Curiosity Never Kills the Cat: Legal Questions for VERIFIED LAWYERS- ~No Discussion~

New Posts

Yes, the discussion needs to continue about how the Zahaus are trying to frame innocent people, and how they are now grasping at straws to do so.
 
AZlawyer said:
Looks like Plaintiffs' counsel tried (without following all the rules) to get Adam's doctor and employer to turn over records that are very protected under California law and would be mostly irrelevant to the issue of Adam's use of Ambien. The judge discussed the situation with the parties but hasn't issued a ruling yet. The judge also suggested a potentially more-relevant avenue of discovery (handwriting sample from Adam).
Click to expand...

That's very helpful of the judge to suggest that the plaintiffs pursue Adam's handwriting sample as a more viable avenue for discovery. Sounds like the judge also wants to see justice done in this case!

Kudos to the judge for her sense of justice and fairness in Rebecca's murder.

Does anyone know if Greer has now asked for Adam's handwriting sample?
 
AZlawyer said:
Looks like Plaintiffs' counsel tried (without following all the rules) to get Adam's doctor and employer to turn over records that are very protected under California law and would be mostly irrelevant to the issue of Adam's use of Ambien. The judge discussed the situation with the parties but hasn't issued a ruling yet. The judge also suggested a potentially more-relevant avenue of discovery (handwriting sample from Adam).
Click to expand...

Thanks, AZlawyer! With regard to the Zahau family's attorneys seeking information from Adam's employer, do you agree that information about Adam's job skills and training, specifically his ability to tie nautical knots, be relevant to the case? Does that seem like something the judge should allow? TIA
 
Hi K_Z, Lash, screecher, Inparadise, etc :

I tried to register on KZ website but someone already registered under my name "Bourne" or "bourne".

I ended up registering as "~Bourne" with squiggly line before my name so y'all know this is me.

I'm thinking someone did that nefariously in an attempt to get inside info from y'all.
 
Betty P said:
Thanks, AZlawyer! With regard to the Zahau family's attorneys seeking information from Adam's employer, do you agree that information about Adam's job skills and training, specifically his ability to tie nautical knots, be relevant to the case? Does that seem like something the judge should allow? TIA
Click to expand...

Something like that might be allowed. Frankly, I doubt Adam would deny having those skills if asked in a deposition or interrogatory; it would be silly to deny something so easily proved. But my recollection from when I looked at the documents is that they were asking for much broader disclosure from Adam's employer, and also that they didn't follow the California statute about notices that have to be sent out when you seek certain personal records.
 
bourne said:
Hi K_Z, Lash, screecher, Inparadise, etc :

I tried to register on KZ website but someone already registered under my name "Bourne" or "bourne".

I ended up registering as "~Bourne" with squiggly line before my name so y'all know this is me.

I'm thinking someone did that nefariously in an attempt to get inside info from y'all.
Click to expand...

Is there a new site for us to post on? That's great! I'm sure many of us would like to post there....what is the URL???
 
Hello! Neil Nalepa’s police interview transcript, from 5 days after RZ’s death, has been made “public” because it was attached to ROA #437, a motion filed by Dina’s attorneys to compel NN’s deposition in advance of the hearing for the order of protection. That seemed strange to me, as he is not a plaintiff or defendant, and his motion for a protective order is STILL pending. There is a tremendous amount of information in his interview, some of which is personal information, or information that is potentially embarrassing, or very private, and I’d think would be protected from disclosure if he had had the protective order in place sooner. It’s been almost 9 months since his attorney requested the protective order.

Was it proper for DS’s attorneys do an “end run” around the pending order of protection for NN and in effect “release” his interview (which is evidence) to the public in that motion? If he had a valid protective order done in a timely fashion (within the last 9 months) would that have prevented his interview from being released? (No valid motions to attach it to.)

I know you have had experience with FOIA requests. Would the interviews of Dina, Nina, Adam, and Jonah be available through a FOIA request after the case is concluded? Would these interviews be available now through a FOIA request since this is a civil lawsuit, and not a criminal case?
 
Hi AZLawyer, here is the letter that Dina Shacknai's lawyer wrote to Neil's lawyer. This states many of the reasons why Neil needs to be deposed.




Re: Rebecca Zahau, et al. v. Adam Shacknai, cl al. SDSC Case No. 30-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

Dear Mr. Miller:

As you are aware, we are counsel for Dina Shacknai in regard to the action entitled Rebecca Zahau, et al. v. Adam Shacknai, et al. and have served your client, Neil Nalepa, with a deposition subpoena for a date that has now passed. Currently, your Motion to Quash the subpoena is set to be heard on November 4, 2016 in Department 69 of the San Diego Superior Court Please allow this correspondence to act as our attempt to meet and confer on this motion in an attempt to either resolve the outstanding issues or advance the hearing date currently before the Court.

It appears from our review of your objection that you may not have been fully advised of the relevance of Mr. Nalepa's testimony in the wrongful death case brought by the family of his ex-wife, Rebecca Zahau. As you are aware, Mr. Nalepa was married to Rebecca Zahau from May 2002 until just a few months before her death. Even after the divorce, he continued to remain in contact with Ms. Zahau until a few days before her death and still has a close relationship with her family, the plaintiffs in this case, making his testimony extremely relevant to this litigation.

