GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 *arrests* #12

Status
Not open for further replies.

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
I listened to a podcast yesterday with a "legal roundtable" discussion on this case. A defense attorney was speculating about a possible defense for Charlie. That he admits hiring the hitmen to "rough up" DM, but not to kill him and that they went rogue. He would really have to take the stand to try and pull that off and explain ALL the wiretaps that say nothing of the sort, but still, interesting. That defense attorney even admitted that the evidence against him is overwhelming. I'm still hoping he takes a deal, if one is offered--for giving up Donna and/or Wendi.
 

clearskies1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2014
Messages
2,389
Reaction score
16,200
It is expected that we will see new developments in the coming weeks leading up to the 7/29/2022 sentencing of Magbanua and Case Management of Charles Adelson. These will be good developments because they are signs of progress toward “Justice for Dan Markel”.

The State may list 100 Category A witnesses but will call only 10 during trial, depending on time allocation and necessity. In the same vein, the raw data of Charles Adelson’s i-Cloud are furnished to the counsel of the defense during the discovery process but only a small portion of it, if any, is meant to be discussed in open court. All pieces of evidence will be made available to all involved during the process, including the Judge’s clerks and the Jury, for examination on demand.

Charles Adelson's i Cloud raw data was listed, and sealed from public view, in the Magbanua discovery. The picture of the Amended Discovery dated 6/29/2022, which I posted in #754, shows that these 6/29/2022 items are “replacements (plural)” for what were previously disclosed from “Magbanua” case. Hence, they must contain “new pieces” of evidence.

Of course, “new pieces” of evidence do not necessarily mean “fresh evidences” (as what you are alluding to, I presume). From 2011, Apple iCloud resides on Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure; and also extended to Google Cloud Platform since 2016. Apple iCloud is a generic name for multiple services such as iCloud Photo, iCloud email, iCloud Drive etc. May be these are “newly disclosed” data from another platform or from another iCloud service not previously explored.

The iCloud evidence could be dated 2016 (not very fresh) but it availed to the State Attorneys only in June 2022 (relatively new for the investigation). This is possible because the privacy disclosures of Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are arcane.

The criminal procedure gives the Judge the ability to define the scope of searches and seizures. Hence, a Judge might withhold the searches and seizures of some parts of the iCloud to protect the defendant from potential government fishing expedition until the investigators provide compelling benefits for justice to be served.

Also, Web based iCloud emails are easier to seize than iCloud Server emails. Web emails transited through multiple Web services across TCP/IP. The FBI could just seize the data from the weaker man-in-the-middle (since they are already disclosed to a third party) rather than fighting the privacy terms of the big 3.

I am just speculating as I am also curious. What could be the evidence worthiness of the Charles Adelson’s iCloud “new contents” for them to deserve a one page addendum to Answer to Demand For Discovery?
I don't think there is new content. I think it's only a new format. In the 6/29/22 Amended Answer to Demand for Discovery, the State lists CA's i-cloud data in Blue Ray format, whereas in the earlier 6/17/22 Answer, CA's i-cloud was listed in Cellebrite format and RTK format.

It looks like in the 6/29 Amended Answer the State is also asking the Defense to provide blank blue ray disks and thumb drives -- presumably so that the State can put CA's i-cloud data and Magbanua's i-cloud data on those disks/drives and then supply them to the Defense. I could be wrong, but that's how I interpret the 6/29 Amended Answer -- no new content, just new formatting. JMO.
 

Sherubbian

Former Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2022
Messages
61
Reaction score
370
Could it possibly be that it's information they couldn't use in previous trials? I wonder how much of that there is that will come in from hundreds of hours of wiretaps between all of them.

Perhaps, you are alluding to the situation whereas several curious facts already in the court records did not get to be discussed in the previous Magbanua trials. I expect the State Attorneys to evoke some of these curious facts in Charles Adelson’s trial to the extent they may show the dynamics of Charles Adelson’s criminal behavior.

