FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *3 guilty* #14

[MTW2011]

GC has been like this for the last 2 trials as well imo. She’s not a methodical, detail oriented prosecutor like many I’ve seen over the years. She doesn’t use silence effectively. She doesn’t use sarcasm or incredulity effectively. She has rushed through all the witnesses so far. She finished Luis Rivera’s direct exam in 30 minutes! That’s crazy! She asks a lot of leading questions and Rashbaum lets her get away with it. I remember Hankinson called her out a couple times during the 1st trial.

I will say her frustration has shown much more in this trial. She’s way more rushed this time.

It’s only DAY 2!!! And she’s already making little snide comments under her breath. Not a good look. This jury knows nothing about this case. They are not convinced Charlie is guilty like we are. And it’s part of a prosecutor’s job to build rapport with a jury and get them to like and trust her! She rushed through Rivera today without asking about Garcia and Magbanua’s relationship and children!!

JMO

You articulated many of the thoughts I found myself having too so well.

I also very much agree on the rushing of witnesses, Rivera being called so early and being questioned so quickly, it did feel rushed to me!

Her comments of “didn’t we all” or whatever remark she made after questioning when Wendi learned of the “extortion” seemed unprofessional & inappropriate; I was surprised defense didn’t more strongly object to the comments she was making like that!

Even her question to Rivera of not “getting his info from a blog” and “no, not blonde, a blog” (as he seemed to think she said Blonde and he thought “blonde lady” or something) seemed more like a jab at defense arguments than a strategic question to elicit important testimony for this jury. I’m sure she thinks she has a strong case, and certainly she’s gotten convictions in it already, but as others here have said the jury doesn’t have all the context we have from the previous trials, and the only “slam dunk” for her this time around is the defense theory so far seems beyond far-fetched and ridiculous that it may not matter if she continues in this manner for the rest of the trial. And I’m not saying it’s bad, but she’s often come across as disinterested, not great at letting some answers linger in the air for the jury before immediately jumping to the next question, and some other stuff we’ve seen of other prosecutors in other cases. JMOO though.

 

[Snoopster]

Here are some:

DM - Dan Markel, the victim
GC - Georgia Cappelman, lead prosecutor
SD - Sarah Dugan, prosecutor
DR - Daniel Rashbaum, CA's attorney
WA - Wendi Adelson, DM's ex-wife
CA - Charlie Adelson, WA's brother
DA - Donna Adelson, mother WA and CA
HA - Harvey Adelson, father of WA and CA
LR - Luis Rivera, participated in the murder, pled guilty to 2nd degree murder, a cooperating witness for the state
SG - Sigfredo Garcia, convicted of murder, serving life, father of KM's 2 children
KM - Katherine (Katie) Magbanua -convicted of murder, serving life, CA's ex-girlfriend, SG's ex-girlfriend
JU - June Umchinda, CA's ex-girlfriend
JL - Jeff Lacasse, WA's ex-boyfriend

Thank you! This is very helpful.

 

[Gypsy Road]

I just had a random thought. I wonder if there are any new jail phone conversations going on now between KM and SG given this new defense theory. KM has to have caught wind of CA throwing her under the bus by now. I wonder what she’s thinking of if it even upsets her?

 

[Marysmith]

This was from when LR pleaded guilty in 2016:

“There was $100,000 in cash waiting once the murder was done.
Garcia, who would take $40,000, promised him $35,000.
The rest, and then some, went to Garcia’s on-and-off girlfriend Katherine Magbanua, Rivera said.”

Rivera: 'We were coming up here to kill somebody'

Rivera says he, Garcia and Magbanua split $100k for Markel hit

www.tallahassee.com

(LR has testified he actually got $37K on July 19 because SG gave him a few grand of his take.)
Also notable they knew the dollar figures upfront when they went to Tallahassee on the first trip in early June. LR also testified that SG had a few grand extra to bring on each trip for expenses, money presumably provided by KM. So is the CA defense that KM funded all this herself up front? Another reason the extortion after the fact story is weak.

Very weak! No way she had that kind of money.

 

[flay012995]

Very weak! No way she had that kind of money.

But she used to work at service industry like Club Fate... She testified that she was earning a lot of money around the time before/after murder.

 

[Marysmith]

But she used to work at service industry like Club Fate... She testified that she was earning a lot of money around the time before/after murder.

