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

[Marvin Berry]

The docket indicates that Katie's proffers were provided to Charlie's counsel yesterday (it says there are 3).

 

[yazoost]

So the judge scheduled a hearing just before the state provided the proffer to the defense. It's clear that the motion itself would not stop a public records request. The proffer must have been completed very recently and there was nothing for the public to request until now. 99.99% certain he seals it.

 

[Niner]

So the judge scheduled a hearing just before the state provided the proffer to the defense. It's clear that the motion itself would not stop a public records request. The proffer must have been completed very recently and there was nothing for the public to request until now. 99.99% certain he seals it.

So - still case management hearing on 2/24 & motions hearing (re seal proffer) on 2/28/23 still a go?

TIA!

 

[clearskies1]

So - still case management hearing on 2/24 & motions hearing (re seal proffer) on 2/28/23 still a go?

TIA!

They are both still listed on the docket.

 

[dotr]

On the Docket: Law Professor Murder-for-Hire

VIDEO: Charlie Adelson is accused of hiring of men to kill his ex brother-in-law, FSU law professor Dan Markel. (2/14/23)

www.courttv.com

''ON THE DOCKET: LAW PROFESSOR MURDER-FOR-HIRE​

Charlie Adelson is accused of hiring of men to kill his ex brother-in-law, FSU law professor Dan Markel. 3 people are already serving time in connection with the 2014 murder. (2/14/23) MORE''

 

[Niner]

They are both still listed on the docket.

Thanks!

 

[vislaw]

The docket indicates that Katie's proffers were provided to Charlie's counsel yesterday (it says there are 3).

Wow ... Cannot wait to see what she says!

 

[TheLoadedGoat]

Next court date 2/24.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Just watched a livestream with Fanci Fiction and she read out WCTV and Court TVs opposing motion to deny Adelson's request to seal Magbanua''s proffers. I dont have a copy, so hopefully someone can dig that up. Spoiler: the media lawyers laid the smack down on Rashbaum. Hopefully the overly cautious Judge Wheeler sees it the same way. I guess we will find out soon!

ps - hope you are all well....

 

[BSBC]

Just watched a livestream with Fanci Fiction and she read out WCTV and Court TVs opposing motion to deny Adelson's request to seal Magbanua''s proffers. I dont have a copy, so hopefully someone can dig that up. Spoiler: the media lawyers laid the smack down on Rashbaum. Hopefully the overly cautious Judge Wheeler sees it the same way. I guess we will find out soon!

ps - hope you are all well....

Here's WCTV/CourtTV brief opposing CA's motion to keep the KM proffer secret until trial, which I think is very strong -- certainly much stronger than CA's motion.

 

[Marvin Berry]

Here's WCTV/CourtTV brief opposing CA's motion to keep the KM proffer secret until trial, which I think is very strong -- certainly much stronger than CA's motion.

Agreed. The response is well drafted and persuasive. To be fair, Rashbaum didn't have the proffers when he drafted the motion, so it is understandably short on details. I would hope he has more specific points during oral argument (or potentially in a reply brief). I'm also curious whether the State will take a position now that the motion has been opposed. If the proffers contain evidence that may lead to the arrest of co-conspirators, GC may ask to keep it sealed.

 

[Marvin Berry]

Charlie just filed a (short) motion for continuance of trial until late July or August.

Rashbaum says that everyone has been diligent, but they need more time "given the sheer volume of discover, the seriousness of the charges, and the need to complete our own investigation..."

 

[Marvin Berry]

Charlie just filed a (short) motion for continuance of trial until late July or August.

Rashbaum says that everyone has been diligent, but they need more time "given the sheer volume of discover, the seriousness of the charges, and the need to complete our own investigation..."

Case management conference that was set for 2/24 has been moved to 2/28 at 10:00am (same time as the hearing on motion to seal the proffers).

 

[Snacky]

Charlie just filed a (short) motion for continuance of trial until late July or August.

Rashbaum says that everyone has been diligent, but they need more time "given the sheer volume of discover, the seriousness of the charges, and the need to complete our own investigation..."