Below are few curious facts about Katherine Diana Magbanua’s life in 2016 that were not discussed much in her Dan Markel murder trials:

1. Magbanua was always packed, at home and in her car, although she admitted that she does not have neither concealed nor open carry permit
2. While Dr. Adelson was steady with Ms. Umchinda, Ms. Magbanua went back to live with Mr. Garcia. However, Katie Diana and Charlie continued to see and to know each other aside
3. Magbanua and Garcia have had a tumultuous relationship and Magbanua threatened to breakup multiple times. Surprisingly, Charlie was the one coaching Katie not to breakup with Sigfredo
4. Besides stapled $100 bills, Katie continually tried to extract valuables from Charlie. She wanted Charlie to gift his Ferrari to Sigfredo. She demanded that Charlie transfers his boat’s title to her. She demanded a Cadillac Escalade before settling for Dr. Harvey Adelson's Lexus
5. Katie refused to meet Charlie and both his parents at the Adelsons’ place. She demanded to meet in public places where there are other people such as at restaurants and by pool sides.

What could be the reason that unemployed Ms. Magbanua has had so much booty call hold on Dr. Adelson the younger, while the good doctor was professionally busy making stapled $100 bills to fill his refrigerator size safe and privately busy humping Ms. Umchinda?

Besides these people's multiple personality disorders, if you have not heard the drollery news about them, here goes one. “Since her divorce, every time Wendi and Donna were at a wedding Donna says “you are next”, which pressure irritates Wendi greatly. Hence, Wendi says the same thing to Donna at funerals.”
 
Last edited:

Dorothy Jane

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
156
Reaction score
1,690
I listened to a podcast yesterday with a "legal roundtable" discussion on this case. A defense attorney was speculating about a possible defense for Charlie. That he admits hiring the hitmen to "rough up" DM, but not to kill him and that they went rogue. He would really have to take the stand to try and pull that off and explain ALL the wiretaps that say nothing of the sort, but still, interesting. That defense attorney even admitted that the evidence against him is overwhelming. I'm still hoping he takes a deal, if one is offered--for giving up Donna and/or Wendi.
Good question.

Charlie is in the jail system right now. Leon County--ironically he's back in Tallahassee where they were trying to break free from. I hope they all 3 end up back there one day.

What I want to know is has Donna tried to visit him--or any of them? I doubt Wendi would.

And as an aside- I can see the Lewisburg Pen tower from my back patio (from a distance!). And a former warden is my next door neighbor.
I watched a Youtube with a similar discussion. I am not sure if I think GC wants Charlie to go to trial or would prefer a deal. Probably a deal, but I do think she wants him locked away for good and that might require a trial.

As far as Donna and Wendi visiting ... My gut feeling is this is a family that can cut you out like cancer. Look what they have done to to the elder son. I just can't fathom why you would distance yourself from a beloved son who is responsible, is a Dr. with a nice family, simply over who they chose to marry.

I can understand cutting out a family member who is a drug addict and steals relentlessly from you (as happened to my mother with my estranged sister) but that is more in the mode of self preservation. But a functioning member of society for such a ridiculous reason?

So, I guess I can see them suddenly cutting Charlie OFF. which might make for interesting deal making!
 

KidonGadol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
411
Reaction score
1,723
I listened to a podcast yesterday with a "legal roundtable" discussion on this case. A defense attorney was speculating about a possible defense for Charlie. That he admits hiring the hitmen to "rough up" DM, but not to kill him and that they went rogue. He would really have to take the stand to try and pull that off and explain ALL the wiretaps that say nothing of the sort, but still, interesting. That defense attorney even admitted that the evidence against him is overwhelming. I'm still hoping he takes a deal, if one is offered--for giving up Donna and/or Wendi.
Of the two obvious defenses (the other being that KM planned it all and solicited CA with a finished plan and hitmen all lined up so he has diminished responsibility), I think the rough up one has the most problems. Given that KM appears to show no interest in testifying for or against CA at the moment the "KM planned it all and solicited CA " idea has a chance of flying. For instance there are zero calls from CA to either Rivera or SG. - which suggests that KM solicited them both. (in fact she solicited only SG). His attorneys could offer to accept a second degree murder plea on this basis. Don't forget that the current paperwork shows that CA and KM are up on the same charge set at the moment. This could change after KM is sentenced. However her solicitation finding appears to apply only to the legal fact that she solicited SG - not that she solicited CA. That latter matter remains open. Blind Freddy can see that CA solicited her (group) of course. For instance Rivera claimed in the proffer that a $5K travelling money transaction was made. KM did not have that sort of money. This statement was never tested in court , likely because Rivera was the nominated hit man on the first trip and the prosecution did not want to discuss that too much.

