GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU law professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 - #4 *Arrests*

[Jerri_Blank]

Someone on the last thread mentioned that Wendi studied game theory. Where did this information come from? If true, that would explain her bizarre comments to LE about her family, trying to deflect guilt with candor.

 

[TTF14]

Someone on the last thread mentioned that Wendi studied game theory. Where did this information come from? If true, that would explain her bizarre comments to LE about her family, trying to deflect guilt with candor.

Although I believe it because it came from someone claiming to know her (and I believe that, personally, IMO), I think we have to consider it rumor since there's no link.

 

[srp]

I don’t think we’ve seen any information about Wendi’s callsor electronic communications other than those the morning of the shooting:

8:09 a.m. DA calls WA
9:02 a.m. DM calls WA
9:12 a.m. CA calls WA
9:19 a.m. WA calls CA
I’m sure law enforcement must have the complete records forthe day. Cellular carriers record the tower ID for both voice and data traffic,though my understanding is that a tower dump won’t reveal data traffic. Thathas to be searched by phone number.
In other words, law enforcement would know if Wendi’s phoneaccessed the network near DM’s residence for background data sessions even ifshe didn’t make a call or text that was recorded.
WA’s data could be used to verify or contradict LR’s storyabout seeing her the day before the shooting, or whether her roundabout trip tothe liquor store and lunch on the day of the shooting is credible.
The police could also use tower dumps to identify additionaldevices. For example, they could get a list of all devices using towers near DM’sresidence the day before and day of the shooting and cross reference that toKM, CA, WA, or anyone else’s call logs to see if burner phones were being used.
Cell data location has come a long way since the late 90sand the Serial case. The carriers aren’t recording GPS information but do havetower information, and they are generally getting closer together. Oftentimessector information is recorded. (Each cell site is typically divided into three120 degree sectors.)

 

[dotr]

The defense might say that SG recognized WA from pics of her on fb.
They might suggest that curiosity/jealousy had him casing pics of KM and CA and saw WA too, not unlike how WA google searched for DM's new gf and her brother.
KM might have bluffed SG by telling him that WA was checking to see he got the job done because she did not entirely trust that he would.
If WA did in fact look right at SG , with the knowledge that he is a hit man, that would be incredibly arrogant, not only for the danger it might pose to her, but the children too.
If it turns out that SG and WA's cell phones ping at the same time and place, even if she had reason to be nearby, that would be beyond coincidence.

Strangely, the admittedly illiterate criminal's statements, came across as more credible, than that of a respected scholar's police interview.
imo, speculating.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/08/more-disturbing-details-about-the-dan-markel-murder-case/

Three days after Markel was killed, a judge signed a search warrant for information on Wendi Adelson’s phone and investigators began searching her Web browser and email records.

On her computer, investigators found Google Chrome keyword searches for Markel’s girlfriend Amy Adler, Adler’s ex-husband and Adler’s brother.

 

[dotr]

Although I believe it because it came from someone claiming to know her (and I believe that, personally, IMO), I think we have to consider it rumor since there's no link.

That suggestion came from missunshine's first post here on Ws.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?312783-FL-Dan-Markel-41-FSU-law-professor-Tallahassee-18-July-2014-3-*Arrests*&p=12857622#post12857622

Folks, she studied game theory. That's all I'll say.

General information about "game theory" in response to that post...

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...July-2014-3-*Arrests*&p=12857742#post12857742

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Robb
Rafael Robb (born October 31, 1950) is an economist and former professor at the University of Pennsylvania who confessed to killing his wife in 2006. ... Robb specialized in game theory


Robb pleaded guilty in November 2007 to voluntary manslaughter in the high-profile death of his wife, Ellen Gregory Robb. She had been bludgeoned to death with a chin-up bar.[SUP][6][/SUP] Her death occurred during a December 22, 2006, argument over the couple's divorce and the plans for their home in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.[SUP][7][/SUP] Robb pleaded guilty on November 26, 2007, and resigned from the university, where he had been on leave since his arrest in January 2007.[SUP][8][/SUP] Robb was sentenced on November 19, 2008, to a 5- to 10-year prison term, though the prosecutor asked for a sentence of 10 to 20 years


http://www.econport.org/econport/req...etheory_intro1
Well, how do we know what is best for the two convicts? Let's go ahead and compare the outcomes achieved with each action. For Joe, a confession gets him 10 years in prison if Crow also confesses. Instead, if Joe confesses and Crow does not then Joe only gets a year in prison. An alternative situation for Joe is of not confessing. Well, if Joe does not confess and Crow does, then Joe lands up in jail for 25 years, and if Crow does not confess and Joe does then Joe spends three years behind bars.
Comparing the outcomes we see that confessing is better for Joe if Crow also confesses. Furthermore, confessing is better for Joe if Crow does not confess! So, no matter what Crow does, confessing to the crime is better for Joe. A similar argument holds for Crow. So a solution to this game is that both Joe and Crow decide to confess simultaneously and end up with ten years each in prison. For your information a formal term for a solution like this is "dominant strategy Nash equilibrium."

