This Quote Also Speaks For Itself

Originality Speaks For Itself

Why can't some performers realize that the original versions of their songs are the best versions? Jason Mraz rerecorded one of the most lovely, simple tunes out there and turned it into a commercialized pop sickly. I hate when that happens. Here's the original, you know, the one you don't hear on the radio anymore.

Connecting Some Recent Dots In The News

I like to write about how government intervention distorts the economy. I call it a passion. And the last several weeks of financial news have given me plenty of interesting fodder. It's full of crony capitalism, law suits, one Harvard economics study and a tenured professor who calls this country's political discourse the “worst nightmare” for our economy.

Dot #1

Crony Capitalism

The first piece of news is a very well written editorial from Senator Rand Paul about the EpiPen pricing scandal. In Time Magazine online, Senator Paul rebukes the EpiPen price increase as a result of the FDA's monopoly against new entrants into the marketplace, and the mountain of red tape that all drug manufacturers face with every innovation. Citing paperwork, patent exclusivity and FDA grants, and a understaffed (and often very scared) FDA, he draws out just one option. His solution? “We can reform the system, lower costs and increase competition by getting bureaucracy out of our innovators’ way.”

Read the whole article here.

Coming from a Libertarian, his solution is expected. He points out that the The Affordable Care Act (a.k.a., Obamacare) was supposed to prevent this kind of gouging. But it, and many other government groups, have actually done the opposite. A small handful of well-connected producers are being protected at the expense of many. And the monopoly being held by those few in that industry is costing everyone far more than is necessary for such life-saving medicines. If the company making EpiPen were acting within the marketplace normally, they wouldn't be spared from the lower prices that would inevitably be offered from competitors who are willing (and maybe even happy) to accept lower profits.

He has rightfully concluded that more government isn't the medicine we need. It's the government that ails us.

Dot #2

The Real Price of Socialized Medicine

In the second, but clearly connected, piece of news, Jed Graham, writing for Investor's Business Daily, talks us through the last policy and legal nightmare that has become Obamacare, and specifically its “risk corridor receivables” program. It's the “corridor” in which if a company suffers losses, the government will make up those losses – it's essentially government-assured backing. Should the companies involved lose, the government will pool all insurance monies together to make sure no losses are allowed. But, conversely, if “excess profits” of 3% or more are gained, all of the companies involved will become profit sharers. This sounds like a pretty good deal. Right? It's not.

In his article, Jed Graham points out that there are lawsuits afoot. In fact, many lawsuits. Several companies, including United Health, Anthem and Aetna are now treating what possible “risk corridor receivables” are owed to them to be “a lost cause,” while insurers Humana, and HealthNet/Centene are reporting losses of hundreds of millions of dollars each. All of them are trying to recoup their monies by way of picking apart the government through a class action lawsuit – if the government decides to allow such action.

And what should have been the biggest recipients of Obamacare funds have turned out to be the biggest losers. Blue Cross/Blue Shield are deep in the red, while participating nonprofit health cooperatives are being driven out of business entirely. What's more, Graham points out: “HHS confirmed in the memo that any money collected under the risk corridor program for 2015 will be used to shrink its massive $2.5 billion shortfall in 2014, and no funds will be available at this time for 2015 benefit year risk corridors payments.” In other words, they're going to pay off their pending debts first (from 2014), then the private insurers might receive something (for 2015). But, given the very disappointing, short history of Obamacare, (it's only two years old) and the numerous pending lawsuits, most likely not.

If these economic insults and injuries weren't enough to satisfy you, there's more. The DOJ is: “...open to discussing resolution of those claims,” which is a euphemism for: go ahead and sue us, we don't mind. Why don't they mind? Because they're getting their money from you. They aren't going to pay anything; you are. If they win, you pay into their system. If they lose, you pay for the failure of their system. That's the real price of socialized medicine. You pay. Always you.

But does that kind of news surprise anyone who knows even the most cursory information about the costs of Obamacare? To date, there are 12.7 million people enrolled in the A.C.A. plan, which cost 9 hundred billion dollars to implement. That means the implementation of the program, which was supposed to save Americans money, is now costing $70,866.00 per person covered from the very beginning.

I think I know what you're thinking: Yes, but that's the estimate for the first ten years. Okay, you're right. That was the initial estimate for the first ten years. Today, that estimate is a little different.

Photo above from The Weekly Standard.

Obviously, the costs have gone up. Actually, they've nearly tripled.