Right… ugh…

 

[Marysmith]

Hoping CA will flip soon and have everyone who has not been charged face their day in court. JMO

Maybe he’s waiting for the outcome and will do a proffer himself if needed. If he’s convicted for sure he’s doing life IMO.

 

[Mariposa]

There was a podcast series about this case some years ago called Over My Dead Body: Tally. Looking back at that podcast, one very interesting thing was that the oldest Adelson sibling, Rob, who is a doctor in New York State, was interviewed. In episode 5, there’s a story about his family razzing him with the nickname Honest Abe because once he got extra change back at a food stand and gave the change back. It implied that honesty was not a family value for that family. The podcast also covered about how his parents rejected him for falling in love with a non Jewish woman, which led him to marry someone more acceptable to them, but the marriage was very brief. Eventually he married and had children with the woman they had not wanted him to marry.

anyway, in episode 6 of the podcast, it is mentioned about Rob attending with his family HA’s 70th birthday in early July 2014. I know his name was on the witness list so given GC asking WA about that birthday event, it made me think. Later in episode 6 he describes being told about DM’s murder and how surprised he was that none of the other Adelsons wanted to discuss it at all or seemed curious what happened. In 2016 when arrests were made and the police implicated the family in a plot, he stopped speaking to HA/DA/WA/CA.

Season Detail - Wondery - Feel the Story

wondery.com

 

[Seattle1]

the interview continues, interview took place in Nov 2022:
'RM: We're only at a stage where the door is open, like a crack in the door. We did try to get some Zooms on the boys' birthdays to wish them happy birthday. We were successful. We made other attempts to get visits, which didn't materialize, but just recently, I asked Wendi for a visit in December, and she approved, she confirmed it. So that'll be the next visit. We saw the boys, we had contact with them in April, and now I'm really hopeful that I will get to see them in December. So we're, you know, it's a rocky ship still, but it's more open communication. And although small, but it's working in the right direction, very incremental, small steps. And so forth.'

( I can't tell whether they were allowed to attend barmitzvah because link says that just before, April 21st 2022 , Charlie was arrested)

^^rsbm

I believe the book was published before Ruth was able to confirm that in addition to zoom greetings, the Markel family had two in person visits with their grandsons in 2022: April and December.

It's my understanding from listening to a couple of podcasts with Ruth that following CA's arrest on April 21, 2022, the Bar Mitzvah was rescheduled from May 14 to sometime in December, and we know the Markel grandparents saw the grandchildren in December 2022.

IMO, I think Ruth knows she can't control the perpetual rumor and prefers not to give the subject any air. In other words, she knows it's not in the best interest of the grandsons or her family to discuss any visits publicly, and would rather take the road that keeps the door open to visitation.

I haven't read Ruth's book but have watched some of her interviews. I didn't get the impression they had much access prior to the temp foster care thing

The lack of access with the grandchildren corresponded with the arrest of the co-defendants in 2016. Ruth is honest and fair about having access from 2014-2016 until the arrests.

When WA lies saying the Markel’s could see the boys any time, GC should’ve asked if they were invited to the Bar Mitzvah. They weren’t, a huge affront.

So true! The Markels were actually invited to the Bar Mitzvah but that invitation was rescinded when they arrested Charlie a couple days before the event.

Although I often see this misrepresentation continued to be reported, it's not true.

Whether or not prompted by ratification of the bill, Wendi invited the all of the Markels (including Shelly's family) to the Bar Mitzvah initially scheduled for around May 14 (just before KM's retrial date).

After the Markels suggested seeing the grandchildren privately a day before the Bar Mitzvah, Wendi suggested they have an earlier in-person visit and suggested a visit in April. (The first April date Wendi suggested fell on Passover and Wendi apologized. I've previously opined about Wendi suggesting inconvenient dates so this came as no surprise).

The Markels arrived from Canada a day earlier to spend time with the boys. FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE 2016, THEY SAW THE BOYS IN PERSON on April 20, 2022!

However, what occurred following the visit was unexpected: CA was arrested and charged for Dan's death on April 21.

It wasn't that the invitation was rescinded but the May 14, Bar Mitzvah date was canceled. The Markels were again invited to attend the re-scheduled Bar Mitzvah which was held sometime in December 2022.

What is not known is whether or not the Markels were invited to the youngest grandson's Bar Mitzvah which was alleged to be happening fall of 2023.

