Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Page 3 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

New updates on San Diego ROA

Post by Admin on Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:10 pm

New updates on ROA.

Ex-parte for tomorrow morning is RESCHEDULED for 11-02-16. Now, that's very interesting, as it appeared that the ex-parte was related to the hearings for 11-21, but maybe not. There is a hearing Friday afternoon, to deal with discovery matters, and a motion hearing (Dina's motion to compel NN's depo.)

I admit I'm somewhat puzzled as to why a motion to compel would be heard before a previously scheduled motion to quash/ protective order. That doesn't seem logical to me, but IANAL.

443 10/19/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 11/02/2016 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.
442 10/19/2016 The Ex Parte was rescheduled to 11/02/2016 at 08:45:00 AM in C-69 before Katherine Bacal at Central

Updated list of future events:

10/21/2016 01:30 PM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil) - Motion - Other
10/21/2016 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing - Motion to Compel Discovery
11/02/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil) - Motion for Protective Order
11/18/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Carioca on Sat Oct 22, 2016 6:03 pm

Hi all,

444 10/20/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.

But no doc available for purchase yet.

Oddly enough, [sarcasm] the kitty liter has already gotten their paws on it as per a Google alert. No way I'm clicking on it, but the alert basically says:

"Rebecca Zahau's Ex-Husband Ordered to be Deposed" (I tried to insert the image but no joy...)

IMO DS is going after NN because she thinks he will be a great witness for the defense. IMO from what I've read, he seems to have his own agenda as the misaligned unhappy ex who was tossed aside for the rich dude. Hoping I'm wrong. But seriously, what on earth can he offer! Nonsense.

Meanwhile, back at the Federal Case on Pacer, here is the most recent doc from Dina's appeal. Basically it's more of Dina whining about the case being closed without prejudice:

In this case, Appellant [Dina] had the power to compel federal agencies to comply with federal subpoenas that were served for the production of documents, or to compel federal witnesses who were involved in the death investigation to testify about their involvement, their percipient knowledge, and their conclusions. But she was deprived of that right – the right to conduct sufficient discovery to defend herself – when the District Court granted Plaintiffs’/Appellees’ Rule 41(a)(2) motion.
Appellant respectfully requests that the District Court’s order be reversed and the case remanded to the District Court.

Will try and attach the doc :-)
Oops, says can't attach. Sorry, still trying to find my way around here.

Embarassed
avatar
Carioca

Posts : 3
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Sun Oct 23, 2016 6:28 am

Thank you Carioca Smile for the update and for trying to upload!

I just added the Tentative Ruling for 10-20-16 (ROA 444) to our court document thread.

The litter box having their dirty paws on the ruling is not necessarily odd. Did I just say that out loud? I would not click on a link attached to them either, unless you want a flea infestation.

Tentative Rulings are published earlier than what we normally see on the ROA. They're published for FREE on a different CA court website. See below link for future Tentative Rulings:

http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/portal/page?_pageid=55,1554961&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by ~Bourne on Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:26 am

Thanks Carioca & Lash for attaching the tentative rulings.

I'm not actually surprised that NN would be deposed because he was Rebecca's ex and WDS is about her death. However, I'm surprised that according to the tentative ruing, "Zahau" had spoke with NN the night of her death. By this, is the court referring to Rebecca herself or her family members?

I don't see NN's deposition as a win for Dina. He's already made it known Rebecca would *never* commit suicide. So if anything, it goes against Dina's argument that she couldn't have murdered Rebecca because Rebecca had done herself in.

I don't know why the courts also said the motion to deposed went unopposed. Wasn't there a protective order filed on behalf of NN?

I hope tha trial goes forward. I see though that Adam's (Jonah's) lawyers are competent.

~Bourne

Posts : 7
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Betty P on Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:06 pm

Carioca wrote:Hi all,

444 10/20/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.

But no doc available for purchase yet.

Oddly enough, [sarcasm] the kitty liter has already gotten their paws on it as per a Google alert. No way I'm clicking on it, but the alert basically says:

"Rebecca Zahau's Ex-Husband Ordered to be Deposed" (I tried to insert the image but no joy...)

IMO DS is going after NN because she thinks he will be a great witness for the defense. IMO from what I've read, he seems to have his own agenda as the misaligned unhappy ex who was tossed aside for the rich dude. Hoping I'm wrong. But seriously, what on earth can he offer! Nonsense.

