Wrongful Death Lawsuit Overview

cynic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,688
Reaction score
436
Below are excerpts from the final major documents filed prior to trial. These provide a good “map” of what the trial will focus on as it moves forward. Attached are the third, and final, amended complaint, as well as the reply to the motion for summary judgement. MIchael Wakshull’s full handwriting report (in two parts) is also attached.


From the third amended complaint:
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1. On or around the early morning of July 13, 2011, Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI battered and murdered REBECCA by:
(a) striking REBECCA on the head multiple times with a blunt instrument;
(b) physically restraining her;
(c) further restraining her by binding her legs with tape;
(d) gagging her;
(e) binding her hands behind her back with rope;
(f) binding her ankles together with rope;
(g) removing the previously placed tape from her legs;
(h) strangling her to the point of unconsciousness or death;
(i) making and placing a rope noose around her neck;
(j) tying the other end of the rope leading to the noose to a bed;
(k) carrying her to the adjacent balcony and pushing her over the railing of the balcony causing her to fall and, if she was still alive at that time, to then die by asphyxiation.
(1) removing evidence of the acts which he committed, including wiping down objects he had touched in order to remove DNA and finger prints; and (m) as a further ploy to cover up his wrongdoing, painted the following words on the inside of door near the balcony where REBECCA was left hanging:
SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER
2. On the morning of July 13, 2011, REBECCA was found dead, naked, bound and gagged, with a rope noose around her neck. Her cause of death was asphyxiation, which was caused by either manual strangulation before she was hanged, or from being hanged with a rope noose around her neck from the second story deck of the Coronado vacation home at which she was staying, located at 1043 Ocean Boulevard, and commonly known as the “Spreckels Mansion.” The Coroner for the County of San Diego determined that she died on that date.
3. Because the only individuals who know the true facts and sequence of events with absolute certainty are the decedent REBECCA and her killer, the allegations made herein are made on information and belief based on the evidence that has been uncovered to date. Plaintiffs intend to seek leave to amend the Complaint as additional facts are developed and uncovered during the course of discovery.

ALLEGATIONS OF SPECIFIC ACTS
4. Plaintiffs allege, based in part on the multiple abrasions, found throughout her body including but not limited to her hips, right hand, right shoulder, left forearm, and left hand, the presence of multiple blood drops on the second story carpet near the entrance of the northwest bedroom and bathroom shower and a knocked over chair within the northwest bedroom, and a scream for “HELP!” heard from a neighbor of the Spreckels Mansion that DEFENDANT ADAM SHACKNAI aggressively confronted REBECCA.
5. Further, based on the on the mud found on DECEDENT’S feet and four subgaleal hemorrhages on the back right side of her head, in response to the aggressive confrontation from Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI, DECEDENT, fearing for her safety, attempted to flee the residence. However, before DECEDENT could evade her attacker, she was struck four times on the back of the head with a blunt object by Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI, rendering her unconscious.
6. Once confronted with the reality that DECEDENT would eventually regain consciousness, and thereafter probably disclose information about this incident, Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI decided to murder the DECEDENT and hide his involvement.
7. Due to the lack of markings on her body evidencing her being dragged back into the house, Plaintiffs allege that Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI carried the DECEDENT back into the house. Based on the facts that DECEDENT was found naked and that the clothing she was wearing on that date was not found at the scene of the murder, Plaintiffs allege that once inside the residence, Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI stripped off her clothing.
8. Based on the tape residue found on DECEDENT’S legs, and the fact that no tape with similar adhesive was found at the scene, Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant ADAM SHACKN AI first restrained DECEDENT with tape, and gagged her, while he was devising and planning the rest of the scheme, and later removed the tape from the scene.
9. Thereafter, Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI contrived an elaborate scheme to murder REBECCA and conceal his involvement.
10. The coverup scheme involved Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI binding DECEDENT’S hands (behind her back) and ankles with rope he found at the residence. Plaintiffs allege that based on the knots having nautical qualities and ADAM being a tug boat captain with experience tying nautical knots, that ADAM bound the DECEDENT. Plaintiffs further base this allegation on the fact that the ropes had the same black paint residue found on DECEDENT’S nipples, thus implicating the person who tied the knots as the person who also pinched the Decedent’s nipples, and that ADAM had admitted to masturbating to *advertiser censored* on his cell phone that evening, the further inference being that the two instances of sexual behavior are consistent with ADAM’s state of mind that evening. Plaintiffs further base this allegation on the fact that multiple contusions in the area subjacent to the ligatures around her lower legs, a result of the strength of the binding and the lack of rope fibers found on REBECCA’S hands.
11. Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI also placed a blue t-shirt around REBECCA’S neck and stuffed it in her mouth, using it as a gag to both muffle her screams and cover up any marks that would suggest murder.
12. Based on the injuries sustained by REBECCA and the amount of strength needed to create such injury, Plaintiffs allege that in the early hours of July 13, 2011, ADAM choked REBECCA to death. REBECCA sustained a left cricoid fracture, a fracture of the left arm of the hyoid bone, and a fracture of the base of the left superior horn of the thyroid cartilage, all injuries which commonly occur with strangulation and is unlikely to occur with a hanging. Furthermore, Rebecca’s face was described as congestive, and petechiae was found on REBECCA’S eyelids, upper and lower palpebral conctivae, and her inner, upper, and lower lip mucosa, periorbital regions and on the left side of her face between he eye, both her eyes fine and coarse petechia above the ligature furrow, extending from the chin to the angles of the mandible, which commonly occurs with strangulation, where there is no complete occlusion of the vasculature, unlike in a full-suspension hanging.
13. Once he murdered REBECCA, Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI wrote a cryptic message on the door outside the room where the murder was committed. The message was painted using black paint at a height that is consistent with an individual who is approximately the height of Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI. The message read: “SHE SAVED HIM. CAN YOU SAVE HER.”
14. Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI, based on black paint residue found on the noose, then tightened the noose around the neck of the DECEDENT and attached the rope to the base of the bed. ADAM then picked up REBECCA, then threw her over the edge of the adjacent balcony.
15. Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI was careful to remove any evidence of his involvement, including the disposal of the tape used to initially bind her lower legs, and REBECCA’S clothes that she was last seen publicly in on July 12, 2011.
16. Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI lastly set out to stage a suicide, and hide his involvement, first by removing and later disposing of the various articles of clothing REBECCA was last seen wearing publicly on June 12, 2011, in an effort to conceal DNA evidence and evidence of having stripped REBECCA of her clothing, laying out clothing matching Zahau’s size including a white undershirt, black long sleeve t-shirt and blue jeans in an effort to divert attention away from her last known clothing in the inevitable investigation into REBECCA’S death. Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI then wiped down several surfaces, including but not limited to the second story balcony door in an effort to remove fingerprints and DNA. Once the staging was complete, the Defendant ADAM SHACKNAI fled the scene, with the intent to call the police in the early morning with claims of suicide.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Keith Greer’s reply to the motion for summary judgement:
Substantial evidence rebuts the coroner’s “suicide” opinion.
Although San Diego Deputy Medical Examiner Jonathan Lucas, M.D. admits in his autopsy report that, “The circumstances of this death are unusual and were initially considered suspicious,” he opines that Rebecca committed suicide because:
(1) there were no signs of struggle or other footprints on the balcony;
(2) there was no sign of a struggle at the scene;
(3) there was no toxicology evidence that she was sedated; and a “complete and thorough investigation” by the San Diego Sheriff’s Office “found no clear evidence that the death was a homicide.” (Declaration of Krista Enns, Exhibit G, Lucas Report, pg. 3).
Plaintiffs respectfully submit that the Dr. Lucas’s report is a classic example of “confirmation bias,” i.e., when information that supports a predetermined conclusion is given priority over information that does not support the conclusion, and facts and opinions that don’t coincide with the conclusion are filtered out. Moreover, an unbiased review of all the facts shows that this was very clearly murder, and the reason there were minimal signs of a struggle are that Rebecca was rendered unconscious by four blows to her head by a blunt object, and she was then strangled in the mansion before she was thrown off the balcony.

Blows to Rebecca’s head were sufficient to incapacitate her.
In their autopsy reports, both Dr. Lucas and Dr. Wecht identified four separate traumas to right side and upper right side of her head, identified as “subgaleal hemorrhages." (Enns Decl.3Ex.G, Lucas Report al pg. 15: Greer Decl. Ex. A, Wecht Depo.. Ex. 6, Wecht Report at 000875). Dr. Lucas admitted that these blows could have been sufficient to render Rebecca unconscious:
”Q. To clarify a comment you made earlier, if you have a blow to the head sufficient to cause the type of subgaleal hemorrhages that you have in this case, are you saying that if you - since you didn’t find any injury to the brain itself, that those blows could not have led to Rebecca being unconscious?
A. 1 didn't say that.
Q. Okay, 'Cause you can - a person can be knocked unconscious without an injury - a clinically identifiable injury to the brain, correct?
A. Yes.”
(Greer Decl. Ex. E, Lucas Depo. at 161:15-25) When asked about the cause of the injuries to Rebecca’s head. Dr. Lucas side stepped his lack of a reasonable explanation, stating” “I think that like I said before. I think going over the balcony, her interaction with the balcony could have caused some of those, maybe secondarily hitting something when she was swinging. Those are possibilities for me. But, again, just because 1 can’t provide a definitive explanation, in my opinion, doesn’t take it out of the suicide category.” (Greer Decl., Ex. E, Lucas Depo. at 201:25- 202:6)(Emphasis added).
Dr. Wecht, on the other hand, was more definitive, opining that: “it is my opinion that these four separate areas of subscapular subgaleal hemorrhage were caused by four separately inflicted blows to the head by what I’ve said before as a smooth, rounded blunt force type of instrument producing those injuries.” (Greer Decl., Ex. A, Wecht Depo. at 44:6-12). Dr. Wecht further testified that: “In my opinion, based upon the fact that there are four such subscapular hemorrhages in four discrete locations, I believe, within a reasonable degree of medical probability, that the totality of the effect of four blows would have led to at least some diminution of full consciousness that would have produced some disruption of the neuronal - the reflex and so on, and I - yes, with a reasonable medical probability', I believe that. (Id, Wecht Depo. at 238:11-20).

Rebccca was strangled before being hanged.
Both Dr. Lucas and Dr. Wecht determined that the cricoid cartilage in Rebecca’s neck, well below the furrows left on Rebecca’s neck from the noose, had been fractured, and both agreed that this type of injury is consistent with manual strangulation. Dr. Lucas testified:
“Q. 1 want to read this to you and ask your opinion on it. It says, “Rebecca sustained a
left cricoid” - - c-r-i-c-o-i-d - “fracture, a fracture of the left arm of the hyoid bone” - h-y-o-i-d - “and a fracture of the base of the left superior horn of the thyroid cartilage, all injuries which typically occur with strangulation and is unlikely to occur with a hanging.” Do you agree with that?
Yes, 1 agree with that statement.”
(Finns Decl., Ex. G, Lucas Depo. at 47:24-48:7).
Dr. Wecht, after further discussing the basis for his opinion (Greer Decl. Ex.A, Wecht Depo. at 88:5-89:23), testified:
“Q. And do you have an opinion as to the cause of death?
1 believe that the cause of death, with reasonable medical probability, would have been strangulation based upon the fracture of the cricoid to a great extent, based upon other findings which have been discussed, and maybe some which we have not touched upon in full. I'm not sure, I can’t speak for Mr. Greer, but I believe that she was more likely than not dead or in the process of dying, what we call pcrimortem period, when the body was then hurled off the balcony. So, I believe that, rather than she was fully conscious and everything was okay from a physical standpoint and that she managed to do all the binding, get herself up on the railing, and then hurled herself off in a fully conscious state and died then from asphyxiation due to hanging. That’s my opinion.”
(Greer Decl., Ex. A, Wecht Depo. at 137:12-138:7).