Our government purveys this feel-good economic chicanery on us all the time. It grossly underestimates the costs of programs to drum up public support, but then tells us the very real, painful truth, one subtle layer at a time much, much later. And all the while, the “architects” of such programs laugh at us for having believed in their nonsense in the first place.

But there's more. Let me bullet point a few of them to save you some time.

- The Obama administration originally wanted to cover at least 52 million people in the A.C.A. program. That number is now only 12.7 million.

- The administrative costs, losses and subsequent lawsuits are still climbing. And all of those costs are already being placed onto the backs of the American taxpayer.

- Out-of-pocket deductible costs to the recipients are much higher than originally estimated.

- Premiums are rising.

- Taxes, fees, and onerous regulations are spiraling into the system.

- There are more older and sicker people going into the system than originally estimated.

- Younger people are avoiding the system altogether, while not paying any penalties.

- Subsidies, money transfers, cost estimates and enrollee estimates have all been obfuscated by several offices and the accounting techniques they use.

- The program officially took effect in 2014, and two years in, it has already become a major liability to the American people and their very fragile economy.

- Should any more than 12.7 million people sign up for the program, the now 2.6 trillion dollar estimate will also go up. (If I include the original 52 million desired people estimate, at the present rate, then the cost of Obamacare for the original 52 million people, in a country of over 300 million people, will cost about 10.64 trillion dollars. That's an amazing sum, because the entire U.S. economy amounts to about 14 trillion dollars. So we need to ask: is there any country in the world that would be willing to sacrifice over 75% of its entire economy to “give” health insurance to less than 20% of its population?)

- Some clinics and hospitals are opting out of accepting insurance entirely, because of the complexity of dealing with that industry.

- Seven states have already tried government reformation of the health care industry in their respective states. All of them have failed.

We can be sure there's more.

There's always more to explore regarding what the government is doing to the American people. Especially when it's something as big as the health care system. I imagine only the tax system would be bigger. But from the information above, we can see that some of the most orchestrated, deceptive and constraining efforts placed onto the laps and into the wallets of the American people recently is socialized medicine – a.k.a. Obamacare.

Dot #3

Cause And Effect

In the last connected news story, Harvard Professor Michael Porter schools us in “...the reality of what is causing our problems and what to do about them.” He's an economist, so he's talking publicly about the economy – always the economy.

But he admits that when he and a group of colleagues put together their “Harvard Business School Study of Competitiveness”: “...the last thing I thought I would end up doing when I got into this project was to actually start deeply studying the political system.” But that's exactly what they did.

Most economists stick to what they already know – the graphs, the charts, the droll, boring data that gives most people the heebie jeebies. But not him. And not me. Their study found that what's really making the American economy sick isn't really the economy, but rather the politics behind the economy. In their study, titled: “PROBLEMS UNSOLVED AND A NATION DIVIDED,” the group outlines what they believe to be the real issues that the American public needs to address to get the economy back on its feet. Again, to save you some time, here are the bullet points.

- THE U.S. ECONOMY IN AN ERA OF POLITICAL PARALYSIS

- FALTERING U.S. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

- AN ERODING U.S. BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT

- THE PRESSING NEED FOR A NATIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY

- AN ECONOMIC STRATEGY FOR WASHINGTON

- ACHIEVING TAX REFORM

- A FAILING POLITICAL SYSTEM

When an entire group of Harvard-educated economists get together to discuss so much of the information that most people find not the least little bit noteworthy suddenly start to talk politics, as a matter of economic necessity, you can be assured that the underlying problems being talked about are seriously pressing issues for everyone. We should all read this study. It highlights what's wrong, and the path forward to put the American economy back on track from stagnation to becoming a growing competitor on the world stage.

It's about the economy, stupid. Always.

Okay, maybe not always the economy. Sometimes, even the most well-intentioned economists can stray from their charts and graphs (Paul Krugman, anyone?). But in this case, and I'm taking into account the two stories above, I think the Harvard Business School review is spot-on. Our current political climate is costing the American people far more than any of us realized.

And the American media is having a great deal of trouble seeing all of that forest through the trees. They're all focusing in on the economy, but the real culprit is our political system, and our political discourse. If we want to restart the economy, and grow, prosper and reinstate the mentality that our children are destined to have a life that's better than our own, then all of us will need to stop confusing cause and effect.

Our economy is sick. Very sick. But it's our political system that's the cause. Not the cure. No one in their right mind can think that the remedy for what ails us will come from the same people and system that are causing our illness.

