INTRODUCTION: A CIVIL RECKONING BEGINS
The civil lawsuit against Rebecca Grossman proceeds in tandem with the fallout from her criminal conviction, with the depositions in Iskander v. Grossman et al. potentially exposing not just the devastating choices made on the night of September 29, 2020, but the systemic failures of law enforcement to fully investigate all parties involved – especially her then-boyfriend and former Major League Baseball pitcher Scott Erickson.
The events of that night were nothing short of devastating with the tragic loss of two young boys on an early evening walk with their parents. As information comes to light in civil proceedings, it will likely reveal the shocking mishandling of evidence, unexplored suspects, and a media-driven narrative that may have overshadowed key facts in the case that were suppressed during the criminal trial.
Sources inside the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department confirm that key personnel involved in the Rebecca Grossman investigation are currently being deposed in the civil trial. It is important to note, the two lead investigators in the crash, Detective David Huelsen and Sgt. Travis Kelly, were never called to testify by prosecutors during the criminal proceedings, raising serious questions as to why critical testimony was withheld from the jury.
This move echoes the handling of the Anthony Rauda trial, where he was accused of murdering Tristan Beaudette during the Malibu Creek State Park shootings. Notably, Sgt. Tui Wright and Lt. James Royal were never called to testify – despite being under Internal Affairs investigation and later disciplined for interfering in the case. Their actions, including mishandling the chain of custody of critical evidence, which could have severely undermined the prosecution’s case if exposed in court.
Among those currently being deposed are Sgt. Scott Shean, Deputy Rafael Mejia, Deputy Cory Gaudet, retired lead investigator David Huelsen, Deputy Michael Kelley (who administered the controversial field sobriety test later discredited at a DMV hearing), Deputy Jason McGee and Retired Commander Chuck Becerra who was Captain at the Lost Hills Station at the time of the crash. Becerra had no direct involvement in the criminal trial. Sgt. Travis Kelly, a lead investigator in the case, committed suicide just six days after retiring in December, 2024.
The depositions could shed new light on investigative missteps and prosecutorial decisions that have fueled ongoing controversy in the case.
PART I: THE CRASH THAT KILLED INNOCENCE
On a quiet suburban street in Westlake Village, according to LASD reports, Rebecca Grossman’s white Mercedes SUV struck and killed 11-year-old Mark and 8-year-old Jacob Iskander while they were walking in a marked crosswalk with their family.
As Erickson and Grossman approached the area, visibility was limited as the sun had set at 6:48 pm. Moments after the collision occurred at approximately 7:10 pm, Grossman pulled over to the side of the road, where her vehicle shut down and automatically triggered an emergency call due to the impact.
Civil filings detail that Grossman saw the boys and hit them anyway – allegations that formed the basis for the criminal charges. But according to contemporaneous notes from witnesses and family, there’s far more to the story.
PART II: ERICKSON’S SHADOW ROLE – STILL DODGING ACCOUNTABILITY
Court testimony and documents reveal what investigators, inexplicably, never pursued: the full involvement of Scott Erickson. Witnesses recall his black Mercedes speeding through the same crosswalk just three seconds before Grossman’s vehicle made impact – a fact corroborated by surveillance footage and the testimony of multiple witnesses who heard two distinct impacts seconds apart.
According to witness Susan Manners, who had to proactively re-contact law enforcement because they failed to follow up, she heard two impacts, 3 to 5 seconds apart. That aligns with surveillance footage showing seven vehicles in a tightly packed convoy: two white sedans, Erickson’s black SUV, then Grossman, then three other vehicles.
Yet despite clear evidence placing Scott Erickson at the scene, his black SUV was never impounded, photographed, or even examined. Incredibly, he was dismissed by the LASD as a person of interest after a single phone call, with no follow-up.
Fox 11 reported, “Photos of his dark Mercedes show no evidence of impact.” The car aired in the story was NOT the vehicle Erickson was driving that night. Whether it was sloppiness or something more deliberate, airing the wrong vehicle while conveniently leaving out the fact that the car Erickson drove that night was never examined by deputies plays right into the LASD’s narrative – one that cherry-picked facts, buried critical details, and focused solely on building a case against Grossman while letting Erickson off the hook for the deaths of the two young boys. Why did investigators fail to thoroughly rule Erickson out?