Rebecca screamed for help before he inn incapacitated.
Marsha Allison has lived at 1057 Ocean Blvd., just two houses down from the Spreckels mansion, for 17 years. (Greer Decl., Ex. F, Allison Depo. at 11:20-24). At approximately 11:30 PM on the night of the murder, she was sitting in her TV room, which faced the street, with the window open, and she heard a woman scream very loudly “help me, help me.” (Id., at 25:17-20, 26:22-27:11, 48:24-49:6). She placed her hand on the phone in case she needed to call 911, but the screams stopped. (Id.). She recalls the screams “coming from up high” and sounding like they came “over the Finches house towards hers.” (Id., at 50:25-51:1). The Finche’s house is between her house and the Spreckels mansion. (Id. at 14:4-9). She presumed the woman was screaming from “up on the porch” of the Spreckles mansion. (Id. at 15-18). Plaintiffs contend that Rebecca was the woman screaming for help, just prior to being struck on the head four times and being temporarily incapacitated. This fact, which is consistent with a struggle, does not appear in Dr. Lucas’s report.

Rebecca was not given bad news that evening.
Dr. Lucas states in his report that: “despite no history of depression, the decedent was found the morning after she apparently learned that her boyfriend’s son - who was under her care when his fall occurred two days prior - would likely not survive.” (Erins Decl. Ex. G, Lucas Report at pg. 3). However, the tests that had been performed on six-year-old Max Shacknai prior to Rebecca’s death showed that he was not getting any worse, and in fact there was slight improvement in his condition. (Greer Decl. Ex. M, Medical Records pg. 505). Dina Shacknai, Max’s mother, was at the hospital with Max from the afternoon of July 12th through midmorning on July 13th, and testified that the doctors confirmed to her on the evening of July 12th that cautious optimism was still appropriate regarding Max, and they would not know if there was any change in his condition until tests were performed the following day. (Greer Decl. Ex. G, Dina Shacknai Depo. at 102:17-19). Thus, there is substantial evidence refuting the existence of the single fact that the Sheriff’s Department and Dr. Lucas relied upon in opining that Rebecca had a motivation for suicide, i.e., that prior to her death she was told Max was going to die.
It should also be noted that the emotional bond between Jonah Shacknai and Rebecca had already deteriorated by the time she was murdered to the point where she was considering leaving him and he was already dating the woman he would eventually marry. (Greer Decl., Ex. I, Mary Zahau-Loehner Depo. at pgs. 62:24-63:24; Ex. G, Dina Shacknai Depo. at 154:20-155:22). This information, which tends to undermine the perception that Rebecca and Jonah were still madly in love and the injury to Max was therefore so painful Rebecca was compelled to end her life, was not shared with the Sheriff’S Department or the Medical Examiner.

Suicidal hanging is not supported by the forensic evidence.
Dr. Lucas based his conclusion of suicide in part on the lack of other footprints on the balcony. However, Forensic Kinesiologist James G. Kent, Ph.D. analyzed the decedent’s injuries and the alleged mechanism of injuries asserted by Dr. Lucas and the San Diego Sheriff’s Department and determined that had Rebecca been bound the way she was found, and her feet were placed on the balcony deck in the manner Dr. Lucas concluded, she would not have been able to propel herself over the railing as is alleged. Moreover, he found that the damage patterns on her body are inconsistent with the mechanics of the decedent voluntarily going forward over the rail. He further opined that it is more likely than not that the decedent could not have had her hands bound behind her and voluntarily been able to flex forward over the rail due to the relationship between the height of the rail and her approximate center of gravity with the binding of her hands in that position, as this would’ve placed her center of gravity on the balcony side and below the level of the rail. Thus he opined it is more likely than not that an outside force, most probably another person, applied the extra force necessary to propel her over the railing. (Declaration of James G. Kent, Ph.D, pg. 4. Section A).
Dr. Kent also opined that had Rebecca fallen uninhibited for 9 feet with a rope around her neck, as stated by Dr. Lucas, her injuries would’ve been much greater than those found on her body, including the probability that she would have been at least partially decapitated. (Id., pg. 5, Section B).
Dr. Kent also analyzed whether the force resulting from a nine-foot fall would pull the bed that the noose was tied to a mere seven inches as shown in crime scene photograph. He determined that if Rebecca had fallen unimpeded for nine feet, the bed would have moved at least several feet, and because the bed only moved approximately seven inches, it is more likely than not that some outside force slowed her fall, such as an individual restraining the rope and/or the bed as she fell. (Id. pg. 6, Section C).

The lack of DNA and fingerprints is consistent with the crime seene being wiped down.
Dr. Lucas and the Sheriff based their suicide conclusion on the fact that only Rebecca’s DNA and fingerprints were found at the scene. This is true. However, what they didn’t give reasonable consideration to was the fact that there was no DNA or finger prints found in a substantial number of the places, most of which you would expect to find such evidence, like the door knob to the bedroom and to the balcony, the paint brush that was used to paint the phrase on the door and the large tube of black paint that was clearly handled by Rebecca prior to that evening and by the murderer that night. DNA expert Susan Ryan and Forensic Specialist Lisa DiMco found this to be surprising, and consistent with the crime scene being wiped down. (Greer Decl., Ex. O, DiMeo Depo. at 75:1-76:14; 212:3-214:18; Greer Decl., Ex. C, Ryan Depo., at 78:11-79:23, 196:17-197:3; 237:8-21; 254:19-255:1; 259:13-260:2) Ms. Ryan prepared an instructive chart that identifies the number of items that were sampled that were capable of being wiped down, and determined that more than half of them had no DNA detected, including the knife, the paint brush, the door knobs into and out of the bedroom and black paint tube. (Greer Decl., Ex. C, Ryan Depo., 163:8-24; 250:6-252:8 79:23).

The murderer raped Rebecca with a knife handle
One of the most morbid and obscene pieces of evidence in this case, as identified by Forensic Specialist Lisa A. DiMeo, is that a steak knife at the scene was covered with blood on all four sides of the handle, a few inches up, and the only source of blood sufficient to coat all four sides of the knife handle was the decedent’s vagina. (Greer Decl., Ex. O, DiMeo Depo. at 169:25¬170:10; see photos at Exhibit 11). Ms. Dimeo further opined that the stripe of blood on Rebecca’s left inner thigh was a transfer stain from the knife handle being rubbed against her leg (Id., pg.188-190:9; see photo at Ex. 43). Plaintiffs respectfully submit that this is not the type of act that a woman who was allegedly committing an “honor suicide” would do.

The painted phrase on the door was written by someone with intimate knowledge of Max’s condition.
The phrase “SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER” was painted on the door to the bedroom where Rebecca was bound, gagged and hanged. It is a reasonable inference to presume that the “she” is Rebecca, since “she” is clearly the “her” who can be saved. It is also reasonable to assume that the “she saved him” portion of the message refers to Rebecca saving Max, since, as discussed above, at the time of Rebecca’s death, Max’s condition remained stable, and both Max’s mother and father, Dina Shacknai and Jonah Shacknai, were thankful that Rebecca was able to give Max CPR so quickly and save his life. (Greer Decl., Ex, G, Dina Shacknai Depo. at 103:6-14).
The other portion of the message “can you save her,” may be directed to Adam’s brother Jonah or to anyone who could intervene. There are only a handful of people who were following
Max's condition closely enough on the evening of the murder to know his current prognosis. And only one of them was in proximity to Rebecca the evening of the murder, i.e., Adam Shacknai.

Writing on the door has similarities to Adam Shacknai’s handwriting
Forensic document examiner Michael Wakshull, analyzed the handwritten statement on
the bedroom door “SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER," and compared it with samples of handwriting from Rebecca and from Adam Shacknai. I Ms very detailed report, which includes handwriting samples he analyzed. (Greer Decl., Exhibit D, Wakshull Depo, Ex. 8, report re: “Examination of handwriting on door”). He opines that “there are indications Adam wrote the words on the door.” (Id., pg. 6 of 65). “Indications” is defined as “evidence to suggest.” (Id., at pg. 7 of 45.) Some of the key factors arc that the Defendant’s handwriting and the handwriting on the door tend to slant left, and Rebecca’s handwriting slants to the right, and there are similarities between the Defendant’s letter A and very unique letter M and the same letters on the door. (Id.)

Height of the writing matches Adam Shacknai. not Rebecca.
Forensic Kinesiologist James G. Kent, Ph.D. analyzed physiological and biomechanical
components which tend to determine the height at which a person comfortably paints on a vertical surface. He determined that the phrase “SHE SAVED HIM CAN YOU SAVE HER” that is painted on the door of the bedroom where Rebecca was strangled, is consistent with the height of an individual between 5 foot 10 inches. Rebecca is approximately 5 foot three inches. (Kent Decl. Pg. 6, Section D). Whereas Adam is 5'11". (Greer Decl., Ex. N).

The knots and bindings are tied to Adam Shacknai.
Plaintiffs retained a forensic knotting analyst, Lindsey Philpott, to analyze the knots that were used to bind and hang Rebecca. (Greer Decl., Ex. B, Lindsey Philpott depo., at 40-41, and Ex. 3, Philpott C.V. He opined that it would be virtually impossible for any individual to bind there own hands behind their back using the type of knots found on the decedent. (Id., Ex. D, Philpott Depo. at 76:22-77:7 and 204:12-205:13). He also opined that the type of knots that were involved had “nautical qualities,” including the figure-eight construction around the wrists and ankles, the use of a clove hitch as the final securing element around the neck and wrists.” (Id., Philpott Depo. at 211:11 -22, 249:5-249:20, 267:14-22; 272:18-21). He further opined that: “the knot attaching around the base of the bedpost is a — an eye splice that is formed in the end of a piece of line. Eye splices are regularly and consistently used nautical applications.” {Id., Philpott Dcpo. at 241:15-22, 244:23-245:17). The knots also showed a level of sophistication and understanding in the use of rope and knots. (Philpott Depo. 242:1-242:17; 257:15-25).
These findings and opinions are significant because defendant Adam Shacknai is a tugboat captain, who uses nautical knots as part of his profession (Greer Decl., Ex. H, Shacknai Depo. at 8:3-5, 8:23-9:21; Greer Decl. Ex. B, Philpott Depo., at 214:15-15).

Adam Shacknai didn’t try to save Rehecca
As noted on the recording of Adam Shacknai’s call to 911, when he saw Rebecca hanging from the balcony that morning, he did not at first attempt to see if she was still alive or help her. Rather he called 911, and when asked if she was alive, he claimed he did not know. (Greer Decl., Ex.L, 911 Transcript at 1:28-30). In response to the question, he the cut her down. (Id., 911 Transcript at 4:138). Plaintiffs content that the reason he didn’t attempt to help her is that he already knew she was dead.

Adam Shacknai’s comments and mannerisms arc suspicious.
It is well settled that a witness's demeanor is always relevant to his or her credibility. (Evid.Code, § 780, subd. (a); People v. Lopez (2013) 56 Cal.4th 1028, 1064; People v. Scotl (2011) 52 Cal.4th 452, 493; and Elkins v. Superior Court (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1337, 1358.) In other words “The weight and credibility of testimony is affected not only by other evidence which is directly contradictory, but also by pertinent circumstances and the demeanor of witnesses.
(Kilstrom v. Bronnenberg (1952) 110 Cal.App.2d 62, 65.) Thus inferences may be drawn not only from the evidence but from the demeanor of the witness and his manner of testifying.” (Berger v. Steiner (1945) 72 CaI.App.2d 208, 214-215.)
Plaintiffs have lodged with the Court the complete video recording of Adam Shacknai’s polygraph interview (Exhibit P), a transcript of the interview (Exhibit R) and the audio recording of Adam Shacknai’s 911 call the morning of July 11, 2013. These records provide additional evidence of Mr. Shacknai’s demeanor and mannerisms that undermine his feigned concern over the horrible death suffered by his Rebecca Zahau which can only be appreciated by reviewing the recordings.
By way of example, when asked whether he is going to lie or not to any of the questions being asked, he responds quote but it still obviously fallible because everyone’s heard about it, but okay.” (Greer Decl. Ex. I, Polygraph Interview at 26:8-11. He asks the interviewer: “I mean, have you ever had someone like cry during these and tell the truth?” (Id. at 56:45-5). He later proceeds to tell the interviewer about how he pleasured himself that morning. (Id. at 80:10-81:9). When asked “what do you think should happen to someone who would do something like this,” he responds “I’m gonna tell you now I’d be scared shitless first of all for my God damn self.” (Id. at 113:3-7). When asked again what he thinks should happen to someone who murdered Rebecca, he responded: “I haven’t pictured, you know, till, like I said, till I started talking to the cops.” (Id.
114:1-11). And very peculiarly, when asked if Rebecca ever flirted with him, Mr. Shacknai said: “No, no - no. Like no. Other than, you know, you know, she’s a decent looking girl, whatever.
I’m probably not the worst looking guy. Just but, no. not flirting.” (Id. at 151:3-8).
Plaintiffs submit that the evasiveness and equivocation of his responses creates a strong suspicion that he is not telling the truth.