Thanks for reading.

Mark

Stop Lying To Yourself And Others

Okay, here goes Markie on his soap box again.

I've been listening to the radio intently over these last several weeks. And it's been, of course, the usual stuff for this point in our time: North Korea, the presidential campaign, the stock market plunging over three hundred points, etc. All of it is likely to rub someone the wrong way eventually. But I keep hearing one thing in many stories that's just generally angering me: “gentrification.”

That word bothers me. I know that people are trying to be politically correct, and they're making a conscious effort not to hurt the feelings of others. But the word is making the airwaves as if it's a completely acceptable term for everyone. Like it's a given. Not a thought.

Really? Let's do the opposite, and just stop and think about it for a moment. What does it really mean?

From my perspective, I think it means what everyone else thinks it means: old people. But I also think it means more than that. I think it means: more old people than I'm comfortable with. And, for whatever reasons, no one seems to be responding to that ill-conceived PC speak. It's just floating around on the airwaves without a dignified question or response.

So here goes mine: If “gentrification” is acceptable, and not offensive in the least, then why not “blackification,” or “jewification,” or “infantification,” or “maleification,” or “twenty-somethingification,” or “thirty-somethingification?” Am I to believe that we can use this one PC word, that's obviously ageist, and all of the other racist, sexist, or any other “ist” words, and place them on the airwaves without a second thought, but we can't simply say what those words really mean? They really mean: “I'm not comfortable with all of the black people here.” “I'm not comfortable with all of the Jews here.” “I'm not comfortable with all of the babies in this area.” “When did all of the younger people move in?”

How can it be that so many people's mouths and minds have become completely divorced? We obviously can't say "jewification." If we did, the PC venom response from the very same "gentrification" users would spit from their pores. So why is it that a person can publicly state one's ageism on the airwaves in a semi-polite PC form, but stating the very same “isms” in any other way is somehow racist, sexist or ageist? I just don't get it. Who do they think they're fooling? When they state: “gentrification,” we all know they're talking about what they believe to be too many old people for their personal comfort. Does softening the wording somehow negate its intention?

This is where I'm reminded of a favorite quote from one of my favorite authors: “There is no denial of reality that can change reality.”

I love the intention of being kind to other people. I want people to be kind to me. I'm kind to them. All of them. And that's why I'm also honest. I respect honesty, and the people who are honest enough with themselves to be honest with me. Honesty is respectful. It saves time. It conserves energy. It simultaneously vaporizes worthless ideas and relationships, and reinforces solid ideas and relationships. A few words of truth are far more valuable to me than a mountain of PC garbage.

So stop coating your words with sugar, and state your personal truth. Don't lie to me. Don't lie to others. And please don't lie to yourself. As I said a moment ago, you're not fooling anyone.

When you say: “gentrification,” we know all too well exactly what you're really trying to say.

The Death Of Rebecca Zahau, My Theory

Hello again, readers.

I'm back. And this time I'd like to talk your ears off about the death/murder of Rebecca Zahau. She was a Burmese immigrant, who came with her family to the United States looking for a better life. And, not surprisingly, she found it. First, she found it with a young man whom she married - and later divorced. But then again with a man by the name of Jonah Shacknai, a multi-millionaire, southern California CEO. But within just two years, her charmed life would end tragically, in a series of events that can only be described as a nightmare. Up to this point in time, Rebecca's death is still controversial, and the Zahau family attorneys and the public have called for the re-opening of her case. What follows are my questions, and my theories on what happened.

But before I begin, again, I want to remind everyone of my standards when I have questions about pretty much anything.

1. Why?

2. Isn't there a better way to do that?

3. From my grandparents' school of logic: If it looks like a rat, if it acts like a rat, if it smells like a rat... Guess what?

4. If it happens once, it's a fluke. If it happens twice, it's a coincidence. If it happens three times, it's a pattern.

And, once again, the thoughts, questions and timeline of events proposed will be mine. I'm responsible for them.

Early in the morning of July 13th, 2011, Rebecca checked her voicemail for the very last time. According to the Coronado Police Department, the voicemail was from Jonah Shacknai, but the message had been deleted. According to Jonah, the message was informing Rebecca about the condition of six-year-old Max Shacknai, who was in the hospital after suffering a terrible fall inside Jonah's home.

