying the exhumation was cancelled.

The Wiki entry says there was an uproar when it was announced the film company might pay for the exhumation, so maybe the doc makers backed off. (I doubt it.) The Wiki entry also mentions differing opinions as to whether the time passed since burial would affect tests such as BAC.

Interesting!

NOTE to twinkiesmom: I'm convinced the film company planned to pay for the exhumation and re-autopsy. I've been though countless on-line sources that say so, while I was looking for some mention that the exhumation was cancelled.

My memory of the film is that it is said that Dan wasn't able to get the exhumation done for legal reasons. Since it didn't happen, IMO there was no need to disclose on camera who was paying for it.

That's what confused me. There's all kinds of articles saying the body is going to be exhumed but no articles mentioning that woops, it didn't happen after all.

I just watched the film last night, and I believe it said something about getting the "necessary permissions."

I feel like I shouldn't say my opinions after having watched the film, because they aren't pretty. Thank goodness Jay finagled some counseling for Bryan. Sounds like Dan has the same way of handling things that Diane did - just don't talk about it, don't mention it, keep your head in the sand.

 

[Nova]

...I just watched the film last night, and I believe it said something about getting the "necessary permissions."....

That is my memory as well, but twinkiesmom remembers the filmmakers saying there wasn't money for the exhumation.

Would the next person who rewatches the doc (I'm trying to stop at three viewings as a matter of principle) please note what is said on this subject?

***

Again, as I now understand NY law, once Dan announced his intention to exhume the body, all either of Diane's parents (or maybe even one of her siblings) had to do was voice an objection. THEN the burden would have shifted to Dan to prove the exhumation was justified.

I suspect that was a burden Dan couldn't meet in 2010, not if he couldn't prove the original autopsy was botched.

The new civil suits, however, may change things.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Here is the filmmaker's position on the exhumation:
"An exhumation could only take place if it's ordered by a court, next of kin or a legal representative," she said. "It's not something that the filmmakers would be doing."

http://www.lohud.com/article/201007...chuler-signs-deal-exhume-his-wife-s-body-film

Later in the same article:

But Schuler, a security guard, couldn't afford to exhume the body, said Thomas Ruskin, an investigator for the family.

"They just didn't have the money at the time," Ruskin said. "Danny's a very modest-living guy. Diane was the source of income threefold over Danny, so upon Diane's death died the major income producer of the family."

 

[Nova]

Here is the filmmaker's position on the exhumation:
"An exhumation could only take place if it's ordered by a court, next of kin or a legal representative," she said. "It's not something that the filmmakers would be doing."

Well, of course the filmmakers don't have legal standing to order the exhumation. If they did, some director would be digging up Jesse James every week.

But that doesn't mean they didn't help facilitate Dan's request for an exhumation with either money or legal advice.

Later in the same article:

But Schuler, a security guard, couldn't afford to exhume the body, said Thomas Ruskin, an investigator for the family.

"They just didn't have the money at the time," Ruskin said. "Danny's a very modest-living guy. Diane was the source of income threefold over Danny, so upon Diane's death died the major income producer of the family."

Ah, yes, but that was said before Dan made a deal with the film company.

There's clearly an expectation in certain scenes from the doc that the exhumation will be the climax of the film; otherwise, there'd be no need to later mention that Dan was unable to get the necessary permissions. If Danny didn't get the money from somewhere, why would the filmmakers expect an exhumation in the first place?

 

[Melanie]

Re: Money -- wouldn't DS get a large sum of money from Diane's life insurance (which was surely secured via her employer). Add to that the money from the docu-story, he should have the funds. I don't know what he paid to TR, but he'd be <unusual> to throw all his money at that guy.

MOO

Mel

 

[rpd113]

Re: Money -- wouldn't DS get a large sum of money from Diane's life insurance

There were reports that the life insurance money went through Dominic Barbara, who was slow to transfer it to Danny and/or kept too much.

 

[BuzzieCat]

I don't remember money being mentioned in the documentary as a specific reason that the exhumation didn't go forward. Jay was talking about how much they had paid for the tests that they were getting from Mr. Ruskin and that they didn't have any more money, but I don't specifically remember them saying we can't have the exhumation because there's no money. All it said on the gray screen at the end was "necessary permissions." Whether that was a euphemism for "no money," I don't know. But I don't have the greatest memory the world has ever known, so I could be wrong.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Well, of course the filmmakers don't have legal standing to order the exhumation. If they did, some director would be digging up Jesse James every week.

But that doesn't mean they didn't help facilitate Dan's request for an exhumation with either money or legal advice.



Ah, yes, but that was said before Dan made a deal with the film company.

This article came out at the same time the deal with the film company was struck....The filmmakers are denying any role in the exhumation other than filming it.