Ruth Markel talks about her search to find meaning after the murder of her son, Dan

Just days after the eighth anniversary of Dan Markel’s murder, his Toronto family is now gearing up for another emotional milestone.

thecjn.ca

 

[cottonweaver]

If the prosecutor theory is right and WA did that drive to see if the deed was done, I wonder if she planned that in advance or did it impulsively. Neither was too smart.

It’s just so strange that her story changes about this depending on when she’s asked.

Impulsively. My guess is she was on edge, adrenalin was pumping. (The hit was happening but she hadn't known exactly what moment it was to take place and also nobody had received the tip-off once it had occurred- LR & SG had turned their phones off & didn't switch back on until many miles away) To her it was worth the risk because she can talk her way out of it later if need be.

imo she changes her story because she can. While she has limited immunity she'll keep on tweaking her testimony, aiming for the most convincing version. She wants to win.

I have forgotten so much since last trial
- was it ever proven she had comm'd her family while she was in the car? ( In order for Katie to have been able to reply to Sigfriedo ' I know.' We know the Adelsons love their secret codes, so it's possible she could've used a signalling technique such as posting or liking a FB post etc)
- was she ever confirmed to be a whatsapp user? ( Isom downloaded her phone)
- Isom asked her if she had more than one phone ( But she was never searched)

 

[Seattle1]

It’s really quite pathetic that JU still has feelings for CA after it’s obvious he had Dan murdered. Say - even if he didn’t, he’s still not exactly an upstanding gentleman. She does seem super shallow however, and materialistic…so maybe quality virtues in a man aren’t a priority for her.

I think this might be known in some circles as a gold digger. Just sayin...

 

[Seattle1]

I have forgotten so much since last trial
- was it ever proven she had comm'd her family while she was in the car? ( In order for Katie to have been able to reply to Sigfriedo ' I know.' We know the Adelsons love their secret codes, so it's possible she could've used a technique such as posting or liking a FB post etc)
- was she ever confirmed to be a whatsapp user? ( Isom downloaded her phone)
- Isom asked her if she had more than one phone ( But she was never searched)

^^rsbm

I've forgotten too! I'm just recalling KM contacting SG during the 2nd trip to Tallahassee where she wanted him to get LR to immediately remove a social media post of an owl. Was this perhaps a code sign or was KM just afraid it could be traced to his location on that date?

 

[Seattle1]

I thought the cop on the stand who was at the roadblock said he knew she drove that type of car. How would he know that?

I think he said it was a Honda Odyssey he saw turn around and he recognized the model because his wife drove one. I'm assuming this is what WA was driving at the time.

 

[Seattle1]

They haven't released info about how they located Wendi at the restaurant. As an aside, in the Isom interview it came out that they towed her car from the restaurant to the police station. Wendi apparently did not know that until Isom told her at the police station.

I believe LE pinged WA's phone to locate her at the lunch restaurant. I want to say police mentioned this during the 5 hour interrogation. Maybe it was the friend who arrived and sat with WA at the PD that asked. MOO

 

[Seattle1]

HUNTER EXCLUSIVE: How targeted murder of Dan Markel went down

Two hitmen and a facilitator were arrested on May 25, 2016, and charged with first-degree murder in the death of professor Daniel Markel.

torontosun.com

9/24/22

Recently, Ruth and her former husband Phil, visited their grandchildren for the first time in six, long years.

“It couldn’t have gone better, we asked if they could give us a hug and they ran right to us and hugged and kissed us,” Ruth said. “There was no awkwardness or discomfort at all. They remembered us.”

She added: “This was real, true grief.”

Earlier, she was asked by a reporter what she would say to the Adelson family. It is stark.

“I wouldn’t send them a message, but I believe this is a time for reflection,” Ruth said. “I would ask them, ‘Was it worth it?’”

The police investigation into the murder of Dan Markel continues.

 

[vislaw]

The defense opening strongly suggests that Charlie will take the stand. However, Jose Baez famously made a series of sensational claims in his opening for Casey Anthony that suggested she would need to take the stand as well, and we all know how that came out. It's possible the defense will close without calling Charlie and claim that "the State never proved its case so Charlie doesn't have to testify." There's no way that would work here IMHO because we have two trials completed with convicted murderers, unlike Casey Anthony's situation.

IF Charlie does take the stand and spins the story that he and his mom were being blackmailed I believe doing so will punch the ticket to indict DA immediately after the verdict no matter what the verdict is. Until now bringing charges against Donna would have allowed her to have a decent chance of acquittal by not putting on a case. If Charlie affirmatively testifies that his mother knew who the murderers were and was involved in paying them off, it changes the dynamics in the courtroom dramatically.

For one thing, I believe Charlie's testimony, if true, would still constitute criminal acts on Donna's part. I haven't studied Florida law, but I'd bet money that such conduct would be covered one way or the other by aiding and abetting theories and possibly misprision of a felony. Of course, the State has no interest in nailing Donna on such lesser crimes, but the fact that it would constitute criminal conduct would be useful to the State in any case. Charlie's obviously false story implicating his mother would put her defense counsel in a very tough position. Donna would be charged with murder and conspiracy to commit murder and Charlie's porky pie lies coming into evidence would put enormous pressure on Donna to have to take the stand in an attempt to shore up the crazy defense. She might try to say Charlie duped her and didn't tell her the whole story but who would ever believe her.

It would be a tragedy if this jury acquits Charlie on this crazy strategy, but I believe if he testifies it will lead to his mother's conviction. Right now Charlie has rolled the dice feeling his best chance is to present to the jury two scenarios: 1) He participated in arranging the hit on Dan; or 2) The killers figured they would kill Dan and then shake down Charlie for money. It seems pretty clear that its a long shot that a jury would pick #2 as the most likely given the evidence we know about. So, Charlie laying out this long shot claim under oath will essentially set up the same equation for his mother unless she concocts yet another explanation as to her actions.

I do wish Donna and Wendy had been named as co-defendants in this case. However, I also believe Charlie's wild defense here is going to essentially seal his mother's fate and will result in charges very soon after this trial is over.

 

[amicuscurie]

^^rsbm

I've forgotten too! I'm just recalling KM contacting SG during the 2nd trip to Tallahassee where she wanted him to get LR to immediately remove a social media post of an owl. Was this perhaps a code sign or was KM just afraid it could be traced to his location on that date?

Why didn’t Georgia ask him about this? This shows Katie knew about the plot. I feel like there was some agreement we don’t know about that she was only allowed to ask Rivera certain things, or something. She skipped over a lot of stuff. The owl is very important, that he posted it and Katie told him to take it down. i still don’t get whether the defense is arguing that Katie was extorting him, or that the others were extorting him and Katie told him about it. That was unclear. It sounded to me like she came to him and told him the others killed Dan and wanted money. (There is plenty of evidence he gave Katie money. Are they arguing that she gave it to the others?). If Katie was extorting him, then I guess they concede that Katie knew about it in advance? But, still. When did the state know about this new theory? Why isn’t her examination of Rivera the same as it was in the prior trials? The owl, the previous trip to Tallahassee, the drug dealer, shooting a hole in the car. It’s a great story, and he tells it well. He’s a direct eye witness.

 

[amicuscurie]

I think he said it was a Honda Odyssey he saw turn around and he recognized the model because his wife drove one. I'm assuming this is what WA was driving at the time.

I know, but he also said he knew WENDI drove one. I mean, he knew at the time. That’s the impression I got. How would he know, within an hour of the murder, the kind of car Wendi drove? Did the police tell him to be on the lookout for her?

 

[Missyrocks5]

I think GC asked Wendi questions and is allowing the jury to draw their own conclusions about whether the answers are truthful. So she does not follow- up
With actual access dates, IMO. She uses questions to others to counter Wendi’s claims - from Lacasse and from DM lawyer. Allows the jurors to draw their conclusions, which shows respect to these jurors. Surely the closing arguments will pull this all together. I think the deep in the details of the previous trials may have led to some boredom. With this quick pace seems to me to be very interesting and will keep jurors engaged and hearing details and watching people’s behavior on the stand.

I hope that is the case. I'm concerned that many can't draw conclusions and need a detailed map to find their way. What i think she likely will do is take it home in closing. That's when she can fill it all in for them, particuarly in the State's rebuttal.

Defense can't counter that. She gets the closing thoughts. I hipe that inckudes a chart of the top 10-15 reasons why there is no way that defense can be true.

 

[Weki]

I believe Charlie has to testify and he will. If he says Donna knew of the extortion and helped arrange the payouts, I don’t know how that would lead to Donna being indicted. First of all there is no way that Rashbaum will do anything that would implicate Donna. Donna is pulling the strings in this defense - we can count on that.

Secondly, there is no way Charlie’s testimony would be admitted in Donna’s trial as proof she was in on it. Charlie would have to testify at Donna’s trial to get that in, which is not going to happen. State can’t compel him while he’s waiting out his appeals.

MOO