 

[GordonX]

i'll tell you what's not "fanciful fiction" - KM is sitting all alone in a cold dark miserable stinky jail cell right now thinking about the rest of her life in prison and maybe death row and the needle. and she's thinking about her kids who will probably grow up without her. and she's thinking about the masterminds who (in her mind) got her into this mess and abandoned her who are out there running around free, still living their privileged lives, driving their expensive luxury cars, sleeping in their luxury condos, and eating at expensive restaurants - all while she sits and rots in jail and takes the heat. how long do you think it is before she talks?

Listen to the bell - it tolls for thee.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

i'll tell you what's not "fanciful fiction" - KM is sitting all alone in a cold dark miserable stinky jail cell right now thinking about the rest of her life in prison and maybe death row and the needle. and she's thinking about her kids who will probably grow up without her. and she's thinking about the masterminds who (in her mind) got her into this mess and abandoned her who are out there running around free, still living their privileged lives, driving their expensive luxury cars, sleeping in their luxury condos, and eating at expensive restaurants - all while she sits and rots in jail and takes the heat. how long do you think it is before she talks?

Listen to the bell - it tolls for thee.

It sure wouldn't take long for me to flip!

 

[Russian Blue]

New blog post.https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/...-raises-questions-over-role-of-wendi-adelson/Another thought is that if Wendi saw the car drive by and was eyeing it as Rivera said, and she was in the dark on the whole thing, then why did she not come forward when photos of the car were released by the TPD shortly after the murder? They asked anyone who had seen such a car that was connected to the shooting to come forward as they were seeking information. Wendi did not come forward to say she saw that car driving by the day before the murder. If she was so concerned about her children's safety as she claimed, wouldn't she contact TPD with the information. Just another thought.

Well we don't have the whole interview. We don't know if she said anything about the car. Maybe she didn't remember anything about it. I am only playing devils advocate.
I don't know if what Rivera is saying is true, but I feel many other behaviors of Wendi's implicate her and she is very involved in my opinion.

I think she got so dang excited at the police interview she just said stupid stuff as the adrenaline was coursing through her brain. She started improvising on the fly instead of sticking to the planned play acting of being shocked etc to hear this news. Her statements are too thought out. She answers questions not asked. She uses words like "never", "never in a million years", etc. I am not an expert in statement analysis, but I have read enough about it to recognize some of the deception signs. I wish the statement - analysis (Peter Hyatt) folks would do this case. I bet it would be really interesting.

I can't wait for the remainder of her interview. There has to be things in there that they are holding back for the next steps.

 

[Russian Blue]

WA would have to think that LE would check on her whereabouts the day of the murder. After she informed LE that a tv repairman was at her house the morning of the murder and and also informed LE that she told the repairman about her brother's hitman joke, wouldn't she expect LE would want to know who the repairman was and then go talk to him? Did LE follow-up on this? Strange.

But she just couldn't stay away, she had to go do a drive by, she had an alibi, TV repair man, later lunch with the girls. For someone so smart so stupid. IMOO, she is an excitement junkie and an obsessive person.

Divorced Dan, but couldn't really let him go, stalking via online his girlfriend, why? Oh yeah all that stuff about her boys would have a new mother or woman to Dan in her life that she was only checking that out will probably be her excuse. Not in my opinion.

She negated her love for her children when she was involved in killing their father (my opinion), changing their name to erase their father, why do that Wendi, you had what you wanted, you got rid of Dan, did you think you could erase his memory too? She sunk her own boat by getting too involved.

If she went by to make sure it was done makes no sense to insert yourself in the crime scene. You would know soon enough. What were you going to do if it hadn't happened?

 

[Russian Blue]

IMO she would certainly need "liquid courage" for what was about to go down. Maybe she had a little bit too much because she did seem to be on something as you suggest and it affected her ability to put on a credible act and ad lib her lies in the interview.

You might be right. The heavy breathing leaning forward to far before hearing the news, not even taking a second to absorb what she has heard before launching into a cry face covered. It just didn't seem right.

 

[SeesSeas]

I think KM will flip soon and that CA, DA and possibly WA will be arrested in two weeks on CA’s 40[SUP]th[/SUP] birthday October 27.

 

[dotr]

The words rang true about CA's hit man jokes as WA knew they would, her chest appropriately heaved , and she knew just what to do with her facial clues- put her head down and hide them!
imo, speculation.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/detecting.aspx

Detecting deception

Some research links lying with such facial and bodily cues as increased pupil size and lip pressing but not with blinking or posture.
By RACHEL ADELSON
July/August 2004, Vol 35, No. 7

 

[86Violet]

Well we don't have the whole interview.

I know - I wonder why they released the entire Rivera interview but no one has published the entire WA interview. From what I understand, the media outlets have the interview in it's entirety. Yet we only got to watch the few minutes published by ABC.