Early the following morning, Rebecca was found bound, gagged, and hanging by her neck from a guestroom balcony. The police have since ruled her death a suicide, because (as their theory goes) she apparently felt guilty about not preventing Max's fall. I personally think that the idea of suicide in Rebecca's case is without a doubt totally, completely wrong. And I would like to explain to you why I think that.

So let's start with step one.

At about 6:48 in the morning of July 13th, Adam Shacknai found Rebecca Zahau hanging by her neck from the second story balcony just outside of the "guest house" of Jonah Shacknai's home. (The quote I just used is significant. But I'll get back to that later.) From that point, Adam said he cut Rebecca down and tried a primitive form of CPR to revive her, but admitted during interrogation that his training was years old. So, from this perspective, calling for emergency services makes sense. If he can't help her, maybe some professionals can. Call 911.

But for everything I know about Rebecca's death, that's just about all that makes sense. From that point on, the clouds of convolution gather, and everything becomes rather messy - unless you look at Rebecca's death from one specific perspective - murder.

According to phone records, Rebecca checked her voicemail at about 12:50am on the 13th. And that was supposedly the message from her boyfriend Jonah telling her that Max's condition was grave. So our question now is: If you were responsible for a young boy who had a terrible accident, would you commit suicide before he dies?

Wow. Let's keep going. But how? We have so much information to cover regarding Rebecca's death, that I have almost no idea where to start, and no adequate narrative I can give could encompass the whole event without writing a book. So I'll write out what makes sense to me. I'll break down everything I can in piecemeal fashion, and hopefully I'll make sense out of it (for you, and for me), by the time I'm done. Please be patient. Remember, this is a messy nightmare.


THE BEDROOM
- Neighbors on both sides of the home stated that they heard cries for "help" coming from Jonah's home the night of Rebecca's death. None of the neighbors responded. They didn't even call the police.

- Adam Shacknai, who was the only other person on the property that night, did not report hearing any cries for "help."

- There was loud music playing inside Jonah's house at about the same time Rebecca committed "suicide."

- The DNA found in the guestroom, and on the red rope, appeared to be only from Rebecca, despite the fact that Adam Shacknai cut her down, moved her bound hands and removed a gag from her mouth to perform CPR.

- I have yet to watch or read any statement that the small paintbrush used in writing the cryptic message found on the bedroom door was fingerprinted, or checked for DNA. If DNA or prints from any other person could be found on that brush, then a significant lead could emerge to help solve Rebecca's death.

- Were there any fingerprints or DNA found on the knives in the bedroom that were used to cut the red rope?

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Possibly. But it looks weak. There are multiple witnesses to the noisy goings-on at the Shacknai residence that night; but other than that, the room appears to be nothing more than a scene. There also appears to be no sign of a struggle in the room, because (most likely) there wasn't a struggle in the room. Police investigators miss DNA samples all the time, so we shouldn't be surprised that they didn't find more samples than just those from Rebecca.

THE MESSAGE
- At first blush, the note that was painted on the door appears to be a cryptic "suicide note" from Rebecca. It stated: "She saved him. Can you save her?" A distraught person writing a cryptic note is nothing new to investigators of all kinds. But the third person voice doesn't make sense - nor does the message - unless you consider that the message could be from a murderer. Then the message makes perfect sense. It's plain, simple sarcasm.

"She saved him." (No she didn't.)

"Can you save her? (No you can't.)

The investigators in this case have dismissed the message written on the door as unimportant to the event. But the message actually tells us a tremendous amount of information about the person who wrote it.

- First, the writer directly connects Max's condition to Rebecca's death. The writer is holding Rebecca directly responsible for Max's impending death. This also means that the writer cares very much for Max.

- Second, the writer is being sarcastic. Any psychologist can explain that sarcasm is a method used by adolescents to "test" their relationships with other people - especially parents, and other adults in positions of authority.

- Third, it's a taunt. It's written as a challenge to anyone who might be able to help Rebecca out of her situation. It's a taunt to anyone who might be her protector - in the same way that she was Max's protector, but, in the eyes of the writer, failed.

- Fourth, it's a slight "catch-me-if-you-can" message. The writer doesn't expect to be caught.

- Fifth, it's a powerful message. The person who wrote it had already exercised a great deal of power and control over Rebecca, and understood that s/he could not be stopped. The writer actually stops what they're doing long enough to write a message to a third party. In this context, the "catch-me-if-you-can" message makes perfect sense.