The main problems with the "rough up " theory being that Rivera knew he was going to be paid $35K * [which seems very large for a criminal assault] (This suggests SG was going to be paid about that or a bit more ) , the purchase of a throw away firearm and the fact that only two men, one of whom had to stay in the car, went both times to " rough someone up". * The defense could say that Rivera knew the amount only after the killing and there's not a lot of evidence to disprove that.
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
Perhaps, you are alluding to the situation whereas several curious facts already in the court records did not get to be discussed in the previous Magbanua trials. I expect the State Attorneys to evoke some of these curious facts in Charles Adelson’s trial to the extent they may show the dynamics of Charles Adelson’s criminal behavior.

Below are few curious facts about Katherine Diana Magbanua’s life in 2016 that were not discussed much in her Dan Markel murder trials:

1. Magbanua was always packed, at home and in her car, although she admitted that she does not have neither concealed nor open carry permit
2. While Dr. Adelson was steady with Ms. Umchinda, Ms. Magbanua went back to live with Mr. Garcia. However, Katie Diana and Charlie continued to see and to know each other aside
3. Magbanua and Garcia have had a tumultuous relationship and Magbanua threatened to breakup multiple times. Surprisingly, Charlie was the one coaching Katie not to breakup with Sigfredo
4. Besides stapled $100 bills, Katie continually tried to extract valuables from Charlie. She wanted Charlie to gift his Ferrari to Sigfredo. She demanded that Charlie transfers his boat’s title to her. She demanded a Cadillac Escalade before settling for Dr. Harvey Adelson's Lexus
5. Katie refused to meet Charlie and both his parents at the Adelsons’ place. She demanded to meet in public places where there are other people such as at restaurants and by pool sides.

What could be the reason that unemployed Ms. Magbanua has had so much booty call hold on Dr. Adelson the younger, while the good doctor was professionally busy making stapled $100 bills to fill his refrigerator size safe and privately busy humping Ms. Umchinda?

Besides these people's multiple personality disorders, if you have not heard the drollery news about them, here goes one. “Since her divorce, every time Wendi and Donna were at a wedding Donna says “you are next”, which pressure irritates Wendi greatly. Hence, Wendi says the same thing to Donna at funerals.”
I always look forward to your posts. I did not know about that highlighted portion above about the vehicles!

Seems the very thing he was worried about with the "blackmailer" was exactly the situation he was stuck in with KM. What was it he called it...a "leech"?

Is that last quote for real??? (I just googled drollery and I'm thinking this is a joke...and thinking you are posting from the UK ;) )
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
Of the two obvious defenses (the other being that KM planned it all and solicited CA with a finished plan and hitmen all lined up so he has diminished responsibility), I think the rough up one has the most problems. Given that KM appears to show no interest in testifying for or against CA at the moment the "KM planned it all and solicited CA " idea has a chance of flying. For instance there are zero calls from CA to either Rivera or SG. - which suggests that KM solicited them both. (in fact she solicited only SG). His attorneys could offer to accept a second degree murder plea on this basis. Don't forget that the current paperwork shows that CA and KM are up on the same charge set at the moment. This could change after KM is sentenced. However her solicitation finding appears to apply only to the legal fact that she solicited SG - not that she solicited CA. That latter matter remains open. Blind Freddy can see that CA solicited her (group) of course. For instance Rivera claimed in the proffer that a $5K travelling money transaction was made. KM did not have that sort of money. This statement was never tested in court , likely because Rivera was the nominated hit man on the first trip and the prosecution did not want to discuss that too much.

The main problems with the "rough up " theory being that Rivera knew he was going to be paid $35K * [which seems very large for a criminal assault] (This suggests SG was going to be paid about that or a bit more ) , the purchase of a throw away firearm and the fact that only two men, one of whom had to stay in the car, went both times to " rough someone up". * The defense could say that Rivera knew the amount only after the killing and there's not a lot of evidence to disprove that.

I seriously doubt the State would go with a 2nd degree offer with so much on Charlie. Unless significant details implicating Donna and/or Wendi was involved. What do you think?

