GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU law professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 - #4 *Arrests*

[DexterMorgan]

Most people wouldn't change the last name of their innocent surviving children, either. WA is despicable for that act alone!!

Hopefully Wendi has petitioned to change their names again.

Especially since the Google search for the name Adelson will link right back to what uncle Charlie and family did to these kids dad.

Jmo.

 

[DexterMorgan]

This is a good reminder my friends that you all are responsible for what you say here or anywhere on the Internet.

You are not really anonymous. If someone sues you or if LE wants to find you there are ways to do so.

Now, it is EXTREMELY hard to sue someone who is now a public figure but that doesn't mean someone won't try.

To prove libel Adelson's lawyer would have to prove you knew the truth about her and still you posted lies with the intent to destroy her reputation.
This is almost impossible to prove. Then again, there are no guarantees.

This article could easily be an attempt to scare people and make them stop. I don't know.

The best way to protect yourself is to make sure before you post state "this is my opinion" or words along those lines. Again, no guarantees.

Don't be nasty and mean. There is no need.

This is unlikely but it could happen: Someday you may have to defend what you posted somewhere on the Internet.

Tricia

I am truly sorry Tricia.

But imo. The lawyers will not sue personal members before suing a site that allows certain comments to pass.

Especially if the site has moderators that are suppose to delete certain things.

So imo. Lat and WA lawyers would never sue broke us for our opinions.

But they may gun for the site itself. Jmo.

So be careful my friend.

Because alot of sluethers are poor.

So a defamation suit would usually go to the platform that allows defamation of innocent people.

But also imo.

Websleuths can counter sue as well;

If her lawyers ever tried to stop free speech that people simply post as their opinions;

This means that the 1st ammendment can trump defamation with a link or someone simply posting a opionated comment.

Jmo

 

[reallybusy]

There is a big part of me that believes if Wendi and co follow through on their statements, they'd cast a MUCH WIDER media spotlight on this case. Raising many profiles and angles. The court may have appetite to set a precedent on this issue. If they pick on an individual, they may pick on someone with resources and tenacity to fight it. Or perhaps someone without those resources may hear from a well-respected and media savvy lawyer(s) who are willing to take a stab at this for them. I wonder what Dan would think of all this if he were still here...?

This thread is about that poor slain man (faults and all) who had a passion for law and justice and the HUGE LOVE of his little boys.

 

[BSBC]

I am truly sorry Tricia.

But imo. The lawyers will not sue personal members before suing a site that allows certain comments to pass.

Especially if the site has moderators that are suppose to delete certain things.

So imo. Lat and WA lawyers would never sue broke us for our opinions.

But they may gun for the site itself. Jmo.

So be careful my friend.

Because alot of sluethers are poor.

So a defamation suit would usually go to the platform that allows defamation of innocent people.

But also imo.

Websleuths can counter sue as well;

If her lawyers ever tried to stop free speech that people simply post as their opinions;

This means that the 1st ammendment can trump defamation with a link or someone simply posting a opionated comment.

Jmo

There is absolutely no possibility that a lawsuit against WS based on an allegedly defamatory post by a user would be successful. Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, web sites cannot be held liable for content posted by their users (with a few exceptions not relevant here). The protections of Sec. 230 are extremely broad and robust. Here is a good primer on the statute: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/immunity-online-publishers-under-communications-decency-act

As others have stated, a user who posts defamatory content can be held liable. But again, WS can't.

 

[Satchie]

I actually lean towards agreeing that Wendi was not involved and did not have knowledge in advance.

I think her crazy family took it upon themselves to eliminate Dan from the children's lives.

This whole family seems very enmeshed. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the parents are the ones who really poisoned Wendi against Dan in the first place - or at least fanned the flames at every opportunity.

In my own case, if I were a human rights lawyer and placed a high value on my career and on justice in general, and realized family members had conspired behind my back to assassinate my ex/father of my sons, I would be enraged at the evil of their action and refuse to have my name dragged through the mud in order to protect them

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Mr. Lat has managed to do one thing well. He has poked the bears here at WS.....including those who have been hibernating. Good luck with that Mr. L.
Nothing I enjoy more than having my cage rattled.


Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Don't know why he's picking on us. There's a lot worse out there.... Other crime forums, Reddit, comments to a gazillion news articles, tons of blogs. And a lot of those other places go a whole lot further in discussing the possibility of Wendi's guilt.

He's got his work cut out for him if he's going to sue the entire Internet.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

[Pawns123]

Don't know why he's picking on us. There's a lot worse out there.... Other crime forums, Reddit, comments to a gazillion news articles, tons of blogs. And a lot of those other places go a whole lot further in discussing the possibility of Wendi's guilt.

