I saw it on a live feed.
Rebecca Zahau Wrongful Death/ADAM SHACKNAI FOUND RESPONSIBLE #5
- Thread starter cynic
- Start date
- Status
I saw it on a live feed.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,290
- Reaction score
- 124,071
I was watching it live on the CBS affiliate, channel 8.
Let's make sure to put those links into the Media & Timelines section for future reference. TIA!
Update from Rebecca’s GoFundMe page...
Today’s press conference after the verdict if anyone wants to watch.
http://kfmb.videodownload.worldnow.com/KFMB_0404201818035700000AC.mp4
https://www.gofundme.com/rydrn-justice-for-rebecca
Today’s press conference after the verdict if anyone wants to watch.
http://kfmb.videodownload.worldnow.com/KFMB_0404201818035700000AC.mp4
https://www.gofundme.com/rydrn-justice-for-rebecca
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,290
- Reaction score
- 124,071
That's a very good question. Assume they all thought it was a slam dunk for the defense's well heeled legal team. I hope the news media learns a lesson or two from this trial. Sometimes juries listen to facts and don't always decide in favor of high priced "dream teams". Let's hope this is a trend, JMO I think it will be with younger people serving jury duty. Their generation seems less likely to be impressed or swayed by wealthy people.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,290
- Reaction score
- 124,071
Thanks! Doug looks like a really nice guy, what a trouper he's been over the years. I'm going to make a donation at the Go Fund Me page so he can get his truck back.
Thank you for all of those links, Betty P!
From Business Insider: “The San Diego County Sheriff likewise ruled out foul play in Zahau's death, and no charges were brought. Authorities even released an unusual video demonstration of how investigators believed Zahau had managed to tie her own hands behind her back before binding her own legs, slipping a noose around her neck and hurling herself off the balcony.”
IMO a reasonable person reads that last sentence and says “WHAT???” And they didn’t even mention the gag. Incredulous on its face.
I've found it. The full reading of the verdict and the jury call for anyone who missed it
http://www.cbs8.com/story/37878542/mansion-death-lawsuit-jury-now-deciding-zahau-wrongful-death-suit
http://www.cbs8.com/story/37878542/mansion-death-lawsuit-jury-now-deciding-zahau-wrongful-death-suit
So, I was a bit confused. I thought the $5million was the punitive damages, which is why I couldn't work out how they could continue today to debate or discuss something the jury had already voted on. Now I realise that wasn't the punitive damages and that is why the jury hasn't yet been released.
This is the part that requires a higher standard of clear and convincing, as opposed to a preponderence of the evidence. It would be informative for the plaintiff to have this and I can see why the defense might be nervous about it, but it's only a guess. In my view it's not about the amount of an award, he won't be paying it anyway, it's the record of how convinced the jurors were that he did it.
This is the part that requires a higher standard of clear and convincing, as opposed to a preponderence of the evidence. It would be informative for the plaintiff to have this and I can see why the defense might be nervous about it, but it's only a guess. In my view it's not about the amount of an award, he won't be paying it anyway, it's the record of how convinced the jurors were that he did it.
Since an election is upcoming for Sheriff, I hope it is ok to mention the observations of Dr. Scott Fairgrieve on the differences between the Canadian and US system. He is a professor of Forensic Science at Laurentian University. He gave evidence in the Steven Avery case.
A summary of his observations on comparing the two systems:
- Having cameras in the courtroom enabled candidates to use it as part of the campaign for election/relection.
- He discusses a case in Kentucky where public defenders had posters up in all of the offices. He questioned it as he saw it as a conflict of interest and was told that people in the judicial system set aside part of their salary to go to the various campaigns so they can get a fair shake in the court.
All those positions in Canada are appointed, we hope based on their credentials and integrity. The observation he made was that judges/prosecutors/sheriffs etc. are elected in the US & will cater to whoever made the biggest contributions to their campaign for election. He felt that in Canada, these positions have no political motives to convict at any cost. British & Australian system are very similar.
He received a lot of his training in the US & mentioned that they encourage experts to be more suggestive, whereas in Canada experts are encouraged to be move conservative.
I would add that the judge in this case was above and beyond reproach in my opinion.
http://www.michaelspratt.com/poadcast-legal-matters/2016/2/3/the-docket-making-a-murderer-after-show-special-guest-scott-fairgrieve
A summary of his observations on comparing the two systems:
- Having cameras in the courtroom enabled candidates to use it as part of the campaign for election/relection.
- He discusses a case in Kentucky where public defenders had posters up in all of the offices. He questioned it as he saw it as a conflict of interest and was told that people in the judicial system set aside part of their salary to go to the various campaigns so they can get a fair shake in the court.
All those positions in Canada are appointed, we hope based on their credentials and integrity. The observation he made was that judges/prosecutors/sheriffs etc. are elected in the US & will cater to whoever made the biggest contributions to their campaign for election. He felt that in Canada, these positions have no political motives to convict at any cost. British & Australian system are very similar.
He received a lot of his training in the US & mentioned that they encourage experts to be more suggestive, whereas in Canada experts are encouraged to be move conservative.
I would add that the judge in this case was above and beyond reproach in my opinion.
http://www.michaelspratt.com/poadcast-legal-matters/2016/2/3/the-docket-making-a-murderer-after-show-special-guest-scott-fairgrieve
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department said it would be open to reviewing its evidence that could impact its original conclusions in the wake of the verdict, but it stands by the findings of the Medical Examiner's Office and our investigators that the death was a suicide.