Good point on the traveling monies--those kind of seemingly "small" details can really hang things up for defendants.

(I once watched a trial where a son killed his wealthy mother and claimed she grabbed a VCR machine out of his hands and ran up the stairs with it, then fell to her death from the landing at the top. Wearing a long flannel nightgown. Being a man who didn't wear long nightgowns, he missed the part where she would surely trip over it going up the stairs with her hands full--and that detail was significant in getting him convicted. I've never forgotten that)
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
I watched a Youtube with a similar discussion. I am not sure if I think GC wants Charlie to go to trial or would prefer a deal. Probably a deal, but I do think she wants him locked away for good and that might require a trial.

As far as Donna and Wendi visiting ... My gut feeling is this is a family that can cut you out like cancer. Look what they have done to to the elder son. I just can't fathom why you would distance yourself from a beloved son who is responsible, is a Dr. with a nice family, simply over who they chose to marry.

I can understand cutting out a family member who is a drug addict and steals relentlessly from you (as happened to my mother with my estranged sister) but that is more in the mode of self preservation. But a functioning member of society for such a ridiculous reason?

So, I guess I can see them suddenly cutting Charlie OFF. which might make for interesting deal making!
I also think Wendi and Donna would and will throw him under the bus like yesterday's garbage and have already discussed that. But that comes at a big risk to them right now. It's a fascinating game of chess with a soup of personality disorders thrown in.
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,623
Reaction score
14,186
CA might try a similar defense as Dr. Leon Jacob -

He is sticking to his story that he never wanted to kill anyone.

Jacob insists he was desperate following the breakup with his ex-girlfriend Meghan Verikas. He admits hiring a person he characterizes as a private investigator to find her because she had shut off all contact with him. But Jacob insists he just wanted to reconcile.

"We had multiple discussions about not wanting to harm or hurt anybody," he said. "I never asked for anybody to be hurt, killed, harmed, kidnapped."

"It doesn't make me guilty of solicitation of capital murder. I'm not on trial for being a womanizer," said Jacob. He continued, "You can assassinate my character all you want up here but it doesn't make me guilty of solicitation of capital murder."

You do know that that defense didn't work and that Leon Jacob got Life for his murder-for-hire scheme, and that there was also evidence that he had stalked Meghan don't you?
 

Sherubbian

Former Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2022
Messages
61
Reaction score
370
I always look forward to your posts. I did not know about that highlighted portion above about the vehicles!

Seems the very thing he was worried about with the "blackmailer" was exactly the situation he was stuck in with KM. What was it he called it...a "leech"?

Is that last quote for real??? (I just googled drollery and I'm thinking this is a joke...and thinking you are posting from the UK ;) )

About the first quote you highlighted, LE wrote in court records to the effect that “it seems Charlie wanted to keep Katie happy”. Hence, it is hoped that Katie and Charlie’s 2016 interactions will come up in court this time with some details to showcase the underlying of Charlie’s criminal behavior. After all, Charlie is taped directing Katie to kill an UC FBI agent.

The last quote is a joke, obviously. It is my hope you laughed. I grew up in my grandfather's household who spoke British English but I completed my undergrad in CA. I went to grad schools and worked in multiple States, and now I work and settle in TX. Somehow, I find UK English jokes to be fancier than US English jokes!
 
Last edited:

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,623
Reaction score
14,186
I believe that June told us her name is Bri.
I may be wrong, but Bri or Brianna is not an Old-Testament name - but Irish in origin.
Could the Adelson's be hiring heathen Catholic Irish workers as menial laborers, like in the early 19th Century?

Anyway - does the public record imply that CA (or the A's more generally) were disputing paternity?
Would there be a child-support order too?
You are correct that the name Brianna is not an Old Testament name. It is of Celtic origin. Irish/Scottish. I named my daughter Brianna partly because my husband has both Scottish and Irish ancestry, and we gave her a Hebrew name for my grandmothers, one of whose names started with a B.
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,623
Reaction score
14,186
How about 3 or 4 at once? Has that ever happened?
Yes. Just saw a Dateline with Keith Morrison where that happened. Can't remember which one though. 4 defendants in one family tried together, although one was boyfriend of mother. I think 2/4 got convicted- mother and oldest son. Wasn't as strong of evidence against the other two-mother's boyfriend and younger son. I believe his name was Alex. The victim was the father, ex-husband. Keith interviewed the 4 defense teams in one room after the trial. They were each trying to throw their co-defendants under the bus- the "he did it" defense.
 
Last edited:

KidonGadol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
411
Reaction score
1,723
Perhaps, you are alluding to the situation whereas several curious facts already in the court records did not get to be discussed in the previous Magbanua trials. I expect the State Attorneys to evoke some of these curious facts in Charles Adelson’s trial to the extent they may show the dynamics of Charles Adelson’s criminal behavior.

Below are few curious facts about Katherine Diana Magbanua’s life in 2016 that were not discussed much in her Dan Markel murder trials:

Snip
5. Katie refused to meet a. Charlie and both his parents at the Adelsons’ place. b. She demanded to meet in public places where there are other people such as at restaurants and by pool sides.
I've added the letters a and b.

a. I'd say if this is provable it is more likely to have come from Charlie than KM. He'd know that his mother would absolutely despise a poor "latino" and Charlie had uses for KM before the crime (and afterwards).
b. The meeting at Dolce V was set up by CJA not KM. He set it up at the last minute in case (I believe he thought) she was in on the extortion racket. There may have been lesser meetings in restaurants but they don't seem to be documented , certainly not in the period April 2016 until Oct 1st 2016, when KM was arrested. This was the period when the wire taps were active and you'd think that extra meetings would have come up in reported conversations.
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
About the first quote you highlighted, LE wrote in court records to the effect that “it seems Charlie wanted to keep Katie happy”. Hence, it is hoped that Katie and Charlie’s 2016 interactions will come up in court this time with some details to showcase the underlying of Charlie’s criminal behavior. After all, Charlie is taped directing Katie to kill an UC FBI agent.

The last quote is a joke, obviously. It is my hope you laughed. I grew up in my grandfather's household who spoke British English but I completed my undergrad in CA. I went to grad schools and worked in multiple States, and now I work and settle in TX. Somehow, I find UK English jokes to be fancier than US English jokes!

As I told my husband, although I consider myself pretty well-versed in trial discussions, I find myself playing with a LOT better tennis players on this board than me. Which is really good for my brain. Likely because the victim in this case was such an intellectual, educated, articulate and well known in those arenas. With that being said, I had to google before I laughed. ;)
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
The just wanting to rough him up defense is a big No. Completely Implausible. And CA would almost certainly need to get on the stand to advance that theory. Not going to happen. JMO.
Oh how I would love to see that. I'm guessing though, since he fancies himself such a "smartest guy in the room" who loves to hear himself speak more than anything, it's going to take some convincing to keep him off the stand. I'd personally love to see it. I wonder who would do the cross.
 

katiecoolady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
1,105
Website
www.twoinnocents.wordpress.com
I've added the letters a and b.

a. I'd say if this is provable it is more likely to have come from Charlie than KM. He'd know that his mother would absolutely despise a poor "latino" and Charlie had uses for KM before the crime (and afterwards).
b. The meeting at Dolce V was set up by CJA not KM. He set it up at the last minute in case (I believe he thought) she was in on the extortion racket. There may have been lesser meetings in restaurants but they don't seem to be documented , certainly not in the period April 2016 until Oct 1st 2016, when KM was arrested. This was the period when the wire taps were active and you'd think that extra meetings would have come up in reported conversations.

What are the chances that there are significant documented wiretaps that we just have heard nothing about because they weren't relevant to the prosecution of KM and SG?
 

AlferdPacker

Former Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2022
Messages
55
Reaction score
226
I've added the letters a and b.

b. The meeting at Dolce V was set up by CJA not KM. He set it up at the last minute in case (I believe he thought) she was in on the extortion racket. There may have been lesser meetings in restaurants but they don't seem to be documented , certainly not in the period April 2016 until Oct 1st 2016, when KM was arrested. This was the period when the wire taps were active and you'd think that extra meetings would have come up in reported conversations.

Pretty sure this is incorrect and that KM insisted on meeting in public rather than meeting at CA"s condo.
What "lesser meetings" in restaurants are you referring to? The one at Monti's was discussed at trial, same with the sushi restaurant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top