Discuss Max's death here - Thread #1.

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I don't understaqnd is how he got the hyperextension of the spinal cord? Is it saying that his face was hit with such impact that his head was thrown back enough to hyperextend the spinal cord? If so, that was quite a force, not enough to happen from a mere fall down those number of steps, in my very humble opinion.

I'm just not seeing him falling down the steps at all, but rather a freefall through the air from the uppermost railing, IMHO.
 
I'm just not seeing him falling down the steps at all, but rather a freefall through the air from the uppermost railing, IMHO.

What could make him have such a fall? I've read older threads where people have suggested it could have been the dog, because he was a hyper breed that isn't a good mix for small children. But how could a dog propel a child over a railing? And doesn't the angle seem odd to you? (The angle from the railing to the chandelier).
 
What I don't understaqnd is how he got the hyperextension of the spinal cord? Is it saying that his face was hit with such impact that his head was thrown back enough to hyperextend the spinal cord? If so, that was quite a force, not enough to happen from a mere fall down those number of steps, in my very humble opinion.


BBM

It was not a fall down the steps...According to LE, it was a fall from the second story bannister to the ground on the flrst floor.
 
What I don't understaqnd is how he got the hyperextension of the spinal cord? Is it saying that his face was hit with such impact that his head was thrown back enough to hyperextend the spinal cord? If so, that was quite a force, not enough to happen from a mere fall down those number of steps, in my very humble opinion.

Do you have a link for MS falling down the stairs. I thought he went over the railing at the top step. TIA

What could make him have such a fall? I've read older threads where people have suggested it could have been the dog, because he was a hyper breed that isn't a good mix for small children. But how could a dog propel a child over a railing? And doesn't the angle seem odd to you? (The angle from the railing to the chandelier).

If, and that is a big IF, the dog was involved.....could it be possible that MS and the dog were running down the hall, the dog turned to go down the steps, and MS 'jumped' over the dog....propelling himself over the railing and into the chandelier and causing him to land fully on his face and causing his fatal injuries.

Just a thought.......
 
BBM

It was not a fall down the steps...According to LE, it was a fall from the second story bannister to the ground on the flrst floor.

Can you link me to the part that says from the second story bannister to the ground on the first floor? I've just posted a quote from the sheriff stating it was a fall from stairs, not from a bannister.
 
Can you link me to the part that says from the second story bannister to the ground on the first floor? I've just posted a quote from the sheriff stating it was a fall from stairs, not from a bannister.

Have you looked at the model presented of how they think it happened? The child didn't fell onto the stairs. He went over the railing onto the floor.
 
Have you looked at the model presented of how they think it happened? The child didn't fell onto the stairs. He went over the railing onto the floor.

There is a direct quote in an above post that states he fell from the stairs.
 
There is a direct quote in an above post that states he fell from the stairs.

I really don't care much for a quote when in the final presentation LE clearly illustrated what they believe had happened.
 
What about the small bit of tranquilizer that might have been in Max's blood? The first test was positive, and the second could not confirm it. This is what they had to say about it:

"In a forensic laboratory it is standard practice to do two independent tests. One is a presumptive test and the second is a confirmatory test," said Dr. Jain, the director of National Toxicology Laboratories in Buena Park, CA.

Jain said there are a couple reasons why the second HPLD/DAD test would come back with a different result of "Not Detected."

"Number one is that the presumptive test was totally negative; there was no benzodiazepine drug present. It could be totally, 100% false positive," Dr. Jain said. "And secondly, there may be a minuscule amount of benzodiazepine" in the blood that was not detected in the second test.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/15398193/...n-shacknai-boys-blood-likely-a-false-positive
 
I really don't care much for a quote when in the final presentation LE clearly illustrated what they believe had happened.

So you believe the LE when it comes to Max's death but not to Rebecca's? Because the also have illustrated what they believe happened.
 
So you believe the LE when it comes to Max's death but not to Rebecca's? Because the also have illustrated what they believe happened.

Makes about as much sense as believing LE when it comes to RN's death but arguing that Max's death wasn't an accident, does it not?
 
Makes about as much sense as believing LE when it comes to RN's death but arguing that Max's death wasn't an accident, does it not?

Actually, there are those who believe Max's death was an accident, but that it didn't happen the way that RZ stated it did to the police (saying she heard no sound til the crash). Big difference.
 
Another thing that troubles me is the chandelier. How could someone of Max's weight and size bring down a chandelier? Those things are usually bolted in so tight it's almost impossible to bring them down without special tools.
 
The autospsy report answered one of my questions: how would the hyperextension of the spinal cord occur?
From page 5 of the AR:



Personal note: It is very hard to read the AR knowing this was the death of this precious child. I can't even imagine how it would feel if I was a parent or family member reading it, AND knowing it was public information subject to srutinization by someone like me. :(

It just broke my heart reading Max' autopsy report.

IMO
 
Actually, there are those who believe Max's death was an accident, but that it didn't happen the way that RZ stated it did to the police (saying she heard no sound til the crash). Big difference.

I'm of the opinion the ME should have listed Max's death as undetermined. There was no explanation for the scooter on his leg plus the broken chandelier. The only way for the scooter to go from the second floor to the bottom of the stairwell is if someone tossed the scooter over the railing, it caught the chandelier and Max tried to intervene.

JMO
 
I'm of the opinion the ME should have listed Max's death as undetermined. There was no explanation for the scooter on his leg plus the broken chandelier. The only way for the scooter to go from the second floor to the bottom of the stairwell is if someone tossed the scooter over the railing, it caught the chandelier and Max tried to intervene.

JMO

I agree. While I don't think that someone set out to kill or injure Max that day, I also don't believe we're getting the full story of what happened. Is that because RZ and her sister didn't witness the incident as they claim, or did something someone doesn't want revealed, happen? I'm convinced RZ and/or her sister knew more than they revealed, but that is only my opinion and could be completely wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
569
Total visitors
784

Forum statistics

Threads
627,117
Messages
18,539,026
Members
241,193
Latest member
karmic14U
Back
Top