Additionally, we are also willing to meet with the Zahau Family to look at any new evidence that came out of the civil trial, the department added in a statement.
http://www.newsweek.com/who-adam-sh...er-found-responsible-girlfriends-death-872724
Additionally, we are also willing to meet with the Zahau Family to look at any new evidence that came out of the civil trial, the department added in a statement.
http://www.newsweek.com/who-adam-sh...er-found-responsible-girlfriends-death-872724
Thank you for posting this.
Mr. Greer is such a gracious man...job well done! I just want to hug Rebecca's sister...what an emotional roller coaster these past years have been. Although the fight is not over, I hope her family can resume some normal.
That life like mannequin has to be the 'best' demonstrative evidence that I had ever seen!
This is a good theory, but I am more inclined to think that the message was just a way for him to stage the scene. I still think he originally staged this as a murder and then changed his mind because suicide would make more sense. But he couldn't unpaint the door.
Greer was asked something regarding if AS connection with his brother might have something to do with this crime at the press conference yesterday. Greer's response was something to the effect that he believes the complete opposite. Its the fact that he is disconnected from his family, and lives in his own world. This disconnection made it easier for AS to approach Rebecca in an inappropriate way, and when AS realized just how inappropriate it was and that his brother and others would find out, it triggered the actions he then made in silencing Rebecca.
was listening to Tricia's interview with Caitlin Rother. Very interesting when she mentioned that she had heard from sources that during the LE investigation, JS was making comments to the police about how this is affecting his business, and everyone knows it his house. Sorry don't have the exact words she said but it was something to that effect. It's in the last interview Tricia did with her.
She also mentioned that she had asked a spokesperson for the defense if they would try to settle with the punitive damages, she said the spokesperson said that they would be discussing it but that if they settle, they won't be able to appeal. With this said, I think if we don't see the defense try to settle on damages today, it means that they plan on an appeal. my opinion.
She also mentioned that she had asked a spokesperson for the defense if they would try to settle with the punitive damages, she said the spokesperson said that they would be discussing it but that if they settle, they won't be able to appeal. With this said, I think if we don't see the defense try to settle on damages today, it means that they plan on an appeal. my opinion.
I read the news of the verdict last night and I was just WOW! I fully admit I did not think there was enough evidence to find Adam responsible, but clearly the jury did and the most important thing to me is clearly they did not buy the ridiculous suicide ruling. I'm very happy about that because while I am on the fence concerning Adam being involved I hope this sends a STRONG message to the SDSO.
Has the SDSO made any statements? Can the case be re-opened?
Has the SDSO made any statements? Can the case be re-opened?
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,290
- Reaction score
- 124,071
See links a few comments above yours for SDSO response. They basically stand behind their own investigation, but have invited the Zahau family to meet with them to go over new evidence they uncovered. JMO, it's just a gesture for good publicity. I doubt they will ever reopen the investigation, though that's not to say someone else might do it instead.
The votes:
Special Verdict for Battery:
Q1. Did AS touch RZ before RZ's death with the intention to harm her? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q2. Was RZ harmed before her death by AS' conduct? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q3. What are the economic losses/damages if any that RZ sustained or incurred before her death? 1 cent. 12 - 0.
Special Verdict for Wrongful Death:
Q1. Did AS touch RZ before RZ's death with the intent to harm her? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q2. Did that touching cause the death of RZ? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q3. What are PZ's economic damages for
a. Past financial support that RZ would have contributed to PZ? $35,000 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
b. Future financial support that RZ would have contributed to PZ? $132,000 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
Q4. What are PZ's non-economic damages for
a. loss of RZ's love,companionship,comfort,care,assistance,affection,society&moral support from Jul 13 2011 to present? $3 mill 10 - 2, Jurors #2 and #9 disagreeing.
b. loss of (ditto above) from today forward? $2 mill 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
I wonder why Juror #2 disagreed with Q4 a. (loss of love etc since the death) but agreed with Q4 b. (loss of love going forward). The amount maybe?
Special Verdict for Battery:
Q1. Did AS touch RZ before RZ's death with the intention to harm her? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q2. Was RZ harmed before her death by AS' conduct? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q3. What are the economic losses/damages if any that RZ sustained or incurred before her death? 1 cent. 12 - 0.
Special Verdict for Wrongful Death:
Q1. Did AS touch RZ before RZ's death with the intent to harm her? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q2. Did that touching cause the death of RZ? Yes 9 - 3, Jurors #2, #9 and #10 disagreeing.
Q3. What are PZ's economic damages for
a. Past financial support that RZ would have contributed to PZ? $35,000 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
b. Future financial support that RZ would have contributed to PZ? $132,000 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
Q4. What are PZ's non-economic damages for
a. loss of RZ's love,companionship,comfort,care,assistance,affection,society&moral support from Jul 13 2011 to present? $3 mill 10 - 2, Jurors #2 and #9 disagreeing.
b. loss of (ditto above) from today forward? $2 mill 11 - 1, Juror #9 disagreeing.
I wonder why Juror #2 disagreed with Q4 a. (loss of love etc since the death) but agreed with Q4 b. (loss of love going forward). The amount maybe?
bellesnwhistles
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,651
- Reaction score
- 4,911
So happy to hear there is finally some justice for Rebecca. I never bought that this was a suicide
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Staff online
-
FraizeAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 114
- Guests online
- 3,276
- Total visitors
- 3,390