Meanwhile, Rebecca Grossman, with her wealth, name recognition, and public profile, was cast as the sole villain. Her image became political currency for a progressive district attorney more interested in appeasing his base by targeting so-called privileged offenders than holding all parties equally accountable.
PART III: CRITICAL EVIDENCE IGNORED – AND POSSIBLY DESTROYED
According to inside sources, the civil trial depositions are beginning to expose what looks less like mere negligence in the accident investigation – and more like a cover-up cloaked in incompetence.
Surveillance videos were not preserved; instead, investigators at the scene recorded short, shaky cell phone clips of the monitor playback. Then – inexplicably – the original footage was deleted.
And there’s more: testimony from Neda Heidari and Susan Manners about hearing dual impacts, and the failure of LASD’s Lost Hills station to refer the case to CHP’s specialized MAIT team, which is standard protocol for complex vehicular fatalities. These failures are now central to the civil claim, and they raise questions about whether key evidence was intentionally neglected to simplify the case for public consumption.
Despite evidence of Erickson speeding ahead of Grossman in the same lane, he got off with little more than a slap on the wrist, charged only with reckless driving, later dismissed via diversion.
In a civil courtroom, there’s nowhere to hide. Scott Erickson is named as a defendant because his actions that night weren’t just reckless – they were catalytic. But in civil court, where the burden of proof is lower and burying the truth is much harder, Erickson is finally being forced to answer for the role he played in the reckless chain of events that ended two young lives.
PART IV: THE MEDIA FRENZY AND GROSSMAN’S DAMNING IMAGE
From the moment of her arrest, Rebecca Grossman was branded a villain – driven by a media narrative shaped by what we now know was a deeply flawed investigation at the scene. That narrative was amplified by a progressive media frenzy, unfolding against the backdrop of the pandemic, the BLM movement, and the peak of the “Defund the Police” era.
Local activist Julie Cohen quickly positioned herself as a vocal crusader for the Iskander family – but her efforts were anything but neutral. Likely influenced by the LASD’s tunnel-vision investigation that zeroed in on Grossman, Cohen amplified that narrative online, pouring fuel on an already inflamed media fire. Recently, Cohen shared her experience about being deposed in the civil trial – suggesting her role in shaping public perception may soon face legal scrutiny of its own.
Now, as the lead investigators are being deposed in the civil case, suppressed information from the criminal trial is beginning to surface—threatening to expose a misinformation campaign built on half-truths, exaggerations, and, in some instances, outright lies.
Grossman was charged with murder – not DUI – yet the media continued to call her “drunk.” The DMV, criminal and civil documents reveal that an LASD deputy lied to obtain a blood warrant, falsely stating she had refused a breath test, which she had not.
In the civil trial depositions, the defense is now pointing out what investigators ignored: there was no physical evidence placing both children definitively in front of Grossman’s car. Some witness accounts changed over time, and the investigation failed to consider alternative possibilities – including the chilling account of Erickson asking Grossman’s daughter, “Why did she stop?” and then telling her, “You never saw me here”.
Erickson consulted with an attorney the night of the crash. If he wasn’t impaired and had no involvement in the fatal impact, why the legal scramble? And if, for argument’s sake, he was trying to sober up before speaking with law enforcement – why show up at the crash scene? When contacted by LASD, why didn’t he voluntarily offer up his vehicle for inspection, especially since investigators failed to take the initiative to thoroughly examine his potential involvement?
Innocent drivers don’t need legal shields. So what exactly is Scott Erickson hiding?
PART V: RECKLESS, OR RAILROADED?
While the fact remains that Grossman was following too closely, at high speed, and failed to stop in time, the criminal case and the civil case discovery are underscoring a far more complex reality: one in which the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department botched the investigation, the District Attorney overcharged for political reasons, and the legacy media, known for their progressive agenda, gleefully crowned a wealthy woman the villain without waiting for the facts.
Was this justice or a carefully orchestrated PR campaign to protect the reputation of a troubled department and give a victory to an embattled DA?
With each page of discovery in the civil trial, the answer becomes clearer: the criminal case told only part of the story.
As more information becomes available, I will have updates on the civil proceedings.
Follow Us