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes, definitely. If it happens once, it's a fluke. If it happens twice, it's a coincidence. If it happens three times, it's a pattern. And there are at least five distinct messages implied in the above two simple statements.

THE BALCONY
- There were three unidentified footprints on the balcony where Rebecca was found. They all have the same design. It's not possible for three additional footprints to be on the balcony without a source.

- Those three prints were widely set, and Rebecca's prints were placed squarely, narrowly, in the middle of them - as if the still anonymous person were lifting a heavy weight between his/her legs.

- Rebecca's bound, bare feet touched down two times on the balcony, and the forensics photos prove it.

- There are other prints attributed to the boots of one of the first responders.

- There were also areas of the metal balcony banister that were bent without any official explanation (I have one). Picking Rebecca up, and pushing her over a banister isn't easy. She weighed barely 100 pounds, but anyone lifting her would still need leverage. And a right-handed, right-footed person would most likely place a right foot on the metal banister to gain a little leverage for the push. And from the photos of the balcony, that's exactly what happened.

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes. Someone walked Rebecca out onto the balcony and pushed her over, and we need nothing more than the evidence on the balcony to prove it. Their steps were widely-set as they picked her up and put her down at least twice, while carrying her body in front of their own.


REBECCA'S BODY
- The time frame of Rebecca's death has a gap of about six hours. It lasts from the last time she checked her voicemail, to the time she was found hanging from the balcony (12:50am - 6:48am).

- Rebecca had scrapes, scratches, bruises, ligature marks, and a number of other obvious points of injury, that have yet to be explained. Only one of her injuries was healing, a small injury on her left knee, which means all of the other injuries were fresh (within the last 12 hours), which means they all happened within a very short time just before her death. And the fresh injuries were extensive. By my count, there were at least 27 still unexplained fresh injuries on Rebecca's body. And if I include the numerous scratches on her back, that count then becomes well over 100. Scene investigators have stated that there appeared to be no signs of struggle in the bedroom. But any unranked amateur can see that there were patently obvious and numerous signs of struggle found on Rebecca's body. So if the struggle didn't take place in that particular bedroom, then it took place somewhere else - and within 12 hours of her death.

- Rebecca was health conscious. When she was found, without her clothing, she was still wearing a "Bionic" band, a "Livestrong" band (both on her left wrist) and a "Power Balance" band (on her right wrist). Again, someone who appears to be so devoted to health, isn't likely to also be suicidal. She was devoted to Christianity, and had no history of impulsive or depressed behavior. From the testimony of all of her family and friends, she was a calm, motherly personality, which doesn't coincide with a impulsive, suicidal personality.

- Rebecca's death has many of the hallmarks that forensics' experts call a "ritualistic homicide." They include abuse, torture, death by falling over a railing (duplicating Max Shacknai's death), a contemptuous note, binding, gagging, drag marks on her back and elbows, a public display of naked humiliation, and knotting that was all of a specific nature.

- There was tape residue found by forensic pathologists around Rebecca's calves. How many people first bind themselves with tape, and THEN bind themselves with rope, only to take off the tape, and THEN jump to their death? My answer? NONE.

- Was there any defecant found on or directly below Rebecca's hanging body? If not, then the balcony is not at all likely to be the place where Rebecca died.

- There were black marks that appeared to be paint on her left breast, right nipple, upper right arm, right clavicle, nail of the right ring finger, base of the right index finger, base of the right thumb and right lower back. All of those black marks could be from a right-handed person standing behind Rebecca, and manipulating her physically to pick her up and push her over the railing, which would coincide very well with the widely-spaced, unidentified footprints found on the balcony.

- Rebecca was 32 years old, 5'3" tall, physically fit, and weighed about 100 pounds.

- There was dried blood found on Rebecca's thighs, toes and fingers. Was it all her blood? Did anyone check?

- The shirt used as a gag was double knotted and wrapped three times around her neck. There were also "secretions" noticed on the ends of the shirt. Were the secretions checked for DNA? Why would someone who's suicidal wrap their own head three times? Such a wrapping appears to be excessively aggressive for a suicide.

- Grass and "other plant material" was recorded on Rebecca's back by Deputy Medical Examiner Jonathan Lucas. Since Rebecca was cut down and placed in the grass, everyone should expect to see plant matter on her body.