Plaintiffs can establish a claim for battery.
As discussed above, a neighbor heard a woman screaming for help, coming from the direction of where Rebecca was attacked. Clearly being attacked and being hit on the head to the point of losing consciousness is battery.

Plaintiffs can establish a conversion claim
Rebeccca's sister, Mary Zahau-Loehner testified that the clothes that Rebecca was wearing the day she was killed have never been found. (Greer Decl., Hx. J., Mary Zahau-Loehner Dcpo., at 124:1-25. This supports a claim for conversion.
 

Attachments

  • Wakshull Handwriting Report Part 1.pdf
    994.3 KB · Views: 16
  • Wakshull Handwriting Report Part 2.pdf
    846.9 KB · Views: 9
  • Third Amended Complaint for Wrongful Death.pdf
    432.8 KB · Views: 14
  • Reply to motion for summary judgement.pdf
    988.4 KB · Views: 9
Cynic: THANK YOU! Will read your post in-depth in the morning.
 
Yes, thank you, Cynic! You're a treasure! Arielilane it's good to see you here again, too!
 
Rebecca Zahau Case - 00075418 - ROA 695


VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF MARSHA ALISON

14 San Diego, California

15 July 27, 2017




8 Now, the house that you live in, at the time of

9 this incident which resulted in you being interviewed by

10 the police, your house faces the ocean; correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Okay. So it faces west; correct?

13 A. Faces the ocean. I don't know what direction.

14 Q. Yeah, in Coronado it's a little -- little

15 different.

16 A. Yeah.

17 Q. But if -- if you're standing in your front

18 door, to the right, there's other houses; correct?

19 A. Right. Oh, yeah.

20 Q. And at that time, the house that was directly

21 to the right as you're standing in your doorway --

22 A. Mm-hmm.

23 Q. -- looking toward the ocean, do you recall who

24 lived there?

25 A. The Finches. They are still there.

——

1 tolerate people that won't say anything back.

2 Q. You understand that their job is to get

3 information not provide information.

4 A. Yeah, but they --

5 Q. Do you know they're trained to ask questions

6 not -- not -- not to provide --

7 A. Yeah, they asked a question, I answered it, and

8 they just sit there. Okay. Well, then that was okay.

9 No, I didn't know that.

10 Q. Okay. Now -- and excuse my ignorance because

11 it's been a while since I've been on Ocean Boulevard,

12 but, you know, at 11:30 at night or so, can you hear the

13 ocean also?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Okay.

16 A. You hear the planes too.

17 Q. So you've got planes, you've got the ocean.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. You've got kids playing across -- in your

20 driveway --

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. -- correct?

23 You've got potentially traffic driving up and

24 down the boulevard.

25 A. That time of the night it's not real bad, but

1 yeah, it's there.

2 Q. Okay. And the reason you never got up to look

3 or dial 911 is because you heard these two words "help

4 me, help me" --

5 A. Mm-hmm.

6 Q. -- and then you didn't hear anything else;

7 correct?

8 A. Correct.

9 Q. And you told me that you believe it was a

10 woman's voice; correct?

11 A. Yes. Yes. It was a high-pitched woman's

12 voice.

13 Q. Okay. And when you say "high-pitched," there's

14 degrees of high -- being high-pitch and it's hard to --

15 hard to ask this question. But some people have a

16 Tweety Bird voice and others have -- have voices that

17 are deeper even though they're women.

18 How would --

19 A. Yeah. Hers is high-pitched.

20 Q. Okay. And other than hearing "help me, help

21 me," did you ever hear that voice at any other time that

22 night?

23 A. No.

24 Q. And you indicate you talked to your neighbors

25 and they indicated that they didn't hear anything?

.......


1 Q. With your husband, that's okay.

2 A. Yeah. Yeah.

3 Q. Did you ever watch any TV shows about this

4 incident, anything like that?

5 A. No, I didn't know there was anything on

6 television about it.

7 Q. Did you ever watch the news reports they

8 were --

9 A. Oh, yeah. The news report, yeah.

10 Q. So you watched those --

11 A. News reports, yeah.

12 Q. Okay.

13 A. Didn't watch them for long because I got upset

14 and I changed channels.

15 Q. Yeah. You know Detective -- do you recall the

16 name Dugal, D-U-G-A-L? Does that ring a bell --

17 A. No.

18 Q. -- as someone who was interviewing you?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Do you recall Detective Dugal asking you, did

21 she actually say "help me, help me," and your response

22 being "that's what it sounded like"?

23 A. Yeah.

24 Q. But you weren't positive.

25 A. Yeah.

1 Q. So is that fair?

2 A. Yeah, that's fair.

3 Q. Okay.

4 MR. VRANJES: I don't think I have anything

5 else right now.

6 THE WITNESS: How long ago was this that she

7 got killed?

8 MR. VRANJES: 2011.

9 MR. GREER: Six years.

10 MR. VRANJES: 2011.

11 THE WITNESS: It's been a while.

12 MR. VRANJES: Yeah.

13 Do you have questions?

14 MR. GREER: Yeah.

15 MR. VRANJES: We need to go off the record so

16 we can switch spots.

17 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time off the record is

18 11:45 a.m. This ends Media No. 1.

19 (A recess was taken.)

20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time back on the record,

21 11:50 a.m. Media No. 2.

22 Counsel, you may proceed.

23 MR. GREER: While we were off the record, in

24 order to expedite the process, we have stipulated

25 amongst the parties that the two tapes -- the foundation
 
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

MINUTE ORDER

TIME: 09:00:00 AM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL

DATE: 03/13/2018 DEPT: C-69

CLERK: Jay Browder REPORTER/ERM: Bridget Mastrobattista, CSR #7715 BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas

CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013 CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other

EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial

APPEARANCES

Krista Enns, David Elsberg and Dan Webb, counsel, are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table. Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 10 - Plaintiff's Case-in-Chief

9:15 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been continued from 3/12/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding plaintiff's counsel's request to use the manikin along with photographs which plaintiff wishes to compare to the manikin.

The Court informs counsel it will hold an EC §402 hearing later in the day.

The Court and counsel confer regarding the following demonstrative Court's Exhibit

893 - Photo of railing

9:19 am Now on the record, the court summarizes the off-the-record proceeding.

9:20 am All jurors are present.

9:20 am JAMES GUY KENT is sworn and examined by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z.

Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

218 -SDS Production - Photo SDS 01619 871 - Photo - Kent Deposition Ex. 39 Digital image of human skeleton with emphasis on the neck and jaw areas 182 - SDS Production - Photo of door with message written on it SDS 01556 217 - SDS Production - Photo of door with message written on it SDS 01616

10:38 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court is in recess.

The witness is excused, subject to recall.

10:55 am Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

10:55 am JAMES GUY KENT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

A purely demonstrative exhibit is published to the jury.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

945 - SDS01736 946 - SDS01750 947 - SDS01814 844 - Balcony diagram

11:19 am Cross examination of JAMES GUY KENT commences by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant:

566 - 08-16-2011, San Diego Sheriff's Department's request for scene processing/investigation, as well as diagrams showing the Shacknai residence's layout

11:31 am Attorney Elsberg publishes previously admitted Court's Exhibit 844 to the jury and attorney Greer objects because it is not the exact exhibit that he had admitted during direct examination.

The Court compares the exhibit being published by attorney Elsberg to the one in her copy of the exhibits and informs attorney Greer that the one currently being published is the same as the Court's copy and informs attorney Greer that, if he published a different one to the jury, he may have a problem.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection andadmitted on behalf of defendant:

948 - SDS02120

Attorney Elsberg's requests that he be allowed to use a person of the same height as Rebecca Zahau to demonstrate falling over a demonstrative of the balcony railing over the objection of attorney Greer is denied.

11:59 am All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, directed to return at 1:30PM and Court remains in session.

The witness is excused, subject to recall.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, attorney Elsberg again requests, as he did during cross-examination, that he be allowed to use a person of the same height as Rebecca Zahau to demonstrate falling over a mockup (the demonstrative) of the balcony balustrade.

The Court denies the request.

The Court is in recess.

1:33 pm Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, ruling on Attorney Elsberg's renewed request that the Court allow a demonstration of a person of Rebecca Zahau's height falling over the balcony railing is deferred because the jury is waiting.

Ruling on attorney Webb's request that the Court admonish attorney Greer for laughing during cross-examination of Kent by attorney Elsberg is deferred because the jury is waiting.

1:35 pm All jurors are present.

1:35 pm JAMES GUY KENT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

1:55 pm Now off the record, a portion of the video deposition of the witness is published to the jury. (179.18 to 180.5)

1:56 pm Now on the record, cross-examination resumes.

1:57 pm Now off the record, a portion of the video deposition of the witness is published to the jury. (188.23 to 189.8)

1:58 pm Now on the record, cross-examination resumes.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant:

552 - Handwritten notes containing a fall kinetics summary

2:47 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the witness informs the Court that if his examination isn't concluded today, he will be out of town for the rest of the week.

The witness is excused subject to return.

The Court and counsel confer regarding remaining time estimates for witness Kent.

Attorney Elsberg estimates he will need 45 more minutes for cross-examination. Attorney Greer estimates he will need 15 minutes on redirect.

The Court informs counsel that it will also need time to hear the EC §402 hearing regarding the additional use of the demonstrative manikin.

Attorney Greer estimates he will need 5 minutes for argument during the hearing. Attorney Elsberg estimates he will need 20 minutes.

The Court informs counsel that it will not be able to conclude both the remaining examination and the EC §402 hearing with those time estimates.

2:50 am The Court is in recess.

2:58 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court informs counsel that it has a commitment after trial today so it will not be able to stay very long past 4:00 this afternoon.

Counsel meet and confer.

Counsel give shorter estimates for concluding examination and the EC §402 hearing.

The Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling for tomorrow.

Attorney Webb states that defendant may call witnesses out of order to allow attorney Greer to get his final witnesses on the stand.

The Court directs counsel to meet and confer this evening and return at 9:00AM to provide a schedule. The Court informs counsel that in the event they cannot agree about witness scheduling, the Court will be prepared to make rulings.

3:04 pm All jurors are present.

JAMES GUY KENT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

3:35 pm Redirect examination of JAMES GUY KENT commences by attorney Greer on behalf ofplaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

3:35 pm Recross examination of JAMES GUY KENT commences by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

3:49 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening, directed to return at 9:15AM tomorrow and Court remains in session.

3:51 pm Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the EC §402 hearing regarding additional use of the manikin commences.

3:51 pm JAMES GUY KENT, previously sworn, remains on the stand for direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

During the examination, attorney Greer rapidly publishes to the witness and to the Court various photographs of the manikin, some of which are new and/or unmarked Court's Exhibit, some for which the clerk has not yet been provided identifications, and compares them to previously marked and/or identified Court's Exhibits which are photographs of the corpse of Rebecca Zahau, some of which remain unmarked.

