Max's back injuries

[MyBelle]

Your suggestion was that Jonah ignored Max's reports of being abused by Rebecca. That is far more serious than ignoring a simple request.

If Jonah had knowledge that Rebecca abused Max and he did not act to prevent it by reporting it or otherwise taking action to protect his son then criminal charges need to be brought against Jonah for contributing to the death of his son.

Imo, he would be more guilty than Rebecca because Max was ultimately his responsibility and not Rebecca's responsibility. Also, if Max told Dina that Rebecca was abusing him and if Dina did not report that to the police immediately then Dina should go to jail right now for failing to protect her son from abuse that he reported to her. If what you hint at was true then both Jonah and Dina abandoned their vulnerable six year old son in the most horrible way possible.

So if you are hinting or somehow suggesting that Max told Dina Rebecca abused him and Jonah and the other kids knew about it too please back up your theory with fact. Otherwise you make this family to appear criminally negligent. Tia.

Your spin is getting pretty incredible. It is you--not me-- who claims Jonah ignored Max's reports of abuse by RZ but you've provided no links to any such comments by Max. Please provide a link to where DS has said Max reported abuse. All I've seen Dina say is that she told Jonah she didn't want Max left alone with RZ or her family. Dina hasn't said why.

To your point that the safety of a child left in someone's care is still primarily the responsibility of the absent parent rather than the caretaker, that's pure hogwash, imo. Neither society nor the the law agrees with you.

JMO

 

[justice be served]

My goodness things seem to be heating up here! When we've seen that before, there was a break in the case coming. Anyone aware of something coming down the pike?

 

[freespeech]

The loops and knots that Rebecca tied herself up with were not "complex, elaborate knots". Please look over the investigative report. It said the knots were not any type of knot in particular. She just looped and tied till she got it right.

And if she could tie her shoes, she could tie those knots. Not knot kidding. :what:

I totally disagree that the knots tied were not done by an expert. Even the female police office in the sdso video who attempted to replicate the wrist bindings found on Rebecca was obviously coached and had practiced prior to the demo.

The person who wrote the investigative report was apparently not a rope tying expert. Dr. Drew stated the the complex rope knots found on Rebecca looked like they had been tied by a 17th century sailor. Most people would not find any of those knots found on Rebecca easy to tie.

I think that what I stated above is one of the major reasons people think she was murdered. Also, considerably more than a handful of people believe that. I do not see that there could be any evidence that could be provided in this case to prove that the knots tied were not done by an expert. There is a simple and common sense answer to why that is and that is because I don't believe most people would be able to tie the knots found on Rebecca without prior knowledge and practice.

 

[freespeech]

Your spin is getting pretty incredible. It is you--not me-- who claims Jonah ignored Max's reports of abuse by RZ but you've provided no links to any such comments by Max. Please provide a link to where DS has said Max reported abuse. All I've seen Dina say is that she told Jonah she didn't want Max left alone with RZ or her family. Dina hasn't said why.

To your point that the safety of a child left in someone's care is still primarily the responsibility of the absent parent rather than the caretaker, that's pure hogwash, imo. Neither society nor the the law agrees with you.

JMO

I disagree with the bolded comment.

If a parent placed their precious child in the hands of a person that they considered dangerous then that parent would absolutely be 100% responsible for harm that came to the child as a result. I believe that the law would find them to be a negligent parent, in that particular case.

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

The person who wrote the investigative report was apparently not a rope tying expert. Dr. Drew stated the the complex rope knots found on Rebecca looked like they had been tied by a 17th century sailor.

Dr. Drew never saw or touched the ropes and knots, so IMO, he is not a credible expert on how they were tied. The investigators and ME are.

 

[MyBelle]

I disagree with the bolded comment.

If a parent placed their precious child in the hands of a person that they considered dangerous then that parent would absolutely be 100% responsible for harm that came to the child as a result. I believe that the law would find them to be a negligent parent, in that particular case.

My comments are specific to the topic, which is this case which isn't a hypothetical. The child died, another was injured. I don't know of any parent who anticipates their lover will kill their child.

RZ's sister was also left in her care and was injured. Using your twisted logic, LE should find her parent negligent as well as Max's dad.

JMO

 

[freespeech]

Dr. Drew never saw or touched the ropes and knots, so IMO, he is not a credible expert on how they were tied. The investigators and ME are.

I disagree that the investigators and ME proved that Rebecca knew how to tie the knots found binding her. They failed to show in any manner that the knots were ordinary and that anyone could tie them without prior knowledge and training. The female police officer in their demo was obviously, trained, coached and then practiced for the demo video.