- There were numerous short scratches covering the entire surface of Rebecca's back. This was described, in part, as: "...many punctate, linear, and slightly irregular abrasions on the back, extending from the neck to the mid buttocks and from each side of the back to the other." That pattern is consistent with being dragged by the feet - not over the grass, because plant material would leave green stains - but rather being dragged over a clean surface such as a rough length of carpeting or fairly smooth concrete.

- The same medical examiner recorded four sub dermal hematomas on the right side of her head, four vertical abrasions on the front side of her scalp, and a three plus inch abrasion on her neck, just above her right trapezius. A one-person hanging isn't likely at all to produce four bruises and four separate vertical abrasions on the scalp for any reason. That finding is another significant area of contention for forensic pathologists and crime scene investigators. The most likely scenario, however, is that someone stood behind Rebecca and hit her repeatedly with a right fist, or hit her with some object of similar density (her skull was not fractured). She then fell forward, scraping her forehead on some object. The pattern of the scratches on her forehead match those of someone falling down and to the left.

- According to Paramedic John Feliciano, who was the first responder to Adam Shacknai's 911 call, Rebecca was cold to the touch, and rigor mortis was present in her jaw. This means that by 6:48am she had been dead for a least 3-4 hours - placing her time of death at roughly 2:45 - 3:45am. (Remember, the last time her voicemail was checked was about 12:50. We're now down to a two hour window for Rebecca's time of death - 12:50 - 2:50.)

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes, definitely. There were a large number of scratches, bruises and other injuries on her body that have yet to be explained. She was a woman who was health conscious, and had no history of depression. She suffered a punishing, ritualistic death. The tape residue on her calves has never been officially explained, and appears not to make any sense from the perspective of suicide. Rebecca was unlikely to have any reason to place black paint on all of the places of her body listed by forensic pathologists. A triple-wrapped gag doesn't make any sense for a person committing suicide. But it does make sense for someone who wants to make SURE Rebecca can't speak again and call for "help." There were multiple bruises and scratches on her scalp that still have no official answer.

THE ROPE AND THE KNOTS
- She was hanging by her neck from a red nylon rope.

- The rope that was tied around Rebecca's neck was also tied directly to the base of the bed in the guest room of the main house. So, factually, the bed was used as a anchor point to her fall from the balcony.

- There were three distinct knots used in her hanging/binding, and all three of them appear to be nautical in nature. The knot tied to the bedpost looks very much like a quickly improvised "Bowline," or "Fishermens' Bend." That type of knot is used to "tie off" something to a solid object.

The knot around Rebecca's neck was a slip knot, which must be tied correctly, or the knot could slip out and become useless.

The knots tied around her wrists and ankles are obviously a variation of what's known as a "Shear Lash." It's a knot used specifically to tie together two logs so they cannot separate, or "shear" apart laterally. All of the knots I have listed are taught in Boy Scouts (to earn a knot-tying merit badge), mariners' courses and survival courses.

- According to forensics' reports, Rebecca's drop was about nine feet, leaving her about two feet from touching the ground. The bones of her neck didn't break, but the cartilage and musculature of her throat was crushed.

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes, definitely. The rope used was listed in scene reports by investigators who stated it still had on it the tag describing its use and tensile strength. It was made specifically for aquatic activities. The three knots used were nautical knots, and all of them need, not only prior knowledge of their specific applications, but also practice in tying them. According to family members, Rebecca had absolutely no knowledge of, or practice in, knot-tying.

ADAM SHACKNAI'S 911 CALL
- Adam Shacknai found Rebecca hanging early in the morning of July 13th and called 911.

- After Adam called 911, he then texted his brother Jonah about Rebecca's death.

- Jonah then called his ex wife Dina to inform her of the same information.

- The recorded 911 call made by Adam Shacknai doesn't make any sense.

What Adam said in his first three statements was:

"Yeah, uh. I got a girl. Hung herself. In the guest house."

He then goes on to talk more, and give directions to the 911 operator.

- First, Adam already knew Rebecca, because he was with her at dinner that night, along with  his brother Jonah. And he had also met Rebecca at least one time prior to that night's dinner to pose with the family for a portrait that included Rebecca. So he would have already easily known who she is by sight, and her name. But in the 911 call, he's speaking about her as if he's never seen her before.

- Second, the "Hung herself." statement is also odd. He found Rebecca bound by the hands and feet, naked, and hanging by her neck with a gag in her mouth. Her hands were bound behind her back. She was also scratched and bruised on almost every part of her body, likely swollen in several parts, especially her face, and was also a light to medium blue or purple in color, given the time frame of her death, and the fact that rigor mortis had already set in. The first thought of seeing such a sight, in my opinion, should not be one of suicide, but one of shock that he just stumbled upon the site of a murder.

