FL - Adam Kaufman on trial for the murder of wife Eleanora Kaufman, 33

Posing for the cameras with his defense attornies

Still in the courtroom posing for the cameras.

Florida got this verdict right!!!!!!! So happy for him and his family!!!!! I LOVE the lawyers he had!!!!! Excellent job!!!!!!

I for one am glad. State did not prove their case. If it was so obvious that this was homocide because of her neck wounds, the marks and deep tissue trauma then why did it take almost 2 years for them to determine cause of death?? Not so cut and dried....justice was served today.

Happy with this verdict. Lawyers did a good job. State did not prove case.

~n/t~ said:

So sorry Lina. I was hoping for justice.

RIP :rose:

Click to expand...

I so agree with you.

Jackson44 said:

I so agree with you.

Click to expand...

I will say first that I didn't follow the case. In the initial review of the case, I really did think he strangled her (Paramedics found the body of Eleonora Kaufman, with strange markings on her neck and burst blood vessels in her eyes, in the bathroom of the couple’s Aventura home.).

But if ya'll think the verdict was fair and just, I am certainly in no position to argue.

But can I ask? What/who killed her? Was there any credibility to the spray tan theory?

I'll have to go back and read now just out of curiousity.

Best,

Mel

Well, I know some aren't going to agree, but I really feel this is the right verdict.

Ya'll know my reasons and how I feel, so I won't repeat.


I wish the best to the children and family and I hope they can find some peace and happiness.

Melanie said:

I will say first that I didn't follow the case. In the initial review of the case, I really did think he strangled her (Paramedics found the body of Eleonora Kaufman, with strange markings on her neck and burst blood vessels in her eyes, in the bathroom of the couple’s Aventura home.).

But if ya'll think the verdict was fair and just, I am certainly in no position to argue.

But can I ask? What/who killed her? Was there any credibility to the spray tan theory?

I'll have to go back and read now just out of curiousity.

Best,

Mel

Click to expand...

The spray tan theory never really came in to court much. The defense focused on her heart and the scar tissue that --in their opinion--caused her death.

I'm on the fence, personally.

If I were on the jury, I could not vote guilty because the pros. did not prove their case.

And, I know it's not supposed to come into deliberations, but having the mother of the deceased on the defendants side certainly speaks volumes.

~n/t~ said:

He was on his cellphone and covering his mouth while talking into it. That was very ....ummm....strange.

Click to expand...

Adam?

This was the right verdict definitely. The prosecution did not meet their burden and the police and ME office was as shoddy as could be. If he'd been convicted on that standard, anybody could be convicted of anything.

Did he get away with murder? Possibly, but its better to let ten guilty go free than see one innocent convicted.

the point is that lina had a bad heart disease. i do not know where the prosecution came up with their idea of what happened.:floorlaugh:

Im glad, he might very well have done it but then again we didnt get to see all of the evidence and our laws are suppose to be written in such a way that we let 10 go free so as not to convict and innocent person.

I dont know why this case did not bother me like Casey Anthony's did. I guess because it was so cut and dry IMO that she was guilty.

I saw where the jury asked about whether or not the family had pets that died in the house? Did anyone hear that and where is the video of the verdict?

dizzychick said:

Im glad, he might very well have done it but then again we didnt get to see all of the evidence and our laws are suppose to be written in such a way that we let 10 go free so as not to convict and innocent person.

I dont know why this case did not bother me like Casey Anthony's did. I guess because it was so cut and dry IMO that she was guilty.

I saw where the jury asked about whether or not the family had pets that died in the house? Did anyone hear that and where is the video of the verdict?

Click to expand...

Yes, I saw where the jury asked about the pets. The judge sent a note back that the jury must only focus on the testimony presented in court.

I haven't found any video of the verdict yet. I know for sure it will be shown on TruTV tomorrow morning starting at 8 a.m. central time.

Well, if ever I want to commit murder I'll be sure to locate to Fla first.

I am glad these residents of this county are maintaining the burden of proof.

I was really scared Adam was going to be convicted and while I might not have felt they were sending an innocent man to prison . I would have fear they can send innocent men / woman to prison.

The conviction rate in this county is interesting . One has to wonder if that is a positive thing or not. On one hand you have a large amount of cases ending in not guilty which brings the question of the qauilty of the professionals involved in this county . On the other hand do their rates reflect what all conviction rates should look like . How many people are charged and found guilty where the juries dont uphold the burden of proof standards and are truely innocent?

My state it seems if you are going to court you are guilty ,and they run up there stats with plea bargins . How many pleas do they take on people who they know are innocent or who they know if they had to present a case it wouldnt hold up under a flordia jury?
The jury system is the best thing ever

Now I just wish we could watch them in the room like reality TV. I wont lie I would watch.

Just FYI I think if you have heart disease there is plenty of evidence of it on autopsy. For CHF the heart is enlarged and boggy and the fact she had a boob job means that doc put her through tests just 4 short months before that surgery. Remember in Whitney Houston case that doctor did not clear her for health reasons for some cosmetic procedure. These sames tests are given to people prior to a surgery it is called a medical clearance.

As for the mother of Lina, I guess she just would rather think Adam wouldnt have done this and I partly agree with the state's theory that she would be lost and on her own w/o that family.

Again I did not get to see the pics I did see some for a very short second and what I saw did not look that bad but I guess the state felt this was a strangulation.

I am so glad this trial is over. I think this is the first time in my many years of trial watching where I couldn't come off the fence.

There have been cases where I believed that the defendant was innocent. Usually, the jury sees it my way. There have been far more cases where I believed the prosecution had reached the beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury disagreed. Most of the time, I can move on and not feel the kind of emotions I still have about the CA trial and the OJ trial.