Meanwhile, back at the Federal Case on Pacer, here is the most recent doc from Dina's appeal. Basically it's more of Dina whining about the case being closed without prejudice:

In this case, Appellant [Dina] had the power to compel federal agencies to comply with federal subpoenas that were served for the production of documents, or to compel federal witnesses who were involved in the death investigation to testify about their involvement, their percipient knowledge, and their conclusions. But she was deprived of that right – the right to conduct sufficient discovery to defend herself – when the District Court granted Plaintiffs’/Appellees’ Rule 41(a)(2) motion.
Appellant respectfully requests that the District Court’s order be reversed and the case remanded to the District Court.

Will try and attach the doc :-)
Oops, says can't attach. Sorry, still trying to find my way around here.

Embarassed

Dina must still be going for the cell block tango defense - "we killed her because she deserved it". Only something an elitist, depraved wealthy person would think of.

I wonder if Dina and Jonah's attorneys are hoping to "sway" NN's testimony.

Also, something I thought of the other day: In #437, when SDSO officers and detectives were questioning RZ's family and tried to accuse RZ of insulting Jonah's older daughter, causing her to commit suicide - where did SDSO get that information? It was only days after RZ's murder, yet these kinds of personal family secrets and bizarre accusations were popping up in interviews.

Who gave SDSO that personal (possibly false) information about Jonah's daughter's suicide attempt?

Who told them about Maxie's head injury at Dina's house the week before the event?

Who gave SDSO personal information (possibly false) information about RZ's romantic life before and after her marriage to NN?

Who (falsely) told SDSO, so early in the investigation, that some members of the Zahau family were in the US illegally?

When and how did SDSO receive that information?

Why did SDSO choose to believe those rumors?

Why did SDSO use those rumors and false information so early in the investigation when they were supposed to be finding out what happened to RZ?

Who gave SDSO information that put RZ in a bad light and helped them develop an interrogation plan that included that information, along with info that Adam has "passed his polygraph exam"? Why did they not ask any relevant questions to learn what might have happened to RZ, like what clothes was she wearing that night? If she painted, what kind of paint supplies did she use? Where did she buy them? What kind of painting did she do? Did she usually shower before bed or in the morning?

Did SDSO interview Dina that early in the investigation? Were others interviewed who provided that personal information? Was this part of Pfingst's early strategy?

Why did SDSO bring up that (possible false or exaggerated) information? It seems apparent from the beginning that SDSO had no intention to build a profile of the victim in this case.

IMO, Jonah and his advisors had much more to do with this than we thought.




Betty P

Posts : 4
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by screecher on Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:21 pm

^^^THIS!!!
avatar
screecher

Posts : 4
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by ~Bourne on Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:34 am

Betty P wrote:
Carioca wrote:Hi all,

444 10/20/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.

But no doc available for purchase yet.

Oddly enough, [sarcasm] the kitty liter has already gotten their paws on it as per a Google alert. No way I'm clicking on it, but the alert basically says:

"Rebecca Zahau's Ex-Husband Ordered to be Deposed" (I tried to insert the image but no joy...)

IMO DS is going after NN because she thinks he will be a great witness for the defense. IMO from what I've read, he seems to have his own agenda as the misaligned unhappy ex who was tossed aside for the rich dude. Hoping I'm wrong. But seriously, what on earth can he offer! Nonsense.

Meanwhile, back at the Federal Case on Pacer, here is the most recent doc from Dina's appeal. Basically it's more of Dina whining about the case being closed without prejudice:

In this case, Appellant [Dina] had the power to compel federal agencies to comply with federal subpoenas that were served for the production of documents, or to compel federal witnesses who were involved in the death investigation to testify about their involvement, their percipient knowledge, and their conclusions. But she was deprived of that right – the right to conduct sufficient discovery to defend herself – when the District Court granted Plaintiffs’/Appellees’ Rule 41(a)(2) motion.
Appellant respectfully requests that the District Court’s order be reversed and the case remanded to the District Court.

Will try and attach the doc :-)
Oops, says can't attach. Sorry, still trying to find my way around here.

Embarassed

Dina must still be going for the cell block tango defense - "we killed her because she deserved it".  Only something an elitist, depraved wealthy person would think of.

