Estate of Rebecca Zahau et al v. Shacknai et al

[MissJ]

Rebecca did not commit suicide because of MS injuries. They were not her fault and she knew it. I'm surprised that an experienced MD would not recognize what MS's symptoms meant. I am an RN and most RN's I know would know he had irreversible injuries from his accident..suffocation leaves very telling evidence. Every medical personnel is required to report what they consider abuse. Patient confidentiality is not an issue in this instance. If the MD had read the EMS report he would have known to expect neck/spinal injuries as well as brain swelling. JMO

 

[kittychi]

Still it begs the question...why didn't Dina file a wrongful death suit against Rebecca's estate? Dr. Peterson could have been compelled to testify had he been subponaed.

 

[MyBelle]

Well it would have been very easy for Dr. Peterson or a representative from the hospital to just state that he can't make a public statement about a patient in his care. Instead, Ben Metcalf, Public Information officer, made this statement: "We appreciate your interest, however, I have spoken with both Dr. Peterson and the attorney for Rady Children's and neither wish to make any comment regarding this case."

IMO, the way this statement is worded, it suggests that there was a clear path for Dr. Peterson to clarify his remarks if he had chosen to.

Pretty clear to me that the path Dr. Peterson and the hospital attorney chose to take is the very path they took.

JMO

 

[K_Z]

I've seen nothing to indicate the Dr. was not in pursuit of the truth. I don't need further clarification of his actions in having police notified. I do know because of privacy laws, Dr. Peterson can't make a public statement about a patient in his care but I think he can testify about it as can the experts Dina hired to offer their professional opinion that Max was a victim of homicide.
JMO

BBM, for focus.

I agree that Dr. Peterson will be HIGHLY desired as a witness in the civil case. It’s my opinion that he will almost certainly be on the Plaintiff’s list of 10 witnesses for deposition under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (see below). This should be a “win-win” situation for Dina and the Zahaus, because both sides will be presumably VERY anxious to hear what he has to say.

It’s my opinion that whatever he said (especially what he said directly to Dina, and how she interpreted that), subsequently became a motive for Rebecca’s murder. Dina, Nina, and Adam will surely also be on the list of 10 for depositions. I believe this list will also include “Bicycle Family Dad”, and Jonah. I’m not sure if the ME, Lucas, and other LE personnel count as “experts” or are in addition to the 10 that can be deposed, but ME Lucas will almost certainly be included in this group.

It’s important, IMO, to remember that this lawsuit is the Estate of Rebecca Zahau et al v Shacknai et al. That means that first and foremost, Rebecca’s death is the subject of the lawsuit. Max’s death, while heartbreaking and immensely sad, is not the subject of the lawsuit. It may have been (and very likely was, IMO) the catalyst for Rebecca’s murder, but Max's accident is not the focus of the lawsuit.

Max’s death is not in question in this lawsuit, and while it will certainly be a part of the case, for both sides, Max’s death will not be explored in the same way it would have been if Dina and/ or Jonah had chosen to file a wrongful death lawsuit on his behalf.

Frankly, I cannot fathom why Dina spent an entire year making (IMO, empty and vindictive) public accusations against a dead woman, and her minor sister, and then chose NOT to pursue pretty much the only avenue left available to effectively reopen his case. Perhaps Dina was eventually persuaded that his death was, indeed, nothing more than a very tragic accident.

Perhaps she was embarrassed that she had made so many baseless accusations against a dead woman and a minor. Perhaps it was made clear to her, legally, that she cannot continue to accuse, intimidate, and harass a young teen (who is alive) publicly any more, without serious consequences.

We don’t know why Dina chose not to file a wrongful death lawsuit for Max’s death, but we can be sure that her most vocal supporters are quite disappointed. Maybe Dina will hold a press conference someday and tell the public why she behaved the way she did, and why she chose not to pursue any civil suits—particularly since she had no hesitation suing San Diego County to get Max’s autopsy pictures and other documents in what appeared to be a run up to filing a lawsuit.

In any event, the occasion of the Zahau lawsuit will not be an opportunity, however tantalizing, for Dina to continue to accuse Rebecca of killing Max. To do so would be an exceedingly foolish way for her to pursue defending herself in the Zahau lawsuit, IMO. It would only make Dina look more vindictive, and more guilty, IMO. I don’t think it would play well to a jury, if the case makes it that far. (And I hope it does.)

Whether Dina chooses to call Bove and Melinek as experts in her defense remains to be seen, but I don’t think anything they have said, or will say, would somehow prove Dina to be innocent of the allegations made in the complaint by the Zahaus. If anything, their reports make her look even more guilty of having a motive to harm Rebecca!

If she does call them as expert witnesses, they will be very expensive, and not add much to her defense, IMO. At best, it will point out that MANY experts can study a case and disagree. It will not “prove” that Dina and her co-defendants are “innocent” of the wrongful death allegations. And, IMO, a jury will definitely see that.

I cannot imagine that the very experienced Judge Whelan will allow Dina to put on a “wrongful death lawsuit by proxy” as a defense in his courtroom. I think the Judge will control the case, and his courtroom, and keep it focused on the allegations of the Zahau lawsuit—the wrongful death of Rebecca, that was caused by the 3 named defendants, and potentially a few as-yet unnamed Does.


Here is a nice summary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Civil_Procedure#Title_V_-_Discovery

Title V - Discovery

Rules 26 to 37.

Title V covers the rules of discovery. Modern civil litigation is based upon the idea that the parties should not be subject to surprises at trial. Discovery is the process whereby civil litigants seek to obtain information both from other parties and from non parties (or third parties). Parties have a series of tools with which they can obtain information:

5. Document requests: a party can seek documents and other real objects from parties and non parties

6. Interrogatories: a party can require other parties to answer 25 questions

7. Requests for admissions: A party can require other parties to admit or deny the truth of certain statements

8. Depositions: A party can require at most 10 individuals or representatives of organizations to make themselves available for questioning for a maximum of one day of 7 hours, without obtaining leave of court.

Federal procedure also requires parties to divulge certain information without a formal discovery request, in contrast to many state courts where most discovery can only be had by request. Information covered by this initial disclosure is found in Rule 26(a)(1)(A), includes information about potential witnesses, information/copies about all documents that may be used in the party's claim (excluding impeachment material), computations of damages, and insurance information. Information about any expert witness testimony is also required.

Notable exceptions to the discovery rules include impeachment evidence/witnesses, "work product" (materials an attorney uses to prepare for the trial especially documents containing mental impressions, legal conclusions, or opinions of counsel), and experts who are used exclusively for trial prep and will not testify.

 

[MyBelle]

Still it begs the question...why didn't Dina file a wrongful death suit against Rebecca's estate? Dr. Peterson could have been compelled to testify had he been subponaed.

You'll have to ask Dina why she didn't file such lawsuit. I believe Dr. Peterson most certainly can still testify for the defense if this case moves forward in civil court.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

BBM, for focus.

I agree that Dr. Peterson will be HIGHLY desired as a witness in the civil case. It’s my opinion that he will almost certainly be on the Plaintiff’s list of 10 witnesses for deposition under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (see below). This should be a “win-win” situation for Dina and the Zahaus, because both sides will be presumably VERY anxious to hear what he has to say.

It’s my opinion that whatever he said (especially what he said directly to Dina, and how she interpreted that), subsequently became a motive for Rebecca’s murder. Dina, Nina, and Adam will surely also be on the list of 10 for depositions. I believe this list will also include “Bicycle Family Dad”, and Jonah. I’m not sure if the ME, Lucas, and other LE personnel count as “experts” or are in addition to the 10 that can be deposed, but ME Lucas will almost certainly be included in this group.

It’s important, IMO, to remember that this lawsuit is the Estate of Rebecca Zahau et al v Shacknai et al. That means that first and foremost, Rebecca’s death is the subject of the lawsuit. Max’s death, while heartbreaking and immensely sad, is not the subject of the lawsuit. It may have been (and very likely was, IMO) the catalyst for Rebecca’s murder, but Max's accident is not the focus of the lawsuit.

Max’s death is not in question in this lawsuit, and while it will certainly be a part of the case, for both sides, Max’s death will not be explored in the same way it would have been if Dina and/ or Jonah had chosen to file a wrongful death lawsuit on his behalf.

Frankly, I cannot fathom why Dina spent an entire year making (IMO, empty and vindictive) public accusations against a dead woman, and her minor sister, and then chose NOT to pursue pretty much the only avenue left available to effectively reopen his case. Perhaps Dina was eventually persuaded that his death was, indeed, nothing more than a very tragic accident.

Perhaps she was embarrassed that she had made so many baseless accusations against a dead woman and a minor. Perhaps it was made clear to her, legally, that she cannot continue to accuse, intimidate, and harass a young teen (who is alive) publicly any more, without serious consequences.

We don’t know why Dina chose not to file a wrongful death lawsuit for Max’s death, but we can be sure that her most vocal supporters are quite disappointed. Maybe Dina will hold a press conference someday and tell the public why she behaved the way she did, and why she chose not to pursue any civil suits—particularly since she had no hesitation suing San Diego County to get Max’s autopsy pictures and other documents in what appeared to be a run up to filing a lawsuit.

In any event, the occasion of the Zahau lawsuit will not be an opportunity, however tantalizing, for Dina to continue to accuse Rebecca of killing Max. To do so would be an exceedingly foolish way for her to pursue defending herself in the Zahau lawsuit, IMO. It would only make Dina look more vindictive, and more guilty, IMO. I don’t think it would play well to a jury, if the case makes it that far. (And I hope it does.)

Whether Dina chooses to call Bove and Melinek as experts in her defense remains to be seen, but I don’t think anything they have said, or will say, would somehow prove Dina to be innocent of the allegations made in the complaint by the Zahaus. If anything, their reports make her look even more guilty of having a motive to harm Rebecca!

If she does call them as expert witnesses, they will be very expensive, and not add much to her defense, IMO. At best, it will point out that MANY experts can study a case and disagree. It will not “prove” that Dina and her co-defendants are “innocent” of the wrongful death allegations. And, IMO, a jury will definitely see that.

I cannot imagine that the very experienced Judge Whelan will allow Dina to put on a “wrongful death lawsuit by proxy” as a defense in his courtroom. I think the Judge will control the case, and his courtroom, and keep it focused on the allegations of the Zahau lawsuit—the wrongful death of Rebecca, that was caused by the 3 named defendants, and potentially a few as-yet unnamed Does.


Here is a nice summary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Civil_Procedure#Title_V_-_Discovery

Where do you get the idea that federal rules of procedure apply to a case filed in a California court?

I'm also baffled why you say that the lawsuit isn't about Max yet you also insist the Zahau's can call his doctor as a witness. That makes no sense to me.

Dina is a defendant and police have publicly cleared her of any wrongdoing in RZ's death. I think any Judge would allow her to put on a defense and that includes the doctors whom saw her and spoke to her while treating her son.

JMO

 

[K_Z]

Still it begs the question...why didn't Dina file a wrongful death suit against Rebecca's estate? Dr. Peterson could have been compelled to testify had he been subponaed.

I think there is a very strong possibility that he will still be subpoenaed as a witness to be deposed, and to testify in a trial.

One side or the other will subpoena him, IMO-- the big question is, will the Zahaus call him FIRST?

An awful lot of people want to hear what he has to say. Like I said above-- Dr. Peterson being deposed and called as a witness is a "win-win situation" for both sides, right?

 

[MyBelle]

Rebecca did not commit suicide because of MS injuries. They were not her fault and she knew it. I'm surprised that an experienced MD would not recognize what MS's symptoms meant. I am an RN and most RN's I know would know he had irreversible injuries from his accident..suffocation leaves very telling evidence. Every medical personnel is required to report what they consider abuse. Patient confidentiality is not an issue in this instance. If the MD had read the EMS report he would have known to expect neck/spinal injuries as well as brain swelling. JMO

I do believe RZ committed suicide. The Sheriff gave compelling reasons why and I accept their conclusion.

As for Dr. Peterson, he is the chief of the ICU of a major pediatric medical center. I'm not going to engage in speculation that he didn't know what Max symptoms "meant." That is a baseless, somewhat reckless accusation for you to make.

According to the public documents, Dr. Peterson wasn't questioning what MS's symptoms "meant." He was questioning the explanation given that resulted in the injuries: "Based on the description of the incident, surrounding Shacknai's fall, Dr. Peterson did not feel the visible injuries were consistent with the cardiac arrest and brain swelling experienced by Shacknai."

JMO

 

[K_Z]

Where do you get the idea that federal rules of procedure apply to a case filed in a California court?

JMO

Snipped and bolded for focus.

The civil suit is filed in federal court, US District Court Southern District of California. The case will follow Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Judge Whelan is a federal judge. We have been discussing the ramifications of a federally filed case since July.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9666090

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9821740


[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_jurisdiction"]Diversity jurisdiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[MyBelle]

I think there is a very strong possibility that he will still be subpoenaed as a witness to be deposed, and to testify in a trial.

One side or the other will subpoena him, IMO-- the big question is, will the Zahaus call him FIRST?

An awful lot of people want to hear what he has to say. Like I said above-- Dr. Peterson being deposed and called as a witness is a "win-win situation" for both sides, right?

I'm not sure why you think the Zahau's want the world to hear more from Dr. Peterson. Usually, the plaintiff's side doesn't call a witness if they don't know beforehand what he will say. He evidently didn't believe the description of the incident fit with Max's injuries two years ago. I doubt he's changed his mind. If this case moves forward it doesn't matter who calls a witness. I believe both sides have the opportunity to question.

JMO

 

[K_Z]

Where do you get the idea that federal rules of procedure apply to a case filed in a California court?

I'm also baffled why you say that the lawsuit isn't about Max yet you also insist the Zahau's can call his doctor as a witness. That makes no sense to me.

Dina is a defendant and police have publicly cleared her of any wrongdoing in RZ's death. I think any Judge would allow her to put on a defense and that includes the doctors whom saw her and spoke to her while treating her son.
JMO

BBM.

Again, if you read my posts above, I really DO agree with you that Dr. Peterson WILL be called as a witness. The question is, which side will call him first?

 

[K_Z]

I'm not sure why you think the Zahau's want the world to hear more from Dr. Peterson. Usually, the plaintiff's side doesn't call a witness if they don't know beforehand what he will say.
JMO

Snipped and BBM for focus.

I'm not a plaintiff in this case, but if I was, I would have no problem at all calling Dr. Peterson as a witness BEFORE I knew what he had to say. I would INSIST that Dr. Peterson be called as a witness, if I were a plaintiff in this case. I am just THAT confident that what he has to say will be more beneficial to "my" case as a hypothetical plaintiff, that it would be detrimental to my case.

I am not at all worried about what Dr. Peterson will say under deposition. I think what he will say will greatly benefit the plaintiffs. I look forward to him being named as a witness. It doesn't matter to me which side calls him first, because both sides will be able to question him thoroughly.

ETA- by calling him "first", what I mean is, the plaintiffs calling him before the defendants. It doesn't matter what order he is called in. Wanted to make that clear, lol!

He is an extremely valuable witness in this case, IMO.

I do hope the Zahaus call him first, so that they get to depose him first.

That's my opinion.

 

[MyBelle]

Snipped and bolded for focus.

The civil suit is filed in federal court, US District Court Southern District of California. The case will follow Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Judge Whelan is a federal judge. We have been discussing the ramifications of a federally filed case since July.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9666090

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9821740


Diversity jurisdiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the clarification. No wonder the case hasn't moved forward.

 

[MyBelle]

Snipped and BBM for focus.

I'm not a plaintiff in this case, but if I was, I would have no problem at all calling Dr. Peterson as a witness BEFORE I knew what he had to say. I would INSIST that Dr. Peterson be called as a witness, if I were a plaintiff in this case. I am just THAT confident that what he has to say will be more beneficial to "my" case as a hypothetical plaintiff, that it would be detrimental to my case.

I am not at all worried about what Dr. Peterson will say under deposition. I think what he will say will greatly benefit the plaintiffs. I look forward to him being named as a witness. It doesn't matter to me which side calls him first, because both sides will be able to question him thoroughly.

ETA- by calling him "first", what I mean is, the plaintiffs calling him before the defendants. It doesn't matter what order he is called in. Wanted to make that clear, lol!

He is an extremely valuable witness in this case, IMO.

I do hope the Zahaus call him first, so that they get to depose him first.

That's my opinion.

In the civil lawsuits I've personally been involved in, a deposition involves both sides at the same time.

Do you know for a fact that Dr. Peterson ever met RZ or had any interactions directly with her? The case is about RZ's death so what "valuable" information would he have other than to confirm he was of the expert opinion that Max's injuries didn't match with the description of the incident and therefore he asked police to get involved? How does such information help the Zahou's prove Dina was responsible for RZ's death?

JMO

 

[K_Z]

Thanks for the clarification. No wonder the case hasn't moved forward.

BBM for focus.

I'm not sure what you mean by that comment, but if you read upthread, and in the legal thread, it will be clear that nothing "had" to happen yet in this case. The Zahaus have 120 days to serve the defendants. That brings us to Nov 14.

And, BTW, federal trials are typically more "by the book" than state trials. Meaning, they stick to deadlines. "Rocket Docket".

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_docket"]Rocket docket - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

A rocket docket refers to a court or other tribunal that is noted for its speedy disposition of cases and controversies that come before it, often by maintaining strict adherence to the law as pertains to filing deadlines, etc.