The exhibits are more accurately reflected in the reporter's transcript, but the clerk believes he hears the following exhibit numbers referred to during direct examination:

Unmarked: 948, 949, 991, 992, 993, 965 Previously marked: 300, 270

3:57 pm Cross examination of JAMES GUY KENT commences by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The Court overrules defendant's objection to the additional demonstrative use of the manikin representing Rebecca Zahau, but will give a limiting instruction, as set forth in the reporter's transcript. The Court informs counsel that it will give its own limiting instruction unless counsel come up with a stipulated limiting instruction.

4:05 am The Court directs counsel to return tomorrow with a proposed witness schedule.

4:06 pm Court is adjourned until 03/14/2018 at 09:00AM in Department 69.
 
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

MINUTE ORDER

TIME: 10:00:00 AM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL

DATE: 03/12/2018 DEPT: C-69

CLERK: Jay Browder REPORTER/ERM: Julie McKay CSR# 9059 BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas

CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013 CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other

EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial

APPEARANCES

Krista Enns and Dan Webb, counsel are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table. Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 9 - Plaintiff's Case-in-Chief

9:57 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been continued from 3/8/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court informs counsel that alternate juror #2 called the clerk prior to calendar call and informed him that he was sick, had been sick all weekend, and would not be able to serve on the jury today.

The Court informs counsel that the Court is excusing the alternate juror #2 from further jury service.

9:57 am Now off the record, the Court inquires if the Court has admitted Court's Exhibit 641 and counsel state that it has not been admitted.

Counsel agree to admit the exhibit at this time.

9:58 am Now on the record, the Court states on the record that previously identified Court's Exhibit 641 is admitted.

The Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Counsel state that witness Wecht will be on the stand all day and no other witness will be on the stand today.

9:59 am The Court is in recess.

10:05 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are present.

The Court is surprised to see alternate juror #2 present and inquires if he is ill and has been ill during the weekend as he reported to the clerk before calendar call.

Alternate juror #2 responds in the affirmative.

The Court releases the juror from further jury service and he leaves the courtroom.

10:06 am CYRIL WECHT is sworn and examined by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

739 - 10-28-2011, Wecht autopsy report regarding Rebecca Zahau. WEC(1)000866-WEC(1)000879

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence over the foundational objection of attorney Webb, later withdrawn, and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

894 - Neck diagram

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

298 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 02067

10:53 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break, directed to return in 10 minutes and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling. Attorney Webb states he will need 3 1/2 to 4 hours on cross examination.

10:54 am The Court is in recess.

11:08 am Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All remaining jurors are present.

11:08 am CYRIL WECHT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for cross examination by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

12:02 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch and Court is in recess.

The witness is excused, subject to recall.

1:34 pm Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

1:34 pm CYRIL WECHT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

1:44 pm The bailiff delivers the following Jury Note #5 to the Court:

"The table light near gallery is very bright and bothersome. Can it be turned off Thank you"

The Court pauses and addresses Jury Note #5 and then cross examination resumes.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant:

445 - Correspondence between Wecht and Greer and related files.

2:29 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening and Court remains in session.

The witness is excused, subject to recall.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness examination estimates. The Court suggests that attorney Webb move on to a different line of questioning.

2:31 pm The Court is in recess.

2:46 pm Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

2:46 pm CYRIL WECHT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

299 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 02068

3:28 on Redirect examination of CYRIL WECHT commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence over the hearsay objection of attorney Webb and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

447 - Wecht letter to Bremner re Rebecca Zahau.

3:36 pm The witness is excused.

3:37 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening, directed to return at 9:15AM tomorrow morning and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Plaintiff's next witness will be James Kent. Attorney Greer estimates he will need about 1 1/2 hour on direct, attorney Enns estimates defendant will need the rest of the day tomorrow on cross examination.

The following day plaintiff will have video depositions that will last approximate 5 hours, followed possibly by Jonah Shacknai.

Plaintiff's last witness will be Adam Shacknai and plaintiff counsel believes plaintiff may rest on Thursday.

The Court asks counsel to let the Court know who on the witness list will not be appearing.

The Court informs counsel that it would like to discuss jury instructions. Attorney Greer states that he should be ready for that discussion next Monday.

The Court directs counsel to meet and confer further about witness scheduling and to come back tomorrow at 9:00AM if they want to take up something out of the presence of the jury.

3:41 pm Court is adjourned until 03/13/2018 at 09:00AM in Department 69.
 
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

MINUTE ORDER

TIME: 09:00:00 AM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL

DATE: 03/08/2018 DEPT: C-69

CLERK: Jay Browder REPORTER/ERM: Bridget Mastrobattista, CSR #7715 BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas

CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013 CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other

EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial

APPEARANCES

Krista Enns and Dan Webb, counsel are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table. Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 8 - Plaintiff's Case-in-Chief

9:00 This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been continued from 3/7/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding the day's trial schedule.

Counsel inform the Court that the video deposition of Xena Zahau would be played first, followed by two audio clips, followed by the video deposition of Dina Shacknai, and in the afternoon Suzanna Ryan will return to the stan.

Attorney Webb states that the parties have waived reporting of the deposition and audio clips, which have corresponding transcripts.

Attorney Enns informs the Court that there were misstatement made on the record regarding exhibits referenced as 837 and 838.

The Court notes that Court's Exhibit 838, a multiple page exhibit, was received into evidence, but 837 was not.9:16 am Now on the record, the Court summarizes the off-the-record discusssions.

9:18 am All jurors are present.

The Court instructs jurors regarding the use of video depositions made under oath.

9:21 am Now off the record, attorney Greer publishes the 1/22/2015 video deposition of XENA ZAHAU, younger sister of Rebecca Zahau.

10:01 am Still off the record, audio clip of a 911 call, made by ZENA ZAHAU, regarding "Max" referenced in the 1/22/2015 video deposition of Xena Zahau is published to the jury.

10:05 am Still off the record, audio clip of interview of XENA ZAHAU by police is published to the jury.

10:06 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding the next video deposition to be published to the jury when they return from break.

The Court directs counsel to choose a stopping point if it will go into the lunch break.

10:08 am Now on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding time estimates on the continued examination of witness Suzanna Ryan.

10:09 am The Court is in recess.

10:24 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are present.

10:24 am Off the record, the 1/11/2018 video deposition of DINA SHACKNAI is published to the jury.

11:50 am Video Deposition is stopped to prepare for lunch break.

11:50 am All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, directed to return at 1:30PM and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, counsel state that they have nothing to place on the record.

11:53 am Court is in recess.

1:33 pm Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

1:34 pm SUZANNA RYAN, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.1:55 pm cross examination of SUZANNA RYAN commences by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following additional pages of previously identified and partially admitted Court's Exhibit are moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant Adam Shacknai: 308, pages 290, 292, 288

2:46 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for break, directed to return in 15 minutes and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding time estimates for remaining examination.

Attorney Webb estimates he will need another 30 minute on cross examination of Ryan. Attorney Greer estimates he will need 15 minutes on redirect.

The Court notes that there may not be enough time to conclude the video deposition of Dina Shacknai.

Attorney Greer still plans to call witness Wecht on Monday and witness Kent on Tuesday.

The Court inquires if parties have an update on who they plan to call on the witness list. Counsel indicate they are close to a determination.

2:49 pm The Court is in recess.

3:01 pm The Court is again in session with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are present.

The Court informs the jury that there will be no trial tomorrow and they will return on Monday at 10:00AM. The Court further informs the jury that the video deposition of Dina Shacknai will now resume.

3:02 pm SUZANNA RYAN, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit(s) are identified moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant:

214 - SDS Production - Photo of striped towel and blood stains on carpet SDS 01613 837 - Chart of Samples Tested from Deposition of Suzanna Ryan. RYA(1)00094-RYA(1)00095

3:16 pm Redirect examination of SUZANNA RYAN commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

3:23 pm Recross examination of SUZANNA RYAN commences by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

3:26 pm Further redirect examination of SUZANNA RYAN commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

3:27 pm The witness is excused.

3:28 pm Now off the record, publication of the 1/11/2018 video deposition of DINA SHACKNAI to the jury resumes.

3:45 pm The video deposition of Dina Shacknai is stopped by an objection made by attorney Greer.

4:00 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the weekend, directed to return Monday, 3/12/2018 at 10:00AM and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding the last portion of the video deposition of Dina Shacknai that was inadvertently published to the jury.

Attorney Greer requests that the last section be stricken if the transcript is requested by the jury during deliberations.

The Court notes that the next sentence on the deposition transcript provided to her was ordered stricken and doesn't know if counsel could not remove it from the deposition.

Counsel agree that the deposition will resume on Monday at 140, line 22.

3:51 pm Now off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Attorney Greer states that he will try to conclude with Wecht Monday morning, though the day will be a little shorter. Attorney Webb states that Wecht is often non-responsive and cannot give an accurate estimate.

The Court directs counsel to make an objecton during examination [to keep him on track].

3:52 pm Court is adjourned until 03/12/2018 at 10:00AM in Department 69.
 
Court MInutes for 3/7/1018


APPEARANCES

Krista Enns and Dan Webb, counsel are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table. Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 7 - Plaintiff's Case-in-Chief

9:03 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been continued from 3/6/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding a print out of an interview of Xena Zahau byy the Police and its use as impeachment as to the deposition of Xena Zahau.

The Court rules that lines 22-25 might be impeachment of the deposition of Xena Zahau.

The Court and counsel confer regarding the use of a manikin as representative of Rebecca Zahau.

9:08 am Off the record, counsel confer regarding the depositions of Dina Shackani and Xena Zahau.

9:10 am Now on the record, the Court rules on objections raised during the depositions as more fully set forth in the reporter's transcripts.

9:17 am The Court is in recess, to allow counsel to meet and confer regarding the use of the manikin.

9:22 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding the use of the manikin which is present in the courtroom.

The Court informs attorney Greer that, if he can lay foundation, he can show the manikin to the jury.

9:27 am Now on the record, the Court summarizes the off-the-record proceedings.

9:28 am The Court is in recess to allow the bailiff to remove the manikin from the courtroom.

9:35 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are present.

9:36 am LINDSEY PHILPOTT is sworn and examined by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased..

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

..51 - SDS Production - Photo of Rebecca Zahau's body on lawn SDS 00806 289 - SDS Production - Photo of rope tied in knot SDS 02021

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified and published to the jury as demonstratives without admitting into evidence on behalf of plaintiff:

881 - Photo of red rope ..81 - SDS Production - Photo of rope hanging from balcony with tape measure SDS 01121 Clerk's note: the two above referenced exhibits published to the jury were actually a real red rope and a physical mockup of a rope hanging from the balcony.

10:45 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, attorney Greer requests that a manikin in the likeness of Rebecca Zahau be used as a demonstrative over the objection of attorney Wells.

10:49 am Now off the record the Court and counsel confer regarding the possibility of covering most of the manikin to reveal only the ankles and wrists that represent the way the decedent was found at the scene of her death.

10:50 am The Court is in recess to allow counsel to discuss covering most of the manikin's body.

11:05 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel discuss how to show jurors the tying of the rope around the manikin's ankles and wrists.

Attorney Greer requests that he project the image on the screen while the witness Philpott ties the knots over the objection of attorney Webb.

see the process, but if they can't the Court might consider having the image projected on the screen by plaintiff's counsel.

11:07 am Now on the record, the Court summarizes the off-the-record proceedings.

11:09 am All jurors are present.

The Court informs jurors that it forgot to say this morning that the testimony of the previous witness Suzanna Ryan was being interrupted and the Court was taking the current witness out of order. The Court informs the jurors that Ryan will be returning tomorrow.

11:10 am LINDSEY PHILPOTT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

..58 - SDS Production - Photo of Revecca Zahau's ankles bound SDS 00814 ..57 - SDS Production - Photo of Revecca Zahau's ankles bound SDS 00813 944 - Photo of Rebecca Zahau's bound ankles

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, published to the jury as demonstratives without objection and without admitting into evidence on behalf of plaintiff:

878 - Photo of mannequin Clerk's note: plaintiff's counsel refers to exhibit 878 as a "Rope" during examination.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintff:

..93 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 01162 287 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 01957

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, published to the jury as a demonstrative, without objection and without admitting into evidence, on behalf of plaintiff:

939 - Red Rope

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence (without evidentiary objection) from attorney Webb and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

818 - Front View - Rope tying re-enactment video produced in response to 9/14/16 subpoena from Advance Attorney Service

11:57 am All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, directed to return at 1:30PM and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding plaintiff's wish to recreate the tying of the knot just shown in Court's Exhibit 818. Attorney Webb objects to the recreation per EC §352.