More specifically, please see the following areas of knowledge, with reference to the investigation into Rebecca's death, which would be relied upon by the Court in making its ruling on the protective order.

* Detective Tsuida relayed in her reports that after 2-3 years of marriage Rebecca left Neil and moved to San Diego. Rebecca dated a couple of men, but eventually reconciled with Neil and moved to Colorado. Things did not work out and Rebecca moved to Arizona. Neil eventually moved to Arizona and was living with Rebecca for a few months as a roommate, but Rebecca eventually asked him to move out. (See Follow-Up Investigative Report by Detective

* During interviews with Doug, Mary, Snowen and Timo, Detective Lebitski discovered that immediately following Rebecca's death, Mr. Nalepa flew from Arizona to attend a memorial at the Calvary Bible School in Murietta. Mr. Nalepa then came to the Sheriffs homicide office and was interviewed by Detectives Palmer and Lebitski. (See Follow-Up Investigative Report by Detective Lebitski.)

* During the recorded interview, Mr. Nalepa indicated that he found out about Rebecca's death from a news reporter. He relayed information regarding Rebecca's background and history of abuse, how they met, her personal and sleeping habits, and her infidelities during the marriage. He was very close to Rebecca's family and helped Mary through her divorce. He had last texted Rebecca on the Wednesday night of her death. Two weeks before, they had exchanged texts and Mr. Nalepa will have information regarding Rebecca's state of mind in the time leading up to her death. Further, during the interview, Mr. Nalepa voiced his opinion as to whether he believed Rebecca's death to bea suicide. (See Statement of Neil Nalepa.)

* During the time that Rebecca and Mr.Nalepa were separated, her then boyfriend filed a missing persons report with the Glendale California Police Department. These reports state that Rebecca had left Mr. Berger to resume her relationship with Mr. Nalepa (See Glendale Police Report.)

* At the time that the Zahau family members were deposed in Missouri in January 2015, Mr. Nalepa was visiting Rebecca's sisters, Xena and Mary. (Excerpts from the Depositions of Mary and Xena Zahau)

Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that not all of Mr. Nalepa's knowledge in this matter was gained during their marriage. His continued relationship with Rebecca and her family after the divorce is relevant to this civil case and his deposition is necessary. Therefore, it is our hope that you will agree to withdraw your objections to the deposition of Mr. Nalepa. In the alternative, we request that you agree to join us in moving ex parte to have the hearing date advanced so that Mr. Nalepa may be deposed prior to the filing of unrelated law and motion and before the commencement of trial preparation.
Click to expand...

I will post more on the Evidence thread about what was found in the investigative reports. Rebecca Zahau was a very disturbed woman, and there is now no doubt that a through investigation was done beginning in the first seconds after her suicide.
 
LuckyLucy2 said:
^ ...seconds after her suicde was responded to by EMTs and police. Seconds after her suicide, she was silent in the courtyard waiting for Jonah to come home and discover her and her angry painted message. (IMO)

The first link to this informative document did not seem to work, so here it is again.

ROA #437

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face..._Motion_to_Compel_Discovery_1476690341306.pdf
Click to expand...

Yes, it certainly looks like the SDSO decided it was a suicide before they had looked at all the evidence.
 
^ You have obviously not read the entire document. After 5 days of intense investigation, NOTHING pointed to ANYONE except Rebecca Zahau. Even then, detectives were waiting on toxicology and other tests to come back and were going to explore any evidence that pointed away from suicide.
 
Hi AZ Lawyer, I hope all is well:) I wanted to ask, now that Dina and Nina have been dismissed from the case, can they sue the Zahaus for defamation of character? Also, does the judge have to allow a third amended complaint against Adam? Thank you so much:)
 
Jessica2012 said:
Hi AZ Lawyer, I hope all is well:) I wanted to ask, now that Dina and Nina have been dismissed from the case, can they sue the Zahaus for defamation of character? Also, does the judge have to allow a third amended complaint against Adam? Thank you so much:)
Click to expand...

Anyone can sue anyone for anything. :) They might sue for defamation for anything said outside the context of the lawsuit (like to the media), but they would have to prove the statements made were false. Getting dismissed from the lawsuit would not count as evidence of that. They might sue for wrongful institution of civil proceedings for the filing of the lawsuit itself. I don't know if it's exactly the same in California, but in AZ they would have to prove that the case was filed without probable cause and was motivated by malice.

I don't think the Zs said they were going to amend their claims against Adam, did they? I thought the amendment was to drop Nina (or both Nina and Dina--I haven't seen the new document that mentions Dina). If there's going to be an actual amendment of claims against Adam, the judge would have discretion whether to allow that, and an appellate court wouldn't overturn the judge's decision unless it was "an abuse of discretion," i.e., clearly stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 151 more.
Total: 4,309 (members: 152, guests: 4,157)

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
4,157
Total visitors
4,309
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,521
Messages
17,970,282
Members
228,792
Latest member
aztraea
Back
Top