I wonder if Dina and Jonah's attorneys are hoping to "sway"  NN's testimony.  

Also, something I thought of the other day:  In #437, when SDSO officers and detectives were questioning RZ's family and tried to accuse RZ of insulting Jonah's older daughter, causing her to commit suicide - where did SDSO get that information?  It was only days after RZ's murder, yet these kinds of personal family secrets and bizarre accusations were popping up in interviews.  

Who gave SDSO that personal (possibly false) information about Jonah's daughter's suicide attempt?  

Who told them about Maxie's head injury at Dina's house the week before the event?

Who gave SDSO personal information (possibly false) information about RZ's romantic life before and after her marriage to NN?

Who (falsely) told SDSO, so early in the investigation,  that some members of the Zahau family were in the US illegally?

When and how did SDSO receive that information?

Why did SDSO choose to believe those rumors?

Why did SDSO use those rumors and false information so early in the investigation when they were supposed to be finding out what happened to RZ?

Who gave SDSO information that put RZ in a bad light and helped them develop an interrogation plan that included that information, along with info that Adam has "passed his polygraph exam"?  Why did they not ask any relevant questions to learn what might have happened to RZ, like what clothes was she wearing that night?  If she painted, what kind of paint supplies did she use? Where did she buy them?  What kind of painting did she do?  Did she usually shower before bed or in the morning?  

Did SDSO interview Dina that early in the investigation?   Were others interviewed who provided that personal information?  Was this part of Pfingst's early strategy?

Why did SDSO bring up that (possible false or exaggerated) information?  It seems apparent from the beginning that SDSO had no intention to build a profile of the victim in this case.  

IMO, Jonah and his advisors had much more to do with this than we thought.




My supposition is that Dina gave the info re: Jonah's teen daughter possibly attempting suicide in order to slant the investigation into Rebecca's death. She wanted Rebecca to appear "evil", that Rebecca, whom Dina wanted to paint a pic as "gold digger" wanted to get rid of all Jonah's kids in order to have him and his money to herself. It's deeply disturbing that Dina was in such a hell-bent, obsessed, delusional course to absolutely destroy Rebecca. I have no doubt that Dina started these pernicious rumors to cops the day she audaciously and unscrupulously showed at the Spreckels mansion when Rebecca's dead body was found hanging.

I think it was said that the housekeeping staff woman was the one who told police about max having head injury two weeks prior to his accident.


~Bourne

Posts : 7
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Imp on Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:48 pm

Betty P: I completely agree about SDSO's intent from the first minutes into their "investigation" into Rebecca's death. They are either the most inept LE investigators on the planet, or they were almost immediately in on the plot to make RZ's death a suicide, whatever it took. There was no legitimate investigation into the manner in which she died. They were on a mission to fit the evidence and Rebecca's "state of mind" to a suicide ruling.
avatar
Imp

Posts : 24
Join date : 2016-10-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Tue Nov 01, 2016 7:12 am

New updates on ROA.

Ex-parte scheduled for tomorrow. Motion hearing scheduled for 11/04/2016 was vacated. Motion hearing on 11/18/2016 rescheduled for 12/16/2016.

Updated list of future events:


11/02/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
12/16/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial


https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:02 am

New updates on ROA.

Ex-parte heard 11/02/2016 scheduled to continue 11/17/1016. Minute order from Friday to follow.

Updated list of future events:


11/17/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
12/16/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Wed Nov 09, 2016 8:12 am

Good Day Smile Everyone!

Two documents have been added to the court document thread. ROA 458 and 462. A few snips below.

Doc 462 - page 2
Attorney Greer informs the Court that they have been requesting discovery from Dina Shacknai for 6 months and responses are still pending, though there are objections.

Doc 458 - page 5
For example, Mr. Shacknai requested copies of information Plaintiffs or their counsel provided to the author Ann Rule that was used in her book Fatal Friends, Deadly Neighbors and Other True Cases (Crime Files #16). This included a copy of, and information related to, a January 6, 2012 letter sent on Plaintiffs behalf to Julie Garland, the senior supervising deputy attorney general in the California Department of Justice, discussed in Ms.Rule’s book. Mr. Shacknai also seeks a copy of, and information related to, the power point presentation given by Plaintiffs’ counsel at the 27, 2012 meeting between members of the San Diego Sheriffs Department and Plaintiffs’ representatives and others, also discussed in Ms. Rule’s book. This information clearly relevant as it goes directly to Plaintiffs alternate theory of the case and is not, by any definition, privileged. Mr. Shacknai should have no less information than an author who wrote a sensational potboiler about this case.
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Betty P on Sat Nov 12, 2016 9:33 am

Lash wrote:Good Day Smile Everyone!