I certainly won't lose any sleep over this trial. This was probably the worst prosecution case I have ever witnessed. I was embarassed for them. Their rebuttal case was spectacularly pitiful.

I'm waiting for InSession to air the verdict this morning. I'll watch that and move on to the next trial. I'm finished with this one.

This case was an eye opener for me. I have cardiac arrythmia on a daily basis. My heart will flutter, hesitate, etc. and I will get dizzy for a few seconds. It has done this for years and years. It has become just a normal thing for me and I dont seem to have lasting effects from it. My doctor has said not to worry about it and just watch it to see if it gets worse. Had a bunch of tests run - nothing showed up. I have had two major surgeries lasting 7 and 9 hours with no problem. It is so common in my daily living that I forget to mention it all the time myself. My Dad had it too. One day he collasped walking up the stairs and dropped dead. He was as healthy as an ox and had NO heart disease. He dies because the heart never started back up and it was over 10 mins before emts arrived.
The Dr. said more people walking down the street have this arrythmia than you would believe. Most times it doesnt cause any problems. In this case she had some past viral problem that hit the heart and damaged it. IMO this created the perfect storm.

One thing I noticed in the comments is that many people heard different things and/or did not hear the complete testimony. I have the luxury of watching these trials without interruption and if I have to miss something because of a phone call, bathroom run I pause it or rewind it because I tape it. In a few comments they got totally different ideas about this case because it was obvious they missed certain testimony. My point? Sitting on a jury you hear much more than we the viewer hear. To put the jury down because their decision doesn't match yours is first wrong and secondly perhaps you have come to different conclusion because you missed key testimony.

i.e. Nobody let the first responder in. The door was wide open and he walked in. Adam was not dressed when the first responder walked in. I surmise that Adam ran down stairs and opened it at some point. He put a pair of jeans and flp flops on when the responder took over the cpr on Lena. The brother who lived seconds away from Adam ran to his home. He was dressed as described.
There was a picture at the hospital of the comforter on the gurney that matched the comforter from Adams bed. The emts used it to cover Linas body (she was naked) as they transported her. That made the bed look as if it had not been slept in.
There was no evidence of a struggle in the rest of the house. No pictures were taken before chairs, etc. were moved by emts and dectectives. Proper protocol for securing the scene was not done in order to process the house as a "crime scene". A number of people stated magazines are flimsy. Stand up eight or ten of them together and try to press down on them. They present a very firm loadbearing surface. There was obvious discoloration on the tops of the stack of magazines in the holder. The holder may be flimsy without the magazines in it but presented a very firm surface with the magazines in it.

These are just a few things I noticed from the comments above. There is a reason a jury is placed in the courtroom without outside distractions to hear and see the evidence. I hate to hear it said that the jury was "stupid", "ignorant", etc. because someone comes to another conclusion from the often interupped viewing of the trial.

TruthSeeker said:

This case was an eye opener for me. I have cardiac arrythmia on a daily basis. My heart will flutter, hesitate, etc. and I will get dizzy for a few seconds. It has done this for years and years. It has become just a normal thing for me and I dont seem to have lasting effects from it. My doctor has said not to worry about it and just watch it to see if it gets worse. Had a bunch of tests run - nothing showed up. I have had two major surgeries lasting 7 and 9 hours with no problem. It is so common in my daily living that I forget to mention it all the time myself. My Dad had it too. One day he collasped walking up the stairs and dropped dead. He was as healthy as an ox and had NO heart disease. He dies because the heart never started back up and it was over 10 mins before emts arrived.
The Dr. said more people walking down the street have this arrythmia than you would believe. Most times it doesnt cause any problems. In this case she had some past viral problem that hit the heart and damaged it. IMO this created the perfect storm.

One thing I noticed in the comments is that many people heard different things and/or did not hear the complete testimony. I have the luxury of watching these trials without interruption and if I have to miss something because of a phone call, bathroom run I pause it or rewind it because I tape it. In a few comments they got totally different ideas about this case because it was obvious they missed certain testimony. My point? Sitting on a jury you hear much more than we the viewer hear. To put the jury down because their decision doesn't match yours is first wrong and secondly perhaps you have come to different conclusion because you missed key testimony.

i.e. Nobody let the first responder in. The door was wide open and he walked in. Adam was not dressed when the first responder walked in. I surmise that Adam ran down stairs and opened it at some point. He put a pair of jeans and flp flops on when the responder took over the cpr on Lena. The brother who lived seconds away from Adam ran to his home. He was dressed as described.
There was a picture at the hospital of the comforter on the gurney that matched the comforter from Adams bed. The emts used it to cover Linas body (she was naked) as they transported her. That made the bed look as if it had not been slept in.
There was no evidence of a struggle in the rest of the house. No pictures were taken before chairs, etc. were moved by emts and dectectives. Proper protocol for securing the scene was not done in order to process the house as a "crime scene".

These are just a few things I noticed from the comments above. There is a reason a jury is placed in the courtroom without outside distractions to hear and see the evidence. I hate to hear it said that the jury was "stupid", "ignorant", etc. because someone comes to another conclusion from the often interupped viewing of the trial.

Click to expand...

Great post.

I just wanted to let you know in closing it was stated the first responder was let in by an older woman. That is what stirred the post about the subject and why we were confused.

I did missed part of testimony of the first responders but I hate when the S.A says things in closing that deviates so dramaticly from what the witness said. Unless I miss understood what the S.A was saying in closing.:waitasec:

How to you get the trials uninterupted? I used not to even get Tru TV then I expanded my cable package for it. I wish they had pay per veiw trials ,I would so do that.