FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen #13 *1 guilty*

[JerseyPride]

Thanks. My bad. Could they have corrected it? I noticed on YouTube some posters were also using the word “implicate”. But I’m sure it’s my mistake. Sorry about that. And not making excuses but I had just come in from lawn mowing 2 acres with a manual mower in 85 degeee heat yesterday and I’m no spring chicken - nor am I in shape. My brain and body were fried.

Sorry if I bent people out of shape here with my typo. It happens. My apologies.

Thanks for the correction.

I wasn’t bent out of shape at all but there is a material difference between implication and incrimination. I think that is what led to folks’ confusion about the contention that Katie’s proffer didn’t “implicate” CA.

 

[Gypsy Road]

I wasn’t bent out of shape at all but there is a material difference between implication and incrimination. I think that is what led to folks’ confusion about the contention that Katie’s proffer didn’t “implicate” CA.

I wasn’t bent out of shape at all but there is a material difference between implication and incrimination. I think that is what led to folks’ confusion about the contention that Katie’s proffer didn’t “implicate” CA.

I understand. And I’m not trying to argue, but Oxford defines the word “implicate” as “show (someone) to be involved with a crime”. Somehow the word I typed was not the word Rashbaum used. I’m sure it was a typo on my part, but the puzzling thing is that lots of people (not just on this board, but on other boards I follow - and also YouTube commenters used the word “implicate” which leads me to believe that that word was printed before it was corrected in the media.

 

[Gypsy Road]

dbm

Double post

 

[Weki]

@Gypsy Road Thanks for the reminder that the defense atty is likely just bs’ing! Phew - can’t believe he got me! I guess I was surprised that state didn’t push back and contradict his statement. Also, why does he want it sealed if it doesn’t hurt his client? It’s the right thing to do??? For whom? For Charlie who else!

If we are to believe that KM’s proffer does not implicate or incriminate Charlie then we have to throw out the state’s entire theory of the conspiracy. I guess KM did all this of her own volition and Charlie didn’t ask her!?

 

[JerseyPride]

I understand. And I’m not trying to argue, but Oxford defines the word “implicate” as “show (someone) to be involved with a crime”. Somehow the word I typed was not the word Rashbaum used. I’m sure it was a typo on my part, but the puzzling thing is that lots of people (not just on this board, but on other boards I follow - and also YouTube commenters used the word “implicate” which leads me to believe that that word was printed before it was corrected in the media.

I don’t think you understand my point.

There are multiple definitions of “implicate” including “to convey a meaning or intention indirectly” or “to involve as a consequence, or natural inference.” When so defined, the word does not necessarily involve (or imply) the commission of a crime.

My point is that counsel’s statement that KM’s proffer did not “incriminate” his client does not foreclose that the proffer did substantively discuss his client. Taken at face value, the statement merely indicates that the proffer is not probative of criminal activity by his client (e.g., “This proffer does nothing more than implicate my client in innocent conversations, it does not incriminate him.”).

To state that CA was not “implicated” in the proffer can be understood to suggest that the proffer does not involve him at all. I believe this is what led many to scratch their heads in confusion (e.g., “How is it possible that KM’s proffer did not address CA???”).

This isn’t to say that “implicate” and “incriminate” are not often used synonymously (indeed, they are). I am instead pointing out that they can have different meanings and that counsel seems to have chosen his words very carefully and in a manner that does not foreclose his client from being the main character in KM’s proffer.

 

[katiecoolady]

I think Rashbaum was posturing when he said the proffers did not incriminate his client. He managed to argue to seal the proffers due to potential jury influence, while at the same time influencing any jury pool by giving an assessment of the value of the proffers, letting his assessment be the only words out there about the proffers. Clever fox.

Hoping we get some firm trial dates soon.

 

[SuziQ]

Why are people here conflating the words “incriminate” (the word used — rhetorically — by CA’s defense) and “implicate”?

I don't believe a word the defense says. Imo.

 

[dotr]

rbbm

Suspected Dan Markel murder mastermind's trial delayed until fall

High-flying Ferrari-driving Florida dentist Charlie Adelson's murder trial has been delayed until fall, The Toronto Sun has learned.

torontosun.com

''High-flying Ferrari-driving Florida dentist Charlie Adelson’s first-degree murder trial has been delayed until fall, the Toronto Sun has learned.''

