Rebecca Zahau Wrongful death trial begins. Trial coverage and discussion #4

[justice be served]

One problem that comes to mind immediately....Dr Bergman could not have interviewed the Zahaus with any expectancy of objectivity. They have both a financial and emotional stake in a verdict of murder.

I believe the family is also the source of the statement that RZ religious beliefs were so strong she would not commit suicide. But the testimony about her serial adultery indicates that the tenets of her faith...”Thiu Shalt Not Commit Adjltery” did not prohibit her from actions and behaviors that seem impulsive at best and destructive at worst.

It would be lovely if you would read my post again. The point is that all manner of family and friends and colleagues were interviewed in the Foster case. I am sure that many of them had competing views. Your response is not germaine to my posting whatsoever. If you want to ignore the facts then perhaps it is better to post nothing since there seems to be no counter argument.

 

[Jessica2012]

I thought someone posted that there can't be just nine votes for the Plaintiff to win. iow, it must be unanimous.

No, since it is a Civil Trial, 9 of 12 must vote “Guilty”. I know the CA rules have been posted before (maybe in the lawyer thread).

 

[justice be served]

I agree. It’s two set of competing and conflicting experts. This is why I’m betting on appeals from either losing side and much more time for us all to discuss this case.

From whence does your talk of appeals keep coming from? Is there some source you can point us to?

 

[MyBelle]

I’m glad you brought that up! Here is what a real and valid case investigation looks like by Dr. Alan Berman on Vince Foster. Now compare his investigation on Foster to Rebecca’s. Nothing is comparable to it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/docs/fosterix.htm

So here is an extensive and in-depth study and conclusion of a suicide by Dr. Alan Berman. He interviewed many, many family, colleagues and broadly looked at his life in the many months leading up to his suicide finding.

Here is just an excerpt:

' The OIC interviewed Mr. Foster's wife, sisters, mother, children, and other relatives; numerous friends in Arkansas and Washington; many colleagues who worked closely with him at the Rose Law Firm or the White House; and various other persons with potentially important information. During this effort, the OIC gathered extensive evidence relating to Mr. Foster's state of mind and activities.

The OIC is grateful to the Foster family members – including Alice Mae Foster, Lisa Foster, Sharon Bowman, Sheila Anthony, Beryl Anthony, and the Foster children, among others – for cooperating with this and prior investigations under painful and difficult circumstances. Lisa Foster and Mr. Foster's mother, Alice Mae Foster, not only spoke with OIC investigators at some length, but also provided additional information and assistance at their homes in Arkansas.'

Dr. Alan Berman has no basis of finding suicide of Rebecca as his own standard of care was not met obviously IMO. Read everything that he did on the link in Vince Foster’s case and compare it to what he did with Rebecca’s case. He may be a top expert in suicide but in Rebecca’s case he fell down dramatically in his investigation and just took money to please the defense IMO.

Wow! I suggest you re-read your own link very carefully because it completely contradicts the rest of your post. The OIC was the investigating agency. Dr. Berman's report on Foster's death sounds like he used EXACTLY the same methodology and criteria he used in determining his conclusions in RZ's case, including relying on the investigative file of the OIC.

Dr. Berman said that Mr. Foster's "last 96 hours show clear signs of crisis and uncharacteristic vulnerability." Dr. Berman concluded, furthermore, that "[t]here is little doubt that Foster was clinically depressed . . . in early 1993, and, perhaps, sub-clinically even before this." Dr. Berman noted that there was some history of depression in the family.

 

[MyBelle]

No, since it is a Civil Trial, 9 of 12 must vote “Guilty”. I know the CA rules have been posted before (maybe in the lawyer thread).

They were posted but then someone posted that the Judge approved the Defense motion that the verdict could not be split. If I misunderstood, I apologize.

 

[MyBelle]

It would be lovely if you would read my post again. The point is that all manner of family and friends and colleagues were interviewed in the Foster case. I am sure that many of them had competing views. Your response is not germaine to my posting whatsoever. If you want to ignore the facts then perhaps it is better to post nothing since there seems to be no counter argument.

All manner of friends and family were interviewed in both the Foster and Zahau cases. However, Dr. Berman didn't do the interviews, the investigating agency did. JMO

 

[minorone]

If the Plaintiffs felt it was “armchair”psychiatry, they could have objected to the Judge that the testimony not be allowed.

The Judge allowed the testimony. The jury Is allowed to consider that testimony in their deliberations.

I guess I did not explain my point very well.

Dr. Berman reviewed documents from:

1) The ME who did the AR who on a dead body and based his opinion on statements made by the Plaintiff’s family & some depositions.
2) LE who based their opinions on statements and input from the family and people close to the death scene.

The defense & Dr. Berman were well aware that Karen Hancock, county’s Psychiactric Emergency Reponse Team, had spent an hour and a half to two hours talking with Zahau at the hospital. He did seek her opinion or assessment of RZ. I have to question the professional and ethical standards of someone who provided expert evidence & opinion based on written reports , BUT NEVER SPOKE to the one professional who actually talked to RZ for one and a half to two hours.

 

[Jessica2012]

In a California civil case, 9 of the 12 people must agree on a verdict.

https://ccss.org/Resources/Documents/Karnow-CivilTrials5-12.pdf

 

[Jessica2012]

No problem, MyBelle. I think that may be the first time ever you were wrong. IMO. :loveyou:

I, too, am unfamiliar with California Civil case rules. I did serve on a California Criminal trial jury. We put a man away for life. The verdict was unanimous. I know you, too, have served on juries.

 

[MyBelle]

According to the testimony:
Defense attorney David Elsberg asked Berman about reports that Zahau had been fondled by her school principal when she was young, and why that might put her at risk for suicide. “Sexual abuse can be devastating to the abused,” Berman answered. “It produces a sense of shame, as if they are to blame;....."

To form this opinion, Dr. Berman reviewed a range of documents including law enforcement reports, the Medical Examiner's reports, and depositions in this case. He never met Rebecca & his opinion is too limited in scope to make that generalization about Rebecca. His opinion is based on reports of people he has not personally inteviewed.

It is not a realistic way to assess and discuss someone's mental state. How can anyone give an in-depth character analysis on psychological or mental health grounds without knowing or examining the person at all?"

BBM. That is your opinion. Apparently the Judge disagrees with you because she certified Dr. Berman as an expert and allowed his testimony as to his post-mortem psychological assessment. It is up to the jury as to whether Dr. Berman is credible.

 

[Jessica2012]

I guess I did not explain my point very well.

Dr. Berman reviewed documents from:

1) The ME who did the AR who on a dead body and based his opinion on statements made by the Plaintiff’s family;
2) LE who based their opinions on statements and input from the same source.

The defense & Dr. Berman were well aware that Karen Hancock, county’s Psychiactric Emergency Reponse Team, had spent an hour and a half to two hours talking with Zahau at the hospital. He did seek her opinion or assessment of RZ. I have to question the professional and ethical standards of someone who provided expert evidence & opinion based on written reports , BUT NEVER SPOKE to the one professional who actually talked to RZ for one and a half to two hours.

She was Rebecca immediately after the accident. Rebecca was most likely still in shock at that time, and the counselor was not there in her official capacity.

Berman did read the deposition from Rebecca’s ex-husband, ex-boyfriend, current boyfriend, and looked over police reports associated with Rebecca. All of the things he testified to in trial throughout her life that put her at a higher risk for suicide.

 

[minorone]

She was Rebecca immediately after the accident. Rebecca was most likely still in shock at that time, and the counselor was not there in her official capacity.

Berman did read the deposition from Rebecca’s ex-husband, ex-boyfriend, current boyfriend, and looked over police reports associated with Rebecca. All of the things he testified to in trial.

The judge would accept Dr. Berman as an expert, but would not have anyway of knowing what his testimony would be. The judge would expect him to give testimony as a professional and with regard to the code of ethics of the APA. Whether the counsellor was there in her professional capacity is irrelevant. What is important is that she is a professional & was doing her assessment of RZ as a professional.

 

[Jessica2012]

^ Attorney Greer has the option of objecting to any testimony. If the Judge agrees, she will sustain the objection.

The Jury heard the testimony of the counselor that was with Rebecca that day,

Berman would also have had her deposition available to him to add to the restof his information. IMO.

 

[minorone]

^ Attorney Greer has the option of objecting to any testimony. If the Judge agrees, she will sustain the objection.

The Jury heard the testimony of the counselor that was with Rebecca that day, and Berman would also have had her deposition available to him to add to the rest of his information.

I assume you were at the trial to know he did not object to it. Not everything gets reported in the media, so I cannot comment on what KG asked, questioned, objected to, etc.

Did the people who gave evidence at the trial do depositions as well??

 

[justice be served]

The judge would accept Dr. Berman as an expert, but would not have anyway of knowing what his testimony would be. The judge would expect him to give testimony as a professional and with regard to the code of ethics of the APA. Whether the counsellor was there in her professional capacity is irrelevant. What is important is that she is a professional & was doing her assessment of RZ as a professional.

The fact is that the Berman investigation was flimsy at best when you compare it to the doctor's valid investigatory procedures. The posters that want to claim otherwise are just dodging reality.

 

[justice be served]

I assume you were at the trial to know he did not object to it. Not everything gets reported in the media, so I cannot comment on what KG asked, questioned, objected to, etc.

Agreed. Links would be handy but seems they've gone by the wayside over the last number of days IMO when many posters went poof!

 

[justice be served]

^ Attorney Greer has the option of objecting to any testimony. If the Judge agrees, she will sustain the objection.

The Jury heard the testimony of the counselor that was with Rebecca that day,

Berman would also have had her deposition available to him to add to the restof his information. IMO.

You seriously think reading someone's deposition is a comprehensive look at determining anything? Really?

 

[justice be served]

She was Rebecca immediately after the accident. Rebecca was most likely still in shock at that time, and the counselor was not there in her official capacity.

Berman did read the deposition from Rebecca’s ex-husband, ex-boyfriend, current boyfriend, and looked over police reports associated with Rebecca. All of the things he testified to in trial throughout her life that put her at a higher risk for suicide.

BBM. Ex-husband: probably emotionally hurt by Rebecca; Ex-Boyfriend: ditto; Current Boyfriend: Can't comment within TOS rules. Police reports: Can't comment within TOS rules. And my very favorite: BBM. Laughable.

 

[justice be served]

Wow! I suggest you re-read your own link very carefully because it completely contradicts the rest of your post. The OIC was the investigating agency. Dr. Berman's report on Foster's death sounds like he used EXACTLY the same methodology and criteria he used in determining his conclusions in RZ's case, including relying on the investigative file of the OIC.

Dr. Berman said that Mr. Foster's "last 96 hours show clear signs of crisis and uncharacteristic vulnerability." Dr. Berman concluded, furthermore, that "[t]here is little doubt that Foster was clinically depressed . . . in early 1993, and, perhaps, sub-clinically even before this." Dr. Berman noted that there was some history of depression in the family.

Wrong.

 

[MyBelle]

No problem, MyBelle. I think that may be the first time ever you were wrong. IMO. :loveyou:

I, too, am unfamiliar with California Civil case rules. I did serve on a California Criminal trial jury. We put a man away for life. The verdict was unanimous. I know you, too, have served on juries.

I sure thought I read here yesterday that the Judge ruled the verdict could not be split. I should have requested a link. My bad! Carry on! lol