The Court notes that it would not be evidence.

11:59 am Now off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding examination estimates.

Attorney Greer states that he will need about 15 more minutes with the current witness on direct. Attorney Webb states that he will need about 2 hours on cross.

Attorney Greer informs the Court that there is a change in circumstances with witness Ryan. She is no longer leaving for Japan and he would like to wait to bring her back and put witness Kent on the stand first.

The Court directs parties to meet and confer during lunch in this regards and to come back at 1:20 if there is no agreement, or 1:30 if they have a stipulation.

12:01 pm The Court is in recess.

1:26 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Attorney Greer informs the Court that, tomorrow, plaintiff will show video depositions and then Ryan will return to the stand. Monday, plaintiff will call witness Wecht to the stand. Tuesday, plaintiff will call witness Kent to the stand.

Attorney Wells request that defendant's counsel be allowed to take photographs of the rope tying conducted by witness Philpott is objected to by attorney Greer, but allowed.

1:28 pm The Court pauses while photos are taken of the manikin as bound by Philpott.

1:33 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

1:34 pm LINDSEY PHILPOTT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased..

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

185 - SDS Production - Photo of plastic bag, rope, paintbrushes and knife handle next to bed. SDS 01559

1:34 pm Cross examination of LINDSEY PHILPOTT commences by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

3:49 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening, directed to return tomorrow at 9:15AM and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court notes that it had granted in part a motion in limine regarding witness Philpott. The Court further notes that both counsel have referred to Philpoot as a forensic knot expert, so the previous ruling is now denied in full to match the testimony given in trial.

3:52 pm Now off the record, the Court and cousel confer regarding deposition transcripts.

3:52 pm Court is adjourned until 03/08/2018 at 09:00AM in Department 69.
 
Court MInutes

ROA 1052

CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED] CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

MINUTE ORDER

TIME: 09:15:00 AM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL

DATE: 03/19/2018 DEPT: C-69

CLERK: Jay Browder REPORTER/ERM: Julie McKay CSR# 9059 BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas

CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013 CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other

EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial

APPEARANCES

Krista Enns and Dan Webb, counsel, are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table. Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 13 - Plaintiff's Case-in-Chief ; Plaintiff rests; Defendant's Submits Motion for Nonsuit; Defendant's Case-in-Chief

9:00 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been continued from 3/15/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the Jury, on the record, attorney Webb objects to plaintiff's request to use the manikin of Rebecca Zahau during trial today.

The Court informs attorney Greer that he would need to lay foundation in order to use the manikin.

Attorney Webb objects to plaintiff's examination of Adam Shacknai regarding masturbation.

9:14 am Now off the record, counsel confer regarding other audio "snippets" that attorney Greer wishes to publish to the jury.

9:15 am The Court is in recess.

9:19 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury off the record the Court defers its ruling on the use of the manikin.

The Court overrules attorney Webb's objection to the mention of defendant's act of masturbation.

9:20 Now on the record, the Court summarizes the off the record proceeding.

The Court and counsel confer regarding audio snippets of a polygraph of Adam Shacknai.

The Court overrules attorney Webbs's objection to the use of the audio snippet but the Court will give a limiting instruction to the jury that what the polygraph officer says is not evidence.

9:26 am All jurors are present.

9:27 am ADAM SHACKNAI is sworn and examined by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

9:40 am Adam Shacknai addresses someone named Mary in the gallery who he states is his girlfried.

Attorney Greer informs the Court that Mary is a potential witness in this matter over the objection of attorney Webb.

The Court excludes the witness and she leaves the courtroom.

The following Court's exhibit is marked for identification, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

1003 - Audio clip of Adam Shacknai's 911 call regarding his discovery of Rebecca Zahau's hanging body.

10:33 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court denies plaintiff's request to use the manikin and plaintiff's request for an EC §402 hearing in this regards.

10:39 am The Court is in recess.

10:51 am Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

10:51 am ADAM SHACKNAI, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

11:03 am Cross examination of ADAM SHACKNAI commences by attorney Webb on defendant's own behalf.

The following demonstrative exhibit is marked for identification on behalf of defendant and published to the jury without objection and without admitting it into evidence:

1020 - House diagram

11:57 am all jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, directed to return at 1:30PM and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, and upon inquiry of the Court, attorney Webb estimates he will need another 45 minutes to 1 hour more on cross. Attorney Greer states he will need 10 to 15 minutes more on redirect.

Attorney Greer requests that he be allowed to call Adam Shacknai's friend Mary to the stand.

The Court directs counsel to meet and confer in this regards during lunch.

11:58 am The Court is in recess.

1:23 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, attorney Greer informs the Court that, in lieu of calling Adam Shacknai's friend Mary to the stand, counsel stipulate to admitted the following Court's Exhibits.

861 - Painting by Rebecca Zahau No. 1 862 - Painting by Rebecca Zahau No. 2 863 - Painting by Rebecca Zahau No. 3 864 - Painting by Rebecca Zahau No. 4

Attorney Enns informs the Court that the parties stipulate to substituting a redacted form of previously admitted Court's Exhibit 14.

1:25 pm Court is in recess.

Prior to reconvening after lunch, another television requests that it be allowed to live stream the audio of Adam Shacknai's testimony. The request is made through the bailiff.

The Court grants the request pending submission of a request and order.

1:31 pm Court reconvenes with plaintiff(s), defendant(s) and counsel present as noted above. All jurors are present.

1:31 pm ADAM SHACKNAI, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney Webb on defendant's own behalf.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and admitted on behalf of defendant:

1004 - 911 Call for Zahau (transcript) ....75 - SDS Production - Photo of exterior balcony and Rebecca Zahau's body in courtyard and SDS 00846 ..973 - Photo: SDS 01122

2:08 pm Redirect examination of ADAM SHACKNAI commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

2:18 pm Recross examination of ADAM SHACKNAI commences by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

2:19 pm The witness is excused.

2:19 pm Plaintiff rests subject to the admission of exhibits.

Attorney Webb informs the Court that defendant has a motion.

2:20 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for break, directed to return at 2:35 pm and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, defendant's counsel submit defendant's Motion for Nonsuit.

The Court notes that the motion is thick and the Court had informed counsel that, if they were planning to make a motion for nonsuit the Court encouraged them to submit it before plaintiff had rested.

The Court does not believe it has time to read the motion before jurors are due back from break, and upon inquiry of the Court, counsel agree to go forward with trial without prejudice to the Court making a ruling later.

2:25 pm The Court is in recess.

2:37 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

2:38 pm The Court directs defendant to commence his case-in-chief.

2:38 pm TROY DUGAL is sworn and examined by attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following Demonstrative is published to the jury without objection and without admitting into evidence:

1000 - Aerial photo of SDSD Canvas Area

3:06 pm Cross examination of TROY DUGAL commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf ad on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

3:14 pm Redirect examination of TROY DUGAL commences by attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit(s) are identified on behalf of defendant:

..310 - 08-10-2011, COPD Production - Det. DuGal's Follow Up Investigative Report. COPD000028 - COPD000031

..900 - Audio record: 1057 Ocean Blvd. Marsha Alison Interview (Revisit)

3:18 pm The witness is excused.

3:19 pm TODD NORTON is sworn and examined by attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

3:40 am Cross examination of TODD NORTON commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

3:55 pm The witness is excused.

3:55 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening and Court remains in session.

Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Tomorrow, Denys Williams, Michael Macceca and maybe John Farrel will be called to the stand.

Wednesday Shelley Webster and Linda Wright are expected on the stand.

Plaintiff's counsel needs to make his designations of the portions of the deposition of Neil Nalepa to be published to the jury.

Attorney Enns informs the Court that plaintiff expects to go through next week on their case-in-chief.

The Court reminds counsel that the department is dark on 4/29/2018 and there is a holiday on 4/30/2018.

The Court informs counsel that it will hear argument from counsel on defendant's Motion for Nonsuit perhaps during an early lunch for jurors, but expects no further briefing.

The Court directs counsel to come in at 9:00AM if they want to take up some issue before jurors return.

4:01 am Court is adjourned until 03/20/2018 at 09:00AM in Department 69.
 
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
MINUTE ORDER
TIME: 09:00:00 AM
JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
DATE: 03/20/2018 DEPT: C-69
CLERK: Jay Browder
REPORTER/ERM: Bridget Mastrobattista, CSR #7515
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas
CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013
CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED]
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other
EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial
STOLO
APPEARANCES STOLO
Stolo
Krista Enns and Dan Webb, counsel, are present on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai, who is
present and seated at counsel's table.
Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of
Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________ Day 14, Defendant's Case-in-Chief; Defendant's Motion for Nonsuit (granted in part, denied in part)

Prior to calendar call, Sergeant Norton of the San Diego Sheriff's Department appears in the courtroom
and requests that the clerk sign a Evidence Transfer Receipt which Norton represents contains a knife
requested by the defendant in this matter.
The clerk signs the transfer receipt and places an exhibit tag on the handle of the knife. The clerk does
this because an exhibit needs to be tagged. Furthermore Norton had told the clerk, when he delivered
another exhibit, a door, that the clerk was free to place an exhibit tag on the door.

9:16 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been
continued from 3/19/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding a knife that
defendant requested the San Diego Sheriff's Department deliver to the Court today.
The Court and counsel discuss whether the next witness, Denys Williams should look at it.

9:19 am Now off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling.

Upon inquiry of the Court, attorney Greer states that he will finalize plaintiff's designations of the video
deposition of Neil Nalepa this afternoon.

Upon inquiry of the Court, attorney Enns states that witnesses Wright and Webster will be called.

Counsel note that the case is moving more quickly now than it did at the beginning.

The Court informs counsel that it will provide time today for argument on defendant's motion for nonsuit.

9:21 am The Court is in recess to allow counsel to look at the exhibit.

9:24 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.

Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding the use of the
knife during examination today.
The Court notes that the knife will not be published to the jury unless it is admitted into evidence.

9:28 am All jurors are present.

9:29 am DENYS WILLIAMS is sworn and examined by attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam
Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of plaintiff:
....41 - SDS Production - Photo of Shacknai Residence - aerial SDS 00743
....42 - SDS Production - Photo of Shacknai Residence - aerial SDS 00744
....43 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 00747
....44 - SDS Production - Photo of Shacknai Residence - aerial SDS 00748
....33 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 00695
....35 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 00697
1007 - COPD digital media production: IMG 7765
1006 - COPD digital media production: IMG 7764
..164 - SDS Production - Photo of contents of Rebecca Zahau's purse scattered on floor
SDS 01377
1005 - COPD digital media production: IMG 7763
1009 - COPD digital media production: IMG 7776
..852 - Last Photo of Rebecca
..186 - SDS Production - Photo of door with message written on it SDS 01567
..187 - SDS Production - Photo of Rebecca Zahau's phone on bedroom floor SDS 01568
..192 - SDS Production - Photo of rope tied to bedpost and items scattered across floor
SDS 01576
..199 - SDS Production - Photo of rope tied to bedpost and paintbrush found on the floor
SDS 01592
..207 - SDS Production - Photo of rope hung over balcony railing SDS 01604
..625 - Photo of balcony tile flooring

10:48 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.
The witness is excused, subject to recall.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court inquires of the proper identification of what
attorney Enns referred to as item 27 and published to the jury towards the end of her direct examination
of witness Williams shortly before break.
Attorney Enns identifies the item as previously admitted Court's Exhibit 195.
The Court and counsel confer regarding witness estimates. Defendant's counsel plan to finish with the
current witness, then call Macceca, and then publish the video deposition of Neil Nalepa this afternoon.

10:50 am The Court is in recess.

11:03 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.
Out of the presence of the jury, the Court informs counsel that it has read the briefing on defendant's
motion for nonsuit and inquires how much time counsel will need for argument.
Attorneys Greer and Webb give estimates of 5 minutes each.
The Court informs counsel that it will rule on the motion for nonsuit before lunch recess and directs
defendant's counsel to tell witness Macceca to come back at 1:30PM.

11:06 am All jurors are present.

11:06 am DENYS WILLIAMS, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by
attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.
The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of defendant:

....68 - SDS Production - Photo of injury on Rebecca Zahau's hand SDS 00829

11:19 am Cross examination of DENYS WILLIAMS commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff,

Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.
Attorney Greer publishes a demonstrative blow-up of a portion of previously admitted Court's exhibit 195
to the jury.
The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

1002 - Photo: Gloves - SDS 01444

The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified on behalf of plaintiff:

1017 - Annotated photo of chef's knife

11:44 am Redirect examination of DENYS WILLIAMS commences by attorney Enns on behalf of
defendant, Adam Shacknai.

11:45 am The witness is excused.

11:46 am All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, the Court informing them that the trial is
likely to finish next week, and if they have an issue with the trial schedule, to write a note, and Court
remains in session.

11:47 am Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court gives its tentative ruling on
defendant's motion for nonsuit pursuant to CCP §581(c).

11:49 am Attorney Greer argues.

11:53 am Attorney Webb argues.

11:58 am The Court grants defendant's nonsuit as to the Third Cause of Action and denies it as to the
First and Second Causes of Action, as more fully set forth in the reporter's transcript.
The Court signs defendant's proposed order as modified and the clerk files the document.

12:04 pm The Court is in recess.

1:24 pm The bailiff delivers the following Jury Note #6 to the Court:
"Your Honor,
Thank you for checking on our timing and potential conflicts. My husband and I are ticketed to fly to
Japan on Wednesday, March 28th. I would very much appreciate having, at minamum [sic], Tuesday,
March 27 to pack & prepare our home for house/dog sitter.
Thank you for your consideration
<modsnip>
Juror #7"

1:30 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.
Out of the presence of the jury, the Court reads Jury Note #6 to counsel and a discussion ensues
regarding a response to the jury note.
Counsel state that they will not submit the matter to the jury before next week.
Upon inquiry of the Court, counsel state that the next defense witness will be Michael Macceca. Attorney
Greer informs the Court that he has completed his designations of the portion of the video depositon of
Neil Nalepa.

1:33 pm All jurors are present.
The Court informs counsel that it is inclined to excuse the juror later in the day.

1:34 pm MICHAEL MACCECA is sworn and examined by attorney Enns on behalf of defendant, Adam
Shacknai.
The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of defendant:
....10 - 08-29-2011, SDS Oridyctuib - Macceca Crime Lab Report correcting initially omitted
measurement at scene. SDS 00142 -SDS 00145
..233 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 01672

2:16 pm Cross examination of MICHAEL MACCECA commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff,
Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.
The following pre-marked Court's exhibit is identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of plaintiff:

639 - 08-28-2011, Email correspondence between Tsuida, Macceca and Lucas regarding specifics
of Rebecca Zahau's death.

2:22 pm The witness is excused.

2:22 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for break and Court remains in session.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the court and counsel confer regarding disputed portions
of the transcript of the video deposition of Neil Nalepa which will be published to the jury after the jury
break.
The Court and counsel confer regarding a response to Jury Note #6 from Juror #7.
Counsel agree that the Court will excuse her from further service today.

2:25 pm Now on the record, the Court states that counsel stipulate to excusing Juror #7 from further jury
service at the end of the day.
The Court directs counsel to meet and confer regarding a selection of an alternate to replace Juror #7,
whether by stipulation or a flip of the coin.

2:27 pm The Court is in recess.

2:37 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.
Out of the presence of the jury, on the record, the Court rules, as more accurately stated in the reporter's
transcript, on parties objections made in the transcript of the video deposition of Neil Nalepa as follows:

Page 68, lines 13 - 23 - Objection sustained.
Page 69, lines 1-8: Objection overruled.
Page 71, lines 22 -24: Objection sustained.
Page 93, line 21 to page 94, line 19: Objection overruled
Page 95, lines 5 -14: Objection sustained

Page 203, line 5 to page 204 line 3 Objection sustained.
Page 209, line 3 - 16, first sentence. Objection overruled.
Page 209, line 16, second sentence to line 20. Objection sustained.

Upon inquiry of the Court, counsel state that the video deposition will last about 1 hour. Upon further
inquiry of he Court, counsel state that that will be all the testimony for trial today.

2:40 pm The Court is in recess to allow the technician to edit the video deposition to comply with the
Court's ruling.

2:46 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, attorney Greer requests clarification of the Court's ruling in
regards to page 209.
The Court informs counsel that he has understood the Court's ruling correctly.

2:47 pm The Court is in recess to allow the edit of the video deposition to be completed.

2:56 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are
present.

2:56 pm Now off the record, the 10/6/2017 Video Deposition of NEIL NALEPA is published to the jury, as
edited, on behalf of defendant Adam Shacknai.

3:47 pm The video deposition concludes.

3:47 pm All jurors except juror #7 are admonished and excused for the evening and Court remains in
session.
Out of the presence of the rest of the jury, on the record, the Court inquires of juror #7's scheduled
holiday.

The Court discharges juror #7 from further jury service, admonishing her not to speak to other jurors,
and she leaves the courtroom.

3:49 pm Now off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding a choosing a replacement for juror
#7.

The replacement is chosen by a flip of the coin, which lands on tails, and alternate juror #3 is chosen to
replace juror #7.

3:50 pm Counsel have nothing to take up on the record.

3:50 pm Still off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness scheduling for Thursday.

Counsel give the following estimates for examination for witnesses on Thursday:

Jonah Shacknai: Defendant - 1/12 hours; Plaintiff - 20-30 minutes
Dave Oleksow: Defendant - 1 hour; Plaintiff - 20 - 30 minutes
Robert Chisnall: Defendant - 90 minutes; Plaintiff - 30 minutes

The Court directs counsel to return tomorrow at 9:00AM if they want to take up an issue out of the
presence of the jury, otherwise to return at 9:15AM.

3:52 pm Court is adjourned until 03/21/2018 at 09:15AM in Department 69.
 
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
MINUTE ORDER
TIME: 09:15:00 AM
JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Katherine Bacal
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL

DATE: 03/21/2018 DEPT: C-69
CLERK: Jay Browder
REPORTER/ERM: Julie McKay CSR# 9059
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Bryan Bagnas

CASE NO: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL CASE INIT.DATE: 11/13/2013
CASE TITLE: Estate of Rebecca Zahau vs. Shacknai [IMAGED]
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other
EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial
STOLO
APPEARANCES STOLO
Stolo
Krista Enns, David Elsberg and Dan Webb, counsel, are present on behalf of defendant, Adam
Shacknai, who is present and seated at counsel's table.
Keith Greer, counsel, is present on behalf of plaintiff Pari Z. Zahau on her own behalf and on behalf of
Rebecca Zahau, deceased. __________________________________________________________________________________

Day 15, Defendant's Case-in-Chief

9:27 am This being the time previously set for further Jury trial in the above entitled cause, having been
continued from 3/20/2018, all parties and counsel appear as noted above and court convenes. All jurors
are present

9:28 am LINDA WRIGHT is sworn and examined by attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam
Shacknai.
The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of defendant:

..744 - Wright's casework notes
1047 - Photo of Latent print powder
1048 - Photo of single use fiber brush
1049 - Photo of lift card
1050 - Photo of lift tape
1018 - Annotated Diagram of Northeast Bedroom
..308 - (Previously identified on 3/1/2018 and partially admitted) - page 59 added to pages previously admitted.

1022 - Latent Prints Casework Notes, Page 65 of 198
1017 - (Previously identified on 3/20/2017) - page 2 only
1019 - (A multipage exhibit misidentified by counsel as "Annotated Photo of Bedroom
Door Frame") page 2 then 3 are admitted in piecemeal fashion

10:48 am All jurors are admonished and excused for break, directed to return in 15 minutes and Court
remains in session.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness
scheduling.

Attorney Elsberg estimates he will need another 1 1/2 hour on direct with the Linda Wright. Attorney
Greer estimates 20 - 30 minutes for cross-examination.
Attorney Webb estimates he will need 2 hours on direct with the next witness, Shelley Webster. Attorney
Greer estimates 20 -30 minutes on cross examination.

10:50 am The Court is in recess.

11:04 am The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All Jurors are
present.

11:04 am LINDA WRIGHT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further direct examination by
attorney Elsberg on behalf of defendant, Adam Shacknai.

The following pre-marked Court's exhibits are identified, moved into evidence without objection and
admitted on behalf of defendant:

1027 - Latent Prints Casework Notes, Page 80 of 198
1028 - Latent Prints Casework Notes, Page 81 of 198
1015 - Wright Dep. Ex. 4 Photo of Bed
1019 - (Previously misidentified and partially admitted) pages 1, 5, then 4 are added in piecemeal
fashion to previously admitted pages.
1040 - Latent Prints Casework Notes, Page 152 of 198

11:49 am Cross examination of LINDA WRIGHT commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff,
Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

11:57 am All jurors are admonished and excused for lunch, directed to return at 1:30 and Court remains
in session.

The witness is excused, subject to recall.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court directs counsel to come back early if they want
to take up something out of the presence of the jury.
Upon inquiry of the Court, counsel state that they will have remaining jury instructions to the Court by
this coming Friday.

11:57 am The Court is in recess.

1:32 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are
present.

1:32 pm LINDA WRIGHT, previously sworn, resumes the stand for further cross examination by attorney
Greer on behalf of plaintiff, Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau,
deceased.
The following demonstrative exhibit is identified and published to the jury without admitting the exhibit
into evidence:

36 - SDS Production - Photo SDS 00717

2:14 pm Redirect examination of LINDA WRIGHT commences by attorney Elsberg on behalf of
defendant, Adam Shacknai.

2:25 pm Recross examination of LINDA WRIGHT commences by attorney Greer on behalf of plaintiff,
Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, deceased.

2:28 pm The witness is excused.

2:28 pm All jurors are admonished and excused for break, directed to return in 15 minutes and Court is
in recess.

2:42 pm The Court is again in session, with counsel and parties present as noted above. All jurors are
present.

2:43 pm SHELLEY WEBSTER is sworn and examined by attorney Webb on behalf of defendant, Adam
Shacknai.

4:05 am All jurors are admonished and excused for the evening and Court remains in session.
The witness is excused, subject to recall.
Out of the presence of the jury, off the record, the Court and counsel confer regarding witness
scheduling.

Attorney Webb estimates he will need 30 to 40 minutes more for direct examination. Attorney Greer
estimates he will need 30 minutes on cross.

Upon inquiry of the Court, counsel state that they have the same previously identified witnesses for
tomorrow.

4:06 pm Court is adjourned until 03/22/2018 at 09:15AM in Department 69.
STOLO
 
Jonah Shacknai took the stand around 11 a.m. Thursday.

Earlier this week, Adam Shacknai took the stand.

Questioning of Jonah Shacknai opened with testimony about Jonah's background, he and Adam's childhood and their relationship growing up.

Adam's lawyer Dan Webb asked questions about Jonah's education and career path before turning to the subject of his ex-wives and children.

Jonah testified about meeting and marrying his second wife Dina Shacknai with whom he had his son Max in 2005. Jonah stated that he and Dina broke up in 2008.

Next, Webb asked Jonah about meeting Rebecca Zahau and Jonah testified that he met her in October of 2009.

Jonah testified that he met Rebecca at an eye center in Phoenix, Arizona, and said he believed she examined his eyes at their first meeting. Jonah also said he asked her to have dinner during that first conversation.

Webb asked if Jonah remembered the date of their first dinner together and Jonah responded affirmatively saying it was Oct. 19, 2009.