Two documents have been added to the court document thread. ROA 458 and 462. A few snips below.

Doc 462 - page 2
Attorney Greer informs the Court that they have been requesting discovery from Dina Shacknai for 6 months and responses are still pending, though there are objections.

Doc 458 - page 5
For example, Mr. Shacknai requested copies of information Plaintiffs or their counsel provided to the author Ann Rule that was used in her book Fatal Friends, Deadly Neighbors and Other True Cases (Crime Files #16). This included a copy of, and information related to, a January 6, 2012 letter sent on Plaintiffs behalf to Julie Garland, the senior supervising deputy attorney general in the California Department of Justice, discussed in Ms.Rule’s book. Mr. Shacknai also seeks a copy of, and information related to, the power point presentation given by Plaintiffs’ counsel at the 27, 2012 meeting between members of the San Diego Sheriffs Department and Plaintiffs’ representatives and others, also discussed in Ms. Rule’s book. This information clearly relevant as it goes directly to Plaintiffs alternate theory of the case and is not, by any definition, privileged. Mr. Shacknai should have no less information than an author who wrote a sensational potboiler about this case.

Thanks, Lash! No surprises here - Dina refusing to comply with discovery for 6 months and still stonewalling. Adam's request for materials related to the Plaintiffs alternate theory about RZ's death seems a pretty weak strategy. Greer, et al were pretty clear in their earlier filings about what they thought happened that night and why. Are they hunting around for anything they could use to intimidate a potential witness or expert? Doesn't make sense, as all of that has been revealed, hasn't it? It looks more like another delaying tactic, as opposed to a legitimate request for information.


Betty P

Posts : 4
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Sat Nov 19, 2016 9:00 am

New updates on ROA.

Ex-parte heard Thursday 11/17/2016. Minute order 467 will be posted in the court doc thread.

Updated list of future events:


12/07/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
02/10/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/05/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial


https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Admin on Mon Nov 21, 2016 1:25 pm

New ex-parte for next week added today to the Future Events on the SDROA. So now there are 2 ex-parte meetings in the first week of December:

12/01/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
12/07/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
02/10/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/05/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

470 11/21/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 12/01/2016 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.

And a big "public" thank you to Lash for keeping the lights on here while I was away for a couple weeks. flower
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Admin on Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:45 pm

So, the parties must be getting a lot accomplished these days! There have been ex-parte meetings Dec 7 and 8th, and today's meeting was continued to Dec 13-- a new entry on the ROA. There is an entry for "minutes" from today's meeting, but no option to purchase (yet-- sometimes takes 24 hours).

482 12/08/2016 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 12/08/2016 08:45:00 AM.
481 12/08/2016 Ex Parte continued pursuant to party's motion to 12/13/2016 at 08:45AM before Judge Katherine Bacal.

Current list of Future Events on the San Diego ROA:

Future Events
Event Date Event Time Location Event Type
12/13/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
01/06/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
02/10/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/05/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Imp on Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:30 pm

Thanks for the updates! I peeked into WS just now and LuLu's latest post really ticked me off, so I felt compelled to respond.
avatar
Imp

Posts : 24
Join date : 2016-10-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by BBL on Sat Dec 10, 2016 8:20 am

Hi Everyone! I've been out of the country for a number of months in China. Internet is hard to come by! First of all, thank you for inviting me over. I have to say, I'm a little sad that not much has changed. Courts are moving at a snails pace for this case. Is this the norm? I'm catching up on the new information. Still optimistic!

p.s. please tell me the comment LL made on the other site about someone giving her this website was false? Just pure baiting on her part?

BBL

Posts : 11
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Admin on Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:01 pm

Two new documents on the ROA-- minute order from last week's ex-parte, simply continuing the ex-parte to Dec 13. And Adam's response to discovery dispute related to AS's complaint that plaintiffs have not answered interrogatories (11 pages). Will have both docs up on doc thread in a little while.