 

[amateur sleuth]

Had it been me called into a police interview room I would be scared as hell about what I was there for. I would asssume it was something bad but when told my husband had been shot and not expected to live I know my first reaction, the first word(s) out of my mouth would be to yell........"WHAT????????????????". "WHAT DID YOU SAY"??????????????? "WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT"?????????? "WHAT HAPPENED"????????????because that news would be such a shock that I would doubt that I had heard correctly. It's only after my brain was able to absorb and process this information that I would or could exclaim "OH MY GOD!" and then cover my face and cry. That is if I hadn't passed out by then. But Wendy did not even ask "WHAT HAPPENED?". She went straight to " OH MY GOD" and burying her face in her hands and "crying" almost a split second after the detective told her. She did not even pause a second to allow her brain to absorb and THEN react to such shocking news. After that, her actions just hit me as being so phony, doing such a bad job of going through the motions and saying things, she thought, a truly grieving and INNOCENT woman would do and say. I had to stop watching after about a minute because her "act" was so bad I could not bear to watch a woman who already knew her husband had been "hit" TRY to act like she was really and truly grieving. And deep down in my brain somewhere, I felt like she was happy to actually,OFFICIALLY, hear the news from a detective that Dan had been shot and not expected to live. But that's just me and my take on how I would act and JMO on WA of course. She could be totally innocent in this whole thing and knew NOTHING!!!!!!! (yeah, right). Bette Davis she ain't!!!!

 

[LiveLaughLove]

Well we don't have the whole interview. We don't know if she said anything about the car. Maybe she didn't remember anything about it. I am only playing devils advocate.
I don't know if what Rivera is saying is true, but I feel many other behaviors of Wendi's implicate her and she is very involved in my opinion.

I think she got so dang excited at the police interview she just said stupid stuff as the adrenaline was coursing through her brain. She started improvising on the fly instead of sticking to the planned play acting of being shocked etc to hear this news. Her statements are too thought out. She answers questions not asked. She uses words like "never", "never in a million years", etc. I am not an expert in statement analysis, but I have read enough about it to recognize some of the deception signs. I wish the statement - analysis (Peter Hyatt) folks would do this case. I bet it would be really interesting.

I can't wait for the remainder of her interview. There has to be things in there that they are holding back for the next steps.

Did anyone else find it strange in Wendi's interview that she said things like "who COULD do this?" Or things like "why WOULD this happen?" I think I would have said "who DID this?" The event had already happened. Why was she speaking in could or would? It seemed like an attempt to distance herself from what happened. I think a completely innocent person, someone that had NO idea this was happening responds differently. I also thought it was strange that her response to would she ever ask someone to do this to Dan she responded "Never. Never in a million years." I immediately wondered why she didn't say "I DIDN'T ask anyone to do this."

 

[stg]

Did anyone else find it strange in Wendi's interview that she said things like "who COULD do this?" Or things like "why WOULD this happen?" I think I would have said "who DID this?" The event had already happened. Why was she speaking in could or would? It seemed like an attempt to distance herself from what happened. I think a completely innocent person, someone that had NO idea this was happening responds differently. I also thought it was strange that her response to would she ever ask someone to do this to Dan she responded "Never. Never in a million years." I immediately wondered why she didn't say "I DIDN'T ask anyone to do this."

Yes, I commented on this very sentence weeks ago when the interview clips were released. What bothered me most about it was that the detective asked her if anyone she knew might have done this, and rather than saying something like, "No! Absolutely not!" she answered with "who could do this," which in my mind was her saying it was definitely possible she knew it was someone close to her who did this. It was a very roundabout response to the question asked. It is very similar to how she did not answer the follow-up about Dan you mentioned above firmly either. We are of the same mindset.

 

[TTF14]

It sure wouldn't take long for me to flip!

She has zero incentive not to.

 

[Ween]

I'm sorry if this has been addressed earlier, but I wonder if WA was a little panicked when she learned through the investigator that DM was not dead yet. It would have been interesting to see her reaction if the investigator simply said DM had been shot, but was still alive. I'm sure she knew if DM miraculously survived the execution he would have immediately pointed to her as being behind it.

 

[tallyeng]

I know - I wonder why they released the entire Rivera interview but no one has published the entire WA interview. From what I understand, the media outlets have the interview in it's entirety. Yet we only got to watch the few minutes published by ABC.

LE/SA are only going to release items that are pertinent to PC/Discovery; which, based on my limited understanding can include snippets of videos. The general idea is they must release what is applicable specific to the implication (as far as what's required by law - nothing stopping them from giving more away to ruffle a few feathers, heh.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Yes yes yes yes yes amateur sleuth! (Sorry, for some reason I can't quote your post on this dang iPad.)

WA accepts the news of DM's shooting/impending death waaaay too quickly (ala Dalia Dippolito), folds her body over & covers her face to fake cry. No questions as to WTF happened, no disbelief at all, just immediate acceptance. IMO