Jonah testified that their first date lasted 3 – 4 hours and talked about the things they discussed during that dinner.

"There was a significant compatibility on many levels," Jonah said of he and Rebecca.

Webb inquired about the progression of the couple's relationship and Jonah testified that they started seeing each other regularly through the end of 2009.

"I think we were undoubtedly a couple at the end of 2009," said Jonah. "Neither one of us were seeing other people."

Jonah testified that when he wasn't with his children he was either with Rebecca or working.

"It's a little bit of an odd story," Jonah said when asked about Rebecca moving in with him.

Jonah testified she moved her things into his home in Phoenix in March of 2010.

He said he had been on a trip with his three children – two from his first marriage, and Max from his marriage to Dina – when

Rebecca moved her things in, including family pictures and personal items.

Jonah testified that they hadn't discussed her moving in and that Rebecca bringing her things into the home caused an issue with one of his older children.

Webb asked what their next steps were regarding the move in and Jonah said that after some discussion she moved her things back out.

Jonah then testified that about a month later Rebecca formally moved in and they were able to introduce the idea to his children.

When asked, Jonah talked about the relationship between himself and Rebecca, and said they were "very close."

"I'm confident that we loved one another," Jonah said. "We spent all of our time together that we could."

Webb's questioning then turned to Jonah's home in Coronado, California.

Jonah testified that he had owned the home for about four years as of 2010. He explained that when school got out he would take all three of his children to the home in Coronado for the summer each year.

Webb asked about where the children were when they weren't with Jonah during the summer and Jonah said Max would be with his mother at another home in Coronado and his older children would travel to the East Coast and back with their mother.

Jonah testified that during the summer months of 2010 Rebecca would come to Coronado for long weekends and use vacation time to visit as she still had a job at an eye center.

Webb asked about Rebecca's hobbies and Jonah testified that she was an amateur painter and was working on a "soccer player painting" for Max around the time of her death.

Next, Jonah talked about boating with Rebecca and his children. Jonah testified that they would use a "tow line" to tow his older children behind the boat on an innertube around Coronado harbor.

Webb asked if Jonah was aware that the same tow line was the rope connected with Rebecca's hanging and Jonah said yes.
Jonah testified that the tow rope and the innertube were stored in the garage.

Webb questioned Jonah about teaching Rebecca how to tie down the boat using the rope. Jonah testified that he showed her a simple, well-known way of securing the lines.

Jonah testified that Rebecca secured the boat this way each time they took the boat out.

Questioning moved to which members of Rebecca's family had met over the course of their relationship.

Webb asked about an event with Rebecca's family in which Jonah asked her father if they could begin dating, though they had already been living together. Jonah testified that Rebecca had asked him to do this.

Webb asked about Rebecca going to church to which Jonah responded that she had gone to church a couple of times during their relationship.

Jonah testified that during their first date he and Rebecca discussed religion and her upbringing.
He said that Rebecca had told him she had grown up in a very religious and strict home.

"She was not a fan of organized religion of any kind," Jonah said.
Jonah also said that Rebecca had not discussed her feelings on religion with her parents.

Questioning turned to Rebecca's job at the eye center and Jonah stated that she quit her job about 9 months into their relationship.

Jonah testified that Rebecca did not have a source of income nor savings that he was aware of at this time.

Webb asked about Rebecca's arrangement with her family regarding money. Jonah testified that Rebecca and her sisters had agreed to send money to their parents each month to help support them and their younger siblings.

Jonah stated that Rebecca would typically send an envelope of cash to her family and was concerned that she would not be able to continue that if she left her job.

He testified that he would give her the money to continue sending to her parents if she were to quit her job.

Webb inquired as to how much money Jonah gave her for sending to her family and he stated it was $500.
He also testified that he gave Rebecca access to credit cards to use up until the time of her death and that he put no restrictions on her spending.

Questioning then moved to tape residue that was found on her leg following her death.

Jonah testified that she used compression tape sometimes for running and other physical activities.

Webb then asked Jonah about a man Rebecca had been married to when she and Jonah met named Neil Nalepa.

Jonah testified that it was his understanding that they were separated with he met Rebecca and that they subsequently got a divorce.

Next, Jonah described a conversation between he and Rebecca in December of 2010 in which she talked about Neil shoving her around.

Jonah also testified that Rebecca had been arrested for shop lifting once. He said that she had told him she wanted him to hear it from him. She explained it as an incident in which she had left a store in a hurry and forgotten she had merchandise on her.

Webb next asked about Rebecca's relationship with Jonah's oldest daughter – who was a young teenager in 2010. Jonah described it as "difficult" and talked about confrontations between the two.

Jonah testified that the relationship continued to be difficult during the summer of 2011 when the couple and children travelled to Coronado.

He described going to a counselor for advice on how to make the household run more smoothly.

Jonah said he thought that summer would be a chance to figure out if they could all get along.

He also stated that during the months before Rebecca's death, she and his daughter continued to have difficulties and the relationship showed no signs of improvement.

Webb's questioning turned to Jonah's son Max who was between the ages of 4 and 5 during the first years of Jonah and Rebecca's relationship.

Jonah said they had an "extremely close" relationship and that he had no doubt that Rebecca and Max loved each other.

Webb asked if the relationship between Rebecca and Max had an effect on Jonah's ex-wife, Max's mother Dina. Jonah testified that it did and said that Dina resented Rebecca for a variety of reasons.

He said that as Rebecca and Max grew closer that heightened the effect on Dina.
"She was pretty rough on Rebecca, there was no question about it," said Jonah.

Next, Jonah again talked about his plans for the summer of 2011 to try to work on the dynamics between his daughter and Rebecca.

Webb next directed Jonah's attention to the events beginning on July 11.

Jonah testified that on the morning of July 11 he took his two older children to the airport because they were flying to see their mom. He said that Max came along to see them off.

Next, Jonah said he and Max returned to his Coronado home where Rebecca and her younger sister Xena were. He said that Xena was there for a visit for her birthday.

Jonah testified that they had planned to go to the zoo later that day.

Webb asked what Jonah did next and he said that he went to the gym a few blocks away for a quick workout.

Jonah testified that he had been at the gym for about 15 minutes when he got a call from Rebecca's phone. He said that he could hear voices and commotion but no one speaking into the phone.

Jonah said he knew something was wrong and ran back to the house where he saw a firetruck, police cars and an ambulance.

Webb asked what Jonah saw when he entered the home and he said he saw Max on the ground near the front door being attended to be paramedics and that Rebecca was nearby.

Jonah testified that paramedics then put Max in an ambulance and Jonah followed behind with an officer in a police car as they went to Coronado Sharp Hospital.

Next, Jonah said Max was taken into an emergency treatment room where doctors worked trying to resuscitate him. He said he was not breathing on his own, but doctors eventually got a pulse.

Jonah then said that the hospital staff took Max for CT scan.

He said a team from Rady Children's Hospital was called to Coronado to take over the case. Max was then transported to Rady Children's by ambulance and Jonah rode with them.

Webb inquired if Jonah spoke to Rebecca while at Coronado Sharp Hospital. Jonah testified that she arrived at the hospital and he spoke to her briefly. He asked her to return home as he was trying to reach Max's mother Dina and didn't want Dina to arrive at the hospital, see Rebecca and have an unpleasant incident.

Jonah testified that when they arrived at Rady Children's Hospital, Max was taken to intensive care and he was "kicked out" so they could attend to Max, which Jonah said he understood.

He said a friend of his worked at the hospital and drove Jonah to Coronado to take a shower and change his clothes. Jonah said he returned to the hospital right after.

Webb inquired about Max's condition as of the evening of July 11. Jonah testified that when they were consulted by doctors at Rady Children's they were told he was his condition was very serious but that with brain injuries you don't know what may happen and that they were working to stabilize him.

Jonah testified that doctors said they were going to put Max in a medically induced coma to put his body through as little stress as possible.

Webb asked about when Dina arrived at the hospital and Jonah said they had a hard time reaching her and that she arrived at 5 p.m.

Jonah testified that he and Dina agreed to an arrangement where one of them would be at the hospital while the other would try to rest.

He said that the nurses at Rady Children's arranged for him to stay at a nearby motel which was a few minutes from the hospital as the Ronald McDonald House was full on July 11.

Webb asked if Jonah was at the hospital with Max all day on Tuesday, July 12 and he said he was.

Next, the lawyer inquired if he spoke to Rebecca on the phone on July 12 and if they spoke about Jonah's brother Adam coming to San Diego.

Jonah testified that Rebecca told him she was going to pick Adam up at the airport. He said later in the afternoon Rebecca and

Adam arrived at the hospital where Jonah was with his friend Howard Luber who was Max's godfather and had come out from Phoenix to support the family.

He said the four of them left the hospital to drop Luber at the airport and that he, Rebecca and Adam got a quick dinner at The Fish Market before returning to the hospital site.

Webb inquired about the mood of the dinner which Jonah described as "extremely somber with not a lot of talking."

Jonah testified that Rebecca and Adam took him to the Ronald McDonald House where he was then staying. He said Rebecca asked for a private word so they went to Jonah's room and Adam stayed in the lobby.

Webb asked what the interaction was like between the couple and Jonah said they didn't say much but that Rebecca wanted a long hug and hoped Jonah could assure her everything would be OK.

Next, Jonah said that Rebecca and Adam left while he remained at the Ronald McDonald House and Rady Children's Hospital site.

When asked, Jonah said his understanding was that Adam would be staying in this guest house at Jonah's Coronado home as he always did when he visited.

Webb asked if Jonah stayed at the hospital late into the evening on July 12 and he said he did and that Dina was there as well.
Jonah then testified that he and Dina spoke with a Dr. Peterson that night and that he was the co-head of the pediatric intensive care unit at Rady Children's.

The lawyer asked Jonah to describe that conversation and Jonah said that the doctor had been "unusually" and "inappropriately" direct with them. He said the doctor told him that he had been doing his job for 30 years and that Max's injuries were similar to what he would see in a drowning. He said in the best-case scenario, if Max survived, that he would not walk or talk again.

Webb asked if Jonah and Dina were very upset by this news and Jonah described Dina as "hysterical." He said she "sort of yelled" at Dr. Peterson saying he was wrong and it wasn't true.

"It was very hard to hear those words," said Jonah.

Jonah testified that he left the hospital sometime after midnight and went to the Ronald McDonald to get some sleep.

Next, he said he tried calling Rebecca but that she didn't answer. Jonah said he left a message for her while crying telling her what Dr. Peterson had said and asked her to call him.

Webb asked if Rebecca ever returned that call and Jonah answered that she did not.

Jonah testified that he returned to Max's ICU room at hospital around 6 or 7 a.m. on July 13 and that Dina was already there
Webb asked if Jonah received a text shortly after arriving at the hospital and he said he said he got a text from Adam saying to call him.

Jonah said he stepped out of the room and called Adam.

He testified that Adam asked if he were sitting down and that Jonah proceeded to sit.

Jonah said Adam then told him Rebecca had "taken her life." Jonah described himself as being speechless.

Webb asked if a police officer then got on the phone and Jonah said he did.

Jonah testified that he had wanted to return to the home but that the officer had told him the house was contained and he wouldn't be allowed in so to "sit tight."

The lawyer asked if he learned the way Rebecca had died and Jonah said he was unsure if either his brother or the officer had told him.

Webb then asked if Jonah could remember what his state of mind was and what he was thinking after receiving the news.

"I couldn't believe it," said Jonah. "My son was laying, fighting for his life in a hospital and the idea that Rebecca was now gone – it was unfathomable."

Jonah testified that shortly after he called Rebecca's brother-in-law Doug Loehner – the husband of Rebecca's sister Mary Loehner-Zahau. He described speaking to Doug and telling him Rebecca had taken her life. He said he told Doug he didn't have details but asked him to tell Mary and the rest of the family.

When asked, Jonah described the organ donation team at Rady Children's approaching he and Dina that day about donating Max's organs if his condition did not improve.