He's got his work cut out for him if he's going to sue the entire Internet.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

What is telling is the Princeses lack of follow up on the case. Lawyered up etc. Oh and the escape to SoFlo!!!

 

[Twister]

What is telling is the Princeses lack of follow up on the case. Lawyered up etc. Oh and the escape to SoFlo!!!

If I had to guess, the entire Adelson family is on pins and needles, just waiting for the other shoe to drop. They probably know that odds are, KM will cut the best deal she can, incriminating any of them she has evidence on.

The email, disclosed inadvertently or to stir the pot, from the Canadian Markel family certainly indicates that they believe the entire Adelson family in Florida, at least, would be unavailable to care for the children at some time in the near future.

Threats to sue internet commentators on this case are probably the least of their worries. Should they beat the rap and not be prosecuted for Dan's murder, or should they be prosecuted but found not guilty, they will be ecstatic to have retained their freedom.

So I think time will tell in this case. Wait patiently....KM will tell her story and the next phase will begin.

Dan is getting lost in all of this. A man, a human being, like all of us, with faults and strengths and much to contribute to this world, most importantly as a father to his children, was brutally murdered. And why? We already know why, many of us think. It's just proving who did it has not been accomplished yet.

Let's hope Dan gets the justice he deserves. It is all he has left, and he does deserve that, after having his life stolen from him. Justice, that all of those who killed him, took him away from his children, stopped his life in that one moment, will have to answer to the crime.

Time will tell, but the story is definitely not over yet. And Dan will never be forgotten - most importantly, by his children.

 

[Pawns123]

If I had to guess, the entire Adelson family is on pins and needles, just waiting for the other shoe to drop. They probably know that odds are, KM will cut the best deal she can, incriminating any of them she has evidence on.

The email, disclosed inadvertently or to stir the pot, from the Canadian Markel family certainly indicates that they believe the entire Adelson family in Florida, at least, would be unavailable to care for the children at some time in the near future.

Threats to sue internet commentators on this case are probably the least of their worries. Should they beat the rap and not be prosecuted for Dan's murder, or should they be prosecuted but found not guilty, they will be ecstatic to have retained their freedom.

So I think time will tell in this case. Wait patiently....KM will tell her story and the next phase will begin.

Dan is getting lost in all of this. A man, a human being, like all of us, with faults and strengths and much to contribute to this world, most importantly as a father to his children, was brutally murdered. And why? We already know why, many of us think. It's just proving who did it has not been accomplished yet.

Let's hope Dan gets the justice he deserves. It is all he has left, and he does deserve that, after having his life stolen from him. Justice, that all of those who killed him, took him away from his children, stopped his life in that one moment, will have to answer to the crime.

Time will tell, but the story is definitely not over yet. And Dan will never be forgotten - most importantly, by his children.

Amen!

 

[GordonX]

i'm not so sure now that KM is going to sing. i think she's naive and i think her lawyers have her convinced that if she goes to trial that they will get her off. i think her lawyers may be getting paid and thus influenced by a very, very interested third party. her defense is actually an extension of the third party's defense. thus, the lawyers are the conduit and facilitators of that connection. i don't think it's in KM's best interest to go to trial but now i think she will.

i think a long time ago when CA found his lawyer and told him everything that his lawyer must have immediately marched right down the hall and got KM lawyered up too knowing what was coming. they had to immediately plug that leak and put up a defense wall well before she was gotten to.

(f) Compensation by Third Party. A lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a client from one other than the client unless:
(1) the client gives informed consent;
(2) there is no interference with the lawyer’s independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship; and
(3) information relating to representation of a client is protected as required by rule 4-1.6.

https://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/482043D3FC06842B852571710054B87B

 

[Montrealaise]

I was wondering how a single mother on food stamps could afford the services of a high-priced private criminal defense attorney in Miami for a case in Tallahassee.

 

[Pawns123]

Well looks like CA is continuing to screw KM despite the bars.

i'm not so sure now that KM is going to sing. i think she's naive and i think her lawyers have her convinced that if she goes to trial that they will get her off. i think her lawyers may be getting paid and thus influenced by a very, very interested third party. her defense is actually an extension of the third party's defense. thus, the lawyers are the conduit and facilitators of that connection. i don't think it's in KM's best interest to go to trial but now i think she will.

i think a long time ago when CA found his lawyer and told him everything that his lawyer must have immediately marched right down the hall and got KM lawyered up too knowing what was coming. they had to immediately plug that leak and put up a defense wall well before she was gotten to.

(f) Compensation by Third Party. A lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a client from one other than the client unless:
(1) the client gives informed consent;
(2) there is no interference with the lawyer’s independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship; and
(3) information relating to representation of a client is protected as required by rule 4-1.6.

https://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/482043D3FC06842B852571710054B87B

 

[DexterMorgan]

I was wondering how a single mother on food stamps could afford the services of a high-priced private criminal defense attorney in Miami for a case in Tallahassee.

Trust me. The IRS is wondering the same thing.

So she could face tax evasion as well.

Btw. Please remember that even if KM flips. Its still going to take a forensic accountant analysis to show the money pattern of how the Adelsons actually payed the 100k and more.

Plus its going to take a forensic phone analysis to show the phone patterns in detail to match with KM story if she does flip.

So this will take some time.

 

[GordonX]

I think CA's lawyer knew immediately of the importance of getting KM a "friendly" "close" lawyer who would take his orders and play ball with him.

 

[Montrealaise]

I have been practising family law for over 20 years and I can tell you that WA is a classic case of a Parental Alienator (PA). Before DM's death, she did everything she could to cut him out of their kids lives (taking them and not telling him where they were, petitioning the court for permission to move 9 hours away with them, refusing to abide by the co-parenting agreement) and afterwards, changing the kids' names to erase all connection with him. I'll bet you anything that she has blocked DM's parents attempts to see their grandsons. Most laypeople assume that PAs (almost always the mother) have a good reason to remove the other parent from the kids' lives, but in my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. (A parent who does have good reason to do so will have documents such as police reports, CPS reports and psychological assessments to support their case and is not considered a PA). For PAs, everything is about them, all the time.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I have been practising family law for over 20 years and I can tell you that WA is a classic case of a Parental Alienator. Before DM's death, she did everything she could to cut him out of their kids lives (taking them and not telling him where they were, petitioning the court for permission to move 9 hours away with them, refusing to abide by the co-parenting agreement) and afterwards, changing the kids' names to erase all connection with him. I'll bet you anything that she has blocked DM's parents attempts to see their grandsons. Most laypeople assume that when Parental Alienators (almost always the mother) have a good reason to remove the other parent from the kids' lives, but in my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. (A parent who does have good reason to do so will have documents such as police reports, CPS reports and psychological assessments as evidence and is not considered a Parental Alienator).

But what if Donna told Wendi that she feels her pain. But she will cut Wendi off unless she follows my instructions. Jmo.

Btw. Wth.

Donna wanted to pay Dan 1 million dollars to let the kids go.

Wth.

So maybe Donna is the main culprit here. Especially since she supposedly had 1 million dollars on hand to make that proposal work. Jmo.

So imo. Donna is the family Annihilator.

 

[GordonX]

I have been practising family law for over 20 years and I can tell you that WA is a classic case of a Parental Alienator (PA). Before DM's death, she did everything she could to cut him out of their kids lives (taking them and not telling him where they were, petitioning the court for permission to move 9 hours away with them, refusing to abide by the co-parenting agreement) and afterwards, changing the kids' names to erase all connection with him. I'll bet you anything that she has blocked DM's parents attempts to see their grandsons. Most laypeople assume that PAs (almost always the mother) have a good reason to remove the other parent from the kids' lives, but in my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. (A parent who does have good reason to do so will have documents such as police reports, CPS reports and psychological assessments to support their case and is not considered a PA). For PAs, everything is about them, all the time.

I initially read that as Parental Annihilator (PA).

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

.
But if WA and her lawyer are itching to sue somebody their most important consideration should be in my opinion,
“The Streisand Effect” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

If WA's lawyer is truly concerned for his client’s welfare then he will have warned her about
The Streisand Effect.

If, in fact, notoriety as a result of her association with murder is her concern, and not just retribution, a lawsuit against non-professionals who are simply discussing and trying like hell to understand how people can commit such horrific crimes would only increase her exposure and she should expect that soon her ABC interview would have 1,000,000 viewers. Her name could easily be spread to Europe and Australia since many of WebSleuth’s members are in those locations.
There really is no limit to the negative publicity that would be generated.

Snipped for focus...

Streisand effect - as a matter of fact, from looking back over the last few weeks, it looks like the rate of postings is already up significantly here since Lat's post. And from browsing other sites, his post has livened up a lot of threads on other sites as well.

The last few Google searches I've done on DM and WA, Lat's blog posts are the top five or so results... I'm not seeing websleuths pop up at all.

If WA and co want to avoid Internet publicity, it looks like Lat's blog has a much bigger audience than websleuths.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

[TTF14]

I initially read that as Parental Annihilator (PA).

That applies, too.

 

[Razz]

But what if Donna told Wendi that she feels her pain. But she will cut Wendi off unless she follows my instructions. Jmo.

Btw. Wth.

Donna wanted to pay Dan 1 million dollars to let the kids go.

Wth.

So maybe Donna is the main culprit here. Especially since she supposedly had 1 million dollars on hand to make that proposal work. Jmo.

So imo. Donna is the family Annihilator.

They were going to split the cost, CA, DA and WA

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk