Do you think Max's scooter was involved in his fall?
- Thread starter K_Z
- Start date
- Status
*Lash*
Justice 4 Rebecca
- Joined
- May 11, 2012
- Messages
- 3,003
- Reaction score
- 66
Hi Gilgamesh! It was cited in Dina's expert Dr. Bove's report. Jonah told Det. Adkins that the damage was not there the day before the accident.
I think it is very likely the marks on the Newell Post and on Max's back came from the scooter.
What I don't understand is why no one has tried to recreate how those marks could have been made on the scooter and the Newell Post.
It seems it would be fairly easy to start with the same model/make of scooter and a clean painted Newell post. I've seem enough of kids trying to pull something or push it over such areas to know that could make the marks. And, there is one spot of paint on the metal area of the scooter (correct?).
I'm uncertain all the marks on the post were made from one incident. Some could have been made earlier (in the morning?) and some later, during the accident. Or just two tries in a very short period of time. It could also be that Max tried to push or pull the scooter up there initially and then rearranged it on the banister, like at a lower point. IDK.
Also, not quite understanding the paint on the tire coming from the top edge of that post. And, we don't know if it was enamel paint or what. I don't think some paint would rub off on a tire like that? If it did, would th ere be tire marks also where it rubbed off onto something? There are scuff marks on the wall in the photo (second floor across from the Newell Post).
The marks on Max's back looks like he landed on the scooter - why can't those marks be measured by someone? And, matched to see?
What I don't understand is why no one has tried to recreate how those marks could have been made on the scooter and the Newell Post.
It seems it would be fairly easy to start with the same model/make of scooter and a clean painted Newell post. I've seem enough of kids trying to pull something or push it over such areas to know that could make the marks. And, there is one spot of paint on the metal area of the scooter (correct?).
I'm uncertain all the marks on the post were made from one incident. Some could have been made earlier (in the morning?) and some later, during the accident. Or just two tries in a very short period of time. It could also be that Max tried to push or pull the scooter up there initially and then rearranged it on the banister, like at a lower point. IDK.
Also, not quite understanding the paint on the tire coming from the top edge of that post. And, we don't know if it was enamel paint or what. I don't think some paint would rub off on a tire like that? If it did, would th ere be tire marks also where it rubbed off onto something? There are scuff marks on the wall in the photo (second floor across from the Newell Post).
The marks on Max's back looks like he landed on the scooter - why can't those marks be measured by someone? And, matched to see?
elfie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 1,381
- Reaction score
- 113
I have thought for a long time that Max's accident was somehow precipitated by his use of the scooter. I had thought that he flipped over with the scooter at the dip in the banister just going down the first stair, but the paint transfer to the wheel points more towards a trick on top of the newel post. The paint chip transfer to the wheel matches the missing paint at the left corner of the post from the photo. The diagonal of missing paint continuing on toward the center of the post matches the paint smear on the wheel. At some point the wheel turned as indicated by the smear.
I would be interested in seeing a recreation as well.
I would be interested in seeing a recreation as well.
Yes and no.
-- The paint chip on the tyre... how does a paint chip get on the tyre? Someone lifts the scooter up. Really high.
-- But why, if Max was trying to ride the rail or something, are those dents in one single small location and not all over the place, considering Max's small size and the swivelly nature of the scooter? The newel is too small an area, IMO, to be evidence that Max was lollygagging about trying a stunt.
-- Max was only six years old. He wasn't very tall. The sheer physics of a child that size trying to lift a swivelly scooter onto a corner of a rail and then himself climb up (or climb up, balance, bend to get scooter, attempt to lift scooter, fall a long way in opposite direction) is.. just not working, in my head.
It looks more to me like the scooter was banged hard several times against the rail in that one small place, and then possibly thrown over.
-- The paint chip on the tyre... how does a paint chip get on the tyre? Someone lifts the scooter up. Really high.
-- But why, if Max was trying to ride the rail or something, are those dents in one single small location and not all over the place, considering Max's small size and the swivelly nature of the scooter? The newel is too small an area, IMO, to be evidence that Max was lollygagging about trying a stunt.
-- Max was only six years old. He wasn't very tall. The sheer physics of a child that size trying to lift a swivelly scooter onto a corner of a rail and then himself climb up (or climb up, balance, bend to get scooter, attempt to lift scooter, fall a long way in opposite direction) is.. just not working, in my head.
It looks more to me like the scooter was banged hard several times against the rail in that one small place, and then possibly thrown over.
freespeech
Inactive
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 933
- Reaction score
- 5
Elfie, yes, I also agreed with your scenario. Your scenario made the best sense to me as to how the scooter went over the railing with Max. However, possibly a slight variation occurred. I would also like to see some recreations of possible scenarios. I hope at some point in the future this will happen. It would be worthwhile to put to rest all the unnecessary rumors.
freespeech
Inactive
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 933
- Reaction score
- 5
I am still wondering why the scooter was allowed on the second floor. There was a courtyard driveway to play in and a garage in which the scooter could be stored.
I believe most parents would train their children to put away bikes and scooters in the garage against the walls somewhere. Some even install hooks on the walls for mounting. Obviously one would need to follow after a six year old to make sure they didn't leave their scooter/bike in the middle of the driveway.