Webb asked if Dina and Jonah discussed the possibility of donating Max's organs and he said they did discuss it and that ultimately, they did donate Max's organs.

The lawyer opted not to go through the details of Max's last days but asked if life support was turned off on July 16 and Jonah said yes.

Questioning then turned to Jonah's brother Adam and the accusations brought against him in the lawsuit at the center of this civil trial.

Webb asked if Jonah ever saw Adam do anything "violent or aggressive" to another human being.

"Never," said Jonah.

The lawyer than asked if Adam had ever done anything that would lead Jonah to believe he was capable of doing the things he is accused of in the lawsuit. Jonah again said "never" and called the idea, "inconceivable."

With that, Webb said he had no further questions and the lawyer for the Zahau family, Keith Greer his cross examination of Jonah Shacknai.

Greer's first questions were about Rebecca and the type of person she was. Jonah affirmed that she had a "calm outward demeanor" and that she was "caring."

The lawyer asked if Rebecca was close with her mother and Jonah said they spoke often and he sensed that they were close.

When asked if he saw Rebecca do things that were "self-destructive," Jonah said she sometimes wouldn't eat "adequately" but that he wasn't sure if that was something he would consider self-destructive.

Next, Greer asked if Jonah had seen Rebecca tie knots before. He said only when she was tying down a boat.

Greer then referred to a witness deposition and read questions and answers related to knot-tying in which Jonah had previously said he hadn't seen Rebecca tie anything other than her shoelaces.

The lawyer then put up several photos and asked Jonah if he had ever seen Rebecca tie knots like the ones in the pictures. Jonah said no to each of them.

Greer then brought up out a red rope and a dock cleat and asked Jonah to demonstrate the way he had taught Rebecca to tie up a boat, which Jonah then did.

"It didn't look like there was any knot at the end of that, correct?" asked Greer.

"I think that's how everyone in the world ties down a boat," said Jonah.

Greer asked about the athletic or kinesiology tape (KT) Jonah had said Rebecca used. Jonah testified that he believed the product is cut into strips and applied to muscles. Jonah testified that she would put it on her foot and calf area but that he never watched her apply it.

Jonah testified that Rebecca used another type of tape at times to cover spots on her legs she was worried would get darker with sun exposure.

Next, Greer gave a package of KT tape to Jonah and referred to a diagram on the back depicting that ways people use the tape for injuries. He asked Jonah to use a pen to mark the ways he recalled Rebecca using the tape.

Questioning turned to the summer of 2011 and Greer asked Jonah if he thought he and Rebecca had planned to "assess" their relationship at the end of the summer. Jonah said yes.

Greer asked if Rebecca told Jonah she gave Max CPR the day of his fall.

"She said that she gave him a few breaths," said Jonah.

Greer then asked if Jonah had thanked Rebecca for being there and for saving Max's life.

"Well, the life wasn't saved," said Jonah. "But I thanked her for being there and doing all that she could."

Next, Greer referred to the video deposition of Nina Shacknai – Jonah's ex-wife and Max's mother. He asked if Jonah had seen it and he said he had not.

Greer asked if on July 12 Jonah had confronted and instructed Dina that she should thank Rebecca for being there and for saving Max's life.

"Not like that," said Jonah.

Jonah described Dina's agitation that Rebecca had been the only one home at the time of Max's accident and that no one knew exactly what had happened. Jonah said he hoped to ease an unpleasant situation by asking Dina to thank Rebecca.

Next, Greer asked about the voicemail Jonah left for Rebecca in the early morning hours of July 13. He asked if Jonah had phrased the message in a way to avoid causing Rebecca "undue stress."

"No," said Jonah.

"You didn't say that Max was going to die, correct?" asked Greer.

Jonah testified that on the message he said what had been told to him and Dina by Dr. Peterson.

Greer asked if there was still hope that day that Max would survive, and Jonah said that even in grave situations, "you always hold out hope."

The lawyer then asked if Jonah had referred to "Asian honor" when telling Dina that Rebecca was dead and he said he did not.

Questioning then turned to Adam's hobbies and if Jonah had said that Adam was a "trained" writer and what types of things Adam writes.

"Do you recall testifying that he makes up stories?" asked Greer.

"Yes, among other things, he is capable of writing fiction, yes," said Jonah.

"Would you agree with the statement, in your relationship with Adam, 'you've got his back'?" asked Greer.

"He's my little brother," said Jonah. "I think we are a strong family. Yes."

Jonah was excused from the witness stand around 3 p.m.

http://www.760kfmb.com/story/37785775/mansion-death-lawsuit-jonah-shacknai-takes-the-stand
 
I previously reported (ROA 1073) the initial Jury Instructions filed with court on 2/26/18 were withdrawn on 3/22/18. Take note that Plaintiffs have objected to new Jury Instructions filed by Defense:

ROA 1078 03/26/2018 Objections (To Defenants Special Jury Instruction Re Evidentiary Value of Death Certificate and Autopsy Report) filed by Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, Deceased.

Pari Z. Zahau, on her own behalf, and on behalf of Rebecca Zahau, Deceased (Plaintiff)

Objection to Special Jury Instruction
 
From Mary Zahau-Loehner’s video-taped deposition taken on 9/22/17:

3 Q. Was the service an open casket? 11:46AM

4 A. Yes. 11:46AM

5 Q. Who selected the clothes that the body was 11:46AM

6 dressed in? 11:46AM

7 A. We all did. My mom and my -- Snowem and I.11:46AM

8 Q. Do you remember what you picked? 11:46AM

9 A. Yeah. I kind of do. 11:46AM

10 Q. What did you pick? 11:46AM

11 A. It was a dress that has -- I can't think of11:46AM

12 the word. It has some glitters on it. 11:46AM

13 Q. What color? 11:46AM

14 A. I believe it was blue and white. And then 11:46AM

15 we also put a tribal blanket on her. That's not a 11:47AM

16 picture I really want to try to relive. 11:47AM

___________________
snip

RZ last photo by Zena depicts RZ wearing a striped, sequined long tank dress which became known as the "lost clothes."

During trial, these clothes were also seen heaped on closet floor , and now we know RZ was buried in the long tank dress.

(Please also see Dr Wechtz Autopsy report during Dr Phil Show when body exhumed and he describes same clothes as MZL deposition).
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 5, 2018

ADAM SHACKNAI ATTORNEY DAN WEBB’S
STATEMENT ON RUNAWAY JURY VERDICT

We were absolutely astonished by the jury’s outrageous verdict in this case, and plan to appeal. This lawsuit was frivolous and reckless from the very beginning, and never should have been allowed to proceed to trial. Plaintiffs admitted under oath that they filed this lawsuit without any proof, later dismissed two defendants they had wrongly accused as murderers, and ultimately fixated on Adam because they came to believe he was, in their words, “smart,” and knew how to tie a common knot known to millions. In my entire 40-year legal career, I have never seen such a catastrophic manipulation and failure of our court system.

The unusual manner of suicide, the intensely sensationalized tabloid media coverage over the last seven years, and Keith Greer’s inflammatory behavior throughout the case – both in and out of court – plainly affected the impartiality of this jury and deprived Adam of a fair trial. Multiple jurors stated prior to trial that they followed the media circus outside of court, and even admitted to forming preconceived views that Rebecca did not commit suicide. On top of that, plaintiffs’ grotesque trial stunts like bringing a custom-ordered sex doll with an exact likeness of Rebecca’s face into the courtroom, and hanging her naked body from a makeshift scaffold in front of the jury, was so vile and wildly prejudicial that it should never have been allowed to occur.
The media firestorm that contaminated the jury, the plaintiffs’ countless ever-changing theories, and most importantly the complete lack of credible evidence connecting Adam to anything having to do with Rebecca’s death, all created a mountain of serious judicial errors. After being dismissed four times for lack of evidence prior to trial, the case should never have been allowed to be presented to a jury, where emotion and innuendo predictably overwhelmed the actual facts. We are confident that this preposterous verdict will be reversed on appeal.

Multiple county and statewide law enforcement agencies long ago unequivocally determined that Adam Shacknai had nothing whatsoever to do with the death of Rebecca Zahau. Nothing about this irrational verdict changes those conclusions, which the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department yesterday again confirmed, based on all the forensic evidence and medical examinations. After six weeks of testimony during this trial, not one shred of credible evidence was produced to suggest that Adam was involved in any way. I challenge the Zahau family and their lawyer to accept the Sheriff’s invitation to share one speck of evidence having anything whatsoever to do with my client. Adam did nothing here except travel across the country to lovingly support his brother and his nephew in their moment of need, and found himself in the unimaginable position of finding Rebecca’s body, cutting her down, calling 911 and attempting to resuscitate her.

The fatal fall of Max Shacknai and suicide of Rebecca Zahau in 2011 were hideous losses that changed both families’ lives forever. It is clear the Zahau family desperately wanted to place blame after such an inexplicable tragedy. But falsely accusing an innocent man of murder, without a shred of credible evidence, did nothing to advance the pursuit of justice, nor to honor the memory of Max and Rebecca. Instead, the fabricated allegations against Adam, and the emotional jury response they provoked, only add another appalling human tragedy to this already horrible situation.

Contact:
Tammy Taylor (tammy_taylor@sitrick.com)
Terry Fahn (terry_fahn@sitrick.com)
Sitrick And Company
(310) 788-2850
 
Wow. That's quite an impressive tirade. If my screen was any closer, I'd be wiping spittle off my face. I think whoever authored that needs to borrow a blood pressure pill from someone before he strokes out all over his keyboard.

This group is not used to losing. No idea how to be gracious.

And why bring Max into this tantrum??

Why state that losing this case dishonors Max's memory??? That is just beyond bizarre.

Sitrick and Company?? Really? We are supposed to believe a tugboat captain needs one of the most expensive reputation management firms in the world to cope with this verdict? My.

I wonder how much longer there will be willingness to pay for this defense dream team? I'm thinking there will be a bit more "sound and fury", and then there will be the "signifying nothing" part phase.

**Oh wait. Sitrick and Company are probably representing attorney Dan Webb and colleagues. My bad! Yes, they probably need some reputation management right about now. But that did them no favors. They managed to demean not only the plaintiffs, but the judge, jury, media, the justice system, etc. Yikes. Maybe Dan Webb and company plans to retire? Why would they piss off the court system and judge that way?? Maybe they never plan to try cases in that district again?
 
Wow. That's quite an impressive tirade. If my screen was any closer, I'd be wiping spittle off my face. I think whoever authored that needs to borrow a blood pressure pill from someone before he strokes out all over his keyboard.

This group is not used to losing. No idea how to be gracious.

And why bring Max into this tantrum??

Why state that losing this case dishonors Max's memory??? That is just beyond bizarre.

Sitrick and Company?? Really? We are supposed to believe a tugboat captain needs one of the most expensive reputation management firms in the world to cope with this verdict? My.

I wonder how much longer there will be willingness to pay for this defense dream team? I'm thinking there will be a bit more "sound and fury", and then there will be the "signifying nothing" part phase.

**Oh wait. Sitrick and Company are probably representing attorney Dan Webb and colleagues. My bad! Yes, they probably need some reputation management right about now. But that did them no favors. They managed to demean not only the plaintiffs, but the judge, jury, media, the justice system, etc. Yikes. Maybe Dan Webb and company plans to retire? Why would they piss off the court system and judge that way?? Maybe they never plan to try cases in that district again?

I'm only half way through reading it and found at least 2 outright falsehoods. Talk about prejudicial and one-sided. These people aren't accustomed to losing and they don't do it well.

They also keep repeating the meme of "multiple law enforcement agencies, etc. etc." SDSO were the lead investigators, they called the shots and decided how much of the evidence they were sharing with other agencies. I rather doubt Coronado PD or the FBI played much of a role. Kamala Harris's office didn't do much at all, other than reading some files. They weren't part of the investigation.

IIRC, wasn't there a similar red-faced ranting response after the McStay family's bodies were found?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
2,642
Total visitors
2,763

Forum statistics

Threads
590,018
Messages
17,929,059
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top