FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #22

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Not open for further replies.
Yeah I don't think there is any intention to flee. I think she really is a deer in the headlights. Even when she stated on the stand "I'll never be arrested" there was doubt in her voice and a lot of false bravado, but part of her still felt she would never be charged. And she's arrogant, egotistical and a narcissist , however she's still a human (kind of) who is intelligent (kind of) so she knows after her brother was convicted and Mum arrested that her being charged is a distinct possibility.

Is that why she's moved, in anticipation of her being arrested and ensuring the boys have someone to look after them? No, I don't think so. I don't think she gives two *advertiser censored*ks about those boys. The two most important things in most kids lives are their Mum and Dad and she destroyed one of those things. And she's potentially destroyed their lives too. They lost their Dad, and now have no contact with either of their uncles, Grandma and most likely Grandad. They'll soon lose their Mum. So Wendi moved to Austin for Wendi. Probably to escape the fishbowl that is Miami, to distance herself from her Dad and also as a strategy to deny the Markels access to the kids as they are no longer in Florida.
So you think she would leave Miami just to spite the Markels? And uproot the boys?

Inconsistent Argument Regarding WA's Knowledge?​

This is a long one. See TL; DR at the bottom if you don't feel like wading all the way through this.

As noted in my prior posts, I believe that WA was aware of and assisted in the plot to kill DM. I also believe it's important to carefully scrutnize the evidence and not give undue weight to evidence that is easily subject to attack.

For example, I think the argument that WA's "owl t-shirt" and her purchase of "Bulleit" whiskey somehow indicate her guilt is just silly. Conversely, I think her participation in the sham TV repair alibi, her (deleted) text and conversation with CA on the morning of the murder, her drive to, and hasty departure from, the crime scene without asking any questions, and her behavior during her police interview are all quite damning.

I recently relistend to Jeff Lecasse's testimony from CA's trial and one thing in particular jumps out at me.

A portion of Jeff's testimony was elicited to help show that WA knew the murder was going to happen on 7/18/14 because she cancelled a trip that might have prevented her from being in Tallahassee that day. Jeff's tesimony was also elicited to help show WA likely knew about the killers' first trip to Tallahassee on 6/4/14, because, according to JL, she was so beside herself with stress she became physically ill.

Here is the problem: WA cancelled the July trip on 6/4 according to Jeff. Why would she believe -- on 6/4 -- that the murder was going to occur on 7/18 (and thus cancel her trip) if she knew the killers were in town that very day and had not yet left town without committing the crime?
It seems quite the stretch to argue that 7/18 was already picked as the "back-up" date in the event 6/4 was unsuccessful. It also seems a stetch (and inconsistent with LR's testimony) to suggest that the 6/4 trip was only intended to be a "scouting" exercise and that 7/18 was always going to be D-day.

I would be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this. To be clear, I do not think this discrepancy indicates that WA was not a co-conspirator. Rather, I am questioning whether WA's cancellation of her July trip (on 6/4) can actually show that she knew the murder was going to happen on 7/18.

I know some people are loathe to post types of questions that could "help" the defense but the idea that WA's counsel would not be all over this would be a major underestimation IMO.

TL; DR: On June 4, 2014, how can both things be true: (1) WA knew the killers were in town for the first trip and (2) WA cancelled her July trip because she knew the killers would be back in town on 7/18
She cancelled the trip not because the murder was to occur on 7/18, but because she thought the murder would occur 6/4-5, and she wouldn't be with him anymore.
It just so happens that the murder didn’t happen in June.
Maybe coincidence?
So you think she would leave Miami just to spite the Markels? And uproot the boys?
Nah. I think it's to escape the publicity she's getting in Miami. I thought it was also to put some distance between her and HA, but rumours are he's moving there with her. Really does show how brainwashed the kids are if they are still seeing HA.
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
Guests online
Total visitors

Forum statistics

Latest member
Clue Keeper