483 12/12/2016 Statement - Other (RE Discovery Dispute RE Responses to First and Second Sets of Discovery) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) RE Discovery Dispute RE Responses to First and Second Sets of Discovery

482 12/08/2016 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 12/08/2016 08:45:00 AM. Minute Order
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Admin on Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:06 pm

BBL wrote:Hi Everyone! I've been out of the country for a number of months in China. Internet is hard to come by! First of all, thank you for inviting me over. I have to say, I'm a little sad that not much has changed. Courts are moving at a snails pace for this case. Is this the norm? I'm catching up on the new information. Still optimistic!

p.s. please tell me the comment LL made on the other site about someone giving her this website was false? Just pure baiting on her part?

BBL, glad you've been enjoying China! Welcome here! I was in China just a few years ago, and will return in a year or 2. Yes, it's hard to get on the "regular" net there-- almost impossible, so I feel your pain!

As far as we know, there haven't been any trolls or troublemakers that have found their way to this new discussion spot. The team here is ever vigilant!

This case marches on-- trial set for June 23, but I expect that to change a few more times.
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Admin on Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:09 pm

New entries on the SD ROA following the ex-parte Tuesday, Dec 13. It appears that they have made progress on the "discovery issues"!

Minute order (# 486):

Now being the time previously set for a continued Discovery Meet and Confer scheduled by defendant Dina Shacknai, counsel and/or parties appear as noted above and the hearing commences.

Parties inform the Court that they have made progress, but defendant would like to get a motion scheduled. The Court trails the matter to allow counsel to further meet and confer.

The Court is again in session, with counsel present as noted above.
Counsel state they believe they have resolved the discovery issues.

Upon inquiry of the Court regarding a hearing on May 5, 2017, Attorney Braun states that the hearing was advanced to January and may be vacated.

The Motion Hearing (Civil) set for 5/5/20017 at 11:00AM is vacated.

And an updated list of Future Events:

Future Events
Event Date Event Time Location Event Type
01/06/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
02/10/2017 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)

05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
05/19/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
06/02/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
06/23/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 48
Join date : 2016-10-02

View user profile http://rebeccazahaucase.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by BBL on Thu Dec 29, 2016 4:34 pm

I noticed in the local newspaper today that Jonah (or whomever actually owns it) put Spreckel's mansion back on the market. In the neighborhood of $15+ million. I guess they think enough time has passed that prospective buyers won't know or care about the fact that they are moving into a crime scene Smile

BBL

Posts : 11
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Carioca on Sat Dec 31, 2016 7:48 am

Just stepping in to wish all of you a very Happy New Year, and may 2017 finally bring justice for Rebecca!

Thank you so much KZ and Lash for being the voices of reason over at WS, and for each and every one of you who have had the stomach and patience to respond to that wretched despicable LL!! You are AMAZING -- true warriors :-) My heart remains in the battle, but my patience is long gone.

Love you all Very Happy
avatar
Carioca

Posts : 3
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Lash on Sun Jan 01, 2017 5:58 am

Happy New Year everyone! I love you I love you I love you Wishing you all the best in 2017! Justice for Rebecca!
avatar
Lash

Posts : 34
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by BBL on Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:40 pm

Here is a link to the news story on the mansion up for sale again.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Spreckels-Mansion-Coronado-San-Diego-for-Sale-Again-2017-409709075.html

Still in the news as questionable what happened in the mansion. I love how Scott Aurich tried to say it shouldn't matter. Yeah, right. Comments on the story are already showing that people don't buy suicide. Even to this day.

I find it interesting that they say Shacknai sold to an investment company. Isn't he part of that investor group?
What do you think of the timing that is it back on the market before a potential trial? I wonder if the timing (and though process) of the renovation and sale was discussed during depositions? I always found it stunningly inappropriate (and yet obviously suspicious) that the renovation happened how it did.

BBL

Posts : 11
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by kittychi on Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:34 pm

Hello Everyone and Happy New Year! May 2017 be the year that the Zahau family gets some relief, maybe even some answers, after the brutal murder of Rebecca. Thank you all for staying with it and for continuing to support, it is heartwarming to see! <3
avatar
kittychi

Posts : 2
Join date : 2016-10-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Wrongful Death Lawsuit- discuss here

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum