GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 *arrests* #11

[KidonGadol]

It's at about 2:02:56

So Flash Gordon can't count. I'm about to give up on this schiesse...
Thank you Gardenista.

It's at about 2:02:56

Ok , hear it . The question is why was Kawass KM's high powered and costly lawyer at the time ? . Here's some history - in 2016 Donna A and HA went into Gerstein and others and signed up to pay for representation in case there was some trial. What sort of trial is not specified. This came to light be cause the Adels being pushy and powerful got Amex to reverse the irrevocable deposits and Gerstein and others sued - And won. So this appears to be a repeat of family behaviour - setting up lawyers ahead of time. The judgement against Amex on the Broward County database. I've posted before on this. Search for it if interested.

I hear in the garbled audio provided that CJA contacted ISOM and this is going to be presented in trial (KM's trial) . Given that Isom interviewed his sister he'd likely have that phone number, no surprise there. Who knows , CJA might have been considering throwing KM under the bus - before talking to lawyer Markus who would tell him he was out of his mind . Then D O Marcus or Kawass talked some sense into him because KM might take him down. (Or he'd shoot his mouth off to ISOM and leave in chains).

This behaviour of CJA, if true is typical of how unpredictable he is. Why are we hearing this for the first time ? Possibly because GC did not want Wendi to feel endangered on the stand at trial I . In addition, if CJA thought he was at serious risk he might pay June U , the dollar stapling woman , to leave the state for a long time. He might do other things.

 

[AlferdPacker]

This behaviour of CJA, if true is typical of how unpredictable he is. Why are we hearing this for the first time ? Possibly because GC did not want Wendi to feel endangered on the stand at trial I . In addition, if CJA thought he was at serious risk he might pay June U , the dollar stapling woman , to leave the state for a long time. He might do other things.

None of this is new, it all came up in the last trial, as discussed in the pre-trial hearing.

 

[GordonX]

IMO - As soon as things started getting hot because of LR's (Rivera's) confession (or perhaps even before) - CA hired Markus and spilled his guts to him about the entire plot. After surmising the situation, Markus knew they needed to keep KM protected and on their side by making sure she had "friendly" legal representation ready to go. So what did Markus do? He walked down the hall of Penthouse One and got his buddy Chris DeCoste (along with Kawass) on the job to "defend" KM and set them up. Markus knew that CA needed a firewall to plug that KM hole and DeCoste/Kawass is the firewall to plug that KM hole. KM is the one that directly ties CA to SG and LR - so they needed to make sure KM had a "friendly" attorney on speed dial and ready to go should the shiit inevitably hit the fan. Without DeCoste as the firewall, and if a truly "independent" counsel was advising KM, CA's defense strategy would burn to the ground. As we know, KM turned down a full immunity deal presumably under the sage and "independent" counsel of DeCoste and Kawass. WHY? And who is paying their huge legal fees? And who paid SG's legal fees?

 

[FreddyG]

Do we know if the tv was really broken or sabotaged? Or did the tech go there and find nothing wrong with it? TIA.

I'm hung up on this too. I asked whether it was even confirmed that there was a Geek Squad repair that AM, and @katiecoolady pointed out that it had been confirmed, which seems to be true based on other sources as well.

But that's not the end of the story: It would help a lot to know if there was actually something wrong with the TV. If there wasn't, the implications for WA are very serious. And I suppose that even if it was all a planned alibi (DA made the appointment after all) then WA could have broken her TV to make a repair seem necessary.

Even if that's true, though, I'm not sure if it's clever or boneheaded by the Adelsons. If they're consistently using "TV" as a theme in their plot, wouldn't it make more sense to set up an unrelated alibi? If CA actually orchestrated the hit, which IMO is like 90% likely, then his saying "I'm fixing your TV for a present, it's cheaper than a hit man" is either idiotically self-incriminating or the kind of chutzpah that marks him as so arrogantly convinced of his own deceptive skills that he wouldn't get caught.

And then WA told the police CA said that. This actually makes me think she may have been clueless about the whole thing. If she knew a plot were going down, would she mention to law enforcement that her brother mentioned murdering her ex for hire? Again, either (1) she wasn't involved and sincerely though CA was uninvolved, (2) she's just an idiot (clearly not true given her education and job), or (3) she like CA had such insane chutzpah that she was screwing with the police bc she thought she and her fam would never be caught.

Long story short: I would dearly love to know what happened during that "TV repair" appointment.

 

[vislaw]

... ... Long story short: I would dearly love to know what happened during that "TV repair" appointment.

We're all in that boat, but there are so many variables and ambiguities inherent in such an event that it becomes problematical for a prosecutor to use. The last thing you want is to inject events that may be viewed differently by reasonable persons. This supposed "TV Repair" is, at best, a concocted false alibi that would be very difficult to prove. You could easily see factions of jurors arguing both sides of the question and anything that divides a jury to any degree is anathema to the prosecution. I agree that it would be interesting if the repair ticket showed there was nothing found wrong with the unit. However, even that would be minimally useful as proof of anything because we're all aware of intermittent problems with appliances. In contrast, DA's statement to CA that "this TV is going to be $5,000" cannot be easily explained as innocent. Even if you assume that everything about the TV repair was innocent, you can't get away from the fact that it coincided with the day of the murder and both Donna and Charlie go on to adopt the term "TV" as a code word for the murder hit.

 

[Razz]

I'm hung up on this too. I asked whether it was even confirmed that there was a Geek Squad repair that AM, and @katiecoolady pointed out that it had been confirmed, which seems to be true based on other sources as well.

But that's not the end of the story: It would help a lot to know if there was actually something wrong with the TV. If there wasn't, the implications for WA are very serious. And I suppose that even if it was all a planned alibi (DA made the appointment after all) then WA could have broken her TV to make a repair seem necessary.

Even if that's true, though, I'm not sure if it's clever or boneheaded by the Adelsons. If they're consistently using "TV" as a theme in their plot, wouldn't it make more sense to set up an unrelated alibi? If CA actually orchestrated the hit, which IMO is like 90% likely, then his saying "I'm fixing your TV for a present, it's cheaper than a hit man" is either idiotically self-incriminating or the kind of chutzpah that marks him as so arrogantly convinced of his own deceptive skills that he wouldn't get caught.

And then WA told the police CA said that. This actually makes me think she may have been clueless about the whole thing. If she knew a plot were going down, would she mention to law enforcement that her brother mentioned murdering her ex for hire? Again, either (1) she wasn't involved and sincerely though CA was uninvolved, (2) she's just an idiot (clearly not true given her education and job), or (3) she like CA had such insane chutzpah that she was screwing with the police bc she thought she and her fam would never be caught.

Long story short: I would dearly love to know what happened during that "TV repair" appointment.

#3

 

[dotr]

Re-run.
Before Florida man died, ex-brother-in-law joked about hiring hitman | wkyc.com
August 27, 2016
“He knew Danny treated me badly and it was always his joke, he said, "I looked into hiring a hitman and it was cheaper to get you this TV so I got you this TV,'" Wendi Adelson told investigators. "He would never.
"I told that to the repair guy this morning. He asked me how much it cost, and I said I didn’t know because it was a gift because my brother said it was cheaper than a hit-man. It was my divorce present. Such a horrible thing to say. I’m so, so sorry.”
Adelson's statement came minutes after Tallahassee Police investigator Craig Isom told her Markel had been shot by someone who wanted him dead and he was not expected to survive.''


''Wendi Adelson drove on Trescott Drive around noon the day Markel was shot. She said she thought the road, which by that time was cordoned off by crime scene tape, was closed because of a downed tree.
She went around and bought a bottle of Bulleit Rye Whiskey from the nearby ABC to take to a party later that evening.
Before that, she said she had been working at home after fielding the TV repair man that morning.''

 

[clearskies1]

I'm hung up on this too. I asked whether it was even confirmed that there was a Geek Squad repair that AM, and @katiecoolady pointed out that it had been confirmed, which seems to be true based on other sources as well.

But that's not the end of the story: It would help a lot to know if there was actually something wrong with the TV. If there wasn't, the implications for WA are very serious. And I suppose that even if it was all a planned alibi (DA made the appointment after all) then WA could have broken her TV to make a repair seem necessary.

Even if that's true, though, I'm not sure if it's clever or boneheaded by the Adelsons. If they're consistently using "TV" as a theme in their plot, wouldn't it make more sense to set up an unrelated alibi? If CA actually orchestrated the hit, which IMO is like 90% likely, then his saying "I'm fixing your TV for a present, it's cheaper than a hit man" is either idiotically self-incriminating or the kind of chutzpah that marks him as so arrogantly convinced of his own deceptive skills that he wouldn't get caught.

And then WA told the police CA said that. This actually makes me think she may have been clueless about the whole thing. If she knew a plot were going down, would she mention to law enforcement that her brother mentioned murdering her ex for hire? Again, either (1) she wasn't involved and sincerely though CA was uninvolved, (2) she's just an idiot (clearly not true given her education and job), or (3) she like CA had such insane chutzpah that she was screwing with the police bc she thought she and her fam would never be caught.

Long story short: I would dearly love to know what happened during that "TV repair" appointment.

I would add possibility 4 -- she had repeated her brother's tv repair joke to others before (including to the tv repair guy himself) and mentioned it to ISOM because she thought ISOM would find out from others about her prior conversations. Strategically better to tell ISOM first. JMO and speculation.

 

[KidonGadol]

I hear in the garbled audio provided that CJA contacted ISOM and this is going to be presented in trial (KM's trial) . Given that Isom interviewed his sister he'd likely have that phone number, no surprise there. Who knows , CJA might have been considering throwing KM under the bus - before talking to lawyer Markus who would tell him he was out of his mind . Then D O Marcus or Kawass talked some sense into him because KM might take him down. (Or he'd shoot his mouth off to ISOM and leave in chains).

Massive mistake by me , KG, here - Wendi was interviewed years after KM was pulled in so there is no link to CJA to get ISOM's phone number or even name for the earlier interview.

Likely scenario - during the call that KM made to T. Kawass (as discussed with J Wheeler in the admissible evidence arguments) she gave the name of the interviewing officer to T Kawass. TK passed that along to CJA. The KM call would have been recorded as part of the police interview at arrest time. Does anyone have a transcript for KM's interview especially at time when she called her lawyer ?

Det ISOM was not new to the case - interviewed Rivera at the proffer.

 

[clearskies1]

Massive mistake by me , KG, here - Wendi was interviewed years after KM was pulled in so there is no link to CJA to get ISOM's phone number or even name for the earlier interview.

Likely scenario - during the call that KM made to T. Kawass (as discussed with J Wheeler in the admissible evidence arguments) she gave the name of the interviewing officer to T Kawass. TK passed that along to CJA. The KM call would have been recorded as part of the police interview at arrest time. Does anyone have a transcript for KM's interview especially at time when she called her lawyer ?

Det ISOM was not new to the case - interviewed Rivera at the proffer.

I thought TK called CJA's attorney and it was CJA's attorney (not CJA himself) who called Isom. The substance of what KM told TK in that call is privileged and, even if it was recorded, would not be released. JMO.

 

[AlferdPacker]

deleted unnecessary correction of well-known facts

 

[KidonGadol]

I thought TK called CJA's attorney and it was CJA's attorney (not CJA himself) who called Isom. The substance of what KM told TK in that call is privileged and, even if it was recorded, would not be released. JMO.

Pre-Trial Motions Hearing 1 - Murder of FSU Law Prof. Dan Markel case - Florida vs. Katie Magbanua ex Ytube

Go in to 2:03:05 approx. "There is a reference to Detective Isom and ar...... that Mr Charlie Adelson contacted him ..." It's the third item on J Wheeler's list to talk to attny Kawass about .

Kawass rebuts that and says that Mr D O Marcus made the call to Det ISOM. So was Wheeler's briefing wrong, did Kawass lie , did Wheeler ad lib from the text ?....

Clearskies is probably right but what J Wheeler quoted is now an official matter of record (did Cappleman's department assemble the document he is using - it seems likely) . Just possibly another ba_lls up that will help the defense with their lies.

I hope old ISOM has good notes or a LE recording exists of that incoming call. Kawass would know CHarlie's unstable nature by then - there's little chance she'd let CJA know what was afoot. KM would be allowed just that one call to a lawyer on arrest .

 

[Niner]

Still no "new" court hearing date for Adelson? I can not access Leon County court site is why I ask.

TIA!

And I have Magbanua's next hearing tomorrow 5/3 Motion hearing.

 

[Niner]

Oh - wanted to ask - is/was there any "info" on what happened at the motions hearing on 4/29/22 for Magbanua. I don't have anything in my notes.

TIA if you can provide a short synopsis!

 

[SeesSeas]

Still no "new" court hearing date for Adelson? I can not access Leon County court site is why I ask.

TIA!

And I have Magbanua's next hearing tomorrow 5/3 Motion hearing.

Oh - wanted to ask - is/was there any "info" on what happened at the motions hearing on 4/29/22 for Magbanua. I don't have anything in my notes.

TIA if you can provide a short synopsis!

https://cvweb.leonclerk.com/public/online_services/search_courts/search_by_name.asp
Nothing new for Charlie.
Katie:
37 2016 CF 003036 A - STATE OF FLORIDA vs MAGBANUA, KATHERINE D
4/29/2022 596 CCCE CASE COMMENTS FROM COURT EVENT STATES AMENDED MOTION IN LIMINE (1-21-22) - SEE TRANSCRIPT DEFENSE MOTION IN LIMINE (1-21-22) - SEE TRANSCRIPT DEFENSE REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE (1-13-22) - 1-5 GRANTED/6-7 DENIED/8-14 GRANTED/15-DENIED/16 GRANTED DEFENSE REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE (4-13-22) - DENIED DEFENSE ORE TENUS MOTION FOR LIST OF ATTENDEES AT RIVERA MEETING - GRANTED; LIST TO BE PROVIDED BY 5 PM ON 5/2/22

MOTION HEARING 5/3/2022 2:00 PM WHEELER

 

[Niner]

Thank you @SeesSeas !

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Some fairly significant rulings in the pre-trial that went against the defense yesterday.

1. Defense is not going to allowed to suggest that she was offered immunity. (We also learned she wasn't offered immunity, it seems she was offered to plead guilty and likely serve no additional jail time. That is not the same as immunity, which the defense have been telling everyone under the sun for years. Which is a lie.)

2. Defense and KM are not allowed to try to garner sympathy by talking about her kids autism, her mother dying in the years shes been locked up, and she doesnt get to describe how hard jail has been on her as its all prejudicial.

3. Judge reserved decision but seemed to suggest he will be allowing the Dolce wiretap in on the grounds that KM's actions before and after the meeting were in line with her involvement in conspiracy.

Bonus: KM's lawyers have also suggested in the past that it was proven to Judge Harkinson that the Adelsons were not funding the defense . Nobody has proven anything in this regard. Harkinson just declined to allow the prosecution to make suggestions about this relationship in the previous trial.

Prosecution were trying to get court to not allow mentions of LR's gang affiliation and history of mental illness in the new trial. Defense won on these but I doubt the prosecution ever expected to win on these minor points.

Overall, I thought the defense looked a bit flustered yesterday. Especially about not being able to mention the fake immunity offer.

 

[Carol1953]

What actual evidence has been made public regarding the source of funds for KM's defense?

Some fairly significant rulings in the pre-trial that went against the defense yesterday.

1. Defense is not going to allowed to suggest that she was offered immunity. (We also learned she wasn't offered immunity, it seems she was offered to plead guilty and likely serve no additional jail time. That is not the same as immunity, which the defense have been telling everyone under the sun for years. Which is a lie.)

2. Defense and KM are not allowed to try to garner sympathy by talking about her kids autism, her mother dying in the years shes been locked up, and she doesnt get to describe how hard jail has been on her as its all prejudicial.

3. Judge reserved decision but seemed to suggest he will be allowing the Dolce wiretap in on the grounds that KM's actions before and after the meeting were in line with her involvement in conspiracy.

Bonus: KM's lawyers have also suggested in the past that it was proven to Judge Harkinson that the Adelsons were not funding the defense . Nobody has proven anything in this regard. Harkinson just declined to allow the prosecution to make suggestions about this relationship in the previous trial.

Prosecution were trying to get court to not allow mentions of LR's gang affiliation and history of mental illness in the new trial. Defense won on these but I doubt the prosecution ever expected to win on these minor points.

Overall, I thought the defense looked a bit flustered yesterday. Especially about not being able to mention the fake immunity offer.

 

[KidonGadol]

Some fairly significant rulings in the pre-trial that went against the defense yesterday.

1. Defense is not going to allowed to suggest that she was offered immunity. (We also learned she wasn't offered immunity, it seems she was offered to plead guilty and likely serve no additional jail time. That is not the same as immunity, which the defense have been telling everyone under the sun for years. Which is a lie.)

2. Defense and KM are not allowed to try to garner sympathy by talking about her kids autism, her mother dying in the years shes been locked up, and she doesnt get to describe how hard jail has been on her as its all prejudicial.

3. Judge reserved decision but seemed to suggest he will be allowing the Dolce wiretap in on the grounds that KM's actions before and after the meeting were in line with her involvement in conspiracy.

Bonus: KM's lawyers have also suggested in the past that it was proven to Judge Harkinson that the Adelsons were not funding the defense . Nobody has proven anything in this regard. Harkinson just declined to allow the prosecution to make suggestions about this relationship in the previous trial.

Prosecution were trying to get court to not allow mentions of LR's gang affiliation and history of mental illness in the new trial. Defense won on these but I doubt the prosecution ever expected to win on these minor points.

Overall, I thought the defense looked a bit flustered yesterday. Especially about not being able to mention the fake immunity offer.

re points above

3. There was no Wiretap at the DV restaurant - it was an air recording. Wiretaps or access to the cellular network require special judicial approval. It's important to keep the language accurate.

I heard mention of Grand Theft in the discussions with J Wheeler. Does this relate to the convicted (embezzlement) sister in law , Chez Magbanua and a possible funding connection ?

Does anyone know what the reference to Planned parenthood was about in the pretrial meeting . Did KM work for them. ? did she leave under some cloud ?

Sympathy vote -
I guess KM won't be able to talk about her leaky breast implants and medical issues they have been giving her in the clink to thusly look for sympathy, given the other things she wanted Kawass to about. It turns out that this alleged cosmetic surgery has paid her back many times over.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

What actual evidence has been made public regarding the source of funds for KM's defense?

Absolutely none, to my knowledge. Although they talked around it a bit in the pre-trial hearing yesterday. KM's defense inferred that the prosecution was making statements to the media about how "Katie holds the key to her own freedom" because the prosecution believed that KM's lawyers were not fully communicating the prosecution's offer to KM. And the prosecution was using the media to get their message to Katie because they genuinely believe that KM's defense is being funded by the Adelsons.

Which they absolutely are, unless you believe Katie was able to raise an extra $500 - $750k in tips working once a month at a club in Miami 7 years ago - or alternatively - that her sister set up an embezzlement scheme and directed every single penny to Katie's defense but that since that scheme was uncovered KM's lawyers just switched to pro bono.

Everyone seems to know that the Adelsons are funding KM's defense. Proving it is the issue.