Would their request for more time be a result of KM's proffer? Probably an obvious question, but I'm wondering if Team Rashbaum is considering other strategies post proffer. I'm espcially interested in the substance of their "own investigation". Guessing they would pin the murder on SG, framing him as the lovelorn Latin King who'll do whatever it takes to win back his ex.

 

[BearWatcher]

Since Charlie’s attorney has access to the proffer, is there any reason that this information would be prohibited from sharing with any of the potential co-conspirators (or their attorneys’) who have not been charged? If there is a requirement not to share, could it still be done and tip the hand of anyone who has not been charged yet, due to minimal repercussions if it is shared?

 

[Wishbone]

Since Charlie’s attorney has access to the proffer, is there any reason that this information would be prohibited from sharing with any of the potential co-conspirators (or their attorneys’) who have not been charged? If there is a requirement not to share, could it still be done and tip the hand of anyone who has not been charged yet, due to minimal repercussions if it is shared?

Not sure, but couldn't Charlie himself share that info with his family if he wished to?

 

[Snacky]

Since Charlie’s attorney has access to the proffer, is there any reason that this information would be prohibited from sharing with any of the potential co-conspirators (or their attorneys’) who have not been charged? If there is a requirement not to share, could it still be done and tip the hand of anyone who has not been charged yet, due to minimal repercussions if it is shared?

This is a fascinating question. I don't know the legal prohibitions involved but if the proffer reveals that Donna, Wendi and/or Harvey are soon to be charged, Rashbaum may position himself ($$$) to be involved in their trials as well. Could be a savvy way to extend his client list and billable hours. Then again, I have no idea how any of this works; it may be illegal for him to engage co-conspirators.

 

[Ferpo]

I don't know how to post it here but the Rashhbaum Continuance filing explicitly points out "WhatsApp chats" in the list of discovery material that they will need to review. Is this new evidence? I believe it was understood during the KM trials that WhatsApp (WA) conversations are encrypted and not preserved/archived on the server side but is it likely that they would still be available on a handset, if recovered (via the Proffer arrangement)? Alternatively, critical WA screen shots could have been stashed somewhere by KM. I'm not WA-savvy and don't know what is maintained on the handset and for how long.

 

[dotr]

fwiw rbbm

What is traceability and why does WhatsApp oppose it? | WhatsApp Help Center

faq.whatsapp.com

''Some governments are seeking to force technology companies to find out who sent a particular message on private messaging services. This concept is called “traceability.”
Technology and privacy experts have determined that traceability breaks end-to-end encryption and would severely undermine the privacy of billions of people who communicate digitally. Reasonable and proportionate regulations for an increasingly digital world are important, but eroding privacy for everyone, violating human rights, and putting innocent people at risk is not the solution. WhatsApp is committed to doing all we can to protect the privacy of people’s personal messages, which is why we join others in opposing traceability.

How does “traceability” break end-to-end encryption?
WhatsApp deployed end-to-end encryption throughout our app in 2016, so that calls, messages, photos, videos, and voice notes to friends and family are only shared with the intended recipient and no one else (not even us).
“Traceability” is intended to do the opposite by requiring private messaging services like WhatsApp to keep track of who-said-what and who-shared-what for billions of messages sent every day. Traceability requires messaging services to store information that can be used to ascertain the content of people’s messages, thereby breaking the very guarantees that end-to-end encryption provides. In order to trace even one message, services would have to trace every message.

That’s because there is no way to predict which message a government would want to investigate in the future. In doing so, a government that chooses to mandate traceability is effectively mandating a new form of mass surveillance. To comply, messaging services would have to keep giant databases of every message you send, or add a permanent identity stamp -- like a fingerprint -- to private messages with friends, family, colleagues, doctors, and businesses. Companies would be collecting more information about their users at a time when people want companies to have less information about them.''

 

[Snacky]

I don't know how to post it here but the Rashhbaum Continuance filing explicitly points out "WhatsApp chats" in the list of discovery material that they will need to review.

Wow! That's a little nugget...