It's clear as day from the article.

The documentary was counting on Schuler money to pay for the exumation/reautopsy. Danny was claiming they would exhume since 2009. It's on the Larry King interview.

The tests actually shown in the documentary were the only ones they could afford.

You don't fly Dr. Spitz out to New York to examine the existing autopsy on camera if you have a solid plan to show a second autopsy on film. There's no drama in his repeating the results they already know about. He gets 5,000 a day and 400 per hour....It's not believable that they would have him out for that if there were better results forthcoming.

 

[Nova]

This article came out at the same time the deal with the film company was struck....The filmmakers are denying any role in the exhumation other than filming it.

It's clear as day from the article.

The documentary was counting on Schuler money to pay for the exumation/reautopsy. Danny was claiming they would exhume since 2009. It's on the Larry King interview.

The tests actually shown in the documentary were the only ones they could afford.

You don't fly Dr. Spitz out to New York to examine the existing autopsy on camera if you have a solid plan to show a second autopsy on film. There's no drama in his repeating the results they already know about. He gets 5,000 a day and 400 per hour....It's not believable that they would have him out for that if there were better results forthcoming.

It is customary for documentary filmmakers to de-emphasize their influence on real-life events; that doesn't necessarily mean they have no influence. Technically, the filmmakers had no standing to order an exhumation; of course they are going to say Dan Schuler ordered it. For one, he would have to; for another, it plays into the doc's "story" of everyone being mad at Dan because he won't accept the coroner's findings.

What secret diary of the film shots are you reading? You insist that you know exactly the real life sequence of everything we see in the documentary and I'm wondering how you know that. How do you know when the decision was made to fly Dr. Spitz to New York? How do you know that the original plan wasn't to have him observe the re-autopsy? How do you know that since they already had him under contract, when the re-autopsy was cancelled they didn't simply fly him out and have him review the existing results? (After all, it was the closest they could get to the ending they originally planned.)

Several posters have now confirmed my memory that the documentary says Dan was unable to get the "necessary permissions" to have the exhumation performed. I've already given you a legal site that lays out what the "necessary permissions" would entail. Nobody (unless you are saying you do) recalls any mention of the exhumation being cancelled for lack of funding.

So re the sentence BBM: how do you know?

 

[twinkiesmom]

It is customary for documentary filmmakers to de-emphasize their influence on real-life events; that doesn't necessarily mean they have no influence. Technically, the filmmakers had no standing to order an exhumation; of course they are going to say Dan Schuler ordered it. For one, he would have to; for another, it plays into the doc's "story" of everyone being mad at Dan because he won't accept the coroner's findings.

What secret diary of the film shots are you reading? You insist that you know exactly the real life sequence of everything we see in the documentary and I'm wondering how you know that. How do you know when the decision was made to fly Dr. Spitz to New York? How do you know that the original plan wasn't to have him observe the re-autopsy? How do you know that since they already had him under contract, when the re-autopsy was cancelled they didn't simply fly him out and have him review the existing results? (After all, it was the closest they could get to the ending they originally planned.)

Several posters have now confirmed my memory that the documentary says Dan was unable to get the "necessary permissions" to have the exhumation performed. I've already given you a legal site that lays out what the "necessary permissions" would entail. Nobody (unless you are saying you do) recalls any mention of the exhumation being cancelled for lack of funding.

So re the sentence BBM: how do you know?

The reautopsy was part of Ruskin's investigation, and he claims they didn't have the money to go through with it. Aunt Jay says they couldn't afford to pay the 10,000 and then 30,000 bills associated with the investigation. Ruskin says specifically in the article that they couldn't pay for the reautopsy.

Danny, Barbera, and the filmmakers were in collusion to make Ruskin look bad claiming that he never shared the results with Barbera or the Schuler family when in fact he met with everyone but Aunt Jay (who was told to stay home!) and went to the papers. The fact that the reanalysis matched the original results was publicly reported in the news a year ago.

The filmmakers text-over that Danny was collecting permissions isn't credible as to the real reason why the reautopsy wasn't done (unless if it means collecting the permission of a licensed coroner who is waiting for a signed sealed contract and $$).

I believe the talk of reautopsy is just noise at this point because Danny doesn't want to accept the BAC results and can't squeeze the money out of the Schuler family (who doesn't have it per Aunt Jay), and the filmmakers are out of there.

IMHO, Ruskin is the only one telling the truth at this point except for Aunt Jay, who was deliberately kept in the dark.

If your theory was correct, it would have appeared in the documentary or Danny would have been screaming to the papers (e.g., the Hance family preventing the exhumation).

Believe what you want, but I'm not buying it. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[rpd113]

Well in any case, if Danny and/or his lawyer thought filmmakers could greenlight a new autopsy, that was pretty dumb.