- Third, the final portion of his opening statement makes the least sense of all. He stated "In the guest house." Rebecca was found hanging outside of the main house, not inside of the guest house. Adam himself was the person staying in the guest house. If he's looking up at her body outside of the walls of the main house, then that's the most appropriate statement. (This is where I think Adam made a classic Freudian Slip. I think something did happen "In the guest house," and it was so memorable that he couldn't get it out of his mind, even when calling for emergency services.)

A more reasonable statement to the 911 operator would be something like: "I think my brother's girlfriend was murdered. She's hanging naked outside."

And there's plenty more to cover.

- What time did Jonah call his ex wife Dina to tell her that Rebecca had "killed herself"? Obviously the call was made before his arrival at the hospital to visit Max. That means he was in some other place (driving?) when he made the call. The only time I've seen reference to is 7:00am. If Jonah called his ex before 7:00am, then we need to assume that he also needed time to receive Adam's text message, process the whole event, then dial his ex wife and explain what happened. That would most likely take a couple of minutes. Adam stated that he found Rebecca at about 6:48am. Adam's call to 911 is at least 4:46 seconds. This leaves just about five minutes for Adam to cut Rebecca down, call 911, attempt CPR, catch his breath, wait for and deal with emergency services personnel, collect his thoughts, call his brother and text him that Jonah's girlfriend is dead. That leaves less than seven minutes between the time Jonah received a hasty text from his brother, collected himself long enough to process the information, and dial his ex. Does five minutes make sense for Adam to go through all of his activities - given those circumstances? And does seven minutes make sense for Jonah to process the information that the woman who had been in his life every day for the last two years is now dead? (Did he even pull over?)

- And something else... who would use such a impersonal method of telling one human that another human is dead? Texting a death seems quite callous. I would also like to see the transcript of that text - if for no other reason than its peculiar immediacy.

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes, obviously. Adam's dismissive attitude toward Rebecca, the time it took him to text his brother (perform CPR, call for and wait for help, etc.), his statements to the 911 operator and Jonah's subsequent response time simply don't add up.


ADAM SHACKNAI'S INTERROGATION
- During his interrogation, Adam Shacknai could not remember if he called 911 first, and then cut Rebecca down, or if he cut her down and then called 911. One has to wonder why is there such a memory lapse at that time? How many naked, bound women, hanging by their necks has he encountered in his life? Most likely just one. The event must have been shocking. He should be able to remember his very next step.

- The longest video I've seen of Adam Shacknai's interrogation lasts barely more than five minutes. The lie detector portion of the interrogation lasts 32 seconds, and consists of three questions. In "raw footage," I saw NO baseline questions given. But his test results were STILL inconclusive. This means he didn't fail, nor did he pass the most benign conditions anyone could hope for when taking a lie detector test. And in the videos I've seen, Adam's testor is obviously not neutral. In fact, he's agreeable to Adam's responses. Anyone giving a lie detector test is supposed to remain as calm and neutral as possible, so the testor doesn't influence the answers given.

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Yes, there sure is.

THE STONEWALLING BY THE CORONADO P.D.

 - The mayor of Coronado, California, Casey Tanaka, knows Jonah Shacknai personally because he purchased a historic home in the area, and wanted to make changes to it. But Jonah needed permission and licenses from the local authorities to make the changes he wanted.

- Many people who have a lot of wealth, much of it already invested traditionally, will try to protect it by seeking out non-conventional investments - like politics and politicians. So...

Has Jonah Shacknai contributed to Coronado's:

   - local police department?

   - sheriff's department?

   - local fire department?

   - mayoral elections?

or, possibly, the California:

   - congressmens' offices/elections?

   - governor's office/elections?

- Any contributions by Jonah to any of those offices would constitute a serious conflict of interest for the offices involved.

- Who and what are his political affiliations?

- The actions of the Coronado P.D. appear to make very little sense. The cases of Max and Rebecca have become international news, and have placed the department under close scrutiny and pressure from a number of outside influences. Any department that wants to be seen as forthcoming and professional in their dealings with the public should be more than willing to leave open those two most public cases in the desire to remain trustworthy in the eyes of their critics. So there must be other motives to closing the cases, and refusing to reopen them. What could those motives be?

- The department didn't investigate the original cases using accepted techniques?