''Charlie the Dentist’s original trial date had been slated for the end of April.

But on Tuesday, a Florida judge pushed the trial back after Adelson’s legal eagles argued they weren’t ready and still needed to sift through hours of audio and video evidence.''

''Prosecutors opposed the delay, saying the legal manoeuvre creates scheduling conflicts and more agony for Markel’s Toronto family.''
“We oppose the continuance and the family of Dan Markel, they don’t want to be heard today, but they did want the court to know that they oppose the continuance as well,” state attorney Sarah Dugan said.''

''Now, the judge has also granted the motion to put a lid on information and interviews that Magbanua gave to detectives following her trial. Charlie Adelson’s legal eagles first filed the order in January to ensure the interviews weren’t leaked.''

A Cleverly Designed Attachable Sensor Device That Automatically Closes a Toilet Seat After 90 Seconds

The SmartNudge is a very cleverly designed sensor that attaches to the top of a toilet seat and automatically nudges it closed with a jutting mechanical

laughingsquid.com

 

[JerseyPride]

I think Rashbaum was posturing when he said the proffers did not incriminate his client. He managed to argue to seal the proffers due to potential jury influence, while at the same time influencing any jury pool by giving an assessment of the value of the proffers, letting his assessment be the only words out there about the proffers. Clever fox.

Hoping we get some firm trial dates soon.

Without a doubt.

 

[Snacky]

Rashbaum would be remiss if he didn't attempt to discredit the proffer. At the very least, he needs to signal to the Adelson's that he's confident with a game plan. The irony is if he really believed the proffer was inconsequential he wouldn't have asked for a continuance.

What I don't understand is why KM is still in Tallahassee.

 

[Weki]

I’m still wondering why state didn’t get up there and say defense counsel is talking out of his behind and KM’s proffer implicates, incriminates and inculpates CA. Cappelman would have probably. Why wasn’t she there I wonder?

 

[BSBC]

I’m still wondering why state didn’t get up there and say defense counsel is talking out of his behind and KM’s proffer implicates, incriminates and inculpates CA. Cappelman would have probably. Why wasn’t she there I wonder?

From GC's perspective, and at this point in time, I don't think saying "KM's proffer actually proves that CA is guilty!" would be helpful. It risks tainting the jury pool, which could make the task of picking a jury more difficult and potentially provide CA an argument on appeal. It also risks annoying the judge, who also wants a smooth and easy jury-selection process. And it might signal to other potential defendants that she's about to come after them next, potentially causing them to flee. I think GC is perfectly content to wait until trial to reveal what's in KM's proffer, which is why she didn't oppose CA's motion for a protective order. I understand why the news media and observers like us would like to see it ASAP, but GC is looking at the issue through a different lens.

 

[BSBC]

I’m still wondering why state didn’t get up there and say defense counsel is talking out of his behind and KM’s proffer implicates, incriminates and inculpates CA. Cappelman would have probably. Why wasn’t she there I wonder?

Sorry -- accidental double post. Moderator: please delete. Thank you.

 

[katiecoolady]

Rashbaum would be remiss if he didn't attempt to discredit the proffer. At the very least, he needs to signal to the Adelson's that he's confident with a game plan. The irony is if he really believed the proffer was inconsequential he wouldn't have asked for a continuance.

What I don't understand is why KM is still in Tallahassee.

Right? That's why I think he's posturing. Katie was just transferred back to the State prison. So, there's that.

 

[Ferpo]

Right? That's why I think he's posturing. Katie was just transferred back to the State prison. So, there's that.

Thanks for reporting! Indeed, she is no longer listed as an inmate of Leon County jail. It will take a day or two for the State of FL Department of Corrections online records to be updated.

Was this reported anywhere in the media?

 

[BearWatcher]

Do you think she stayed in Leon Co to give Rashbaum or his team to get a deposition from her?

 

[Ferpo]

KM is back in the Lowell Annex

 

[Snacky]

Smiles gone....

 

[newbysleuther]

New Mugshot, not smiling anymore..

 

[Niner]

@DeDee or @clearskies1 - just wonder if either of could see if Adelson has any hearings coming up & anything else filed?

TIA!