No average person could tie those knots and the sdso did not bother to prove how or if Rebecca knew those knots. On the flip side however, it is glaringly apparent that Adam, Jonah and Dina had years and years of experience and knowledge in tying boating knots.

Also who would know how to wrap multiple layers of rope around their wrists in the front of them that included a complex mechanism that allowed them to loosen the rope layers, transfer the binding behind their back and then tighten them again. No one knows how to do that without prior knowledge unless they have years of practice like as with tying boating knots.

Also take into consideration the nonsensical concept of using the rope binding to prevent yourself from trying to save yourself if you change your mind by leaving the wrist bindings loose enough to remove your arm from it if you feel like it. That maneuver defies any logic known logic and common sense because it cancels itself out so why bother.

There was no logic or purpose or ability or knowledge shown by sdso in any manner that Rebecca knew how to or did tie those bindings or even had any reason to do that. Those binding were done by the murderer/s and not Rebecca, imo.

 

[Inparadise]

I disagree that the investigators and ME proved that Rebecca knew how to tie the knots found binding her. They failed to show in any manner that the knots were ordinary and that anyone could tie them without prior knowledge and training. The female police officer in their demo was obviously, trained, coached and then practiced for the the demo video.

No average person could tie those knots and the sdso did not bother to prove how or if Rebecca knew those knots. On the flip side however, it is glaringly apparent that Adam, Jonah and Dina had years and years of experience and knowledge in tying boating knots.

Also who would know how to wrap multiple layers of rope around their wrists in the front of them that included a complex mechanism that allowed them to loosen the rope layers, transfer the binding behind their back and then tighten them again. No one knows how to do that without prior knowledge unless they have years of practice like as with tying boating knots.

Also take into consideration the nonsensical concept of using the rope binding to prevent yourself from trying to save yourself if you change your mind by leaving the wrist bindings loose enough to remove your arm from it if you feel like it. That maneuver defies any logic known logic and common sense because it cancels itself out so why bother.

There was no logic or purpose or ability or knowledge shown by sdso in any manner that Rebecca knew how to or did tie those bindings or even had any reason to do that. Those binding were done by the murderer/s and not Rebecca, imo.

<modsnip>.

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

<modsnip>
<modsnip>
So in your opinions, WHY would the "killers" (who took the trouble to travel by boat from the hospital?!!!) leave the bindings so loose that Rebecca could have easily just let the end of the rope go to become untied?

<modsnip>

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

Can someone explain to me what the ropes have to do with Max's back injuries?

 

[freespeech]

Originally Posted by MyBelle
The Judge or Jury determines credibility. Max's father and siblings are still alive to corroborate whatever Max may have said and what he may have observed that gave Dina the fear he was in danger. Wrongful death lawsuits are often filed against estates. JMO

and

To your point that the safety of a child left in someone's care is still primarily the responsibility of the absent parent rather than the caretaker, that's pure hogwash, imo. Neither society nor the the law agrees with you.

JMO

Mybelle, I was simply responding to your comments that are shown above.

If Max related a fear of Rebecca to his mother and Max's father and siblings knew about it but both parents still allowed Max to be in her custody then yes they are legally responsible for not protecting their child. This is only my opinion. Our opinions differ.

However, if my child told me mommy there's a dangerous tiger over there. I am afraid of it. Then I would not lock my child in a cage with it and walk away and then blame the tiger for harming my child. I would blame myself for being negligent. I would not sue the tiger's estate but I would have to live with the guilt of failing to protect my child. Who knows i might even be thrown into jail for criminal negligence if charges were brought against me by the state.

I used myself as a example here so you could fully understand that I am only expressing my own feelings and opinions and that I completely understand that they differ from your opinions. I believe that we are both allowed to express our own opinions, no, even if they don't agree with each other? I am not expressing any opinion to make anyone angry with what I say but am saying what I truly see as the case in my own opinion only and not to offend you or anyone else for that matter but only to add my "spin" as you said to the discussion at hand.

 

[MyBelle]

Originally Posted by MyBelle
The Judge or Jury determines credibility. Max's father and siblings are still alive to corroborate whatever Max may have said and what he may have observed that gave Dina the fear he was in danger. Wrongful death lawsuits are often filed against estates. JMO

and

To your point that the safety of a child left in someone's care is still primarily the responsibility of the absent parent rather than the caretaker, that's pure hogwash, imo. Neither society nor the the law agrees with you.

JMO

Mybelle, I was simply responding to your comments that are shown above.

If Max related a fear of Rebecca to his mother and Max's father and siblings knew about it but both parents still allowed Max to be in her custody then yes they are legally responsible for not protecting their child. This is only my opinion. Our opinions differ.

However, if my child told me mommy there's a dangerous tiger over there.
I am afraid of it. Then I would not lock my child in a cage with it and walk away and then blame the tiger for harming my child. I would blame myself for being negligent. I would not sue the tiger's estate but I would have to live with the guilt of failing to protect my child. Who knows i might even be thrown into jail for criminal negligence if charges were brought against me by the state.

I used myself as a example here so you could fully understand that I am only expressing my own feelings and opinions and that I completely understand that they differ from your opinions. I believe that we are both allowed to express our own opinions, no, even if they don't agree with each other? I am not expressing any opinion to make anyone angry with what I say but am saying what I truly see as the case in my own opinion only and not to offend you or anyone else for that matter but only to add my "spin" as you said to the discussion at hand.

You offer a hypothetical to which I have no opinion because Dina has NOT said Max told her he feared his safety around RZ.

My opinions are about the topic, <modsnip>
JMO

 

[Betty P]

The issue of a wrongful death civil suit
related to Max leaves me with a question.

What is the purpose of Dina filing a wrongful death civil suit against Rebecca or her family? Rebecca is dead, so there's no possibility of bringing criminal charges against her. Rebecca probably had no monetary assets to speak of, she wasn't a wealthy person. She had given up her job to take care of Jonah's home and children from his previous marriages.

Rebecca's family is also not wealthy. They had to raise money from donations, etc. to have her case reviewed. They are working class people.

So, if there are no monetary assets for Dina to recover from RZ's estate or from her family, what's the point in attempting to sue them? Seems it would be a waste of Dina's money to pay attorneys to pursue it.

 

[time]

The issue of a wrongful death civil suit
related to Max leaves me with a question.

What is the purpose of Dina filing a wrongful death civil suit against Rebecca or her family? Rebecca is dead, so there's no possibility of bringing criminal charges against her. Rebecca probably had no monetary assets to speak of, she wasn't a wealthy person. She had given up her job to take care of Jonah's home and children from his previous marriages.

Rebecca's family is also not wealthy. They had to raise money from donations, etc. to have her case reviewed. They are working class people.

So, if there are no monetary assets for Dina to recover from RZ's estate or from her family, what's the point in attempting to sue them? Seems it would be a waste of Dina's money to pay attorneys to pursue it.

I'm entertaining the idea that this is all to stir up attention. Remember, these are all key words and phrases that the media will cover, e.g., Dina "Wrongful Death Lawsuit", "Claims Boy was Assaulted", "Experts Reexamine Case"... it's all fine if it has substance, but frivolous PR machinery if not. It keeps the momentum going to come out every week or two with something new and get it in the media. And, after such a blitz over a couple of months, it would appear to rewrite the story if anyone is searching in the media. Unfortunately, in some cases, people are their worst enemies and even the media and consumers will not swallow everything.

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

The issue of a wrongful death civil suit
related to Max leaves me with a question.

What is the purpose of Dina filing a wrongful death civil suit against Rebecca or her family? Rebecca is dead, so there's no possibility of bringing criminal charges against her. Rebecca probably had no monetary assets to speak of, she wasn't a wealthy person. She had given up her job to take care of Jonah's home and children from his previous marriages.

Rebecca's family is also not wealthy. They had to raise money from donations, etc. to have her case reviewed. They are working class people.

So, if there are no monetary assets for Dina to recover from RZ's estate or from her family, what's the point in attempting to sue them? Seems it would be a waste of Dina's money to pay attorneys to pursue it.

I believe the purpose would be to get X to testify under oath. JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I believe the purpose would be to get X to testify under oath. JMO

Good point, as usual.

JMO

 

[Betty P]

I believe the purpose would be to get X to testify under oath. JMO

Who is X? Why would it be worth bankrupting RZ's family in order to make this person testify?

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

Rebecca's teenage sister., XZ. And because she is the only person alive that might know what really happened to Max. IMO

 

[Betty P]

Rebecca's teenage sister., XZ. And because she is the only person alive that might know what really happened to Max. IMO

So you think its a good idea to bankrupt the family of a homicide victim and their innocent teenage daughter? What kind of sick, twisted, sadistic person would want to do something like that? What could she possibly reveal that would be of benefit to anyone?

Why not push for the reinvestigation of both deaths instead of trying to punish and torment innocent victims?

 

[CuriousGeorgia]

XZ could reveal what really happened to Max Shacknai while under Rebecca's care. The truth about what happened to Max and why Rebecca really committed suicide needs to be revealed.