- There were errors made in the original investigations?

- They don't have the budget to leave those cases open?

- They have received pressure from outside influences that are forcing them to seal the cases?

- They're afraid of losing tourist dollars?

- They don't want to change their current methods of operation?

- Is their desire to reopen those cases outweighed by the possibility of embarrassment from re-opening them?

- If public pressure to properly serve and protect the public isn't enough to force the department to reopen the cases, then what could be enough?

Q: Is there a pattern here?

A: Possibly. There could be layers upon layers of patterns here, but I have no knowledge of anyone but myself asking the above questions.


MORE OF MY STATEMENTS AND QUESTIONS
- Black rubber gloves and women's underwear were found trashed on the property, but were not investigated.

- Nina Romano stated on video that she did stop by the Shacknai home for about three or four minutes, in the early morning hours of July 13th, to talk with Rebecca about what happened to Max, and his condition in the hospital. She said she saw a light on in the guest room (the balcony of which Rebecca was found), but the rest of the house was dark, and no one answered the front door. She said she left shortly thereafter.

- Adam Shacknai is a tugboat captain, which fits nicely with the nautical theme I mentioned earlier.

- Adam Shacknai traveled to Coronado, California the day before Rebecca died. When did he leave?

- Jonah had a friend named Howard with him on the night of Rebecca's death. Who is "Howard"? And where is he? Has he been interviewed?

- On the morning of July 13th, what time did Jonah Shacknai check into the Ronald McDonald house?

- Have there been any large withdrawals from any of Jonah Shacknai's bank accounts?

- Have there been any large deposits into Adam Shacknai's bank accounts?

- Has Adam Shacknai made any large purchases lately that don't coincide with his tugboat Captain's salary?

- Is Adam living a different lifestyle after Rebecca's death, than before Rebecca's death?

- Was there a significant life insurance policy taken out on Rebecca that has since been cashed?


SUMMARY
Rebecca's death was a nightmare at the time it happened, especially for her. And it's still a nightmare now for anyone who cared about her, or anyone who looks into her case (even superficially). But the only things I can give here are my own theories and timeline of what I believe took place at the Shacknai residence in the early morning of July 13th, 2011. So here goes...

I think Rebecca was very concerned about Max's condition. She wasn't sleeping well - just like the rest of the Shacknai family. She either went to bed mostly in the nude early in the morning of the 13th, or she was visiting someone on the Shacknai property until late into the evening. But after falling asleep, she woke up to very loud music, and a person binding her calves together with duct tape, so she couldn't run away. She was then bound with red nylon rope as she tried to fight back and call for "help." After her second or third call for "help," a field-expedient gag was wrapped around her head repeatedly using the assailant's hands and mouth. Then the rope binding continued. She was then likely completely stripped and humiliated for not taking better care of Max. Something happened shortly thereafter, because the assailant realized s/he could no longer back out of the activity, and Rebecca was then beaten on the head, choked, and carried to the main house - away from where the main assault took place. But the assailant couldn't carry her the whole way. She had to be dragged by her feet (back-down), for some remaining distance. Once inside the main house, Rebecca was already dead, nearly dead, or at the very least, unconscious. The stage for Rebecca's death then became the guest room nearest to the guest house. The assailant found some of her paints and paused long enough to write a contemptuous message on the door. The assailant then tied one end of the rope to the bed, and with fresh paint still on the right hand, fumbled with her limp body onto the balcony. Carrying and pushing a 5-foot-tall, 100 pound, limp body over a waist-high banister isn't easy for anyone - even experienced weight-lifters. The assailant struggled with every part of her body the whole way, grappling with her arms, chest, back and the red rope. Once on the balcony, she was deliberately picked up and put down twice before her body was close enough to be pushed over the edge of the banister. S/he then gently exited the main house, and discarded Rebecca's underwear and a black pair of rubber gloves elsewhere on the property - again, away from where the main assault took place.

See. I told you it was a nightmare.　

To anyone who's come to this point in my post, please let me say to you that I'm sorry, and I hope I haven't ruined your day. I can assure you that processing and writing about Rebecca's death has been more disturbing for me than it has been for you to read about it. I have the firm opinion that the world is worse off for the losses of Max and Rebecca. And we are certainly worse off, because the person responsible for Rebecca's murder still walks among us. So hug and kiss your babies today - your human babies, and your furry babies - because you just never know what kind of curve ball life will throw you.

Thanks for reading

M.B. Davidson