Later the term was applied to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.[3] Other jurisdictions that have been characterized as rocket dockets include the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; the United States District Court for the Southern District of California; the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia; and the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.[4]

BBM

 

[MyBelle]

BBM for focus.

I'm not sure what you mean by that comment, but if you read upthread, and in the legal thread, it will be clear that nothing "had" to happen yet in this case. The Zahaus have 120 days to serve the defendants. That brings us to Nov 14.

And, BTW, federal trials are typically more "by the book" than state trials. Meaning, they stick to deadlines. "Rocket Docket".

Rocket docket - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


BBM

At least 50 of the defendants are John Doe. Kinda difficult to serve multiple figments of a lawyer's imagination.

JMO

 

[K_Z]

At least 50 of the defendants are John Doe. Kinda difficult to serve multiple figments of a lawyer's imagination.

JMO

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doe_subpoena"]Doe subpoena - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

A Doe subpoena is a subpoena that seeks the identity of an unknown defendant to a lawsuit. Most jurisdictions permit a plaintiff who does not yet know a defendant's identity to file suit against John Doe and then use the tools of the discovery process to seek the defendant's true name.[1] A Doe subpoena is often served on an online service provider or ISP for the purpose of identifying the author of an anonymous post.

Good chance the "Does" are because the Zahaus did not receive the information they sought in their civil suit in time to meet the statute of limitations in the wrongful death suit, IMO.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9863886

 

[MyBelle]

Doe subpoena - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Good chance the "Does" are because the Zahaus did not receive the information they sought in their civil suit in time to meet the statute of limitations in the wrongful death suit, IMO.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=9863886

I doubt a federal court is going to allow a baseless fishing expedition.

JMO

 

[K_Z]

I doubt a federal court is going to allow a baseless fishing expedition.

JMO

I agree with you again.

A federal court will not allow a "baseless fishing expedition."

A federal court WILL allow a proper and legal discovery process to proceed.

And there is nothing in Judge Whelan's judicial history, IMO, that suggests that he will not allow a proper and legal discovery process to proceed. (And being that SoCal is a "rocket docket", I think we can have confidence that things will proceed on time, right?)

He presided over Betty Broderick's trial TWICE. And both sides approved of his decisions, at BOTH trials. Surely he is a good judge for this case, don't you agree?

 

[kittychi]

I do believe RZ committed suicide. The Sheriff gave compelling reasons why and I accept their conclusion.

As for Dr. Peterson, he is the chief of the ICU of a major pediatric medical center. I'm not going to engage in speculation that he didn't know what Max symptoms "meant." That is a baseless, somewhat reckless accusation for you to make.

According to the public documents, Dr. Peterson wasn't questioning what MS's symptoms "meant." He was questioning the explanation given that resulted in the injuries: "Based on the description of the incident, surrounding Shacknai's fall, Dr. Peterson did not feel the visible injuries were consistent with the cardiac arrest and brain swelling experienced by Shacknai."

JMO

BBM

...conjecture, but no proof (I.e. Suicide note signed by RZ, and evidence of THE voicemail from JS, and not having either of those, at the very least a re-enactment of RZ's motions that evening while they had full access to the home).

There is further narrative from the suicide believers that RZ not only committed suicide, but did it in an intentionally extremely dramatic fashion as a statement to JS and/or to take attention away from Max who lay on his death bed in the hospital. IMO, that is drama totally uncharacteristic of anything I have read about RZ, but a dramatic scenario does fit with many things I have read about DS. If RZ felt guilt, why would she defiantly draw attention to herself? IMO, a suicide in this fashion would not be performed by a guilty, remorseful person.

Let me make sure I understand: You believe RZ committed suicide as the sheriff has concluded, but not that Max's fall was an accident as the police have concluded. That RZ committed suicide because of extreme guilt that she harmed Max, had no remorse and defiantly bared all to the world.

This leaves the reasoning that I have read from suicide believers: that she was afraid of CPS, that life as she knew it was over. It also, IMO implies that she deserved to die and knew it. Surely she would have known ahead of time that harming Max would mean life as she knew it would be over, especially if Max was a big part of her connection with JS. If he was, IMO she would not "blow it" by harming him!

I am not a legal expert so I may be wrong, but it appears to me that any opportunity to get Max's case re-opened is gone. This is so unfortunate for everyone who wants to know the truth of both deaths.

These are my personal thoughts, opinions and questions only.