Is there is something inherently wrong with allowing the scooter on the inside of the house and on the second floor aside from the obvious danger and sanitation issues? Are there any parents who post here that allow bikes/scooters to be kept and played with indoors? I would love to hear a different take on this matter because it is not generally an commonly accepted practice in the circles with which I am familar.
I believe most parents would train their children to put away bikes and scooters in the garage against the walls somewhere. Some even install hooks on the walls for mounting. Obviously one would need to follow after a six year old to make sure they didn't leave their scooter/bike in the middle of the driveway.
Is there is something inherently wrong with allowing the scooter on the inside of the house and on the second floor aside from the obvious danger and sanitation issues? Are there any parents who post here that allow bikes/scooters to be kept and played with indoors? I would love to hear a different take on this matter because it is not generally an commonly accepted practice in the circles with which I am familar.
SweetT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2012
- Messages
- 2,939
- Reaction score
- 114
In think a fight ensued with the scooter..it got banged against the newell..Max fought to keep his scooter from being thrown over and then in the process he was pushed against the bannister and fell over. Just a possible scenerio. One of many. I think someone was upset that he was still using his scooter in the house upstairs after being told not to.
Carioca
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 493
- Reaction score
- 5
SweetT - Exactly my thinking! Thank you for putting it in words. I do think the scooter was involved in his fall, but not that he was trying to ride it at the time. It was the catalyst, the incident that preceded his fall. And I do not believe it was in Rebecca's character to have fought with him over it. She would have gently reminded him. Thus IMO it would have been another authority figure, one was accustomed to sleeping in, and when awakened and found the scooter, was extremely annoyed. Always IMO.
freespeech
Inactive
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 933
- Reaction score
- 5
I believe rumor has it that Jonah likes to sleep in. That would make sense. If he generally gets up early to commute to the office then I'm sure he likes sleeping late while vacationing. Who wouldn't want to do that?
As far as I know Jonah probably would not kick the scooter. I don't recall that it was written that Rebecca complained that he was mean with the kids. Didn't she complain that he let the kids abuse her and refused to set limits on their bad behavior?
I read he was mean with his ex-wives. His first wife, Kimberly, stated that he was either a good or a doting father. I don't remember which term she used. I remember in an early article that has now been scrubbed that she alleged he threatened her with a knife and was granted an order of protection.
Probably everyone here knows about how he treated Dina. Apparently the abuse there was mutual though. Jonah was definitely into abusing the women or allowed others to abuse them like in Rebecca's case but has anyone ever heard or read that he ever abused any of the kids? Idk.
inthedark14
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,824
- Reaction score
- 38
I think that the scooter had to be involved, or something else big enough, heavy enough to make those large gouges into painted wood. Looking at the new pictures we have seen, and the statement by JS that this damage was not there before, what else, that was the scene could have possibly caused that damage. Surely not poor MS' body could have made that kind of damage. What other objects are around that could have caused that damage? Also, when did JS make the statement that the damage wasn't there before? Was it immediately after MS' accident? Was it after RZ was found? I'd like to know the date/time he made that statement.
Always, MOO.
Always, MOO.
Considering Jonah Shacknai seems to have difficulty getting his story straight about whether or not he still owns Spreckles, I am certainly not going to take his word for it the chipped up paint on the newel post was not there the day before.
If you look closely at the newel post photos, it appears as if there was older "touch up" paint on the post. Possibly from earlier incidents or contacts. This would be a red flag to any investigator in a future legal action. Its quite possible the damage on that newel post was not from just a one time only incident, but rather accumulative damage over a period of time. It explains the touch up paint and multiple planes of damage. This would not be surprising since this is an area of high traffic flow in a house filled with children and teenagers. I can imagine that Max, his siblings, housekeeping staff, and other people all carried or played with numerous objects (ie: scooters, vacuum cleaners, furniture, baseball bats, balls, ect) around the stairs and bannister.
If you look closely at the newel post photos, it appears as if there was older "touch up" paint on the post. Possibly from earlier incidents or contacts. This would be a red flag to any investigator in a future legal action. Its quite possible the damage on that newel post was not from just a one time only incident, but rather accumulative damage over a period of time. It explains the touch up paint and multiple planes of damage. This would not be surprising since this is an area of high traffic flow in a house filled with children and teenagers. I can imagine that Max, his siblings, housekeeping staff, and other people all carried or played with numerous objects (ie: scooters, vacuum cleaners, furniture, baseball bats, balls, ect) around the stairs and bannister.
freespeech
Inactive
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 933
- Reaction score
- 5
I wonder if Dina will attempt to file a wrongful death lawsuit. She has 9 months before the SOL is over. She may be able to use several arguments regarding whether the railings were up to code and whether Max was properly supervisied prior to his accident.
She may be entiled to collect a portion of the property Max would have inherited through the law of intestate succession according to one article. Does anyone know if she would be entiled to collect on properties or Trust Funds that Max would have inherited? Just wondering?
Read more: The California Wrongful Death Law | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_6916279_california-wrongful-death-law.html#ixzz2BDZ8tEiwna
She may be entiled to collect a portion of the property Max would have inherited through the law of intestate succession according to one article. Does anyone know if she would be entiled to collect on properties or Trust Funds that Max would have inherited? Just wondering?
Read more: The California Wrongful Death Law | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_6916279_california-wrongful-death-law.html#ixzz2BDZ8tEiwna
- Status