I hope Tricia doesn't mind that I've transcribed the majority of Keith Greer's latest interview:
TG: Everybody wanted to know why the defense did not call the medical examiner. The person who ruled this a suicide. The medical examiner you would think this person would be the first one the defense calls. Well Mr Greer said it was no surprise to him because every witness from the sheriffs department that was called by the defense he was able to put massive holes into their suicide theory. Mr Greer is confident that the suicide theory fell apart because of the fact that he was able to show these witnesses and their stories just didnt match up, didnt make sense. Greer said he was anxious and couldnt wait to get the medical examiner on the stand to blow holes through his theory that Rebeccas death was a suicide.
The ME was supposed to go on the stand Monday March 26[SUP]th[/SUP] and Sunday night Greer received an email saying the defense was withdrawing the ME as a witness. Greer said in his personal opinion it was because of how he was able to blow holes in all of the sheriffs department witnesses, the defense didnt want to have the MEs theory destroyed on cross.
Now lets go to the second half of the interview, the one that recorded properly, with Keith Greer:
How are you going to explain the fact that Rebeccas DNA was on the rope and Adams was not? That to me seems a very difficult task to take on.
KG: Well its interesting cause I learned a lot about DNA during this process and one of the things that all of the DNA experts were clear on was sometimes people dont leave DNA, particularly after theyve washed theres going to be any of the cells that would shed will be cleaned off, and different people shed at different rates, some people shed a lot some people will not at all, so its interesting.
Here we have we know that Adam held the knife that cut her down, we know that Adam loosened up the wrist, the bindings on her wrist, and he said he wedged his hand underneath them in order to check her pulse we know that he took the gag out of her mouth we know that he says he gave her mouth to mouth resuscitation, he said he gave her chest compressions, so weve got him touching her all over after shes hanged, but theres no DNA. So its a question of did he not do that stuff? Well we know shes cut down, we know theres a knife there we know hes touched it, we know the ropes are loose on her hands, theres evidence that what hes saying is true, yet no DNA.
And so part of it is where its tested, I know the rope on the bed, thats tying the rope to the bed, they didnt test in my opinion where the person who looped the rope around the bedpost would have been touching the rope. They tested a knot that wasnt even associated with the rope being looped around the bed.
So part of it is where they test, where they do the swabbing, part of it is does the person leave DNA? Adam said that he showered that night and he also said he showered that morning. So we have both cases, if in fact he was there that evening then he had already showered just like he did the next morning he didnt leave any DNA the next morning. What makes us [cant hear] the night before?
Interestingly he had no idea. If it was in fact him he did not have any idea that he wasnt a shedder of DNA because he wiped off everything. The door knobs in and out of the room, no fingerprints no DNA, you can see on the doorframe on the door itself the area thats been wiped clean cause the doors white and theres powder, the fingerprint powder shows up 8 above the door knob and 8 below theres all kinds of powder yet its really clean white and the whole area of the door and around the door knob and on the door knobs themselves where its been wiped. No DNA on the paintbrushes, if Rebecca painted that herself youd expect her DNA on there, theres nobodys. No DNA on the paint tube that was squeezed 20 some odd times to get that paint out, if Rebecca painted it youd expect to have her DNA on there. And its not. So same with the knives that youd expect her DNA, her fingerprints are on the carving knife, as if shes holding the blade facing towards her and no DNA of hers on the handle, which is a porous surface, so I think the DNA evidence helps show that it was murder. Because if youre gonna commit suicide are you gonna be wiping off, I dont even know if she could, in the order that things were done.
TG: Finally, the judge decided to not give the jury the option to separate the two questions. So now Im gonna give you a scenario here, lets say theres somebody that absolutely believes it was murder but they just cant wrap their mind around the fact that theres no physical evidence of Adam. Do they then have to say the preponderance of the evidence does not convict this person?
KG: [crosstalk] they jump right to Adam. First question is, uh not quoting it exactly, did Adam Shacknai touch Rebecca Zahau in a harmful or offensive manner? Yes or no. Did that conduct cause her death? Those are the first two questions. So the jury doesnt get to say it was murder but were not sure who it was, its right to did Adam do it.
TG: The other thing too, Im trying to think if I was on that jury, I might say ok the evidence really does show it was murder, hes the only one that couldve done it, even though theres no physical evidence though its explained why there is no physical evidence, and were not sending him to death or to jail, its civil...
[snipped]
KG: When it comes to punitive damages those have to be proven by clear and convincing evidence so its more of a challenge obviously to meet the clear and convincing standard.
TG: So if they come back with $100 punitive that would give you an indication that maybe they werent quite sure about Adam.
KG: Well theyd probably come back with zero, it would either be something substantial or zero, they have to find that its clear and convincing first and if they do find that then they can come back with the larger number, but they may put a very large value on the damages caused by her mother losing her 32-year old daughter who was definitely a very important part of her life, taking care of her, consoling her, taking care of her financially, emotionally, it was a very strong relationship, so they could put a big number on that.
TG: How long do you think, I know this is a question thats very difficult to answer, but normally what do juries take, 2 - 3 days maybe?
KG: Yeah, it could, I think they first come in they probably all I presume the vast majority say its murder if not all of them, I think all should but maybe therell be a straggler or some unique person in there that doesnt, and then the next step of who else could it be? The defense on closing argument will probably throw out a few names of people that it could be, but then I think if the jury look at it and say theres no evidence of those people, theres no handwriting, no knot-tying, no motive, it looks like the only evidence we have is Adam and theres nothing about anyone else, if they look at it logically and apply the law cleanly it shouldnt be that long a process. Id expect it by the end of the day on Tuesday.
TG: But dont they, if they say its murder, they have to pretty much say it was Adam dont they? They have to be either he is culpable or hes not?
KG: Yeah, murders not even a question, Im gonna recommend to the jury that they do that, just get that out the way, cause it changes how you look at the evidence. If you believe that it is murder you look at the evidence very differently than if you believe its suicide. Cause if you believe its murder then all of a sudden a lot of questions are answered, cause she didnt do this herself, so then the question is who did it? Who, other than her, did it? And then what evidence we have appears to point to Adam. Unless you take what the defense experts say which says the other evidence points to nobody. The door cant be compared, the writing on the door cant be compared to anything, and anybody could have tied the ropes that way, and hes just an unusual guy and his mannerisms when he saw the body that morning, its open to interpretation. Its a challenging case. But I think looking at the evidence it weighs in our favor, and hopefully the jury believes so too.
